PDA

View Full Version : Recommendations for a .308 AR ?



mario
10-13-08, 13:38
I'd like to get my hands on one but from what I've read most aren't dependable. Anyone here have hands on experience with one? Thanks in Advance!

SHIVAN
10-13-08, 14:00
My hands on experience with the ArmaLite AR-10's has been mostly good. I had one carbine that didn't run quite right back in 1999, I think. I sent it back to ArmaLite and 3 weeks later it was perfect.

Since then I've probably owned and shot 10 uppers and lowers in some sort of configuration. I usually build the uppers now from parts, so the QC is higher than possible in any factory.

I think one of the other mods recently got an AR-10 carbine and has said he was happy with it.

I love mine, and wouldn't change anythng I've done with them.

VooDoo6Actual
10-13-08, 15:03
+1 Armalite/Noveske

uscbigdawg
10-13-08, 19:42
I've got like 15k through my DPMS LR-308 and it's just bad ass. JP trigger and my own lightened carrier.

Look at the JP Enterprises' 308's as well as the DPMS LR's. You won't be disappointed.

Rich

Buck
10-13-08, 19:58
Not an AR, but as a 7.62 NATO battle rifle, the FN FAL is hard to beat... Look for a nice Springfield SAR-48, they can be found for around 1K and are one of the best rifles ever made...

Just my .02

B

mashed68
10-13-08, 21:53
The FAL is the greatest of the .308 battle rifles yes, but for a .308 AR I've heard nothing but good about the DPMS Lr308's.

Sean King
10-13-08, 22:09
I recently got a POF P-308. I really like the rifle, but have only had it a few weeks and have only put 200 or so rounds through it so I can't say yet if it will be a reliable gun.

So far, it's very accurate at the short distances I've shot it and has had no malfunctions.

It's really easy to clean as well. It's expensive though and quality with POF's seems like it can be spotty.


HTH,
Sean

SHIVAN
10-13-08, 22:24
The FAL is the greatest of the .308 battle rifles yes, but for a .308 AR I've heard nothing but good about the DPMS Lr308's.

First let me say "Welcome aboard!"

Second, let me ask you to please take some time to familiarize yourself with our intended goals and objectives of this website. Qualified, firsthand information is absolutely king...

If you have some way to expand on your thoughts above, giving us some context of your use of either the DPMS LR-308 or FAL, we would all appreciate it.

Thanks!

armakraut
10-14-08, 04:07
My statistical sampling with the AR10's was relatively small, but between a factory DPMS and factory Armalite, I'd be far more confident in a professional non-factory build of either.

I'm building up an ultra-lightweight DPMS 308 right now (mags are a bit more available these days). But I'm probably going to grab an AR10 receiver within the next month or so. I asked one of the more well known AR smiths his opinion on the DPMS vs Armalite quality, he didn't feel there was a demonstrable difference when he got his hands on them.

Rana
10-14-08, 10:33
I'd like to get my hands on one but from what I've read most aren't dependable. Anyone here have hands on experience with one? Thanks in Advance!

IMHO they are not dependable enough as a fighting gun. Why we still use them as such (KAC SR25) is a mystery to me. The best AR platform for reliability and durability is still the MK12 SPRish AR with 77gr. MK262.

I thought the 6.8 might have been the cartridge to bridge the gap but "reports from Crane" indicate bizarre parts breakage at relatively low (in relation to 5.56) round counts. I would like to see someone perform independent test on the 6.8 SPC-in relation to durability.

The AR10's can be made very accurate and are fine for range or bench shooting, if that is what you want. If you want something "Tactical" beyond a MK12 or clone in 5.56 then the best alternative is still a quality bolt action rifle with good glass in 7.62NATO/.300WM/.338Lapua/.338Norma etc.

Cohibra45
10-14-08, 13:54
I thought the 6.8 might have been the cartridge to bridge the gap but "reports from Crane" indicate bizarre parts breakage at relatively low (in relation to 5.56) round counts. I would like to see someone perform independent test on the 6.8 SPC-in relation to durability.

Rana,

Just kinda curious, but what "reports from Crane" are you talking about? I really don't know who/what Crane is. Sorry for the ignorance, but I am about to get into the 6.8 and am very interested in any and all information about this round. Is this a 'military report' or something similar? Is it public? Can you provide a link to that report?

