Most reliable semi auto .308 rifle?

Erickson5006 said:
I was hoping to see the Modern Hunter on here a few times... Is it not reliable? Or just not common?
Click to expand...

When it comes to reliability a semi auto battle rifle which in many cases has full auto parentage will always win out over a semi precision rifle. Tighter manufacturing tolerances, match type chambers and more complex triggers will always lose in reliability compared to loose tolerance chambers that will cycle anything regardless of how deformed or dirty the ammo is. Get grit in a complex target type trigger and it will fail in comparison to a milspec trigger that has much fewer parts and can be cleaned in the field with simple flushing.
Same applies to bolt action rifle to a degree. A SMLE will function in conditions that the soldier may not, whist even something like a Rem700 which is not nearly as finicky as most of the custom actions are, won't.

Our Modern Hunter and Varmint are very reliable, providing they are kept clean, well lubricated and fed good ammo. Unlike an AK that will work pretty much in any condition, dry and full of sand, but the AK is not terribly accurate in comparison. Our rifles were never intended for battle field use.
In the car world it would be like asking which is the most reliable vehicle, you won't find many fancy cars in the line up, but many very basic vehicles like the older Land Cruisers and Willy's jeeps as they were simple, compared to the G Wagon or HumVee
 
well put Rick

My LRB M25 is perhaps one of the more reliably accuarate semi auto rifles I have owned and will print nosler J4 168grHPBT sub moa
BUT..... that reliablilty begins to go away after about 150 to 200 rounds then I have to clean the internal reaches of my gas piston and plug and she's back in the zone again.
I tried a custom plug and various things but in the end, she is not a battle rifle anymore , she is a precision rifle that happens to be semi automatic hehehe
 
Bartok5 said:
The last trial conducted of the Post-WW2 Western Battle Rifles was likely that of the South African Army in 1960. The winner was the FN FAL, followed closely by the Artillerie Intrichtingen (Armalite) AR10, then the HK G3 in third place. The M14 was apparently not included in the SA trial for any number of reasons, not the least of which were an international arms embargo and a prickly relationship with the USA. In any case, the FN FAL was considered the most reliable Battle Rifle at that time. Since then, the only real new developments have been in regards to the AR10. The further development undertaken by Knights Armament, the reborn Armalite Ltd, HK and others, have made the modern Direct-Impingement .308 AR pattern the most reliable (and accurate), semi-auto, military .308 in the world. This is evidenced by the US adoption of the Stoner SR25 and the more recent (2010) British acceptance of the LMT MWS as their Sharpshooter Rifle, the L129A1. The HK G28 (another .308 AR system) has more recently (2017) been adopted as the US Army's new Compact Semi-Automatic Sniper System (CSASS), the M110A1 rifle. There is no refuting the military dominance of the .308 AR within Western militaries as an intermediate-range sharpshooter/Designated Marksman Rifle (DMR).

The M14, in contrast, was pressed back into service as a stop-gap DMR only until sufficient SR25s could be fielded. Then it was passed on to the fledgling post-Saddam Iraqi Army... poor buggers. The accurized M14s, while capable of good accuracy and reliability, are very maintenance-heavy and in need of Armourer-level servicing on a much more frequent basis than the more modern, modular systems such as the Stoner rifle or LMT MWS.
Click to expand...

Excellent post.

Unfortunately the two well known non restricted AR308 rifles out there are both hobby grade. One knows it, the other seems to be in denial.

The Stag 10 is a much better option for non restricted AR308. I'll be building one of these. I already have a BCL 102 which is as I stated, hobby grade but looking it over it has exceeded my very low expectations. Still not in the same class as the above listed rifles in military use. Not even close. I believe the Stag 10 will be as close as we can get to a real quality AR308 in non restricted here in Canada.
 
driller212 said:
My Modern Hunter, BCL-102, and XCR-M never skipped a beat. That being said, I never did torture test any of them for obvious reasons.
Click to expand...

I seem to recall that this wasn't the case until you changed the barrel on your MH to a Remington R25 barrel/extension.
 
Epoxy7 said:
I seem to recall that this wasn't the case until you changed the barrel on your MH to a Remington R25 barrel/extension.
Click to expand...

Not at all. I only switched the barrel so that I could shoot .308 ammunition and talked about getting a non-match barrel in .308 so I could shoot surplus reliably. The rifle never skipped a beat with either barrel.
 
Erickson5006 said:
I was hoping to see the Modern Hunter on here a few times... Is it not reliable? Or just not common?
Click to expand...

