is there an underground competition between arms designers to make the most uncomfortable, clunky and dangerous (for the end user) folding stock? if so, this rifle wins for having sharp steel fins where you cheek would go.
In the US it's a little known office in the DOD that's also called the DOD....the department of difficulty. They take any design for weapon, vehicle or equipment and if it makes sense and is east to work with they change it so it's a pain in the ass.
Short answer, yes... There's also a competition to make folding stocks in the west as janky as possible so they wobble and a repeatable head position is all but impossible. And then there's the Germans... The g3a3 telescoping stock is a monument to minimalist sadism I have had the pleasure of a decent round count behind in both semi and full auto. My advice if you ever find yourself in possession of a g3a3 and need to go full auto... Hold it like you would a very loved family member, that has just done something that's making you consider squeezing hard enough that it becomes their forever hug. It's still going to bash you in the cheek bone but it probably won't bruise you if you do it that way.
At 2:35 British visitors tend to pronounce Costa Mesa with the first syllable as in English "cost" but here in Costa Mesa the English-speaking locals say "coast" thus "COAST-uh MACE-uh" (the high flat land by the coast). Local Spanish speakers pronounce it as per Spanish. An historical aside: early English-speaking settlers called the area Goat Hill which name only survives in a local pub The Goat Hill Tavern, known for its 150 taps and musty smell.
This was fascinating. A few months ago when the museum solicited topics I had said I would like to learn more about Waters' experiments with 7.62 NATO, because the only FW guns I had seen were the S11 and the one featured in Moss' Sterling SMG book, which was in 7.62. I had no concept of this thing so it was wonderful to learn about it. The stock completely threw me on the What Is This Wednesday quiz post- and while watching my brain was working out the geometry as Jonathan was closing it thinking "but how does the butt plate not impede the sights" when it clicked in as a "carry handle" - I said (in my office alone mind you) "oh my god" aloud in a horrified way. If necessity is the mother of invention, surely patent avoidance is the black sheep aunt. Does the burst mechanism reset if the trigger is released mid burst or is it possibly to get a 2-1-click? Again, thank you all for taking this one out of the collection for us to examine.
Thanks Jonathan and team that was really interesting to see. I do remember semiauto AR-180 being offered for sale in the UK, when civilian ownership of such things was still allowed. But I don't think I ever saw one in use at my local rifle club - AR-15's and Mini-14's seemed to be the preferred options for 5.56 calibre rifles.
What happened if you owned rifles like those when the laws changed ? We’re you like grandfathered in and allowed to keep them or did they make everyone who did have a rifle like those turn them in and get rid of them? Or were you able to get away with hiding an AR or two
@@JaySantana-so9zw Everyone had to turn their rifles in and only very limited compensation, up to £150 per rifle, was paid. Later, after Dunblane, when we had to surrender our handguns, EU law required market value compensation to be paid.
Owned a Stirling Armaments AR180 before they were banned here in the UK. Accurate, reliable and comfortable to shoot. Can't see why they made such a lash up with the LAR
Something I find rather amusing in this is the fact that alot of the time where you come across an LAR in gaming, it's often the AR 18 they've seemingly modeled it after.
The Stirling LAR was actually licensed to Singapore, where it emerged (with fixed stock) as the SAR80 and SAR88 follow on. Only used by second line units in the Singapore Armed Forces, though it was sold to a few countries, and examples still turn up in the Horn of Africa
@@hendriktonisson2915 IIRC there was a shipment of SAR80s and Ultimax 100s to the Yugoslav federal police that was used by the Croats and Slovenes. I’ve also seen Fijian soldiers armed with Ultimax 100s during the 1987 Fijian coup, and photos of Cambodian resistance fighters carrying SAR80s. Some were sold to countries Central Africa, which is why this rifle still turns up in Somalia, etc
The L1A1 carrying handle was used in the British military. On range practices where one was walking say from 100 yard firing point to the 200 yard firing point, we carried the rifles with a chambered round and the safety on but kept them pointing at the berm by carrying them by the carrying handle pointing backwards as you walked. This saved a lot of range time in certain range drills, not having to clear weapons and reload them simply to move further from the target. Whether this sort of thing would fly today I don't know but 70s/80s.
