AR10 Picture Thread :)

**RobertTheTexan** · 01-22-18, 09:28

Originally Posted by BufordTJustice

Will do. The BCG will eventually be replaced by an LMT enhanced. But, I've had a difficult time finding those and I paid precious little for this one.

Word is that the UK contract is eating up all the 7.62 enhanced BCG production capacity for now.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://www.strongsidetactical.com/l...-auto-bcg-308/

Unless you’re looking for the FA. I suspect you are, but just in case.
I did not realize LMT made a enhanced BCG for the 308. I run them in my all my 5.56 SBR’s, because of the longer dwell time for a short barrel makes sense. Is that applicable for a longer barrel and gas system? Back from a long weekend hunting trip and haven’t had coffee yet, so it’s still a little foggy upstairs.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

**BufordTJustice** · 01-22-18, 12:24

Originally Posted by RobertTheTexan

https://www.strongsidetactical.com/l...-auto-bcg-308/

Unless you’re looking for the FA. I suspect you are, but just in case.
I did not realize LMT made a enhanced BCG for the 308. I run them in my all my 5.56 SBR’s, because of the longer dwell time for a short barrel makes sense. Is that applicable for a longer barrel and gas system? Back from a long weekend hunting trip and haven’t had coffee yet, so it’s still a little foggy upstairs.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yeah, I prefer an FA version...but only due to the added mass it would bring. however, if the SA version is the same mass as the FA then I want whichever is cheaper, lol. I honestly need to familiarize myself more with LMT's 7.62 SKU codes.

I use an LMT enhanced carrier on my 11.5" 5.56 suppressed, my 16" intermediate gas suppressed, and my 18" rifle gas suppressed/unsuppressed without a single issue. In fact, the 11.5" suppressed and 16" BRT Optimum barrel intermediate gas suppressed share the exact same A5 equipped lower.

I would submit that the longer dwell time would be beneficial due to the increase in pressures we've seen with commercial .308 Win ammo, which I intend to use, as compared to the std ball used during the original AR10's development. I also think it's no accident that these enhanced BCG's were a specifically called-out item for the LMT L129A1 and LM308MWS contracts according to some sources I have. For the later contract, the likes of the HK417 and FN SCAR-H were beaten (and others). The LM308MWS contract competition required full function with both RG 155gr and M80 FMJ.

So, considering the breadth of ammo power within what constitutes a US available .308 Winny commercial loading, I think that the added dwell time from the modified/lengthened cam-pin track, the twin-entry gas manifold ports into the toroidal expansion chamber from the gas key, the three exhaust ports, and the added 4th exhaust port that vents directly from the expansion chamber......these are all very good things for both reliability, parts life, and they just can't do anything bad to accuracy either (though I certainly don't have any data to show they aid it).

**RobertTheTexan** · 01-22-18, 13:18

Originally Posted by BufordTJustice

Yeah, I prefer an FA version...but only due to the added mass it would bring. however, if the SA version is the same mass as the FA then I want whichever is cheaper, lol. I honestly need to familiarize myself more with LMT's 7.62 SKU codes.

I use an LMT enhanced carrier on my 11.5" 5.56 suppressed, my 16" intermediate gas suppressed, and my 18" rifle gas suppressed/unsuppressed without a single issue. In fact, the 11.5" suppressed and 16" BRT Optimum barrel intermediate gas suppressed share the exact same A5 equipped lower.

I would submit that the longer dwell time would be beneficial due to the increase in pressures we've seen with commercial .308 Win ammo, which I intend to use, as compared to the std ball used during the original AR10's development. I also think it's no accident that these enhanced BCG's were a specifically called-out item for the LMT L129A1 and LM308MWS contracts according to some sources I have. For the later contract, the likes of the HK417 and FN SCAR-H were beaten (and others). The LM308MWS contract competition required full function with both RG 155gr and M80 FMJ.

So, considering the breadth of ammo power within what constitutes a US available .308 Winny commercial loading, I think that the added dwell time from the modified/lengthened cam-pin track, the twin-entry gas manifold ports into the toroidal expansion chamber from the gas key, the three exhaust ports, and the added 4th exhaust port that vents directly from the expansion chamber......these are all very good things for both reliability, parts life, and they just can't do anything bad to accuracy either (though I certainly don't have any data to show they aid it).

I did some reading of the L129A1. It seems like it fit the bill for what UK MoD was looking for. I think, at least from what I read the BCG is a SA, both on the L129A1 and the LM308, which makes sense as they are semi-auto weapons.
To be honest I actually don’t know if they make. FA version. Not sure why they would if their applications are all semi. Unless it is just to have more carrier mass. I haven’t seen a FA version. Kind of assumed, but that was before my first coffee.
Also good points and good food for thought.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**BufordTJustice** · 01-22-18, 13:50

Originally Posted by RobertTheTexan

I did some reading of the L129A1. It seems like it fit the bill for what UK MoD was looking for. I think, at least from what I read the BCG is a SA, both on the L129A1 and the LM308, which makes sense as they are semi-auto weapons.
To be honest I actually don’t know if they make. FA version. Not sure why they would if their applications are all semi. Unless it is just to have more carrier mass. I haven’t seen a FA version. Kind of assumed, but that was before my first coffee.
Also good points and good food for thought.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I actually am finding that I cannot locate a SKU for an LMT FA 7.62 BCG or carrier. Period. Either in their catalog or on any vendor's website.

As I said before, as long as there is enough mass, I'm totally cool with an SA carrier. I'm literally indifferent about it as long as the mass is there. That was the rub way back when for FA carriers.....they had quite a bit more mass (just over an ounce additional....if not more). But, as you said, FA is simply not an issue for any sane human in 7.62. Too much recoil, and I ain't that rich (ammo cost would be a friggin mortgage payment!).

**RobertTheTexan** · 01-22-18, 20:43

Originally Posted by BufordTJustice

I actually am finding that I cannot locate a SKU for an LMT FA 7.62 BCG or carrier. Period. Either in their catalog or on any vendor's website.

As I said before, as long as there is enough mass, I'm totally cool with an SA carrier. I'm literally indifferent about it as long as the mass is there. That was the rub way back when for FA carriers.....they had quite a bit more mass (just over an ounce additional....if not more). But, as you said, FA is simply not an issue for any sane human in 7.62. Too much recoil, and I ain't that rich (ammo cost would be a friggin mortgage payment!).

I think it’s safe to assume they don’t manufacture a FA version, so go ahead and get the semi one already. I want to know how it functions! I if I could have a full auto 7.62, I would n a NY second. I’d get a 2nd mortgage if necessary. I mean you cannot tell me that you can’t find purpose for a crew serve weapon! Lol

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

**Stickman** · 02-01-18, 00:27

**RobertTheTexan** · 02-01-18, 05:21

Originally Posted by Stickman

Boy seeing this 308 resting in the CMR rail is not helping me be patient. I was just telling JWKnutson that I’ve been turning over another AR-10/LR308 build but utilizing a CMR rail like this one. Been out shopping barrels. Looking at all my options.

But this is pretty close what I’m looking to do, with a few changes here and there.

Mind if I save this for future reference?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk