Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Please identify this rifle


Recommended Posts

Just a question of having been a firearms enthusiast for a long time, and still having regrets because I passed on one at a great price many years ago.  Search and you will find photos.

Edited by Rip Snorter
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

14 minutes ago, Rip Snorter said:

Just a question of having been a firearms enthusiast for a long time, and still having regrets because I passed on one at a great price many years ago.  Search and you will find photos.

 

Same here. I think, and have always thought, that the AR 180 would've been a better choice that the M16. It uses a short stroke gas piston that does not require a buffer assembly in the butt stock. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite_AR-18

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Wallaby Jack, SASS #44062 said:

 

 

 

 

 ........ looks like a black rifle to me ....  :mellow:

 

Yep, you seen one you seen 'em all!!

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/27/2024 at 6:25 AM, Chickasaw Bill SASS #70001 said:

the folding stock was a failure , flopped around , like a Walmart bag in a tornado 

 

 been a long time since I had one in hand , was not impressed with it then or now 

 

Chickasaw 

 

Eugene Stoner, who also developed the M16, thought differently.  He designed the AR18 to replace the M16.  After the thread about the Springfield '03, I have been researching rifle designers.  Stoner ranks right on up there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Chickasaw Bill SASS #70001 said:

Stoner was one heck of a designer , I felt and still do the AR180 was a failure as it was built 

 CB 

The M16 was a failure as it was built. It's taken 60 years of further development to get it where it is today. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Chickasaw Bill SASS #70001 said:

Stoner was one heck of a designer , I felt and still do the AR180 was a failure as it was built 

 

 lots of cool bits , that are better than the AR10/15/M16 series , 

 

 look at the Stoner 69 , that is very impressive unit 

 

  CB 

 

 

I saw an AR180 at a gun show one time.  Looked closely to see if it was "gold-plated" because of the price-tag.  About the M16, I read an article on it that referred to its introduction in Vietnam was initially referred as the "woodchuck wars", mainly because of the much smaller round than the Garand.

 

Stoner may have been good, but in my research there are much better designers over the years:

 

  • Yisrael Galili – designer of the IMI Galil and the Uzi SMG.
  •  Victor Mikhailovich Kalashnikov – Designer of the AK47 & AK74.
  • But after ALL of my studies, the greatest of all time:  John Moses Browning who surpasses them all.  His brilliant designs are too numerous to clutter up this fine thread.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a Ugly Black One !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/26/2024 at 9:59 PM, Wallaby Jack, SASS #44062 said:

 

 

 

 

 ........ looks like a black rifle to me ....  :mellow:

 

On 2/26/2024 at 10:11 PM, J-BAR #18287 said:

 

Yep, you seen one you seen 'em all!!

I am kind of the same way on these rifles. If I were walking past a gun display of ARs and M16s and there was an AR 180 mixed in I probably wouldn’t notice. Now, if I stopped and looked I might notice the differences, but to be honest, I am just not an AR enthusiast. 
I have owned 5 AR 15s. Sold them all except for one I gave to my son-in-law. I now own an SFAR by Ruger. I am warming up to it but I don’t love it. Yet. It’s growing on me. 
 

It’s like SASS folks that love their vintage style arms. If you stuck a bunch of Cowboy Action long guns on a table and a bunch of AR, AK, FN, Galil guys walked past they would see a bunch of lever guns. 
 

It’s all about desire and familiarity. If you have the desire you can become familiar to a type of gun more easily. 
 

My SFAR in it’s current condition. 
image.thumb.jpeg.3a803e8580672b1cb9b6219db97b81a8.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing few people realize is that the design of the buffer tube being incorporated into AR-15 was a direct result of the Army not wanting the 7.62X39 round. To get the AR-15 design into production a cheaply as possible it was carried over to the AR-15.

 

Had Stoner started out designing the rifle for the small 5.56 cartridge the buffer tube would not have been part of the design.

 

Stoner was against the inclusion of a forward assist. But Big Green insisted. The forward assist has caused more rifles to be put out of commission than it has ever kept in action. Forcing a round into the chamber almost always results in that round failing to extract when fired. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.