Thanks I had forgotten all about that on fixed butt ranges when doing the individual weapon tests! Only other time we were allowed to use the carry handle was when doing the fireman carry during CFT cause human hands are not big enough to carry 2 rifles without the handles in one hand 😅
AR 18: *to CZ Bren, HK 416, Fn Scar, AUG* "you guys make me produ" This "rifle" and the SA 80: "Hi mom" AR 18: "I don't remember giving birth to you..."
a question for you, do you think blatant patent avoiding on rifles like this and others have affected the willingness of one company to lease the rights of their rifles to other companies for production? because clearly Sterling got the license, made AR18's for a time, and then made this thing so they could have their own version by just avoiding the legal patents(on technicalities really.) what, if any, affect did it have on future license deals for designs?
You've got your chronology backwards - the LAR pre-dates Sterling getting the AR-18 licence. They dropped it when they got the licence, but evolved it into the SAR-80 that also doesn't infringe any of the Armalite UK patents, and that's what they sold to Singapore cos the terms of the licence were such that they couldn't sell 18's there or sublicence the Armalite design to CIS.
Very interesting video Jonathan, one suggestion would be to include some close up shots of mechanisms- as the detail is hard to see with the two fixed camera positions. Please keep the videos coming, they are excellent.
What happened to British arms manufacturing? The state of it and their inability to field a decent rifle is kinda shocking. At least the Canadians can build them a decent rifle.
Starting @11:47 - *ARMALITEY* - New word! Well done Jonathan! Def: (adj) - A descriptor utilized by the firearms industry to describe the degree to which a rifle or weapons system which is derived from the Armalite AR-18. [or some such definition] Examples include: .... [I'll let other commentators fill this in as we go]
I am certain this was a verbal miscue that was missed in editing. At approximately 1:09, the AR-18 was announced as being chambered in 7.62x51 NATO. There was a prototype made some 10 years before the AR 18 in 7.62x51, but the AR-18 was produced in 5.56.
The British seem to design iconic masterpieces that endure through history, or weapons that become iconic failures. As a Brit it pains me to say that most of the masterpieces are deep in the past.
But our 'iconic masterpieces' are usually designed by other countries firearm designers (SLR, Bren gun, GPMG etc) just with changes made to suit. Have we designed and manufactured any decent modern military firearms?
@@davekennedy6315 Well thats what Im saying mate. The Brown Bess, the Lee Enfield, the Sterling, the webley revolver, but of late we just keep designing complete turkeys.
@@TheWtfnonamez ahh yes I get ya! The old stuff really was great but yeah, recently.....its not been good. The only reason our assault rifle the SA80 even works now is down to H&K. Its a shame as a lot of our other modern military hardware is top notch.
@@davekennedy6315 The fact HK had to come in and save the day really makes the story hilarious. Had they just adopted the AR or G3 or something it would have been so much less memorable.
1st thought: (based just on looks) "This looks like the result of a drug-fueld threesome between a AKM, a Spas 12 and a SA80." It is not the most aestheticaly pleasing firearm I've ever seen.
eh...considering the only way Ian would get to the gun would be through Jonathan, likely not. But if you'd like to see where a Brit goes where Gun Jesus couldn't - The Armourer's Bench actually strips a G11 - th-cam.com/video/D7ooe6OaKzM/w-d-xo.html
I didn't know that the AR-18 was made in 7.62x51 NATO. I have only heard of the 5.56x45 guns. Indeed, the intermediate cartridge was a much better idea. Especially as it was "improved" with the SCHV cartridge concept.
The oldest break open two part receiver design I am aware of is the CZ vz 29. It never entered considerable production, but CZ made an effort in the early 1930’s to sell the rifle.
Interesting thought when you said "5.56 is the future". If we had adopted EM-2 with it's .280 cartridge. Do you think that it would be or at least the calibre would still be around today?
I owned a Costa Mesa AR-180, between the mid 80's and the early 00's. Shot it many times, over that time frame. It's Achillies Heel was the hinge on the folding stock. It was so fragile and poorly designed to be a joke. To be viable, a military rifle has to be designed to be solider proof. The hinge on the AR 180/18's folding stock, wouldn't have lasted a week in the field. It always amazed me that when Howa and Sterling, made their licensed copies of the 180/18. They used the same design folding stock, with the miserable fragile hinge. I would have thought, that they would have gone with something much more durable and soldier proof.
@@BlokeontheRange that what I said the very first didn’t have them then very quickly the protector was welded around the magazine catch I remember in the ACF they didn’t have them in the early 90s and yes the magazine fell out when I joined the army in 93 they all had them
I thought all of the AR-18s and AR -180s are all in 556 /.223. ( and I also thought the British army was trying to replace their L1 A1 rifles with something in that caliber )
The only use of a carry handle I have seen is the Light Division (Light Infantry Regt and Royal Green Jackets?),long time ago,doubling on parade.Impressive and bloody difficult to do.
Love your stuff Jon....its nice to see a fellow Brit talking about weapons fora change lol. Dunno if your going to see this but i had a question. What normally dictates the reason for a curved magazine and straight mag.....as it differs a lot....is it simply design choice or bullet caliber?
I believe nowadays it has to do with space efficiency for necked cartridges. Smaller size for same capacity. Though originally I believe they were developed for more reliable feeding than straight box magazines.
I suppose that the armed forces knew the difference between 5.56 and 7.62mm, but didn't understand the difference. That is why we see some recent purchases which attempts to get around the weaknesses of 5.56 caliber.
They told us in the USMC that we could not carry our M-16s by the carry handle because they wanted us to be able to bring the weapon up and on target quickly. This was in the early '80s.
The reason that the AR-18 used a gas piston instead of the direct impingement system of the AR-10/AR-15 had nothing to do with manufacturing cost. In 1959 Armalite sold its AR-15 design to Colt and all the associated patents went with it. Stoner designed the AR-18 in 1963, but Armalite no longer owned the patent to the direct impingement gas system at that time, so they reverted to a piston operated action.
Stoner had very little to do with the AR-18. He designed the AR-16 in 7.62, in late '50s. The AR-18 had been designed, by Arthur Miller, partly scaling down the AR-16, well after Stoner left Armalite. Stoner disliked the .223 Rem. cartridge for military use, and designed his first .223 weapon only at the end of the .70s, the Knight's Armament Company LAMG
I don’t see the point of patent avoidance. The whole process of designing a gun, making pro types, then organising sales, then setting up a manufacturing line & finally making them, usually takes longer than the patents actually last for
Back in the day when California wasn't a 2a dystopian nightmare. Oh how that AR-18 would weep if it could but only see how the land of it's birth has fallen.
"if anyone else has any rare Sterling assault rifles sitting around please let us know" has a whole different meaning in the UK. Going to get a visit from AFOs, SFOs, even a legendary BFO (b for "big")
Great video, but halfway I realized Jonathan is wearing a John Wick t-shirt, and for the rest of the video I was trying to figure out what the scene on the shirt is, if there is a John Wick graphic novel.
Perhaps a little unkind to a tool room proof of concept. The role was to design a licenceable LAR suitable for less developed countries to make in their own light engineering resources. There may be many small parts but it may be that the individual pieces are within the ability of simpler local production than more complex machining of cunning one piece items. If one can afford an AR18 licence then you are not a potential customer for the final proven version of the Sterling LAR, had it progressed into it’s final offering. Not to mention avoiding patent clashes whilst you are at it. I have severe doubts that the business model was viable but this example is a reasonable par for the course compared to many successful small arms at the first stage. Just as machine gun makers learned of the French, Sterling and Webley learned the hard way that government establishments will steal private industry patent ideas and it takes years and fortunes in the courts to get restitution.
Jonathon... taking the bolt apart had a 'back of the lecture hall in a watch repair class' vibe to it. Really not much to see when you were taking it apart just because of the distance from the camera. Otherwise, usual find job and very informative esp about the patent issues.
hey Jonathon your graphic on the AR 18 was wrong it had it as a 7.62x51 not a 5.56x45! you've got a AR 18s, Ian's been looking to find one you might want to mention it the next time you talk with him. and that LAR isn't the most obscene thing the MOD or sterling did to the AR 18, that would be the SA 80!!!!!
Jonathan, I really enjoy this series. However, please, please, please do something for us with the 'overhead' view; zoom in a bit so we can see. I understand that you are probably trying to keep the whole firearm 'in frame', and that's perfect for the 'frontal' view. But, when the perspective changes to the overhead view, the focus is usually on the smaller bits of the firearm which, unfortunately, are not visible. This is a just a small request as your videos are otherwise outstanding works. Really, I feel like the short child standing on tippy-toes behind the taller children annoyingly crying "I cannot see, I cannot see!" Again Jonathan, thank you so much for the outstanding work you do!
![ทุกครั้งที่หลับตา (Lucid Dream) - AYLA's [ Official MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4i1OBAQyv58/mqdefault.jpg)
is there an underground competition between arms designers to make the most uncomfortable, clunky and dangerous (for the end user) folding stock? if so, this rifle wins for having sharp steel fins where you cheek would go.
That stock looks like it doubles as a razor. You'll have a fresh shave any time you shoulder that rifle. Ouch.
@RR Continued Are you responding to the right comment? I don't see the relevance of what you are saying with regards to my original comment.
In the US it's a little known office in the DOD that's also called the DOD....the department of difficulty.
They take any design for weapon, vehicle or equipment and if it makes sense and is east to work with they change it so it's a pain in the ass.
Short answer, yes...
There's also a competition to make folding stocks in the west as janky as possible so they wobble and a repeatable head position is all but impossible.
And then there's the Germans... The g3a3 telescoping stock is a monument to minimalist sadism I have had the pleasure of a decent round count behind in both semi and full auto.
My advice if you ever find yourself in possession of a g3a3 and need to go full auto... Hold it like you would a very loved family member, that has just done something that's making you consider squeezing hard enough that it becomes their forever hug.
It's still going to bash you in the cheek bone but it probably won't bruise you if you do it that way.
Still looks miles ahead of the SA-80 though...
I will never ever forget my first visit to the royal armouries.
Thanks to you all for what you do 😊
I could literally sit for hours and listen to Jonathan talk about weapons.
At 2:35 British visitors tend to pronounce Costa Mesa with the first syllable as in English "cost" but here in Costa Mesa the English-speaking locals say "coast" thus "COAST-uh MACE-uh" (the high flat land by the coast). Local Spanish speakers pronounce it as per Spanish. An historical aside: early English-speaking settlers called the area Goat Hill which name only survives in a local pub The Goat Hill Tavern, known for its 150 taps and musty smell.
This was fascinating. A few months ago when the museum solicited topics I had said I would like to learn more about Waters' experiments with 7.62 NATO, because the only FW guns I had seen were the S11 and the one featured in Moss' Sterling SMG book, which was in 7.62. I had no concept of this thing so it was wonderful to learn about it. The stock completely threw me on the What Is This Wednesday quiz post- and while watching my brain was working out the geometry as Jonathan was closing it thinking "but how does the butt plate not impede the sights" when it clicked in as a "carry handle" - I said (in my office alone mind you) "oh my god" aloud in a horrified way.
If necessity is the mother of invention, surely patent avoidance is the black sheep aunt.
Does the burst mechanism reset if the trigger is released mid burst or is it possibly to get a 2-1-click? Again, thank you all for taking this one out of the collection for us to examine.
Thanks Jonathan and team that was really interesting to see. I do remember semiauto AR-180 being offered for sale in the UK, when civilian ownership of such things was still allowed. But I don't think I ever saw one in use at my local rifle club - AR-15's and Mini-14's seemed to be the preferred options for 5.56 calibre rifles.
There were quite a few galils back then too
What a shame you can't own them anymore.
Gunmart was the book to ogle over
What happened if you owned rifles like those when the laws changed ? We’re you like grandfathered in and allowed to keep them or did they make everyone who did have a rifle like those turn them in and get rid of them? Or were you able to get away with hiding an AR or two
@@JaySantana-so9zw Everyone had to turn their rifles in and only very limited compensation, up to £150 per rifle, was paid. Later, after Dunblane, when we had to surrender our handguns, EU law required market value compensation to be paid.
Owned a Stirling Armaments AR180 before they were banned here in the UK. Accurate, reliable and comfortable to shoot. Can't see why they made such a lash up with the LAR
Something I find rather amusing in this is the fact that alot of the time where you come across an LAR in gaming, it's often the AR 18 they've seemingly modeled it after.
The AR16 was in 7,62x51; not the AR18. I think that, at 01:10 min it was a mistake.
Great video nonetheless!
I spotted that too!
Yup spotted that
Was thinking the same
Believe ar 10 was 7.62
@@demonprinces17 both were
I look forward to these videos every week, thank you for putting the time and effort into these history lessons!
Are you sure about the caliber at 1:10? Could've sworn the ar18 is a 556 gun
It is. That definitely looks like a mistaken caption.
He said at the beginning of the video this is a 556 rifle
Oh I see what you're talking about yeah that's not right
Yes, the AR16 (the father of the AR18) was in .308. The AR18 in .223.
The Stirling LAR was actually licensed to Singapore, where it emerged (with fixed stock) as the SAR80 and SAR88 follow on. Only used by second line units in the Singapore Armed Forces, though it was sold to a few countries, and examples still turn up in the Horn of Africa
SAR 80 rifles were used by Croatian forces in the Yugoslav Wars in the 1990s.
@@hendriktonisson2915 IIRC there was a shipment of SAR80s and Ultimax 100s to the Yugoslav federal police that was used by the Croats and Slovenes. I’ve also seen Fijian soldiers armed with Ultimax 100s during the 1987 Fijian coup, and photos of Cambodian resistance fighters carrying SAR80s. Some were sold to countries Central Africa, which is why this rifle still turns up in Somalia, etc
The L1A1 carrying handle was used in the British military. On range practices where one was walking say from 100 yard firing point to the 200 yard firing point, we carried the rifles with a chambered round and the safety on but kept them pointing at the berm by carrying them by the carrying handle pointing backwards as you walked. This saved a lot of range time in certain range drills, not having to clear weapons and reload them simply to move further from the target. Whether this sort of thing would fly today I don't know but 70s/80s.
Singapore Armed Forces do the same thing to do this with their SAR-21s, seems about the only use for carry handles in a modern context.
There was also an entire drill process for the "trail arms" position that used the carrying handle. Was very rarely seen though.
Thanks I had forgotten all about that on fixed butt ranges when doing the individual weapon tests! Only other time we were allowed to use the carry handle was when doing the fireman carry during CFT cause human hands are not big enough to carry 2 rifles without the handles in one hand 😅
When I was in Nicaragua in the 1980's ,there were quite a few AR-18s being used by the Contras but none had markings or serial numbers.
A rifle only a mother could love... No not even a mother could love that.
Well it's a good thing this rifle was aborted then right? 😊
AR 18: *to CZ Bren, HK 416, Fn Scar, AUG* "you guys make me produ"
This "rifle" and the SA 80: "Hi mom"
AR 18: "I don't remember giving birth to you..."
@@quakethedoombringer It didn't give birth to it, it shat it out
@@phohecks6046maybe it was a mutant conjoined-twin from Mars?
a question for you, do you think blatant patent avoiding on rifles like this and others have affected the willingness of one company to lease the rights of their rifles to other companies for production? because clearly Sterling got the license, made AR18's for a time, and then made this thing so they could have their own version by just avoiding the legal patents(on technicalities really.) what, if any, affect did it have on future license deals for designs?
You've got your chronology backwards - the LAR pre-dates Sterling getting the AR-18 licence. They dropped it when they got the licence, but evolved it into the SAR-80 that also doesn't infringe any of the Armalite UK patents, and that's what they sold to Singapore cos the terms of the licence were such that they couldn't sell 18's there or sublicence the Armalite design to CIS.
It would be helpful if you could adjust the camera to show the details of the action. Perhaps you could zoom it in? Fascinating nevertheless.
can we please get a video discussing the Sterling SAR-87, it just looks funky AF?
Thanks, Enjoyed the story and humor. Still have my Sterling AR180 from decades ago. later from Texas,usa.
Very interesting video Jonathan, one suggestion would be to include some close up shots of mechanisms- as the detail is hard to see with the two fixed camera positions. Please keep the videos coming, they are excellent.
Agreed, the ratchet surfaces are barely visible
C'mon man , those Google Earth satellite images are crystal clear 😂😂😂
What happened to British arms manufacturing? The state of it and their inability to field a decent rifle is kinda shocking. At least the Canadians can build them a decent rifle.
What happened to them is the same as what happened to British car manufacturing.
@UCiU2mSzDjUgxbux4wrEz7Vg she privatised the Enfield site which was then shut down.
Project managers
Any light engineering of any description,we used to lead the world,now we lead dogs.
Not to mention that they cannot sell to any of The Queen's Subjects so how are they gonna make any money?
Instead of calling in the Sterling, the Pewter might of been a better name reflecting it's quality?
Interesting video as usual, thanks. 1 small mistake, your caption claimed the AR-18 is chambered in 7.62x51mm @Royal Armouries 😄
Starting @11:47 - *ARMALITEY* - New word! Well done Jonathan!
Def: (adj) - A descriptor utilized by the firearms industry to describe the degree to which a rifle or weapons system which is derived from the Armalite AR-18. [or some such definition]
Examples include: .... [I'll let other commentators fill this in as we go]
I am certain this was a verbal miscue that was missed in editing. At approximately 1:09, the AR-18 was announced as being chambered in 7.62x51 NATO. There was a prototype made some 10 years before the AR 18 in 7.62x51, but the AR-18 was produced in 5.56.
Love Jonathan fergusons work!!
The British seem to design iconic masterpieces that endure through history, or weapons that become iconic failures. As a Brit it pains me to say that most of the masterpieces are deep in the past.
it really does seem to to be a coin flip for you guys doesn't it? 😂
But our 'iconic masterpieces' are usually designed by other countries firearm designers (SLR, Bren gun, GPMG etc) just with changes made to suit. Have we designed and manufactured any decent modern military firearms?
@@davekennedy6315 Well thats what Im saying mate. The Brown Bess, the Lee Enfield, the Sterling, the webley revolver, but of late we just keep designing complete turkeys.
@@TheWtfnonamez ahh yes I get ya! The old stuff really was great but yeah, recently.....its not been good. The only reason our assault rifle the SA80 even works now is down to H&K. Its a shame as a lot of our other modern military hardware is top notch.
@@davekennedy6315 The fact HK had to come in and save the day really makes the story hilarious. Had they just adopted the AR or G3 or something it would have been so much less memorable.
Small editing mistake AR18 is chambered for 5.56mm AR16 is 7.62mm
1st thought: (based just on looks) "This looks like the result of a drug-fueld threesome between a AKM, a Spas 12 and a SA80."
It is not the most aestheticaly pleasing firearm I've ever seen.
It's quite an atrocious rifle.
That is a good way to describe it.
if it saves youre life looks are nothing
@@samholdsworth420 so are the holes it would make on youre enemy
15:00 I am very curious to learn how the heck the recoil spring hasn't shot off to the other side of the room yet. It's under tension right?
Jonathan Ferguson - 'Sorry, I'm not stripping this thing.'
Ian McCollum - 'Hold my French 75...'
eh...considering the only way Ian would get to the gun would be through Jonathan, likely not. But if you'd like to see where a Brit goes where Gun Jesus couldn't - The Armourer's Bench actually strips a G11 - th-cam.com/video/D7ooe6OaKzM/w-d-xo.html
@@kencampbell1750 Ahhh, the fabled G-11. Also known as 'Kraut Space Magic'. 😜
@@kencampbell1750 stripping G11 is usually not a problem. Question is, can you put it back together?
I own a M153GN18 model Armalite and I absolutely love the thing
can you make one about the hk416 because i want to know why specialforces prefer them over other ar15's and there is sadly no detailed video about it
I've heard so much about this gun. but never could find a picture of it. Kinda glad I didn't.
I didn't know that the AR-18 was made in 7.62x51 NATO. I have only heard of the 5.56x45 guns. Indeed, the intermediate cartridge was a much better idea. Especially as it was "improved" with the SCHV cartridge concept.
You know I did try to get a K1A or an FNC on Facebook and boy it seems like the two got combined and I am not disappointed.
The oldest break open two part receiver design I am aware of is the CZ vz 29. It never entered considerable production, but CZ made an effort in the early 1930’s to sell the rifle.
THE TERMINATOR used an AR18 one handed with stock folded.
Never knew about this one. Thanks!
when the handling of every part of your gun by a firearms expert feels "slightly awkward" you know something is wrong
Thanks for the video. Can you please improve the lighting over the weapon, to make its details more distinct, and do more closeups.
The fact that the AR 18 was listed as 7.62 NATO moderately surprised me but it also very much gave me a smirk.
Look up the AR-16.
It's weird to hear Jonathan say Costa Mesa. Also, TIL the AR-18 was manufactured in Costa Mesa, CA.
Interesting thought when you said "5.56 is the future". If we had adopted EM-2 with it's .280 cartridge. Do you think that it would be or at least the calibre would still be around today?
I have owned a Sterling AR180 and a Costa Mesa Armalite AR180 and both were great rifles.
