Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

I don’t know how closely the SA80 could be based on the AR-18 when the SA80 is a bullpup design. I gather that it shared nothing in common with Britain’s experimental EM1 - EM2 7mm design they tested in the late 1940’s (beyond being a bullpup).

The AR-18 will forever remain a question mark. The official legend as I read it was that a Japanese company was contracted to manufacture it in the 60’s but that was scotched because their constitution forbade them from supplying arms to belligerents at war.

The original AR-15 was supposed to have been phenomenally reliable when originally used by the Special Forces and SAS but when the Army adopted it as the M-16 the ordnance corps forced a change in propellant, which fouled Eugene Stoner’s direct-gas-impingement system and cause all the jamming problems. I believe it was the late Dr. Edward C. Ezell who insinuated that the ordnance corps did this deliberately to sabotage the design, as the M-16 had been forced on them by SecDef McNamara. Casualties be damned.


17 posted on 01/21/2011 7:46:03 AM PST by sinanju
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: sinanju

***The official legend as I read it was that a Japanese company was contracted to manufacture it in the 60’s but that was scotched because their constitution forbade them from supplying arms to belligerents at war.****

This is true. I used to have a HOWA made AR-180 but let it go. Two weeks later the price skyrocketed!

I later bought a Sterling AR-180 but it was no where near the quality the HOWA was.


18 posted on 01/21/2011 8:16:37 AM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar (I visited GEN TOMMY FRANKS Military Museum in HOBART, OKLAHOMA! Well worth it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson