«-- Odds 'n Sods: | Main | Characteristics of a General Purpose Survival Flashlight by W. in Washington --»
Letter Re: The AR-10 as a Primary Rifle for a Retreat?
Dear Jim:
I have read time and again about .308 rifles on SurvivalBlog, and how you often
steer people towards the HK and FN brands. What do you think about the Armalite
AR-10
I have two, and like them very much, and have extensive spare parts and magazines.
BTW, you won't hurt my feelings if you do not like them, I just wonder why
you [don't often] mention them.
Sincerely, Mark in Albuquerque, New Mexico
JWR Replies:
I have a personal preference for L1A1s, FALs,
and HK91s,
but I hardly rule out functionally equivalent rifles such as M1As
and AR-10s. I only de-emphasize the latter because of the relatively high cost
of extra magazines and spare
parts. I particularly recommend AR-10s for readers that are prior US or Canadian
military service--those that already
have
a
lot of muscle
memory
invested
in the AR
platform--namely
the US M16 series
and the Canadian C7 series.
(The sights and controls will seem familiar and "right" to
them.) I also appreciate the light weight of AR-10s. (They weigh more than
a pound less than most other .308 semi-auto battle rifles.) The only major
drawback
is that the AR-10 has the
same dirty
gas
tube
action
as
an AR-15.
Just be sure to clean your rifles frequently and scrupulously.
OBTW, I strongly prefer the
varieties of AR-10s that can use standard FN-FAL magazines. Specifically,
I recommend the Bushmaster
AR-10 (now out of production) and the RRA
(Rock River Arms) LAR-8 . Standard metric FAL magazines can be found for
as little as $7 each, versus up to $60 each for some of the
proprietary AR-10 magazines. That may not be much of an issue to casual shooters,
but it is is a big issue for well-prepared folks that want to salt
away 25 or more spare magazines for a "lifetime supply." At $40 each,
a supply of 25 spare magazines would cost nearly as much as the rifle itself!
If properly cared for, rifles using noncorrosive ammunition may last for three
generations
of
regular
use. But magazines are the most fragile part, and cannot be expected to put
up with
the vigors
of
regular
field use. They are after all, very vulnerable when one drops to a prone
position. Another factor to consider is the prospect of another Federal magazine
ban. Based on the experience of the ill-conceived 1994-to-2004 ban, I anticipate
that a new ban will probably bump the
prices
of
FAL
magazines to $20+ each, and AR-10 magazines to $120 each, or more. If the anticipated new
law is permanent (with no sunset clause) then magazine prices might reach absurd heights.
