Ruger 30-06 SAR Rifle

257Roberts

257Roberts

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 92.9%
12   1   1
Location
Peterborough ON
I seen a very interesting rifle today at the 8 Wing open house at CFB Trenton.
They had a Ruger 30-06 with a really heavy and short bbl. and a folding stock.
I was told that it was a survival rifle that is supplied for self defense if the squad was down in a area that had some dangerous critters (meaning up north with the bears).
My bad for not taking a picture of this rifle but it was really interesting.
Just found this on another site, you can have a look to.
http://www.eme421.com/SAR.html
 
Last edited:
Yep, it's a really curious gun. Seems to have been ordered/thought up by someone not overly 'woodsy', not a hunter or firearms chap, likely more aviation minded than function oriented. Why they decided to burn more powder and choose the non-NATO (at least no longer current) .30-06 over .308 boggles the mind, good for more muzzle blast from such a short barrel and that's about it. Don't get me wrong- I prefer the -06 but here it's not helping anything in this rifle.

Also, 14.5" barrel... Basically a .30-30 with a lot more noise and recoil now. If I was designing an air survival full bore rifle, to handle large game and predators, would be a folding stock (the stock's good), stainless, 18" .308/7.62 NATO. Modest recoil for those unfamiliar with hunting rifles, a more supplied, more efficient cartridge for the short barrel, stainless to resist the elements over the years of service, and more barrel to make it a little more effective.

Glad to see the SAR boys flying with Ruger though! And hope I never meet them while they're at work, not a good sign in my line 'o work. :D
 
The barrel looked like a target or heavy varmint profile, and it was heavy for it's size.
It surprised me to be a 30-06 as well but at 14.5 inches you would loose lots of velocity.
 
"It surprised me to be a 30-06 as well but at 14.5 inches you would loose lots of velocity."

They're still claiming 180 @ 2700 for velocity...

Neat little rifle I think.

I'd buy that for a dollar...
 
I encountered a few of these when I was still wearing green. Same Ruger 30-06 and short barrels, except the stocks were standard length, factory walnut models that had been painted over with SAR-Tech orange. Heavy for their size.
 
Put a reasonable weight barrel on it, chamber it to 308 and thin out the ridiculously oversized stock and you'd have a brilliant short-actionned survival rifle. And it's likely finish at about 5.5 lbs and be as shootable as that thing and be quieter to boot. Hell, at 14.5" you're just burning powder to no effect in a 30-06. And there's no way on God' sGreen Earth that they're actually getting 2700 out of that little beast. I fit's 2300 I'd be impressed.

SARFail.
 
I saw a couple of those a few years back when the SAR techs made a training jump here. As I recall I thought the rifle would have been better with a folding fiberglass stock rather than with a door hinge on the factory wood stock, but otherwise it seems to fill their niche pretty well. If I was selecting their ammo, I would choose a 220 or 240 gr bullet to minimize the velocity loss from the short barrel, it seems to me they carried factory Winchester 180 gr PPs.

As BUM suggests, a .308 would suffer less velocity loss and could be had in a shorter rifle due to the shorter action length, or they could of had a rifle of equal length with a slightly longer barrel. But because I'm a solid '06 fan, I'll say the .30/06 fits the bill as well or better than anything else could in a rifle of that size; anything bigger would kick too hard and anything smaller wouldn't be up to the job.
 
They won't be getting 2700 fps out of a 14.5" barrel. Muzzle flash and noise would be astounding too. Sounds like they're using Remington factory ammo.
"....308 would suffer less velocity loss..." Nope.
 
I like it.

I travel in and out of small aircraft, and usually do the poor-mans-takedown (barreled action out of stock, rolled in a couple stanfields, and stuffed in the duffelbag), and I can see the utility of that configuration.

Hate to see what Diemaco charged us per copy though.
 
rgv said:
I like it.

I travel in and out of small aircraft, and usually do the poor-mans-takedown (barreled action out of stock, rolled in a couple stanfields, and stuffed in the duffelbag), and I can see the utility of that configuration.

Hate to see what Diemaco charged us per copy though.
Click to expand...

Diemaco is likely under contract to Not sell such dangerous military weapons like this bolt gun to Canadian civilians in order to keep their other gov't contracts.
 
AR stocks have no place on anything but AR's...! If it doesn't have an operating buffer and buffer tube, it shouldn't have an AR stock- true folders are better.

rgv said:
I like it.

I travel in and out of small aircraft, and usually do the poor-mans-takedown (barreled action out of stock, rolled in a couple stanfields, and stuffed in the duffelbag), and I can see the utility of that configuration.

Hate to see what Diemaco charged us per copy though.
Click to expand...

Same here, but still wouldn't choose .30-06 in a 14.5" barrel.
 
Ardent said:
AR stocks have no place on anything but AR's...! If it doesn't have an operating buffer and buffer tube, it shouldn't have an AR stock- true folders are better.



Same here, but still wouldn't choose .30-06 in a 14.5" barrel.
Click to expand...

Amen. What's needed in this application is the ability to stow it easily, not adjustment for different operators/clothing/armor options.

I can understand having a repeater, but what about H&R/NEF's survival type single shots? They chamber one in 308, but not in stainless. I'm sure they could pull them off the shelf and pay Diemaco a ridiculous amount of coin to nickel-plate it or something along those lines.

I'm actually pleasantly surprised that it's made on a M77, not a Rem 700. I've always been a fan of the M77, especially in that canoe paddle stock.
 
They should have looked at the RFB.

Why go folder when you can go bullpup :)
Kel-TecRFBRifle_SMGLee_4.jpg
 
Last edited:
They were built by Diemaco. I know a weapons tech that phoned Ruger to get spare parts. After he told them what Diemaco did to it, they wouldn't warranty it. The stock use to fold on them when you fired the rifle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom