Sunday Answer 4-5-15

The part shown on Saturday.



DSC_4693csBelongs to the AR-180. It is the barrel extension for the 18/180 rifle.

A close up of it in the receiver.


The basic rifle.

DSC_4733csclose up of the receiver.

DSC_4734csOther side of the rifle.

DSC_4731csAnother close up.

DSC_4732csA quick video of me taking the day off and going shooting the AR-180’s in my collection.

1 comment to Sunday Answer 4-5-15

  • Kerwin Kerr

    The AR18 was one of Eugene Stoner’s better designs. It was designed to be less labor intensive then the M16 and set up for a much more rapid fabrication process. The major components of the receiver as well as the hammer, trigger and disconnectors were all designed to be stamped out on high speed sheet metal dies. The piston gas system is much more reliable then the M16’s and can be fired much longer between cleanings. In my opinion the two worse feature of the rife were lack of a STANAG magazine [it uses a proprietary magazine release] and the fact that it’s folding stock is flimsy [really a joke!]. Stoner would have better served his customers to have the stock [either wood or polymer] bolted solidly into a nut welded on the rear of the lower receiver. Also there are alternative folding stocks such as on the Galil, the AK47, the Daewoo K2 that are much more robust then the AR18. The lack of a STANAG magazine was the main reasons for this rifle’s commercial failure in my opinion.

Leave a Reply





You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>