This video took way longer than I expected it to but when you start with the Stoner 63A as a subject well it gets quickly out of hand.



https://youtu.be/-Q3eb0zbBP0

Sorry for the slight Hi-Jack but how do you get the video to embed?  I've tried using every embed option I can think of for forums and even tried using the forum's embed video feature and can never get it to work and have to resort to just leaving a hot link.

To embed YouTube videos:

Awesome video. The things I would do for a Stoner...

 
2 questions....


Is that true about team v. non-team being able to embed vids?


Is that your 63?

God I love the looks of that drum magazine!

I wish someone had made a Stoner look alike [drum] for the Robinson Armament M96. The Beta C's and the snail drums just don't give it that pizazz.

Great video but thread title is misleading! It may give me a wealth of info except for one key piece...

Where can I get one cheap?

I wish somebody would do a real semi clone with all the options available. I mean FN came out with the M249 for a cool $8K which I'm not a player on but might be for a true Stoner clone at the same price with options available.

I have an M96 and curse Robinson on a regular basis for abandoning support of it!

Reed Knight has the original drawings...

It's a damn shame that the M96 deviated soooooo much from the Stoner.  The only way in which the M96 is superior is in the materials science.  The rest of the gun was a very poor compromise.  I'd like to say I miss mine....but honestly, I often forget I ever owned one.



 

The amount of engineering and tooling it would take to bring a Stoner 63 back into existence would be STAGGERING.   Remember, the Stoner takes advantage of steel stamping technology which, as far as firearms goes these days is relegated to mostly internals and AK-47s....and mags, of course.  The key is this:  Progressive dies require an immense and intense amount of engineering and are VERY, VERY expensive to create.  You pay off stampings by selling thousands upon thousands or millions of components......



A semi Stoner 63 just wouldn't come close to being able to recoup its costs.



 

Knight owns the tooling as well. They made their own run of 63's in the past. The problem, if I recall, was how to engineer the gun to satisfy the ATF. They have the data and tooling for machine guns, not semi-auto rifles.

Owning the tooling is DEFINITELY a bird in the hand.  





Academically, I would be interested to know if they own the stamping dies for the receivers and trigger group and other sundry components.  That kind of tooling is HUGE and HEAVY.  I have stamping dies from Michigan stored at my workplace in Arizona and you have to have a good sized forklift to move even the "small" die sets around.
 

That was so much info I wanna puke!

What did you not like about the M96? What was the "poor compromise"?

Smoked a cigarette when I was done watching.

Nothing like purging to a Stoner 63A





 

The entire operating system save the second edition adjustable gas block.  The trigger mechanism was ridiculous....I mean, who in all seriousness build a trigger system that has to be help together with cotter pins???  The AR-70 type gas system was unnecessarily complicated and much more fragile than the Stoner System, the safety coupld not be activated from the shoulder unless you were part chimpanzee....and, despite it the fact that the gun WAS robust by all appearances.... bolts liked to break between 6 and 10k rounds with regularity.  I will say that the M96 is the ONLY gun I can think of that could run with a bolt snapped at the cam pin hole....that WAS impressive.



My 1911 has more in common with a Stoner 63 than an M96 does.





Now, in fairness, my M96 was dead nuts reliable.  It was also very accurate and easy as hell to shoot...especially fast.  M96s float in rapid fire.  The stainless steel and melonite type construction was AWESOME.  I treated that gun like a red headed step child and I never did scratch it.  I will say, had the stock material been glass re-enforced polymet and designed for super hard use, it is the only gun besides a Garand I think I could have beaten someone to death with.



BUT....in the end, what killed it was this:  It was NOT a Stoner 63 in any way other than shape.  THAT was the death knell.  Had Robinson duplicated the Stoner mechanism....he would be selling them to this day.