Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 7/6/2010 4:55:53 PM EDT

Link Posted: 7/6/2010 5:05:26 PM EDT
MSAR STG 556 E4.
Link Posted: 7/6/2010 6:16:56 PM EDT

I'm not a huge fan of the Classic's plastic folder. I'll probably replace the Sully with an EMOD.
SIG has a great rifle mechanically. It's too bad they go el cheapo on furniture and accessories.
Link Posted: 7/6/2010 6:41:26 PM EDT
Sig 556! Although I think the original AR 180 is a great gun in its original form it's non STANAG mag issues are annoying. You have to modify AR mags to work with the gun. The new production AR 180's are sub par compared to the originals. The Sig is overall the better of the two guns. You have to forgive the MSAR fanboys they don't escape from the Bullpup Forum very often. (Just joking LOL I'm a bullpup fan myself)
Link Posted: 7/6/2010 10:27:20 PM EDT
For a home defense rifle, I'd go with an MSAR. .....but I damned sure don't want to be there with you when you touch a 5.56 round off in a hallway.
Link Posted: 7/7/2010 2:52:13 AM EDT
Bullpups need not apply ;o)
Link Posted: 7/7/2010 10:29:23 AM EDT
The AR18/180/180B is a rifle that in all honesty, probably should have been alot "bigger" the first go-around. If you research some of the trials it was entered in, primarily in Brazil and parts of Asia, it performed exceptionally well, better than the M16 in some cases. I think what ultimatly hurt it was the M16 was standardized already while the AR18 was not. If you look at rifles like the Type 89 and other indigenous Asian 5.56 rifles, most are clearly inspired by the AR18. Even the Europeans took inspiration from the AR18, especially the English with the SA80/L85/L86 series.

For the time, it was an outstanding rifle. Now, its a relic. Anything you could do with an AR180 you could do better with a Sig 556 or XCR. 1/12 twist barrels, non standard mags, easily breakable/impossible to replace furniture and lack of parts are all huge down sides IMO. The AR180B might be a more reasonable option, but these too are now defunct and as we all know, its pretty easy to destroy the polymer lower.

I personally don't understand how you came up with just these too options. I realize AR's are a little "boring" but if you get a Colt/LMT/Sabre or a few others, you have a 1st world "milspec" infantry rifle. With the slight exception of the Mk16, the AR is the only way to acheive this goal. The Sig 556 and AR180 aren't going to have the reliability or durability of a Colt carbine. Ask the SAS...

If you want to buy eiether a Sig or AR180 for fun, thats the right reason. As a serious fighting tool, the AR carbine is still king.
Link Posted: 7/7/2010 1:58:00 PM EDT
SIG 556 Classic all the way.
Link Posted: 7/8/2010 9:18:12 AM EDT
I own a MSAR XM17-E4, Armalite AR-180B, Colt SP1, and a Colt 6721. I've played with the Sig Sauer Rifles. Quality Control isn't that great with them. Good design but shitty stocks and some are just crap while others are great.

The Armalite AR-180B lower was made by Cavalry Arms. It's a pretty rugged lower if your treat it right. Mine is a fine light weight plinker and I'd use it as a home defense rifle in a heart beat.

But my go to gun is my SBR FN PS90. Small, compact, well made, and light.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 12:43:47 PM EDT

Great response sir, I have a good AR-15 and want something else just as a back up and fun gun.

It is indeed an interested and sad fact that the AR-18 never achieved wide acceptance, yet it's design was copied as the basis of most modern rifles, G36 of course being the most obvious example that hasn't been sighted.

Why did you chose the 556 over the AR-180?



Originally Posted By XM287:
The AR18/180/180B is a rifle that in all honesty, probably should have been alot "bigger" the first go-around. If you research some of the trials it was entered in, primarily in Brazil and parts of Asia, it performed exceptionally well, better than the M16 in some cases. I think what ultimately hurt it was the M16 was standardized already while the AR18 was not. If you look at rifles like the Type 89 and other indigenous Asian 5.56 rifles, most are clearly inspired by the AR18. Even the Europeans took inspiration from the AR18, especially the English with the SA80/L85/L86 series.

For the time, it was an outstanding rifle. Now, its a relic. Anything you could do with an AR180 you could do better with a Sig 556 or XCR. 1/12 twist barrels, non standard mags, easily breakable/impossible to replace furniture and lack of parts are all huge down sides IMO. The AR180B might be a more reasonable option, but these too are now defunct and as we all know, its pretty easy to destroy the polymer lower.

I personally don't understand how you came up with just these too options. I realize AR's are a little "boring" but if you get a Colt/LMT/Sabre or a few others, you have a 1st world "milspec" infantry rifle. With the slight exception of the Mk16, the AR is the only way to acheive this goal. The Sig 556 and AR180 aren't going to have the reliability or durability of a Colt carbine. Ask the SAS...

If you want to buy eiether a Sig or AR180 for fun, thats the right reason. As a serious fighting tool, the AR carbine is still king.


Link Posted: 9/4/2010 2:00:08 PM EDT
Having no first hand experience with either rifle but having held both, I would probably go with the SIG by a narrow margin. It just feels like a more solid rifle to me. If I ever run across a smokin deal on an AR-180 I would buy in a heartbeat though.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 5:13:38 PM EDT
for fun I would get the AR-180. Unless you have the coin to make the Sig what it should be.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 5:25:30 PM EDT
I have a Costa Mesa and a 556 Commando, I would choose the Sig over the 180. Mag issues with the 180 are a pain, the Sig uses standard AR mags. Althought the 180 action has been copied numerous times by manufacturers world wide the Sig's AK action is superior.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 9:25:49 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/5/2010 3:39:23 PM EDT

IMO I don't think you could go wrong with a SIG 556 as a SHTF rifle.

ARs are great but I am conviced the SIG would hold up better to long-term abuse than your average AR.

YMMV-

4073
Link Posted: 9/6/2010 7:39:04 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/7/2010 5:56:32 PM EDT
Originally Posted By colklink:
Having no first hand experience with either rifle but having held both, I would probably go with the SIG by a narrow margin. It just feels like a more solid rifle to me. If I ever run across a smokin deal on an AR-180 I would buy in a heartbeat though.


Define "smokin deal on an AR-180".

How much is the Sig?

How much for an AR180 or 180B? The Sig is at least twice the price of a 180B and probably also for an original 180.

Got both of these for what you would probably pay for the Sig:



Got a shitload of original mags for the 180 back when they were cheap.

Both are utterly reliable and as accurate as any standard military type rifle.

Link Posted: 9/8/2010 8:14:16 AM EDT
Top Top