Dutch made Portuguese and Sudanese AR10s

can14 said:
How many people still have them? What about assy's?
Click to expand...

My relatives who used them in Africa wish they still had their issued ones.

1274731208.jpg


Translated from Portuguese:
"I owe you life"
 
Last edited:
From practical (military) point of view how does this rifle compare to FN FAL?

They are approximately the same age yet FAL became far more popular.

Too advanced/costly?
 
donor said:
From practical (military) point of view how does this rifle compare to FN FAL?

They are approximately the same age yet FAL became far more popular.

Too advanced/costly?
Click to expand...

they were very light, but the stock design made them very controllable, they were tried against the FAL and the M-14 by the americans, and the prototype had a stellite lined aluminium barrel. Springfield armoury got to run the tests, and they also wanted to sell the m-14 so they ran an AR-10 on full auto for 10000 rounds continuously at which point the barrel failed.

the british and americans had a deal where the british would adopt 7.62 nato rather than .280 british for interchangeability, and the americans would adopt the FAL. the americans then went with the M-14, and shortly there after went to 5.56 nato and the AR design that stoner had sold off when it didn't get any buyers the first time. the rest of NATO had bought into the FAL because everyone was going to adopt them with the british/american agreement.
 
The Sudanese AR10s came into the shop, long ago, with some of the desert still in 'em. Full of sand. Sold well, but mostly because they were a novelty. The Portuguese rifles were in much better condition. Mind you, they were carried a lot but fired little. There were 2 models too. One was like the only in the video link. The other had a short forestock. SAW variant, as I recall.
The Americans adopted the M-14 for political reasons then promptly told other NATO countries the 7.62 would be adopted or they'd pull out of NATO. The Americans went with the M-14 primarily because it was invented there. Despite it only winning the accuracy part of the tests. Claimed they didn't want a foreign made rifle in case they ever needed 'em for a war and couldn't get 'em. Politician's BS, of course. No reason FAL's couldn't have been made Stateside, except FN likely said no.
Same thing 10 years later when McNamara decided the U.S. Army would adopt the M16 and the 5.56. Both cartridges were jammed down NATOs throat. No 'deals' were ever made. Certainly not with just the Brits.
Always thought the best idea for an AR-10 was the Finns'. They bought 5 of 'em for testing chambered in 7.62 x 39. Nothing ever came of it though. The AR-10 was too far ahead of its time. Too radical looking for 1950's military minds.
 
once again, sunray pulls info out of his rectum and then leaves
several meetings and agreements were made in the late 40s and early 50s

-in 1947 the americans first disagreed with the 7mm concept
-in 1950 springfield was told to continue persuing the .30 cartridge and rifle T-25 becoming the T-47
-april of 1951 the brits announced the adoption of .280 british and the EM2 rifle
-august of 1951, canada called a meeting at the pentagon to settle on new round, where in the T65 round (7.62 nato) was basically chosen on the americans insistence, since the .280 FAL had performed the best in the trials of 1950.
-late 1952 the american buy some FALs in 7.62 calling them T44s, FN gives at no cost the rights to produce the FAL in the US for use of US Troops anywhere in the world.
-october of 1953, the FN would slowly replace the M1 and the T44 (springfield m-14) would cease development
-1954 conversion of drawings and test batches of american made FALs begins, the americans have accepted the FAL and the british/canadians are now fully committed to both the FAL and the 7.62 nato
-1955 the americans start new tests, eventually choosing the M-14 over the AR-10 and FAL.

all of this can be found in the first book of R. Blake Stevens series on the FAL
 
scott585 said:
once again, sunray pulls info out of his rectum and then leaves
several meetings and agreements were made in the late 40s and early 50s

-in 1947 the americans first disagreed with the 7mm concept
-in 1950 springfield was told to continue persuing the .30 cartridge and rifle T-25 becoming the T-47
-april of 1951 the brits announced the adoption of .280 british and the EM2 rifle
-august of 1951, canada called a meeting at the pentagon to settle on new round, where in the T65 round (7.62 nato) was basically chosen on the americans insistence, since the .280 FAL had performed the best in the trials of 1950.
-late 1952 the american buy some FALs in 7.62 calling them T44s, FN gives at no cost the rights to produce the FAL in the US for use of US Troops anywhere in the world.
-october of 1953, the FN would slowly replace the M1 and the T44 (springfield m-14) would cease development
-1954 conversion of drawings and test batches of american made FALs begins, the americans have accepted the FAL and the british/canadians are now fully committed to both the FAL and the 7.62 nato
-1955 the americans start new tests, eventually choosing the M-14 over the AR-10 and FAL.

all of this can be found in the first book of R. Blake Stevens series on the FAL
Click to expand...

That's pretty much how understood it to be also. I seem to recall reading that the AR10 was a latecomer to the scene, and that just about all the NATO countries had already selected their rifles by the time the AR 10 came around, which is why, despite being such a great weapon, it didn't have a better reception.

Pity that.
 
CGS said:
That's pretty much how understood it to be also. I seem to recall reading that the AR10 was a latecomer to the scene, and that just about all the NATO countries had already selected their rifles by the time the AR 10 came around, which is why, despite being such a great weapon, it didn't have a better reception.

Pity that.
Click to expand...

Real pity is the 280 being abandoned.
 
woodchopper said:
Real pity is the 280 being abandoned.
Click to expand...

So true.
The brits were light years ahead on that cartridge.
It was the perfect missing link between full power cartridge and High Velocity intermediate in my opinion.
They're still playing catch up/beating a dead horse in my opinion with the .223/5.56 Cartridge as a battle round long after they had the solution......
 
The ultimate irony of that being that the US was to blame for the demise/waysiding of the .280 British for the "more powerful" 7.62 NATO.
Which they abandonded as a main battle rifle cartridge for the 5.56mm much less powerfull cartridge about 10 years later! lol

There was found to be massive bias by the US in charge of the trials and evaluations that led to them settling on the 7.62 (T65) cartridge. Apparently they thought the bullpup design the .280 was designed for, was a strange foreign bastard anomally. They also refused to even acknowledge the existance of any cartridge under the beloved US .30 Cal so it was doomed before the results of the trials were even in on the US side of the house.

The Brits and FN went far out of their way to appease the Americans creating modified cartridges still in line with the .280 Brit but it was no use obviously.
 
Last edited:
Travis Bickle said:
The ultimate irony of that being that the US was to blame for the demise/waysiding of the .280 British for the "more powerful" 7.62 NATO.
Which they abandonded as a main battle rifle cartridge for the 5.56mm much less powerfull cartridge about 10 years later! lol

There was found to be massive bias by the US in charge of the trials and evaluations that led to them settling on the 7.62 (T65) cartridge. Apparently they thought the bullpup design the .280 was designed for, was a strange foreign bastard anomally. They also refused to even acknowledge the existance of any cartridge under the beloved US .30 Cal so it was doomed before the results of the trials were even in on the US side of the house.

The Brits and FN went far out of their way to appease the Americans creating modified cartridges still in line with the .280 Brit but it was no use obviously.
Click to expand...

lots of .280 cases made to use the same bolt face as .30-06 so existing guns could be converted, sort of a shorter 7mm-08. FN paid for all the development of the 7.62 FAL from their own pocket to appease the americans who then chose the m-14
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom