Okay, it seems as though the writer of this article really likes the new Ruger AR variant (“Small-Frame Autoloading Rifle”), although when last did you see a gun writer say about a new gun: “Nah, this really sucks”?
My longtime reservations about the AR-15 platform notwithstanding, I have to say that I like the look of this little thing, especially when I read about how light it is, for a .308 rifle.
What I’d like is to have one of these… in .270 Win. Why? From a hunting perspective, there’s not much the .308 can do that the .270 cannot; and the reduced recoil of the smaller bullet takes away the need for that anti-social, range-emptying muzzle brake. (I’m quite serious about this; the last half-dozen range sessions have been spoiled by the guy next door shooting an AR-15 with a muzzle brake, with earsplitting consequences for me despite the combination of foam plugs and ear protection which have become standard gear for me at indoor ranges.)
Of course, the mechanics (and magazine) of the SFAR would be unaffected by the change to .270 Win as it uses the same casing as the .308 Win; so all that’s needed is a rechambered barrel for shooty goodness and Happy Days Smileyface Kim. (Why not the 6.5 Creedmoor? Because I don’t have any of that on hand, whereas the .270 Win is, let’s say, well represented in Ye Olde Ammoe Locquere.)
But nobody’s going to listen to me; so there I go, shouting into the uncaring void, again.
On a tangential note: a kind Reader once offered to send me a replacement extractor for my busted M1 Carbine. For the life of me, I can’t remember who it was, so please drop me an email if it was you, and we can get the thing taken care of, financially speaking.
“Of course, the mechanics (and magazine) of the SFAR would be unaffected by the change to .270 Win as it uses the same casing as the .308 Win;”
While it’s true that they’re both bangers, they’re cartridges, not sausages, and those parts are called cases. 😉
Got out the wrong side of bed today, did we?
.270 Winchester is much longer than .308. Same head size but .270 needs long action same as .30-’06. Sorry but it’s -40 below here and I’m cranky.
.270 is a necked-down ’06, and has the length to prove it.
As several others have noted, the .270 Winchester is based off the same -parent- case as is the .308 Winchester / 7.62x51mm, that is, the .30-06. However, the .270 is merely a necked down .30-06 / 7.62x63mm, and is still about the same length (actually longer, at a nominal 64.5mm), far too long for a standard AR-10 action. It simply will not fit, not unless you go for one of those ridiculously oversized rifles in .30 WM.
As one or two others have noted, this is an excellent opportunity for you to slip into a man bun (you can slap a Christmas bow on your head for five minutes and I think that counts) and embrace the balanced cartridge that is the 6.5mm Creedmore.
Or, you know, stick with what you have. The 6.5 CM is in the .308 capability range anyway. Does some things slightly better and some slightly worse, but overall they’re equivalent.
I’d like one in .243 Win! 🙂
I thought the 270 was derived from the 30.06 and not the 308 which would figure since the 270 is older than the 308. The internet says it was the 303. At any rate the case dimensions are quite a bit longer for the 30.06 and the 270 than the 308,
Richard is quite correct, the .270 is a necked down 30-06 and is too long for the common .308 AR actions. However, you could find yourself an M1 Garand and have it re-barreled in the excellent .270 chambering. You would then have an all American autoloading rifle that goes “Pling” after you have shot your Haji.
I hate to say it (I’m not quite as stodgy as you but do tend toward that end of the spectrum) but you want one in 6.5 Creedmore. Same magazine/action length but with all the advantages you list for the 270. It’s only a difference of 0.264″ vs 0.277″.
Complaining about muzzle blast Oh Great and Powerful Kim?
There is no military shoulder fired rifle more obnoxious than your beloved FN/FAL or SLR.
I hated being an SO when someone showed up at our tactical rifle matches with one.
They were much louder than even the gamer guns with muzzle breaks on any 5.56.
Of course they are manly man guns.
As noted above, 270 Winchester is based on the 30-06. Perhaps 260 Remington is worth considering.
M1 Carbine extractor. Well, I hope it was me that made the offer, honestly don’t remember. Either way, the offer still stands. Back in the day when surplus parts were coming in by the boat load, I built several carbines for customers. Still have all my tools and a small stash of surplus parts. Let me know. I am an hour or so away over in Arlington.
We corresponded briefly by email in May of 2019 about some range time, but I was not able to break free then.
As I recall from when the extractor on my carbine broke, having the special M1 carbine tool made replacing that extractor much easier than it would have been without the tool. Sounds like you live close enough to Kim that fixing his carbine would be a good reason for a day at the range. After all, the repair has to be tested.
I question why Ruger carried over the “forward assist” as that was IIRC never needed on the AR-10?
The .308 platform is actually an AR10 (also called AR308) platform. It’s not insignificantly beefed up vs. the AR15 platform. Note the magazine size for example. Makes a difference in recoil, among many other differences.
In Saint Helens, Oregon, my neighbor Rob Heller is a superb machinist.
His main gig is crafting replacement bearings and races for heavy equipment.
He employs probably a dozen skilled craftsmen… and firearm fanatics.
The other side of his shop is Tactical Ordnance.
He can make any barrel and upper for any of the different pattern AR rifles.
An example is an old friend, .257 Roberts:
Rob also hosts the biggest gun show (outside of the massive three-day Portland Expo Center) at the nearby Columbia County fairgrounds.
I did not know that. Thanks for posting the link.
Comments are closed.