Ruger Introduces the New 308 Small-Frame Autoloading Rifle (SFAR)

[ilikegunspdx]

MidwayUSA bought Stoner, so all the Stoner gear out there is made for them (Bear Creek Arsenal or so I have heard). Don't know if they have rights to the the AR-16 or any other designs.

Sorry for the confusion. I was talking about Eugene Stoner the designer, not the AR-stoner company.

A modern version of the ar 16 is a gun I would buy in a heartbeat if they made it, especially a shorter barrel variant. Maybe PWS could make the upper like they do for the brn-180 and use standard ar 10 lower.

 

[3MTA3]

Sorry for the confusion. I was talking about Eugene Stoner the designer, not the AR-stoner company.

A modern version of the ar 16 is a gun I would buy in a heartbeat if they made it, especially a shorter barrel variant. Maybe PWS could make the upper like they do for the brn-180 and use standard ar 10 lower.

View attachment 1272476
View attachment 1272477

They bought rights to the Stoner name and then, perhaps out of respect (?) use AR-Stoner. Likely they do not have the patent rights to any of the designs.

 

[erslll]

Sorry for the confusion. I was talking about Eugene Stoner the designer, not the AR-stoner company.

A modern version of the ar 16 is a gun I would buy in a heartbeat if they made it, especially a shorter barrel variant. Maybe PWS could make the upper like they do for the brn-180 and use standard ar 10 lower.

View attachment 1272476
View attachment 1272477

What advantages does the AR-16 have over the AR-18/180?

 

[Stomper]

There was a reason it didn't fly, it sucked.

Well, if you want to shoot around corners with .308 instead of .223 or 7.62x39 then you're all set!

 

[ilikegunspdx]

What advantages does the AR-16 have over the AR-18/180?

All the same advantages, just in .308. Man that would be a handy gun if shorter barrel version. My brn-180 10.5" with brace folded is same size as an mp5 with brace folded. A 308 in handy barrel size with short stroke gas piston would be awesome.

 

[quneur]

As an aside, AR Stoner didn't do us any favors naming it 'AR'-18. Might as well named it WoW-18 (Weapons of War).

And 'Full' auto & 'Semi' auto? Something is either 'automatic' or manual. Its like calling someone a quarter or semi-pregnant. It should be called auto-loading single shot. We have single stage reloading presses and turret or progressive presses, not semi-automatic presses.

Sorry, had to get that off my chest.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

As an aside, AR Stoner didn't do us any favors naming it 'AR'-18. Might as well named it WoW-18 (Weapons of War).

And 'Full' auto & 'Semi' auto? Something is either 'automatic' or manual. Its like calling someone a quarter or semi-pregnant. It should be called auto-loading single shot. We have single stage reloading presses and turret or progressive presses, not semi-automatic presses.

Sorry, had to get that off my chest.

AR-Stoner is a recent company (or trade name?) under midway as I understand it.

The AR-18 was designed/named by Armalite in 1963ish.

ArmaLite AR-18 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[ma96782]

OMG???





Aloha, Mark

 

[WAYNO]

XGI XGI XGI ...

Had it gone into production, folks would have hated it, too.

Mikey hates everything.

 

[Certaindeaf]

All the same advantages, just in .308. Man that would be a handy gun if shorter barrel version. My brn-180 10.5" with brace folded is same size as an mp5 with brace folded. A 308 in handy barrel size with short stroke gas piston would be awesome.

The thing about short barrel .308's is they are then a 30-30.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

The thing about short barrel .308's is they are then a 30-30.

I had to investigate that one cuz I really didn't know if they were the same or different. Here is the comparison of a .308 12" barrel vs 30-30 20" barrel. The energy drops off in a big way as yardage increases which is what we would expect due to the ballistic coefficients (bullet shape) being so different.

The 30-30 might have an edge though if shooting through brush as it would likely not veer off course as much when hitting brush as much compared to the .308. Also it would likely be more quiet. Other than that though I'm seeing them as pretty different.

Here are the energy and drop values. I highlighted longer range ones.


Note that bullet choice was based only on a fast search to find real world measured data of 12" .308 and 20" 30-30. I did not try to find bullet data optimized for the barrel length. So these numbers could change a bit depending on ammo choice but it gives a good general comparison I think.