Many MH owners refuse to post anything publicly due to the flak from the haters. We have 2 guys that I know of who are shooting F Class with a MH with good success and several guys and girls shooting PRS and 3 gun with Modern Varmints also with good success.
I believe the key is to get your mind into the space that these rifles are NOT battle rifles and do require ammo and maintenance more suitable to a precision rifle than a battle rifle.
 
anton520b said:
For me and all my needs, be it a bush or range, one truly ultimate "do all" rifle is Robinson Armament XCR-M with heavy barrel.
Some people complain it's heavy, but when you use top notch steels, all metal parts, no cheap flimsy plastics, of course it get's a bit hefty as it should.
Lot's of lighter and inferior plastic designs out there, but for me no other platform does it. Swap calibers and barrels at will, ergonomics that even gods would be thrilled about lol,
and it just looks good in that OD-green and feels good in hands like no other (after trying out most other platforms that our market has to offer).
Click to expand...

Higher quality steel doesn't = heavier. Actually might be the opposite, but only slightly. "High quality" steels tend to have higher %s of carbon and alloying elements in them, i.e. chromium, molybdenum, nickel, manganese, vanadium, etc. Carbon is much lighter than iron. Chromium, vanadium and manganese are slightly lighter than iron, molybdenum and nickel are heavier. But the percentages are so small that you'd never notice a weight difference.
 
Epoxy7 said:
Excellent post.

Unfortunately the two well known non restricted AR308 rifles out there are both hobby grade. One knows it, the other seems to be in denial.

The Stag 10 is a much better option for non restricted AR308. I'll be building one of these. I already have a BCL 102 which is as I stated, hobby grade but looking it over it has exceeded my very low expectations. Still not in the same class as the above listed rifles in military use. Not even close. I believe the Stag 10 will be as close as we can get to a real quality AR308 in non restricted here in Canada.
Click to expand...

If it's not to involved, can you explain the differences between what you call hobby grade and a quality AR308?
 
Can-down said:
If it's not to involved, can you explain the differences between what you call hobby grade and a quality AR308?
Click to expand...

You can get into all the nitty gritty details such as MPI/HP tested bolts, barrels, 7075 anodized etc etc. Long story short:

Professional:

1) You can trust your life that it will work (reliability) and it will shoot as expected (accuracy).
2) It will last a designated period of time before requiring refurbishment. Professional grade equipment has a high round count before requiring refurbishment.
3) It will hold up due to build/components for the type of use it will be subjected to. Which is expected to be harsh environment use.


Hobby Grade:

1) It works with some ammo but might need tinkering as it's designed to work with a very large range of ammo. Or it's very specific and only works with a few types of ammo. Example, can't shoot milsurp ammo or soft round hunting ammo etc.
2) The life span of the parts are designed at a price point and with the average hobby shooter round count in mind. This is determined by what is financially best for the company.
3) Material are selected for financial reasons and it just has to last long enough and isn't necessarily designed for harsh environments as that would cost more. Cheaper build cost and mass production = more profit.
4) There is no guarantee with accuracy. It might shoot very well, it might not. Often luck of the draw.
5) Reliability doesn't have to be perfect. Chances are it won't be as it has to work with numerous magazine types and ammunition. Or in the case of some, it will only work with some ammo and only a few mags. Unfortunately not necessarily the ones the owner would choose.

That's pretty much how I sum it up. There is a lot more and you can go into all the individual specs etc. Bottom line, neither the BCL or the MH would ever be selected for professional use. While military/police are somewhat protected by competitions and awarded contracts based on the above qualities, I would add that others should also consider this. The hobby grade or consumer grade for instance would be informal target shooters. A hunter going after dangerous game should only go with professional grade. Their and others lives may be at stake. I wouldn't trust my life to either of these two rifles I've listed as hobby grade.

There is still a place for hobby grade. Cost benefit is usually the number one reason. I would have no problem using a lesser grade product for target shooting or even competitions. I'd be pissed at a bad range day or loosing a competition (I don't compete) but it's not the end of the world and the price, availability of parts etc might make it a worthwhile option. Given the choice I would want the best I could afford. But if you're competing a lot and putting a lot of rounds down range then the cheaper option that you can easily source new parts for might be the better option. This is why you often see people trying to avoid as much proprietary parts as possible.

The BCL allows you to replace parts to a point. The MH requires a lot of effort to change/replace anything and is pretty much forbidden by the company. The Stag 10 uses the easiest compatible parts to source and parts from Stag are available and can be changed in by the owner. I think the Stag 10 is the current best all around for price/quality. It will be interesting to see if they go after any professional sales with this. At this point I think they are very good consumer grade bordering professional grade. They are well made, cost effective and easy to get parts for. Would I trust my life with one? Not sure. So no. However after a full evaluation and the rifles were checked over then likely it would make the grade. I would however trust a KAC, LMT, HK and a few others including a couple of Armalite rifles I own which were all designed and specd for professional use.
 
Last edited:
One last comment, is software engineering there's a saying: "If it's not tested, it doesn't work".
Testing, even basic field trials is extremely expensive, takes time and manpower, so only a government can realistically afford them.
Also AKs, ARs and HKs are now extremely reliable and have been battle tested for decades.
All the bugs have been ironed out or a good work around is known and is systematically used in the field.
 
Epoxy7 said:
You can get into all the nitty gritty details such as MPI/HP tested bolts, barrels, 7075 anodized etc etc. Long story short:

Professional:

1) You can trust your life that it will work (reliability) and it will shoot as expected (accuracy).
2) It will last a designated period of time before requiring refurbishment. Professional grade equipment has a high round count before requiring refurbishment.
3) It will hold up due to build/components for the type of use it will be subjected to. Which is expected to be harsh environment use.


Hobby Grade:

1) It works with some ammo but might need tinkering as it's designed to work with a very large range of ammo. Or it's very specific and only works with a few types of ammo. Example, can't shoot milsurp ammo or soft round hunting ammo etc.
2) The life span of the parts are designed at a price point and with the average hobby shooter round count in mind. This is determined by what is financially best for the company.
3) Material are selected for financial reasons and it just has to last long enough and isn't necessarily designed for harsh environments as that would cost more. Cheaper build cost and mass production = more profit.
4) There is no guarantee with accuracy. It might shoot very well, it might not. Often luck of the draw.
5) Reliability doesn't have to be perfect. Chances are it won't be as it has to work with numerous magazine types and ammunition. Or in the case of some, it will only work with some ammo and only a few mags. Unfortunately not necessarily the ones the owner would choose.

That's pretty much how I sum it up. There is a lot more and you can go into all the individual specs etc. Bottom line, neither the BCL or the MH would ever be selected for professional use. While military/police are somewhat protected by competitions and awarded contracts based on the above qualities, I would add that others should also consider this. The hobby grade or consumer grade for instance would be informal target shooters. A hunter going after dangerous game should only go with professional grade. Their and others lives may be at stake. I wouldn't trust my life to either of these two rifles I've listed as hobby grade.

There is still a place for hobby grade. Cost benefit is usually the number one reason. I would have no problem using a lesser grade product for target shooting or even competitions. I'd be pissed at a bad range day or loosing a competition (I don't compete) but it's not the end of the world and the price, availability of parts etc might make it a worthwhile option. Given the choice I would want the best I could afford. But if you're competing a lot and putting a lot of rounds down range then the cheaper option that you can easily source new parts for might be the better option. This is why you often see people trying to avoid as much proprietary parts as possible.

The BCL allows you to replace parts to a point. The MH requires a lot of effort to change/replace anything and is pretty much forbidden by the company. The Stag 10 uses the easiest compatible parts to source and parts from Stag are available and can be changed in by the owner. I think the Stag 10 is the current best all around for price/quality. It will be interesting to see if they go after any professional sales with this. At this point I think they are very good consumer grade bordering professional grade. They are well made, cost effective and easy to get parts for. Would I trust my life with one? Not sure. So no. However after a full evaluation and the rifles were checked over then likely it would make the grade. I would however trust a KAC, LMT, HK and a few others including a couple of Armalite rifles I own which were all designed and specd for professional use.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the lengthy reply.

I understand the concept of hobby and pro grade tools in general and I do understand getting the best tools for the job when it comes to personal safety.

It sounds like a lot of the reliability of issue guns comes from only using one or two loads that are tailored to the design or vice versa.

So if these cheap "hobby" guns cost $2000 (using cheaper parts with less quality)..... how much does a typical issue AR10 or similar rifle cost?
 
with the military they use 1 type of rifle, 1 type of mag, one type of ammo. in the civilian market we are all over the dang map with 1000 different combo's of components. Something like those benelli's or fnar semi autos, are probably the safe bet. back in the good old days im sure the lever guns gave quite a bit of grief at times.
 
alberta tactical rifle said:
Many MH owners refuse to post anything publicly due to the flak from the haters. We have 2 guys that I know of who are shooting F Class with a MH with good success and several guys and girls shooting PRS and 3 gun with Modern Varmints also with good success.
I believe the key is to get your mind into the space that these rifles are NOT battle rifles and do require ammo and maintenance more suitable to a precision rifle than a battle rifle.
Click to expand...

My MH .308 has run flawlessly for years now using both the metal and plastic mags and every type of ammo I could conjure up including lead-tipped hunting bullets, many polymer and Match HP from three manufacturers. It hasn't had a single failure in over 550 rounds. I've used mostly handloads sized with a regular Lee FL die but also factory stuff including steel-case. I can't make it fail. I've shot many sub-moa groups with the Speer 168's and it really likes the 175's as well. I should probably clean it some day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom