Friday, November 25, 2011

AR-10 Review

This review of the Armalite AR-10A4 includes a 2" group at 500 yards!  That has to be extraordinary luck.  I have always been partial to the AR-10, but when I bought a .308 battle rifle, the AR-10 was not back in production.  The review also claims that the AR-10 has less recoil than the M1A--primarily because it is distributing the recoil over a long period of time.  Do any of my readers have experience of AR-10 and M1A recoil?


  1. The AR10 has a less felt recoil, but it is VERY hard to get a comfortable sitting and prone position. Prone is the worst. Seems like the oversized receiver makes it hard to get find a spot that feels natural. The AMU shooters hate it, having tried it as a 1000 yard rifle.

    M1A is very comfortable to shoot prone. Put your cheekbone on the back of your thumb joint and watch the front sight.

  2. No experience with an AR-10, so I can't give you a direct comparison.

    I'd advocate a different approach, however: whenever you start to think your M1A has too much recoil, go shoot your Mosin for a while. :-)

  3. If I were interested in the genre, my money would go for a LaRue PredetAR, and if a dedicated marksman rifle was the intended utilization, the the LaRue OBR.

  4. If I wanted a weapon in this class, I would've gone for Kel-Tec RFB. I have one of their toys, a SU-16CA, and I like it a lot. As for AR-10, it always seemed like a Saiga (even though historically it was before its medium-size successor).

  5. I don't know anything about comparable recoil, but I'd agree with extraordinary luck on the accuracy.

    People I Know Who Would Know assure me that the AR-10 is not typically a target rifle (in terms of its innate characteristics and Being Hard To Make Accurate, they say - and because evidently Armalite has had some shoddy QC).

    2" at 500 yards is half minute-of-angle territory, which is impressive from anything. I find it almost incomprehensible from an AR-10.

    (And having looked at that review, I have serious doubts of the competence of the author.

    First there's some pretty mall-ninja-ish stuff about home defense and shooting through walls and doors - intentionally.

    And then "This 2.03 inch group at 300 yards was surprising for the gun and makes you wonder if with a little tuning it could be an under MOA gun for not a ton of money."

    Doesn't he know that MOA at 300 yards is just over three inches, and he's claiming the gun is already sub-MOA?

    The mind, it boggles.)

  6. Sigivald: I did not even notice the severity of that error. I remember in the 1990s, when I was still a gun dealer, it was commonly understood that the Remington 700 Police Sniper Specials were typically 1/4 MOA rifles--and these were pretty special rifles. They started with the Varmint Special barrels, and picked the top 10% in accuracy for the PSS model.

    While 1/4 MOA rifles are a struggle, sub-MOA rifles are not at all difficult to get. Shortly after I bought my M1A (and not even a National Match version), I shot a four shot group at 100 yards that was under 1" center-to-center--and three of those shots were overlapping. (This was from a bench, sandbag, and using a 12x scope.)

    A friend kept a target on his reloading bench as a reminder of what he could achieve when he was careful enough with his measurements: it was a 220 yard target with three overlapping .308 holes, fired from a Ruger M77. (Again, fired from a bench, a bipod, and using a 12x scope.)

  7. Having owned a national match at-10. They are not your every day hunting rifle but magnitudes far better. Double hits on a quarter at 250yards. This was with mm peep sights. As for quality you have to see it ,when you out shoot a weather and they ask to shoot your weapon

  8. Most prefer to spend less,get less for the money