Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Posted: 3/11/2001 3:32:13 PM EDT
What are the main differences between and Armalite AR10B and the AR10A2? Opinions and info, please- I'm thinking about getting an AR10B. Thanks in advance! _________________________ "In the United States, the difficultities are not a Minotaur or a dragon,not imprisonment, hard labor, death, government harassment and censorship, but cupidity, sloppiness, indifference. Not the acts of a mighty all-pervasive government, but the failure of a listless public to make use of the freedom that is its birthright." --Alexander Solzhenitzyn
Link Posted: 3/11/2001 3:39:32 PM EDT
I believe the 10B goes back to early styling. It has a trigger-type cocking lever under the top rail of the carry handle, old-style handguards that are round (but unlike A2 handguards) and brown color scheme.
Link Posted: 3/11/2001 4:07:26 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/11/2001 7:54:16 PM EDT
SunDog, That came from the ArmaLite Site. That was a good paraphrase of my post there. No scopes for the AR10B due to the early style cocking handle. I would prefer the A4 flattop version to the A2 due to the greater variation in sights you can add to it.
Link Posted: 3/12/2001 1:27:48 PM EDT
lets not forget the higher resale and also the higher price tag for the ar10B i also heard dust collects in the charging handle area "gets dirty" wich is why they stopped making it that way . but for resale and collectability it is superior to the ar10 a2 i would have bought the ar10b instead of my ar10 a2 but i had trouble enough getting the one thousand four hundred dollars for my a2 vs one thousand seven hun... not to mention your converted mags at 80.oo a pop!!!
Link Posted: 3/12/2001 1:35:53 PM EDT
I have no personal experience with the AR10B, but consider this.... ...take the MAJOR drawback of the AR15, the unburnt powder residue blowing back into the upper receiver, and multiply this 2-3 fold, in going from a .223 cartridge to a .308 cartridge. NO THANK YOU.
Link Posted: 3/12/2001 2:02:24 PM EDT
garandman, I always appreciated the principle that the 7.62 NATO parts (bolt, rings, carrier key, etc.) are bigger than the .223, hence less subject to gunking up.
Link Posted: 3/12/2001 2:12:55 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Chairborne Ranger: garandman, I always appreciated the principle that the 7.62 NATO parts (bolt, rings, carrier key, etc.) are bigger than the .223, hence less subject to gunking up.
View Quote
I'm not sure I follow the logic. You have maybe 20% larger parts. You also have 200-300% more powder residue. Still, its NOT a rifle I would want in a foxhole, as it takes teh inherent problem in the Ar15, and [size=6] MAGNIFIES [/size=6] it. I want my rifles as reliable as possible.
Link Posted: 3/12/2001 3:21:17 PM EDT
ar10b for nostalgic and plinking, 10a4 for the most versatile use of sights.....B&G
Link Posted: 3/12/2001 3:21:51 PM EDT
ar10b for nostalgic and plinking, 10a4 for the most versatile use of sights.....B&G
Link Posted: 3/12/2001 5:28:48 PM EDT
No, garandman, we look at the same rifles and reach different conclusions. The 15 is more susceptible to gas fouling than the 10. Smaller parts means it is easier to "crud-up," much like my P32 Kel-Tec is more likely to be fouled with pocket lint than my Glock 27. Gas blowing crud into the action is not good in any system, but it's worse, or at least causes more problems, in a 15 than a 10. IMHO at least.
Top Top