LUVO AR-15's (crazy ####!)
- Thread starter SCDL
- Start date
No they were not. The original AR-10's were all aluminum and fibreglass - from the early prototypes to pre-production test models. The original Dutch AR-10's had a "half-wood" fore stock with a protruding gas tube, but no wood on the butt stock.
The original Armalite AR-15's had full woven fibreglass furniture.
The first Colt 600 series rifles were brown fibrite furniture. Some early models had a green stock, which the originals were brown fibrite painted green.
The XM16E1 had black "impregnated" firbrite furniture
The round "top and bottom hand guards appeared in 1965-66 but not adopted until M16A2 contract.
Other than a very few early dutch part wood fore stocks, there has never been any wood stocks for production or prototypes.
I installed a set of those laminated stocks for a customer, they really are terrible, the finger grooves are in the wrong place unless you have hands of an orangutan, and they are much heavier than factorycall me weird... but I like the laminate wood furniture one
C77 is correct - the pre-production Armalite "Hollywood" AR-10s wore all synthetic furniture, as did the Dutch Artillerie Inrichtingen-manufactured "Sudanese", "Transitional" and "Portuguese/NATO" production variants. I have owned examples of the Sudanese and Portuguese variants, and have a nice Portuguese in my safe. Even the "half & half" handguards found on the Transitional and Portuguese variants of the AR-10 (as alluded to above) are synthetic and aluminum. The gas tube is not "exposed" per-se, as it and the barrel are covered by the ventilated aluminum (forward) portion of the Portuguese style handguard.
Where the confusion regarding wood furniture on the AR-10s comes into play is when they hit the international surplus arms market. SIDEM (U.K.) bought up as many of the original AI AR-10s as they could find in the late 1970s, early 1980s. I don't know any exact numbers that survived to hit the surplus market, but it was likely only a few thousand. Only approximately 12,000 production guns were ever manufactured in the first place, and the largest batch saw hard use by Portuguese Paras & Marines during their 1970's colonial war in Angola. The synthetic furniture was the first of its type ever fielded, and at that early juncture the technology was such that the AR-10 furniture was far less robust (but also lighter weight!) than wooden equivalent would have been. A lot of the furniture on the surviving rifles was damaged when they were sold off to various dealers.
One of those dealers is a member of this board, and would be best positioned to speak about those fascinating times if he were willing. I will simply say that Peter Wilke of Ontario Gun and Tackle was one the primary (perhaps the only?) Canadian importers, and I recall reading that it was Mr. Wilke who commissioned someone (presumably in Canada) to produce replacement wooden AR-10 furniture when it was determined that there were far more rifles than intact furniture. I believe that the surplussed original AR-10s that ended up in other Commonwealth countries such as NZ and Aus, passed through Mr. Wilke's hands and thus received the after-market wooden furniture that he had arranged to make the surplus rifles with damaged or missing parts whole again for civilian resale of the "converted-auto" (and thus non-restricted) rifles.
Truly original AR-10s (select-fire, original lower receiver) are few and far between outside of the US, where there are a few hundred "transferable" examples. Parts are in high demand, with original furniture (esp. buttstocks) at the top of the "wants" list. I sourced an original buttstock for my Portuguese variant from a fellow AR-10 enthusiast in NZ so that I could finally ditch the replacement wooden stock that mine came with. It took me years to find that buttstock, and it needed minor repairs to hairline cracks.
Anyhow, that is the explanation behind the wooden AR-10 furniture. There is a terrific book on the history of the AR10 (original and the modern "rebirth") written by US Army Major (Ret'd) Sam Pikula. He explains all of the above, plus a whole bunch more. It is really quite a fascinating read about Western small arms development during that critical period of the 1950s and 60s - the competition with the M-14 and FN FAL for the U.S. M1 Garand replacement project, etc). Mr. Wilke's prominent role in the second life of the original AR-10 rifles is well-documented in Maj Pikula's book and elsewhere, which is why I was willing to mention a fellow CGNer's identity in this response.
Hope this clears up some of the confusion. The original AR-10s are amazing rifles, and their history is of "the one that got away". Few folks realize just how close the AR-10 came to being a major player against the FN FAL and HK G3 as the pre-eminent battle rifle of the 7.62mm NATO Cold War era. A bad decision led to a blown barrel on a pre-production rifle during the U.S. Trials, which put the final nail in the coffin there. It was just a few years too early for the prototype AR-10 to compete against more conventional designs and materials. Still, the improved production version of the rifle came a very close second behind the FN FAL during the South African rifle trials of 1960, beating out the G3, M-14, etc. By that point the writing was already on the wall anyhow - the U.S. had realized its mistake in insisting that NATO adopt the 7.62x51mm cartridge in the 1950's, and were already looking at adopting an intermediate cartridge and the "Assault Rifle" to with it. And we all know where the AR-15 came from, don't we? It bears more than a passing resemblance to the "obsolete" AR-10 for good reason. How ironic that the AR-10 was resurrected for civilian sales in the 1980s, only to finally become a type-classified component of the U.S. Government arsenal after all as the DM weapons we see being produced by Knight's, LMT, etc for a "who's who" laundry list of high-speed Western war-fighters.