I would like to do the same with 12" .308 vs 16" 6.5 Creedmoor just for fun. I can't remember 6.5 CM ballistic coefficient but I know it's high. I would expect 6.5 CM to lose energy slower and drop less.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Here is a comparison of 12" .308 vs 16" 6.5 CM just cuz I was curious. Chart says 6.5 Swedish (6.5 cm is not an option on the pull down menu) but I input the numbers manually for 6.5cm BC, velocity, and weight. Bullet used for 6.5 CM was 140 grain hornady match.



Side note, I was surprised that velocity drop going from a 24"barrel to 16" barrel for 6.5 CM was less than I thought it would be.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Ok going off the deep end ha ha. Here is a comparison of 12" .308 vs 12" 6.5 CM. Was really hard to find the 6.5 CM data but one site had it. They are remarkably similar at that barrel length. Bullets were hornady match 147gr for 6.5 CM and Winchester 147gr for .308

 

[Alexx1401]

I had to investigate that one cuz I really didn't know if they were the same or different. Here is the comparison of a .308 12" barrel vs 30-30 20" barrel. The energy drops off in a big way as yardage increases which is what we would expect due to the ballistic coefficients (bullet shape) being so different.

The 30-30 might have an edge though if shooting through brush as it would likely not veer off course as much when hitting brush as much compared to the .308. Also it would likely be more quiet. Other than that though I'm seeing them as pretty different.

Here are the energy and drop values. I highlighted longer range ones.

View attachment 1274248
Note that bullet choice was based only on a fast search to find real world measured data of 12" .308 and 20" 30-30. I did not try to find bullet data optimized for the barrel length. So these numbers could change a bit depending on ammo choice but it gives a good general comparison I think.

I would like to do the same with 12" .308 vs 16" 6.5 Creedmoor just for fun. I can't remember 6.5 CM ballistic coefficient but I know it's high. I would expect 6.5 CM to lose energy slower and drop less.

Certaindeaf is often using humor that's quite "dry"
I strongly suspect this was another case of it. For many years there was the 06, vs 308 going on. I suspect what he was getting at was shortening the tube on a .308 that much would bring the power down to something smaller. Often his humor is easy to miss. Now and then something of his goes over my head and days later It will hit me what he was doing and I start laughing. Pretty sure he did not mean this literally.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Certaindeaf is often using humor that's quite "dry"
I strongly suspect this was another case of it. For many years there was the 06, vs 308 going on. I suspect what he was getting at was shortening the tube on a .308 that much would bring the power down to something smaller. Often his humor is easy to miss. Now and then something of his goes over my head and days later It will hit me what he was doing and I start laughing. Pretty sure he did not mean this literally.

I hear you. For me it's fun to try figure out the best balance of barrel length vs performance. Particularly cuz I like smaller, handy weapons a lot.

Fe here is a graph of % energy loss for 556 as barrel length decreases. So it's a question of how much velocity are you willing to give up for a smaller weapon. And that varies tremendously from person-to-person.



I have longer 6.5 CM and other rifles and I appreciate them, don't get me wrong. It seems like every round has a point where when the barrel gets too short the velocities "drop off a cliff" so to speak. 22 mag is one that really comes to mind for dropping off a cliff in velocity. In rifle length it's a completely different beast than it is in pistol length (where it is basically the same as a 22lr).

And probably every round has a bit of a sweet spot where velocities aren't reduced that much but you can have a shorter weapon. For 556 one might say that is either 14.5" or 12.5" depending on your own individual preferences (and some ppl might say nothing under 20" and they don't value a shorter weapon at all, which is fine).

I think certaindeaf made a great comment cuz it got me thinking about it and made me answer a question I had for my own use, "Should I make a short barrel AR-10 In .308 or 6.5CM?". I think I answered that for me (bring on the .308 fireballs and noise!).

 

[Pandaz3]

What exactly is the benefit over the common AR-10?

Iam AR-10 poor,, but mine are all a lot heavier than 6.8 pounds, Good to have something lighter. Also I put a Ruger 452 trigger in a DDM4 with excellent results, reminiscent of a M-14, or is that an AR-14, anyway I like the 452 trigger, I have another squirreled away somewhere.

 

[coop44]

Nothing to see here, move along.

 

[AK0perator47]

Certaindeaf is often using humor that's quite "dry"

Maybe put some lube on it?

 

[AK0perator47]

Neat. Ruger giving the people what they want at a reasonable cost

Unfortunately they are all over the place right now. I suggested to their president almost 2 years ago about making a 2011… obviously Springfield listened and once again introduced something that people are buying.

 

[Nosferatu]

I'll be picking one up. My favored FFL quoted me $1030 OTD. Hard to pass up a lightweight .308 at that price.