Good non restricted "AR" type rifle.

AB_blaster said:
An AR type rifle does not mean a semi auto that fires 5.56x45 ammunition.
Click to expand...

No, so it's a good thing that's not what I said. I said those are some of the most basic characteristics of an AR, so if OP is looking for a rifle that fills the role of an AR, there are plenty of options.

An AR type rifle would indicate one that MOST LOOKS like an AR 15 and/or MOST REPLICATES an AR15.
Click to expand...

Would it?

Again, tool less take down is great, but it's not a feature that improves on function or reliability of the firearm.
Click to expand...

yadda yadda yadda, it's a common capability the SLR does not have, and is therefore relevant information for anyone considering it as an option.
 
All "ARs" on the market are currently technically "AR type" (AKA "AR pattern") because they're not actually Armalite or automatic as the original was. Any other rifle isn't "AR type" because it's not based on the same design. So if you're looking for another rifle that does a similar job, fine, but the idea that you'll find "AR type" rifles outside of the "AR type" itself is a bit nonsensical.
 
dfritter1 said:
Well, I guess all I can say is that I'm glad every major gun manufacturer doesn't agree with your opinion.
Click to expand...

Not opinion, fact. Explain how take down pins improve performance or reliability? Do they make the rifle more accurate or resistant to fouling and stoppages?

Jarvy said:
No, so it's a good thing that's not what I said. I said those are some of the most basic characteristics of an AR, so if OP is looking for a rifle that fills the role of an AR, there are plenty of options.



Would it?



yadda yadda yadda, it's a common capability the SLR does not have, and is therefore relevant information for anyone considering it as an option.
Click to expand...

Like I said, you listed the base criteria for a semi auto rifle chambered in 5.56x45. The OP asked about "AR type rifles" which to any intelligent person would mean a rifle that CLOSELY resembles either in appearance and/or controls/function that of an AR15. Seeing as the control layout and function of the SLR and MS are IDENTICAL to that of the AR15 and both use about 90% of the parts as an AR15, it would stand to reason those are the options that best suit his search. The vast majority of the others are either completely different in terms of control layout, appearance or both. Most of which share nearly ZERO parts in common with an AR15.

Kosmonument said:
All "ARs" on the market are currently technically "AR type" (AKA "AR pattern") because they're not actually Armalite or automatic as the original was. Any other rifle isn't "AR type" because it's not based on the same design. So if you're looking for another rifle that does a similar job, fine, but the idea that you'll find "AR type" rifles outside of the "AR type" itself is a bit nonsensical.
Click to expand...

Yes they are. AR pattern means a rifle based on or a direct copy of the original. It does not have to be made by Armalite to be an AR type of rifle. Any AR pattern upper will work with any AR pattern lower, provided they were both made to spec. Manufacturer is irrelevant. By your standard there is only one 1911 and it must be Colt.
 
AB_blaster said:
The OP asked about "AR type rifles" which to any intelligent person would mean a rifle that CLOSELY resembles either in appearance and/or controls/function that of an AR15.
Click to expand...

Really? As I pointed out, it depends on what they mean and how familiar with ARs they are. For example, how many people unfamiliar with ARs know that the A in AR stands for Armalite? Very few. If you told such person that an XCR is nothing like an AR they'd be puzzled, then possibly bored when you tried to explain the minutiae in detail, when an XCR might be the sort of thing they want. I've absolutely seen "AR" used to mean "any civilian variant of a service rifle." The reality is that "AR-Type" can mean a lot of different things if not clarified further.

What OP actually meant, we don't know. He hasn't responded, and might never respond because of this gongshow the thread has turned into.
 
Last edited:
dfritter1 said:
Easy: Serviceability equals reliability. Super simple. The easier it is to service, and effect repairs, the more reliable something is.
Click to expand...

I would beg to differ.
Lada, Skoda, Trabant, Yugo, were all designed with very high serviceability in mind.
Component access, replacement, and repair were very expedient.
They, alas, remained unreliable bags of sh!t.
Reliability is a measure of how far/long something will go before failure. (Aerospace: Mean Time Before Failure)
Serviceability is the inverse of time/effort to perform a maintenance task. (Aerospace: Maintenance Hours per Flight Hour)
Two totally different measures.
 
AR rifle and AR type are two completely different things.

There’s an actual AR , then there’s many rifles that share similarities.

None of the Non restricted rifles are actually AR 15,s, so why continue to call them that.

Anything that has a pistol grip and a adjustable stock can fall under the, AR type category.( according to the media) lol

But only an AR15 ( restricted) is actually an AR.

????

When I take my Stag 10 , NR .398 to the range and people ask what is, I don’t say it’s a AR10.
I tell them it’s a .308 semi hunting rifle.
And they say, cool ,and move along.
 
Last edited:
Brianma65 said:
AR rifle and AR type are two completely different things.

There’s an actual AR , then there’s many rifles that share similarities.

None of the Non restricted rifles are actually AR 15,s, so why continue to call them that.

Anything that has a pistol grip and a adjustable stock can fall under the, AR type category.( according to the media) lol

But only an AR15 ( restricted) is actually an AR.

????

When I take my Stag 10 , NR .398 to the range and people ask what is, I don’t say it’s a AR10.
I tell them it’s a .308 semi hunting rifle.
And they say, cool ,and move along.
Click to expand...

Best reply of the thread :cheers:
 
If you are comparing apples and oranges and using that as a justificatiuon - then muzzle loaders don't use magazines so they aren't necessary on any other firearm either. A user-friendly but unnecessary convenience.
 
Last edited:
Bubba Yugga said:
I would beg to differ.
Lada, Skoda, Trabant, Yugo, were all designed with very high serviceability in mind.
Component access, replacement, and repair were very expedient.
They, alas, remained unreliable bags of sh!t.
Reliability is a measure of how far/long something will go before failure. (Aerospace: Mean Time Before Failure)
Serviceability is the inverse of time/effort to perform a maintenance task. (Aerospace: Maintenance Hours per Flight Hour)
Two totally different measures.
Click to expand...

With the exception of the Trabant, Yugos, Ladas, and Skodas actually weren't all that unreliable compared to their American and European contemporaries; the Chevrolet Corvette was less reliable than the Yugo when the latter hit American shores. Only the Japanese cars really set a trend for reliability, and that largely came from a design force with a background in aviation, and included (you guessed it) an emphasis on serviceability.

On the topic of guns though, I don't view reliability as the measure of time between failures so much as I view it as an uptime vs. downtime sort of affair. A gun that never actually fails but requires four hours maintenance every three days is not one I would define as "reliable," compared to a gun that broke every three years but never required any maintenance. Hence, I view the ability to service something quickly and easily as a real boon when it comes to reliability.

But, all that said, I understand your perspective. My perspective comes from spending a lot of time talking to armourers handling large fleets of firearms, and my own experience, which is that if something is a pain to fix it usually just sits in my safe for years until I get tired of looking at it.
 
dfritter1 said:
Easy: Serviceability equals reliability. Super simple. The easier it is to service, and effect repairs, the more reliable something is.
Click to expand...

Lol my TNW ASR has tooless take down.... But is the most UN reliable gun I own !

In a basic civilain role like my self, an uber reliable gun like my JR carbine or MR1 don't require servicing simply because they are reliable and therefore never jam. I only take them down a few times a year to clean them. Which makes tooless take down on those rifles kindof unessecary.
 
AB_blaster said:
Yes they are. AR pattern means a rifle based on or a direct copy of the original. It does not have to be made by Armalite to be an AR type of rifle. Any AR pattern upper will work with any AR pattern lower, provided they were both made to spec. Manufacturer is irrelevant. By your standard there is only one 1911 and it must be Colt.
Click to expand...

You completely misread my post.
 
I just bought a RAM96 Stoner 63 clone and love it.. if you have an extra 4gs and are gunsmith Savy (no longer made nor supported for parts) I’d suggest tracking one down
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom