Jgun

I think you have a sick mind, I like that. Sounds like something I would have thought, but probably not said. <lmao>

I think AAC should supply a case of this stuff when you buy one of those Honey Badger subguns.

All of my comments are based on looking at the same photo's as you. What I meant about the bolt carrier was that it looked to be lightened differently than any other carrier I've seen, AR 15 or .308. Although it's clearly an AR type bolt/lug setup, I'd be surprised if it would interchange with anyone Else's. As far as the barrel change goes, I'm not ex military, and I didn't mean to imply that it was designed to be a quick change barrel like on a Browning M2, but I've heard that one of the problems with certain issued weapons is that to have them repaired requires sending them back off the line. It appeared to me as though a design like this could have a barrel replaced with hand tools in a tent, almost as easily as you'd pop the pins to remove the BCG to clean it. I may be wrong here but I would think that if true, that ability might be usefull.

I'm not posting this to scare anyone, just to remind us that there is always the potential for injury when reloading. I think that most of us (especially me) have become complacent after loading for a long time without ever having a serious problem, which we all hope never DOES happen. Maybe this thread will instill a little respect among the members that are loading. http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=495909

Don't know if this is true or not, but looking at the photo's, it appears as though the barrel may be mounted in the hand guard and the barrel/piston/hanguard assembly attaches to the upper receiver with those four cap screws. If that is in fact the case, this gun might be caliber convertable with the change of that assembly and a matched BCG. I Wonder if that's possible? At the least, you ought to be able to replace the barrel pretty quickly out in the field, a feature that the would most certainly be desirable to the military.

We'll all be looking forward to your review of your new FD .338 <thumbsup>

because they're both piston guns, neither carrier has a gas key, but it appears to be different than any of the pics I've seen of POF's .308 carriers.

I also use the Magpul. I like the type of links they use, although I wish they'd use different sling material like the Vickers has. I don't really practice with the sling like I should, but have found that I don't like a single point setup with the .308 AR's due to their heavier weight, I do like it sometimes on the small platform AR's though.

I actually found this on GB. from the pics I get the impression that this is a pretty high end rifle. I'm not usually a big fan of rifles with proprietary handguards, but I have to admit that it sure looks as though they took the time to make a strong interface between the receiver and HG. And that bolt carrier doesn't look like any other I've seen, maybe it's because it's a piston setup. there are so many variables when it comes to making a quality product, a good design can be wasted if they use inferior materials, or don't pay attention to tolerances, and even if they do everything right, if it costs so much to produce that they price themselves out of the market, or can't sell enough to make it profitable, than it doesn't matter how good it is, but from the pics it appears to me as though they've put a lot of effort into development on this one. http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=259585801

Have any of you guys seen/handled this gun? I just stumbled upon it and it looks pretty impressive. www.fd-defense.com/fd308

That's a good point. If this is going to be a dedicated large game hunting rifle and your OK loading .338 for it, ammo availability might never become an issue for you. On the other hand, if your planning to have this gun serve multiple roles, and you might ever need to get factory ammo for it in a hurry, the .338 will be harder to find, not to mention that shooting a .338 is going to be more expensive than shooting a .308, assuming your planning to put a lot of rounds through it.

Just think how much better it is to remember that now, instead of after you take it to the range to test fire.

One of my friends went with .260 when he ordered his bolt action bench rest gun. He told me that was because it was ballistically superior to the .308 for long range accuracy. How does the .270 stack up in that regard? I know nothing about it's range vs the .308 but am I correct in assuming that the .308, being larger cal has greater power out to it's max effective range?

As mentioned above, a fine looking gun. Maybe you can answer a question, I saw that one of the other members complained about His G3 beating up the cases to such an extent that they're not reloadable. I have the same issue with my 7.62 Galil. If it wasn't so hard on the brass I might shoot it more. Can you tell me how your HK is on the brass?

Mike, I'm very intersted in the other chamberings that are physically practical in the large platform AR's, not the one offs that are being made in the really large calibers, but those that I could conceivably build myself (and afford to shoot). I have been led to believe that the largest cals feasible in the .308 AR receiver are the .338 Federal and the .338 RSM. Can you tell me what factors led you to choose the .270? I've also been told that, as you mention, the mag issue is another big question when converting to one of these calibers. I'm thinking that it wouldn't be much fun to build one of these and not be able to get a mag that will function reliably with your chosen caliber.

Mike, How about posting some pictures of your guns. I'm very interested in how the AR type offerings in other countries differ or resemble their US counterparts, and welcome. Hopefully you can share your knowlege of arms and firearms regulations in your country, with those of us in the US.

I've been wanting to try these. Survivalshop, can you tell me, do they have the internal center rib in the front like the Pmags, or are they flat like the Lancers? I'm wondering if they might be well suited to 300BLK loaded long?

Sounds like someone that's thinking outside the box, and those guys are the most interesting to talk to, they've always got some crazy new idea, just not always good to stand next to them when they're trying them out. Definitely want to hear what he's got to say about the .458

I don't wish to post this in the wrong place but i figure you'll move it along with the rest of the off optic review content, so, in reference to 98's comment's about the AR45, I think that once you've become friendly with the owner you need to ask him to try the .458 SOCOM out as well. I've ordered a .458 barrel (don't know when it will be done) that I'm planning to build an upper with. I've never actually shot one, so I would be grateful if you were able to ask the owner anything and everything you can think of about performace, loads, any feed issue's he might have had with it, basically anything that you can think of. Any info you can weasel out of him would be helpful.

Sounds to me as though you've got a pretty enviable problem there, having to decide on the caliber/configuration of ANOTHER gun build LOL!!! Based on your last post, it sounds as though you've decided on the wood furniture 5.56 build. From seeing your other guns, including the one pictured above (beautiful build) I have no doubt that it will turn out well. Just to express a personal preference here, I think that an AR with wood furniture could be very attractive with the stainless barrel, but for my taste the thing to avoid is the tacky sporting equipment look. I'm thinking more hunting rifle look. Although I have no doubt that you'll get to those other builds, I'm thinking that, with the long range distance available to you, that 5.56 build may give you more pleasure to shoot. Regarding the AR45, What was your impression of it? Looks good with the wood furniture, is that one built with the Olympic Arms upper? The one that I tried had a heavy barrel and was heavier than needed for a pistol carbine IMO, As I've previously stated, if I were to do it again, I'd build one of them over the Super V, but $400 for the lower receiver is a lot, although I realize that he's only making a small number at a time. Looking forward to seeing the posts on your progress with this one.

I wonder if the AMU bothered to test the 7.62X40 Wilson. If it shoots flatter/longer than the 300BLK, it might be well suited to 3gun. Right now, I'm finding that the case length on 300BLK is the limiting factor on how much powder I can load. My 125gr bullet with 21.5gr of LIL GUN powder, is just about the max I can fit in the case. If I had an extra .200" case length, I might be able to get a faster/flatter bullet, unless pressure became a problem. I may possibly experiment with the Wilson down the road.

As you say, with his skill, Horner would probably win with 5.56 as well, but I think it's significant the the AMU, with their resources, who can shoot anything they want, even going so far as to create the 30 gremlin, choose to run 300BLk on the short courses. For me, if shooting the a match that recognizes power factor, the scoring advantage of major PF is a benefit, besides, I can actually see my .30cal hits on close targets and make up a miss or bad hit. With my eyes I have a tough time seeing those little .22 holes, LOL.

Looks like I'k batting 1000 tonight, hopefully this link will work. http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2011/10/23/usamus-horner-takes-the-gold-with-300blk/

May be a problem with the last link, hopefully this one will work. http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2011/10/15/aacs-mpw-honey-badger-dont-care/comment-page-1/#comment-17393

Although probably not of much use to most of the members, if AAC ever decides to offer the upper/lower/stock from this, for sale seperately, it would sure make a great foundation for one hell of tactical carbine with a 14.5" barrel and fixed MB. militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2011/10/15/aacs-mpw-honey-badger-dont-care/comment-page-1/#comment-17393