Great video Jonathan. Question what is the rifle to the right your left above the sig 550 it keeps bugging me I can't tell what it is.
Nice nod to a collab with Bloke!
Any chance to see a video about the VSS Vintores and/or AS VAL?
would a 100 round mag fit in that rifle? Does the magazine well accept all standard magazine types?
I owned a Costa Mesa AR-180, between the mid 80's and the early 00's. Shot it many times, over that time frame. It's Achillies Heel was the hinge on the folding stock. It was so fragile and poorly designed to be a joke. To be viable, a military rifle has to be designed to be solider proof. The hinge on the AR 180/18's folding stock, wouldn't have lasted a week in the field.
It always amazed me that when Howa and Sterling, made their licensed copies of the 180/18. They used the same design folding stock, with the miserable fragile hinge. I would have thought, that they would have gone with something much more durable and soldier proof.
Howard did with their modernized Type 89
Thank you 👍
The sa80a1 I had , had a magazine catch protector around it , it didn’t fall out that was the very very first models
The very first models didn't have one and were upgraded twice. Firstly with a protector glued on (I shoite ye not), then with one welded on.
@@BlokeontheRange that what I said the very first didn’t have them then very quickly the protector was welded around the magazine catch I remember in the ACF they didn’t have them in the early 90s and yes the magazine fell out when I joined the army in 93 they all had them
I thought all of the AR-18s and AR -180s are all in 556 /.223. ( and I also thought the British army was trying to replace their L1 A1 rifles with something in that caliber )
Thank God for royal armory!! Stopping nerd and wana be gunsmith from destroying firearm history. Keep doing it right!!
12:05 "Now this is where it gets awkward" Brother that ship sailed about twelve minutes ago;)
There's a pay tent for the ar18? Where is it? How much do they charge?
The Sterling memoars are so salty about the SA80 intruding on the license 😂
big fan of jon's cheeky smile
The only use of a carry handle I have seen is the Light Division (Light Infantry Regt and Royal Green Jackets?),long time ago,doubling on parade.Impressive and bloody difficult to do.
1:55
"Fell between two stools"
does that mean what I think it means?
Love your stuff Jon....its nice to see a fellow Brit talking about weapons fora change lol. Dunno if your going to see this but i had a question.
What normally dictates the reason for a curved magazine and straight mag.....as it differs a lot....is it simply design choice or bullet caliber?
I believe nowadays it has to do with space efficiency for necked cartridges. Smaller size for same capacity. Though originally I believe they were developed for more reliable feeding than straight box magazines.
could you do a video on the mp412?
I suppose that the armed forces knew the difference between 5.56 and 7.62mm, but didn't understand the difference.
That is why we see some recent purchases which attempts to get around the weaknesses of 5.56 caliber.
They told us in the USMC that we could not carry our M-16s by the carry handle because they wanted us to be able to bring the weapon up and on target quickly. This was in the early '80s.
lol @ 1:12, the AR-18 is 5.56x45mm not 7.62x51. The AR-16 was the 7.62x51mm NATO prototype predecessor to the AR-18.
Working around all those awesome guns would be breaking my heart that I couldn't shoot any of them or own any of them for myself
I have heard an British Army rumour that the SLR is coming back into service known as the SLR-A2, bottom standard SLR, the top is an Galil ACE upper
Make sure to keep a matchstick on hand
No chance.
Also iam not sure if that stock is that bad when it have carry handle and potentialy can be LMG?
Very cool piece of history
If it is a less than Sterling attempt, does that make it a Sten attempt?
The reason that the AR-18 used a gas piston instead of the direct impingement system of the AR-10/AR-15 had nothing to do with manufacturing cost. In 1959 Armalite sold its AR-15 design to Colt and all the associated patents went with it. Stoner designed the AR-18 in 1963, but Armalite no longer owned the patent to the direct impingement gas system at that time, so they reverted to a piston operated action.
Stoner had very little to do with the AR-18. He designed the AR-16 in 7.62, in late '50s. The AR-18 had been designed, by Arthur Miller, partly scaling down the AR-16, well after Stoner left Armalite. Stoner disliked the .223 Rem. cartridge for military use, and designed his first .223 weapon only at the end of the .70s, the Knight's Armament Company LAMG
The stock bruh💀
+"So this is (to put you out of your misery)"
- oh thanks Jonathan how kind haha
I don’t see the point of patent avoidance. The whole process of designing a gun, making pro types, then organising sales, then setting up a manufacturing line & finally making them, usually takes longer than the patents actually last for
That dust cover design carried over into the SAR-80
Back in the day when California wasn't a 2a dystopian nightmare. Oh how that AR-18 would weep if it could but only see how the land of it's birth has fallen.
looks like you have the ar18 as shooting 7.62 nato instead of 5.56 at 1:12 mark!
How the LAR-18 became the SA-80? Is totally unbelievable and should of stuck with the LAR-18 with the 40round magazine...
So a British museum with thousands of weapons and not a single video about the English longbow?
"if anyone else has any rare Sterling assault rifles sitting around please let us know" has a whole different meaning in the UK. Going to get a visit from AFOs, SFOs, even a legendary BFO (b for "big")
I always thought that the AR-18 was an ugly duckling but that Sterling LAR is truly an abomination.
Well, it IS a prototype. So the design was never finalised. But yea, as it is, it is not the prettiest I've ever seen.
Jonathan, will you be doing any videos on the Taiwanese T-65 series?
My favorite part is always the sounds all these firearms make when handling them.
That clickity clack sound.
Great video, but halfway I realized Jonathan is wearing a John Wick t-shirt, and for the rest of the video I was trying to figure out what the scene on the shirt is, if there is a John Wick graphic novel.
folding stock doubles as a Cigar cutter or digits and or appendages of all sorts.
Weirdly enough, when I look at that thing I see a luger and an AR doing inappropriate things in a dark room
Without looking at the thumbnail, I assumed it was another 'why the l85 failed" type video.
I cant help but see M1A1 Thompson similarites in it as well
Perhaps a little unkind to a tool room proof of concept. The role was to design a licenceable LAR suitable for less developed countries to make in their own light engineering resources. There may be many small parts but it may be that the individual pieces are within the ability of simpler local production than more complex machining of cunning one piece items. If one can afford an AR18 licence then you are not a potential customer for the final proven version of the Sterling LAR, had it progressed into it’s final offering. Not to mention avoiding patent clashes whilst you are at it. I have severe doubts that the business model was viable but this example is a reasonable par for the course compared to many successful small arms at the first stage. Just as machine gun makers learned of the French, Sterling and Webley learned the hard way that government establishments will steal private industry patent ideas and it takes years and fortunes in the courts to get restitution.
As far as standard infantry weapons go , did britain throw in the towel after the EM2 got burned ?
2:12 *Up the 'RA!!!*
R.A. stands for Royal Armouries, of course!!
Jonathon... taking the bolt apart had a 'back of the lecture hall in a watch repair class' vibe to it. Really not much to see when you were taking it apart just because of the distance from the camera. Otherwise, usual find job and very informative esp about the patent issues.
hey Jonathon your graphic on the AR 18 was wrong it had it as a 7.62x51 not a 5.56x45! you've got a AR 18s, Ian's been looking to find one you might want to mention it the next time you talk with him. and that LAR isn't the most obscene thing the MOD or sterling did to the AR 18, that would be the SA 80!!!!!
i love your content!!!
I also love your shirt!!!! XD
Jonathan, I really enjoy this series. However, please, please, please do something for us with the 'overhead' view; zoom in a bit so we can see. I understand that you are probably trying to keep the whole firearm 'in frame', and that's perfect for the 'frontal' view. But, when the perspective changes to the overhead view, the focus is usually on the smaller bits of the firearm which, unfortunately, are not visible. This is a just a small request as your videos are otherwise outstanding works. Really, I feel like the short child standing on tippy-toes behind the taller children annoyingly crying "I cannot see, I cannot see!" Again Jonathan, thank you so much for the outstanding work you do!
Gooood gooood, can't let Ian get all the cool forgotten weapons lol
It looks like one of those weird Frankenrifles you see on obscure weapons channels...
You should show that to Gun Jesus.
I wonder if Jonathan's ever had his hands on a Type 89, apparently they're AR-18 based.
Just nitpicking, but another camera to show clearly the workings of the 3 round burst feature would have been great.
correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't the AR-18 chambered in 5.56?
the intro card said 7.62
yep. AR18 is 5.56.
The 7.62 NATO version of the rifle was the prototype AR16