I really like what I have read on this round. I think with the right bullet/powder and correct barrel twist/chamber, this round could possibly be a very positive asset to our forces. There has been a lot of testing going on over at 68forums.com and they have gotten some very impressive results with this cartridge. That said, they are a group of civilians doing this on their own dime and I would really like to see the government take a serious look at this round for further development. I would really like the government to also not brush aside what others have done with the development of this cartridge with regards to barrel twist/chamber configurations. The original SAAMI specs were unfortunately turned in by Remington without the suggestions from the original designers!!! The specs Remington gave makes the chambers very much like the 223 vs 5.56 in that they are very tight and way too short leade. Also, the barrel twists (shown as optional in the SAAMI specs) used by manufactures in most of todays are from left over 270 Winchester specs of 1:10. The use of shorter/lighter bullets in the 6.8 beg to have a slower twist of minimum 1:11 to 1:12...

Like I said, there has been a lot of cartridge development over the last few years that the original specs of this round by the original developers have been shown to be good or even exceeded!!!

Thanks,

Kelly (Cohibra45)

Sorry for the hijack!!! Now back to our previous program...

gunwriter
10-14-08, 14:37
Crane

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Surface_Warfare_Center_Crane_Division

Cohibra45
10-14-08, 14:44
Thanks David!!! I would be really interested in what parts broke???

MarshallDodge
10-14-08, 14:45
My DPMS LR-308 is setup as a target rifle and performs well. I only have about 150 rounds through it and keep it meticulously clean.

It is accurate but very tight.

firearm-freq
10-14-08, 17:32
I have a DPMS LR .308 (Tac 20) and have 400 down the pipe with absolutely no problems, even with various types and brands of ammo.

Hope this helps.

uscbigdawg
10-14-08, 20:25
My DPMS LR-308, freaked out by yours truly has about 15k (as stated above) with zero issues. Shoots well under a minute with zero worries.

For a "battle" rifle, over a bolt action, a ton of my snipers in Afghanistan are still using M14's with no problems.

Rich

mario
10-14-08, 20:39
I have plenty of trigger time with an M-14 and they're fine rifles but they seem low tech nowadays and I want something lighter

Rana
10-14-08, 21:14
I have plenty of trigger time with an M-14 and they're fine rifles but they seem low tech nowadays and I want something lighter

.308 AR's aren't on the "light" side.

For recreational shooting a plain jane Armalite AR10 is not a bad choice for the money.

uscbigdawg
10-14-08, 22:49
Then you definitely want to go LR-308. There are some "tricks" to lighten them up a bit. Mine's only like 1-1.5# heavier than my 18" AR.

Rich

Littlelebowski
10-15-08, 08:04
IMHO they are not dependable enough as a fighting gun. Why we still use them as such (KAC SR25) is a mystery to me. The best AR platform for reliability and durability is still the MK12 SPRish AR with 77gr. MK262.

I thought the 6.8 might have been the cartridge to bridge the gap but "reports from Crane" indicate bizarre parts breakage at relatively low (in relation to 5.56) round counts. I would like to see someone perform independent test on the 6.8 SPC-in relation to durability.

The AR10's can be made very accurate and are fine for range or bench shooting, if that is what you want. If you want something "Tactical" beyond a MK12 or clone in 5.56 then the best alternative is still a quality bolt action rifle with good glass in 7.62NATO/.300WM/.338Lapua/.338Norma etc.


The SR25 worked well enough for my brother (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=9328&highlight=sr25).

Littlelebowski
10-15-08, 08:06
I've shot DPMS 16" 308 and the LR308. Both were very impressive. I plan on buying a LR308 very shortly.

longshot
10-15-08, 10:36
I'd like to see that report as I have not had any breakages whatsoever even with hot loads.

Rana
10-15-08, 10:39
I'd like to see that report as I have not had any breakages whatsoever even with hot loads.

How many rounds you at?

Again, I would like to see an "independent" study myself...

DocGKR
10-15-08, 11:17
Unfortunately none of the current 7.62 mm AR's run reliably, including the AR10 and SR25/Mk11/M110.

It was reported that the very expensive, highly touted SR25K "Battle Rifles" purchased for SOF use did not prove particularly durable or reliable in combat conditions and were withdrawn for service rather quickly. Many folks who have deployed with SR25/Mk11/M110 have not had kind things to say about their durability. One well known SOTIC instructor has written the following:


"The first SRs had serious function problems and mag problems. They broke at the worse possible times and were not user friendly to fix once broken. The newer Mk11s are almost as bad but have a better rep function wise and the mag problem seems to have been fixed. The guys are shooting the crap out of the weapons and using it more as a battel rifle than a sniper rifle. The manual states that only 25 to 50 rounds should be fired form teh weapon per day. That is being violated badly and the weapons are paying for it. The SR was never designed to be a super precision sniper rifle and it is not. Even if Knight is now claiming the same in his SASS BS. I have seen too many not make it through our course and the ones that do require almost daily maintenance to continue. I have seen the SASS and I predict that they will start having trouble wiht the weapon as a sniper rifle within the year that it is first issued in mass. Say this time next year. The first to go will be the stock extension mechanism which is as flimsy a pice of crap that I have ever seen. As far as lost accuracy and range on the old versus new, none that I know of as the old had crappy range and accuracy and the longer barrel did not enhance already lousy. Sniper versus DM, one shots a priority target and the other bangs away at everyone, oh like a rifleman."

Littlelebowski
10-15-08, 11:20
I can point you to a Marine that was very happy with his SR25 and it was reliable enough for the Battle of Fallujah which was reliable enough for him.

Littlelebowski
10-15-08, 11:22
Read this (http://longrangeinternational.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=128)

SHIVAN
10-15-08, 11:31
I believe Rana, and DocGKR are speaking about sample sizes above one.

Rana is more likely speaking from the aspect of several weapons fielded in some branch of special warfare, and DocGKR is probably speaking from the benefit of having seen reports on topic covering multiple units and myriad weapons.

While singular success stories are much appreciated, please remember that we have some unique members on this forum with a very wide range of experience.

Littlelebowski
10-15-08, 11:33
I do realize that. There's plenty of 8541s who've used the weapon over at LRI that all say the same thing. Perhaps they got a good batch....

SHIVAN
10-15-08, 11:44
I do realize that. There's plenty of 8541s who've used the weapon over at LRI that all say the same thing. Perhaps they got a good batch....

It could also be a matter of expectations, fire schedule, etc.

Many of the complaints I read about regarding the SR-25 (and other 308 AR's tested by DoD) involve the inability to fire more than X rounds every X minutes without having issues.

Which is fine while shooting it for groups on a bench or at the range, but not so hot while trying to suppress a horde of BG's precisely at distance.

I used to think it was BS too, as I can run my AR-10's pretty hard and not choke them up. However, the complaints and stories persist - from people at the very tip of the spear.

There's got to be something to it.

Littlelebowski
10-15-08, 11:48
Yeah, I doubt they're lying also. I'll bring it up over at LRI. Kinda of curious as to see if they suffer from first shot stringing like 5.56 ARs do. You know, when the first shot is off of the rest of the group, cold bore or not? Our gunsmith attributes it to feeding issues.

DocGKR
10-15-08, 13:20
Rana,

I am confused about your comment:


”I thought the 6.8 might have been the cartridge to bridge the gap but "reports from Crane" indicate bizarre parts breakage at relatively low (in relation to 5.56) round counts. I would like to see someone perform independent test on the 6.8 SPC-in relation to durability.”

I am not aware of Crane doing any extensive testing of 6.8 mm, as they have generally opposed 6.8 mm starting back in the 2002-2003 time frame. There were previously rumors about supposed 6.8 mm reliability issues back in 2005, however, these comments were found to be specious, per my comments here: http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=8419&page=47&fpart=2&vc=1

During the independent terminal ballistic tests conducted by JSWB-IPT, FBI BRF, and the Marine Corps, no 6.8 mm parts failures occurred.

The most extensive 6.8 mm independent durability testing to date, was conducted by CTTSO/TSWG ( http://www.cttso.gov/) in 2007; in the 10,000’s of rounds fired by U.S. and allied SOF personnel, as well as Federal LE officers and agents for the MURG testing, NO 6.8 mm parts breakage was noted. See pages 18 & 19 of my NDIA briefing (http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008Intl/Roberts.pdf). This past July, CTTSO/TSWG, in conjunction with the FBI BRF and the Marine Corps, briefed Congressional representatives on the highly favorable results of the 6.8 mm MURG testing.

longshot
10-15-08, 14:14
How many rounds you at?

Again, I would like to see an "independent" study myself...


I am at about 3k and have shot commercial and combat loads as well as hot reloads that were hot enough that I had to back off dur to signs of pressure. I've dumped magazines, rapid fire and slow fire to get data on cold bore and hot barrels. No parts failure of any kind.

Rana
10-15-08, 17:44
I am at about 3k and have shot commercial and combat loads as well as hot reloads that were hot enough that I had to back off dur to signs of pressure. I've dumped magazines, rapid fire and slow fire to get data on cold bore and hot barrels. No parts failure of any kind.

3K isn't enough for a durability evaluation of any weapon system.

If or when "Crane" releases their findings it might be a step in the right direction as far as clarity goes. I myself don't have the full skinny on the 6.8 round tests conducted at Crane.

Again, I would like to see an "independent" test conducted with a round count comparable to that of the service life of existing 5.56 service rifles from the same platform (I.E. M4A1).

DocGKR
10-15-08, 18:22
That is pretty much what the independent TSWG 6.8 mm MURG testing was all about...

KevinB
10-16-08, 00:00
Someone Doc probably knows at Crane told me they had 2,500 bolt life on the 6.8 about 3.5 years ago. From the MURG stuff I saw - I would say sample size needs to be EXTENSIVELY increased.

For .308 AR I still beleive with my hand on my heart KAC makes the best system out there. However I do think that, that system could be improved upon, but its a Sniper/Spotter gun not a LMG

DocGKR
10-16-08, 12:40
Since we first started testing them in mid-2002, we have never seen a 6.8 mm bolt break.

In 2005, Dave Dunlap of PRI wrote:
"We have three units tested at 8000 rounds each by an outside group (not under PRi control) and are under written agreement to furnish all repair parts. There have been no repairs or repair parts and they are still being tested. We also have unofficial knowledge of other test programs and the 6.8 has not seen the problems you are claiming."

At the same time, I wrote:
"In addition to the 3 weapons with 8000 plus rounds through them mentioned by Mr. Dunlap, I know of an organization that has test fired 100,00 rounds through thirty 6.8 mm carbines with no problems-that is an average of over 3000 rounds per weapon without any weapons damage or significant malfunctions. Another test was performed with a suppressed 6.8 mm firing 3000 rounds full-auto; no malfunctions or damage were noted. Another group has a 6.8 mm rifle with nearly 10,000 rounds through it and several that have around 5000 rounds fired through them, all going strong. We currently have five 6.8 mm weapons in our inventory-none have ever exhibited any failures."

MURG testing involved firing 30,000+ rounds without ANY parts breakage.

ToeCutter
10-23-08, 03:14
Armalite AR-10, tried and true!;)

Cesiumsponge
10-25-08, 23:26
For what it's worth, another DPMS LR-308 owner with no issues (24" non fluted, heavy-ass version). About 500 rounds of Federal GMM down the barrel with no failures. If you're strong enough and want to drag the match version LR-308 around all day and treat it like an M4, I'm pretty sure its going to seize and choke up on you. I'm not sure if the carbine ones are built with more clearance to operate in dirtier conditions.

Taking reality into account, the 308 ARs are never going to be issued and tested in similar quantities compared to the 5.56mm AR family, and they won't see similar round counts either and the resultant data to correct issues. Speaking from a probability standpoint, the 308 ARs aren't nearly as debugged as the 5.56.

Would anyone hazard a guess as to how many 5.56mm ARs are sold per every .308 AR? 25:1? 50:1? 100:1?

Cagemonkey
10-26-08, 10:10
[QUOTE=mario;232041]I'd like to get my hands on one but from what I've read most aren't dependable. Anyone here have hands on experience with one? Thanks in Advance![/QUOTE
I just purchased an AR10A4. Has M4 feed ramps and upgraded extractor spring. Haven't shot it yet, Armalite forgot to send carrying handle and front sight. I like the new generation magazine. Its an improvement on the modified M14 mags. I got some 20 rounders on the way from 44Mag.com. The weight of the rifle is reasonable since they now have a GI weight barrel. Also the barrel is chrome lined. The DPMS rifles aren't. If all goes well, I feel you should get all of the advantages of the M16/M4 weapons system with the benefit of .308/7.62. Due to the increased mass of the reciprocating parts the AR 10 should be as reliable if not superior to the M16/AR15. The original Armalite AR10's performed reliably.

WallaS
10-26-08, 10:50
I have an AR10T that had the barrel shortened to 20" and refinished black by GAP. Ran perfect in the standard configuration. I attempted to install a collapsible stock with a buffer made by Slash from TOS and had some cycling issues, it appeared that the buffer was not fully retracted into the tube. I did remove a coil from the buffer spring and it appeared the buffer was now fully retracting into the stock, but I found a Magpul PRS at a great price and never took the AR10T back to the range with the shorter buffer spring. After reverting back to a standard length buffer system the rifle has been 100% reliable.

A good friend has a DMPS-308 and the only time I have been out with him (which was his first attempt at sighting in the rifle) every other round was a ftf. He thought it was due to the magazines and I have not followed up with him to see if he had it resolved.

I would definitely recommend Armalite and if you can afford it the KAC SR25.

mechanicus
10-29-08, 11:35
...308 AR's aren't on the "light" side...

maybe ...let's wait on this guy's range report: link (http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=121&t=395072)

KevinB
10-29-08, 16:02
maybe ...let's wait on this guy's range report: link (http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=121&t=395072)

FYI - Somehow I dont think Rana really needs a lecture or advice from you. Secondly quoting a half built gun is bad form for anyone.

A range report of ONE gun is not even a validation of concept - its an idea -

Secondly if you had listened to those of us who have been playing with this idea professionally, you'd see light 7.62N guns dont do so well

armakraut
10-29-08, 20:56
I'm doing an ultra-lightweight rifle length DPMS 308 build right now. As much as I'd like to say otherwise, I'm not expecting a tack driver. To get the weight down, I'm willing to sacrifice a few things.

That being said, it's hard to shave weight off a .308. FAL and AR's have it easier than a G3 or M14.

Hallboss
11-14-08, 00:25
not to highjack the thread, but I have a question I just recently purchased a Fulton 308 lower and from what Fulton and DPMS told me, DPMS makes the fulton lowers. I originally bought this lower to put a 24" bull barrel DPMS upper on it, because my BIL is a sniper in the Army and he uses a bolt 308 for a weapon. I am just riding on his experience and assume that the 308 would be a good round for me.

My intention for this rifle was for long range target practice somewhere 250-500 meters with the occasional visit to the 1000 meter bay. From the reliability and range benefit is the 308 worth it? Or should I be looking into a different cal or maybe just build a 24" AR-15 with the spare lower I have?

Thanks for the information,
Darin

KevinB
11-14-08, 06:56
With an SR-25 platform anything over 20" bbl is suffering the law of dminishing retunrs in that receiver flex is starting to degrade accuracy potential, and your velocity increase is not that impressive.

LonghunterCO
11-14-08, 12:53
With an SR-25 platform anything over 20" bbl is suffering the law of dminishing retunrs in that receiver flex is starting to degrade accuracy potential, and your velocity increase is not that impressive.

I am considering getting my 24" barrel threaded for a can. That would be my opertunity to have it shortened too. What is the vel. loss between the 20" and 24".

maximus83
11-20-08, 12:42
S

MURG testing involved firing 30,000+ rounds without ANY parts breakage.

This seems like a very good start on testing the 6.8spc. Personally, my long-term hope is that the 6.8 will turn out to be a more viable caliber upgrade to 5.56, than trying to find some kind of battle rifle that is light enough, yet still durable and accurate enough, in 7.62. I've waited and researched, looking for a 7.62 battle rifle that I thought would be the winner in the horse race, but I just don't see it out there yet. Maybe the Scar-H down the road, but it's not available yet, doesn't work on existing AR platforms, and will still be expensive. And it doesn't address the issue of whether 7.62 is really the optimal caliber choice, for a battle rifle. Really, ballistically, the 6.8 seems almost ideal as a battle rifle caliber to upgrade to the 5.56 (I think some of Doc's other ballistic testing has well established that), except that I'm not quite ready to take the plunge yet.

A couple of times in the past year or so, I've been on the verge of taking the plunge into 6.8 myself, starting with getting an upper. But each time I've been about to, something has happened. One of the things that has held me back thus far has been the ongoing changes (over the past couple of years) to what are considered to be optimal barrel twist and chamber specs for the 6.8. These specs have changed a couple of times, and customers who got the earlier rifles now find that the latest ammo coming out for 6.8 cannot be fired safely in some of the rifles with the earlier specs. I am not knocking that fact: you have to do some experimenting and updating to develop a caliber to its full potential. It's just that I'm not ready to get on board yet, and spend my own money for it, until things have settled down and the optimal rifle specs are firmly established.

The other thing I'd like to see before I buy, in addition to the specs for the rifles stabilizing, is additional testing and adoption by more govt agencies. I'm always a little risk averse to buying an experimental rifle that, if not adopted by the govt or large numbers in the private sector, is likely to become an unsupported, expensive paperweight within 5 years. Personally, I cannot afford to buy the latest experimental calibers just for fun: I need to stick with something that will be adopted, and widely supported, and reliable. The above testing that Doc mentions is a great start, but personally, I am hoping to see even more testing in addition to the 30 rifles and 3K rounds apiece that were done. What would be really great is adoption by a large govt agency, which then later makes available its internal testing results, and/or its field use results. Obviously the military is unlikely to adopt 6.8 for general use anytime soon, but if substantial numbers of govt agencies, or even one big agency, adopts the 6.8 on a large scale and has a good experience, then I'll feel better about moving onto the 6.8 too.

Until then, I've basically already followed Rana's advice in his first post: get your rifle(s) set up in 5.56, and then get a good bolt rifle (or two, IMHO) in 7.62. But I'm definitely looking forward to trying 6.8, if it gets just a little more "established" and widely adopted.