(original) AR-10 vs AR-15

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

RobSmith

BANNED
BANNED
BANNED
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Location
Rigaud, Quebec
Just out of curiosity, has anyone made a side by side comparison of the technical drawings of an original AR-10 vs an AR-15 ? Is there any physical difference in the lower receiver (the registrable part) of these two ? How about the rest of the innards, how many of the parts would be interchangeable ? I know that one company out there makes a firearm that they market under the <name> AR-10, but since their documentation seems to state that it's based on an AR-15 it got nailed as a "variant" and is deemed restricted.

Since the AR-10 technically <preceeded> the AR-15, and the AR-15 is the one that is named as a prescribed restricted, if a manufacturer (or an individual for that matter, with all rules, regulations, and paperwork on this matter strictly adhered to) started making firearms using some of the original AR-10 drawings, should it not be classed as non-restricted ? (even though they would be both cosmetically and mechanically very close to each other).

while we're at it, has there ever been such a beast as an AR-11, 12, 13 or 14 ?

Just curious.
 
AR10 is a 7.62 version of the AR15. the design is basically the same but alittle bigger for obvious reasons. the mag well is longer for the size of the cartridge.

the AR10 is also restricted as a variant of the AR15 :roll:
 
RobSmith said:
Since the AR-10 technically <preceeded> the AR-15, and the AR-15 is the one that is named as a prescribed restricted, if a manufacturer (or an individual for that matter, with all rules, regulations, and paperwork on this matter strictly adhered to) started making firearms using some of the original AR-10 drawings, should it not be classed as non-restricted ? (even though they would be both cosmetically and mechanically very close to each other).
Click to expand...

The original AR-10 from the late 1950's in factory semi auto is non-restricted. There are very few around but they are around. If someone today were to exactly copy an “original” then it would be non-restricted. That being said… we are dealing with the CFC and, to them, logic is not relevant. Expect anything from those Bozo’s.

This is a "real" AR-10
AR10_a.jpg
 
SP1inBC said:
The original AR-10 from the late 1950's in factory semi auto is non-restricted. There are very few around but they are around. If someone today were to exactly copy an “original” then it would be non-restricted. That being said… we are dealing with the CFC and, to them, logic is not relevant. Expect anything from those Bozo’s.
Click to expand...

Precisely my train of thought, is there such a thing around as either technical drawings or even a basic complete parts diagram of both the AR-10 and the AR-15 so they could be put side by side and see how much of a difference we would be talking about ?

What i'm specifically after is the geometry/dimensions/location and size of the various holes in the lower receiver of the original AR-10, compared to the modern day AR-15, since the lower is the registrable part of the firearm, one could conceivably partially redesign the upper to get rid of the god-awful operating handle sticking out in the carrying handle (fugly AND impractical in my opinion). I understand that the mag release system is completely different on the AR-10 versus the AR-15, is this correct ?

While we're at it, do anyone on this board have a list of the patent #'s that were issued regarding the AR's 10 and 15 ? That's another method to see how the design matured.
 
I can't help you with any tech papers for the AR-10 but I did pull it out of the safe and compare it to an SP1. Based on visual comparison, the only part that may be interchangeable would be the pistol grip screw. The concept and design are identical but all dimensions and most of the geometry is different. I have seen info about these guns on eBay in the past… haven’t been looking lately.

There is a short history of the AR-10 at http://www.armalite.com/library/history/history.htm#1
It may give you some ideas as where to look for the info you need. You may also have some luck if you get in touch with the archivist at Colt. They’ve been helpful to me on other projects.

My AR-10 is a CA not a SA. I am assuming the SA version uses the same receiver as the FA. I do know some of the fire control parts are different. Not unlike the difference between AR-15 and M16 fire control parts.

Frankly, I think you’re only real access to the specs you asked for is to reverse engineer the lower receiver.
 
"...AR10 is a 7.62 version of the AR15..." No. The AR-15 is a .223 version of the AR-10. None of which came out of the factory as semi-auto only. They are converted FA's. Hence prohibited. The lower in physically bigger than the AR-15.
"...how many of the parts would be interchangeable?..." None.
 
What Sunray said. http://world.guns.ru/assault/as16-e.htm

So, historically the AR 10 is a battle rifle and not an assault rifle. The powers that be have once again mis-classified a firearm and prohibited it from legal ownership. Will wonders never cease?

Hmmm..............how come his rifle is longer in a bull-pup than in his walnut stock? Gotta take a $2 billion skank tank to figure that one out. Idiots, that is all they are and it is :oops: our own fault.

Actually it is really amazing when you place a Muzzlelite bull-pup and a standard Ruger stock side by side with the rifles fitted. My oh my do you think the brains can read the numbers on a tape measure.

Think I'll design a bull-kitty or a bull-hamster. I can see the headlines now "Liberal Party takes to caucus the issue of whether to ban fully automatic hamster killer air soft rifles, 'you know, the ones with the red muzzle'"

3rd rant of the day and feel at least 2 more coming on strong.

Sorry for the semi-hijack, just couldn't pass up a gov dig.

Have a nice day
 
if original are non restricted when not CA why would this be

ar10BWholeLarge.jpg



i mean we have ar180 and ar180b type of a situation here :D anyone know if wolverine submitted one
 
New production AR10s are considered to be variants of the AR15, and are therefore restricted. When these current production "AR10s" were designed they were engineered to have as much in common with AR15s as possible, and in a way are variants of the AR15. (AR15s reverse engineered for .308). The original AR10 preceded the first AR15. The overwhelming majority of original AR10s were selective fire, although a few were semi only, and at least one in Canada is classed as non-restricted. Therefore, new production semi-only AR10s made as exact duplicates of an original semi AR10 should be classed as non-restricted. Whether it would be or not is anyone's guess. Having shot a few original AR10s, these are impressive rifles; if they had been in production a few years earlier, they would probably still be widespread standard issue.
 
I still havent figured out why AK's are prohib and CZ858's are non. Govt thinking goes along with a "B" movies plot line!! Why should the AR10 & 10B be any different.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom