.30 remington AR

[Come and take it.]

Why?

Why not just get an AR in 7.62x 39?

Sure the advertised velocity is 2800 fps but it is out of a 24-28 inch test barrel.

AK47 length barrels were used to measure the velocity of the Russian cartridge back when it was developed.

I just dont see it being a very successful cartridge.

 

[raftman]

Umm what?

 

[brian923]

For 1, the more big companys that we get makeing components and ammo the better. 2, the AR is booming so fast, eveyone is trying to get there slice of the pie. C, the external ballistics of the caliber (.308) are superior to .311 caliber bullets. im guessing that the barrel used for those velocitys was a 24" barrel. I think the cartridge greatly extends the ar 15 platform. Im curious to see what a 6.5/30 ar wildcat cartridge would do. i wonder if it would best the venerable grendal round.

 

[bfoosh006]

I consider it to be a max-ed out 2009 rendering of the 7.62x39, it is all a .308ish can be and still be hi-capacity gtg ( fits in a AR15 platform ). As far as I'm concerned, its a shame it will be a "flash in the pan".It has all the good qualities of the 7.62x39 ( length and caliberish ) while using modern .308 bullets at 2850ish FPS speeds.... kinda something I've seen asked about numerous times.. a faster 7.62x39 with modern bullets...

Frankly, its a darn good match ( IMHO ) for the AR15 platform. But it will never go far.... there are far cheaper to shoot versions available. If someone gave me one, I'd be very happy.... would I buy one?.. nah... for not much more I could get an AR10.

 

[Marquezj16]

It's something remington has tried to start up and never caught on...Kind of disappointed because it would have been a nice caliber to have in an AR15. Of course they have so many other calibers chambered for the AR and now thay have the 7.62X39 in an AR upper and that probably spells the end for that experiment.

 

[Jim243]

Why not just get an AR in 7.62x 39?

Becasue a 6.8x43 SPC upper is cheaper and is a more effective round at 400FPS faster than the 7.62x39 and uses the .277 bullet (same as the 270 Winchester) but in 110 or 115 grains instead of 123 grain for 7.62 or 130 grain for the 270.

Just attaches to a AR-15 lower no gunsmithing needed.

Just makes more sense.
Jim

 

[tirod]

And either gun doesn't use a magazine compromised with the x39 case taper - which forces a curved stack magazine to get doglegged into a straight mag well.

Goes to - just because you can shoot x39 in an AR doesn't mean you should.

.30 Rem AR also doesn't use AR compatible bolts or a compatible upper. Moot point about trading off the AR platform when it's as different as the AR10. It won't pin over to the other.

Search for others chambering in it and you find it's a stand alone. Remington only for parts and ammo.

The market for guns is like cigarettes - any little variation can sell, but when it comes right down to it, a smoker will usually take whatever they can get in a shortage. When severe economic or political circumstances pressure the industry, many of the slow selling and small profit calibers disappear completely, some never to return. Popularity counts, not necessarily technical differences just for the sake of becoming a forced single source of supply.

Trading off the popularity of .30 caliber just to sell a few guns is a niche market - selling to the old tech school thinker, not the future users that will be common in twenty years. They may very well be loading caseless, and brass case fed weapons as antique as blackpowder is today - well, if you still pour loose powder. New BP guns are shooting sabots over solid propellant, aren't they?

We're just one step away, either way.

 

[Palmetto-Pride]

I don't think it's a bad idea, in fact if I thought it would still be around in 5 or 10 years I would get one. The problem is like most people I just don't think it will ever take off. I think Remington marketed it wrong they should have at the very least got Bushmaster to make some regular ARs and uppers and maybe another ammo maker on board and even pushed some cheap uppers chambered in it instead of just coming out with one cameoed hunting R-15 chambered in it.

 

[Technosavant]

The reason for its existence has been said- to duplicate the ballistics of that round in a cartridge that will actually feed properly in an AR-15.

Problem is, I'm not sure how many people were screaming for that kind of ballistic capability to the point of adopting a new round. It doesn't bring much else to the table; at least .300BLK has subsonic variants that suppress well- something .30 Rem AR can't really claim.

IMO, while it does get the same ballistics while feeding better, it doesn't do anything other rounds don't, and those wanting to shoot 7.62x39 out of an AR were wanting it because it's generally inexpensive to shoot and feeds the same ammo as their AK or SKS. That's something the .30 Rem AR won't be.

But I don't get all worked up about it; if somebody introduces a new round that nobody wants, it will flop. No big deal.

 

[Loader9]

I see issues with this round. There is already a 30 Remington that was made in 1906. It is not the 30 Remington AR which is a different case. The names are far too close and it will confuse some people. Why Remington chose to go this route is uncertain when they could have gone to the 30Tc and gotten considerably more out of the venture......but they didn't. Maybe if this round survives, Hodgdon will come up with something in their Super Performance powders to help this along. But I doubt it survives.