Where the confusion regarding wood furniture on the AR-10s comes into play is when they hit the international surplus arms market. SIDEM (U.K.) bought up as many of the original AI AR-10s as they could find in the late 1970s, early 1980s. I don't know any exact numbers that survived to hit the surplus market, but it was likely only a few thousand. Only approximately 12,000 production guns were ever manufactured in the first place, and the largest batch saw hard use by Portuguese Paras & Marines during their 1970's colonial war in Angola. The synthetic furniture was the first of its type ever fielded, and at that early juncture the technology was such that the AR-10 furniture was far less robust (but also lighter weight!) than wooden equivalent would have been. A lot of the furniture on the surviving rifles was damaged when they were sold off to various dealers.
One of those dealers is a member of this board, and would be best positioned to speak about those fascinating times if he were willing. I will simply say that Peter Wilke of Ontario Gun and Tackle was one the primary (perhaps the only?) Canadian importers, and I recall reading that it was Mr. Wilke who commissioned someone (presumably in Canada) to produce replacement wooden AR-10 furniture when it was determined that there were far more rifles than intact furniture. I believe that the surplussed original AR-10s that ended up in other Commonwealth countries such as NZ and Aus, passed through Mr. Wilke's hands and thus received the after-market wooden furniture that he had arranged to make the surplus rifles with damaged or missing parts whole again for civilian resale of the "converted-auto" (and thus non-restricted) rifles.
Truly original AR-10s (select-fire, original lower receiver) are few and far between outside of the US, where there are a few hundred "transferable" examples. Parts are in high demand, with original furniture (esp. buttstocks) at the top of the "wants" list. I sourced an original buttstock for my Portuguese variant from a fellow AR-10 enthusiast in NZ so that I could finally ditch the replacement wooden stock that mine came with. It took me years to find that buttstock, and it needed minor repairs to hairline cracks.
Anyhow, that is the explanation behind the wooden AR-10 furniture. There is a terrific book on the history of the AR10 (original and the modern "rebirth") written by US Army Major (Ret'd) Sam Pikula. He explains all of the above, plus a whole bunch more. It is really quite a fascinating read about Western small arms development during that critical period of the 1950s and 60s - the competition with the M-14 and FN FAL for the U.S. M1 Garand replacement project, etc). Mr. Wilke's prominent role in the second life of the original AR-10 rifles is well-documented in Maj Pikula's book and elsewhere, which is why I was willing to mention a fellow CGNer's identity in this response.
Hope this clears up some of the confusion. The original AR-10s are amazing rifles, and their history is of "the one that got away". Few folks realize just how close the AR-10 came to being a major player against the FN FAL and HK G3 as the pre-eminent battle rifle of the 7.62mm NATO Cold War era. A bad decision led to a blown barrel on a pre-production rifle during the U.S. Trials, which put the final nail in the coffin there. It was just a few years too early for the prototype AR-10 to compete against more conventional designs and materials. Still, the improved production version of the rifle came a very close second behind the FN FAL during the South African rifle trials of 1960, beating out the G3, M-14, etc. By that point the writing was already on the wall anyhow - the U.S. had realized its mistake in insisting that NATO adopt the 7.62x51mm cartridge in the 1950's, and were already looking at adopting an intermediate cartridge and the "Assault Rifle" to with it. And we all know where the AR-15 came from, don't we? It bears more than a passing resemblance to the "obsolete" AR-10 for good reason. How ironic that the AR-10 was resurrected for civilian sales in the 1980s, only to finally become a type-classified component of the U.S. Government arsenal after all as the DM weapons we see being produced by Knight's, LMT, etc for a "who's who" laundry list of high-speed Western war-fighters.
There are some examples of AR10's with factory wooden handguards. However, it seems like all the Sudan and Porto contract rifles has synthetic furniture throughout.
A very few of the earliest Dutch AR10's had wooden handguards. These predate the Sudan contract and are prototypes of a couple hundred rifles sold into south and central America. The Dutch call these Cuban rifles.
There are many Transitional AR10's with wooden handguards, but most still had plastic. Maybe there are so many Transitionals now with wood because that is what collectors would most prize.
There are no real Portuguese AR10's with wooden handguards. However, one well-known Porto sniper prototype has wood. Note that the trigger charging handle is a little weird.... Because its a prototype.
A very few of the earliest Dutch AR10's had wooden handguards. These predate the Sudan contract and are prototypes of a couple hundred rifles sold into south and central America. The Dutch call these Cuban rifles.
There are many Transitional AR10's with wooden handguards, but most still had plastic. Maybe there are so many Transitionals now with wood because that is what collectors would most prize.
There are no real Portuguese AR10's with wooden handguards. However, one well-known Porto sniper prototype has wood. Note that the trigger charging handle is a little weird.... Because its a prototype.
Thats a weird looking little cartridge eh...
