There is an article on AllOutdoor.com talking about Heavy duty SHTF battle rifles. The picture used for the article shows an AR-10 next to an FN/FAL. Looking at the picture I have to ask myself, why do we need an AR-10 in a niche that is already full?
The right arm of the free world, the FN/FAL that has been in service since 1954. As of 2015 that is 61 years.
M1A, which is based off the M14, battle proven, reliable, marksmanship rifle has been in service since 1974. The M14 has been in service since 1959. As of 2015 that is 56 years.
PTR-91, based off the Heckler and Koch G3, in service since the year 2000, so only 15 years as of 2015. The Heckler and Koch G3 has been in service since 1959. So 56 years like the M1A.
We have three military grade rifles based off proven designs. Where does the AR-10 fit into that group?
If you want something along the lines of a sporting rifle, there is the Remington Model 750 Woodsmaster with a walnut stock and the Model 750 Synthetic. The 750 synthetic comes with a synthetic stock as its name suggest.
Then there are the dozens of bolt action rifles chambered in 308 Winchester. Just about every firearms manufacturer makes a rifle model chambered in 308 Winchester. It is not like the market “needs” another rifle chambered in 308 Winchester, much less another semi-automatic rifle.
Awhile back I was looking for a 308 semi-auto rifle that would be included in my long term SHTF survival plans. I considered the AR-10, but not seriously. If I am going to stockpile magazines and gun parts, why not stockpile them for a rifle that has half a century of military service behind it?
What are your thoughts on the AR-10?
With so many other rifles out there chambered in 308, in my opinion, the AR-10 i not needed. The AR platform should stick to what it does best – 223/5.56mm, 300 blackout, 6.5… etc. and leave the 308 to the big boys.