Daniel Defense's 7.62 offering

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Wayne1one

    gun aficionado
    Feb 13, 2011
    3,127
    Bowie, MD
    Looks pretty sweet, hope the price is reasonable, but it probably won't be....



    I guess we will be getting some funky DD signature flash hider too, since there is no muzzle device attached in the video.

    Either way, who is interested?
     

    BradMacc82

    Ultimate Member
    Industry Partner
    Aug 17, 2011
    26,177
    Seeing how DD prices things, I'm going to say about $2200 to $2400.
     

    smg1231

    Member
    Dec 15, 2012
    99
    Ellicott City
    The latest issue of Recoil Magazine had a nice write-up on it. It looks like an interesting system....the handguard bolts to the receiver directly and serves as the barrel nut. If I had to guess, I would expect price to be north of $2500.
     

    501st

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 16, 2011
    1,627
    The latest issue of Recoil Magazine had a nice write-up on it. It looks like an interesting system....the handguard bolts to the receiver directly and serves as the barrel nut. If I had to guess, I would expect price to be north of $2500.

    Seeing as the msrp for the ruger sr 7.62 is $2269, a $2500 msrp for DD sounds about right.
     

    clandestine

    AR-15 Savant
    Oct 13, 2008
    37,031
    Elkton, MD
    They need to get some adjustable gas on that thing, she is recoiling pretty hard.

    I wonder if accuracy will degrade if someone monkeys a muzzle device with too much torque.
     

    smg1231

    Member
    Dec 15, 2012
    99
    Ellicott City
    $2700 MSRP
     

    Attachments

    • image.jpg
      image.jpg
      99.9 KB · Views: 387

    501st

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 16, 2011
    1,627
    Why are they not releasing a 20/22 inch barrel version off the bat?
     

    501st

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 16, 2011
    1,627
    Demand.

    If it isn't there, no reason to do so.


    .308 ar-10's are for longer range shooting, no? I don't see the point in copying the familiar 14.5/16/18 inch barrellengths of the AR-15 especially with rounds like 300 blackout that pack more of a punch than .223/5.56.


    I'd rather have an .308 AR-10 than an M1A.
     

    BradMacc82

    Ultimate Member
    Industry Partner
    Aug 17, 2011
    26,177
    Would you want a 24" AR-10 that comes in at 10+ lbs. before optics?

    DD will read the market, if they feel there's demand for a SASS-type AR-10, they'll do one. Honestly, with 168gr or 175gr rounds - you're not giving up an earth-shattering amount by limiting your barrel options to 18" to 20", for an entry - even 16" will still get you out past 500 yards with plenty more energy than 5.56, x39, 300BLK.

    Most of the people buying AR-10's aren't going to try and stretch them to their limits, so a 16" out to 600 or so yards isn't shabby, but with significant more lethality than 5.56. I'd dare say most of the people buying a 16" AR-10 are thinking more of a shorter range rifle with more ass than 5.56, x39, 300BLK, etc.
     

    501st

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 16, 2011
    1,627
    Would you want a 24" AR-10 that comes in at 10+ lbs. before optics?

    DD will read the market, if they feel there's demand for a SASS-type AR-10, they'll do one. Honestly, with 168gr or 175gr rounds - you're not giving up an earth-shattering amount by limiting your barrel options to 18" to 20", for an entry - even 16" will still get you out past 500 yards with plenty more energy than 5.56, x39, 300BLK.

    Most of the people buying AR-10's aren't going to try and stretch them to their limits, so a 16" out to 600 or so yards isn't shabby, but with significant more lethality than 5.56. I'd dare say most of the people buying a 16" AR-10 are thinking more of a shorter range rifle with more ass than 5.56, x39, 300BLK, etc.

    Last I checked the point of going .308 was for range. The additional energy is great, but for target shooting (considering the additional cost)I don't see people opting for a .308 ar10 over the less expensive ar15 in various calibers or a bolt action .308. And I doubt there are many hunters lining up for another AR10. (especially at this price)

    And I don't see it being difficult for DD to create an AR10 with say a ~22/24inch S2W profile barrel that easily comes in under 10 pounds (as long as they don't stick their "cheese grater" rail on it)

    And for the .308 at longer ranges (closer to 100 yards) the barrel length reductions have more of an impact than for .223/5.56 (for example going from the standard 20 inch to 16 inch barrel)

    http://rifleshooter.com/2014/12/308...ato-barrel-length-versus-velocity-28-to-16-5/

    Finally a .308 at 16 inches would be rather unpleasant to shoot unsuppressed compared to a 22/24 inch barrel length.
     

    BradMacc82

    Ultimate Member
    Industry Partner
    Aug 17, 2011
    26,177
    The above rifle is listed at 8.3 lbs. empty with a 16" barrel. 20" Gov't profile (.308) from Rainier comes in at 2 lbs. 14.5 oz. alone. 18" comes in at 2 lbs. 10 oz. alone. I don't have the weight for a 24" barrel handy, but it's safe to assume that'll be in the 3 lbs. range.

    In my circle, the people I know that'd be interested in a 16" .308 AR-10 wouldn't be interested in it for LR. They'd be drawn more to the appeal of a handy carbine with more ass to it for hunting. If they want to do real LR shooting, they'll grab their bolt gun.

    The M110 for example, has 2 available upper groups. 1 is a 16", the other is a 20". The 16" is used for CQB/spotter, the 20" is used for the real work.

    I've already had 16" AR-10's light off just above my head at a few ranges in MD and VA, it's no more unpleasant than a 5.56 with a comp being lit off the same distance from your head.
     

    fidelity

    piled higher and deeper
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 15, 2012
    22,400
    Frederick County
    Following on what Brad wrote, I shoot 308 out of 16- and 20-inch barrels unsuppressed, and using the same ammo, I don't really notice any sound difference. I use good ear protection, and if anything, the 20-inch rifle is more unpleasant to shoot (lever gun that handles recoil less well). With ear protection and shooting outdoors, I don't find the sound report to be particularly bad. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if my Mini-14 (shooting 223/5.56) is nearly as loud.

    16-inch barrels are quite common for 308 rounds. It's true that one doesn't extract the fullest potential of the cartridge but the combined power and ballistics are still superior to 5.56 and 7.62x39 in the combat arena and excellent for medium game hunting in North America (e.g. superior to the common 30-30 cartridge used for the same game). As Brad pointed out, it's a compromise. 308 barrels are heavier (even if the width of steel is the same, it's longer path around a 308 vs a 223, so there's going to be more mass per length of barrel), so if not shooting from a bench and taking a rifle to the field, a difference between a 16- vs 22-inch barrel is easily felt. Despite the loss of power and some range by going shorter, if your game (or combat) is from 100-400 yards, a 308/7.62x51 round from a 16-inch barrel has much more appeal than a 5.56 round given the knockdown power at these distances.

    The ballistics (derived in part from aerodynamics) of the 308 bullet are so appealing that it's been incorporated in the 300 BLK cartridge (a Frankenstein round incorporating the larger 308 bullet into a trimmed 223 shell). Even with "optimal" barrel length (which is under 16-inches for this round), a 300 BLK round is not going to approach the energy of a 308 round fired from a 16-inch barrel. However the mass of the bullet results in increased energy and knockdown power vs 5.56, one that manifests over distance. Even if shorter (7.62x35mm), the 300 BLK is comparable to the 7.62x39 in knockdown power because the bullet has a better ballistic coefficient. As you probably know, the 300 BLK has become an increasingly popular deer hunting round because it has lighter recoil than a 308 (and probably 30-30) and with just a barrel change can be used in an AR-15 platform for which part prices are inexpensive due to economies of scale and modularity is supreme. Instead of the barrel length compromise when taking an AR-10 from 20-inches to 16-inches, in this case, the 300 BLK cartridge is the compromise, but the benefits derived offset the losses for its targeted use.

    For distance shooting (greater than 600 yards), it is debatable whether 308 is really the best option (with the primary appeal possibly being price ). Moreover it's more the realm of bolt gun usage vs semi-automatics given accuracy is paramount.

    Anyway, that's the understanding of the pluses and minuses of the 308 from different platforms in my limited use. I'm sure someone with more practical experience could correct my misconceptions.
     
    Last edited:

    DaemonAssassin

    Why should we Free BSD?
    Jun 14, 2012
    23,970
    Political refugee in WV
    Would you want a 24" AR-10 that comes in at 10+ lbs. before optics?

    DD will read the market, if they feel there's demand for a SASS-type AR-10, they'll do one. Honestly, with 168gr or 175gr rounds - you're not giving up an earth-shattering amount by limiting your barrel options to 18" to 20", for an entry - even 16" will still get you out past 500 yards with plenty more energy than 5.56, x39, 300BLK.

    Most of the people buying AR-10's aren't going to try and stretch them to their limits, so a 16" out to 600 or so yards isn't shabby, but with significant more lethality than 5.56. I'd dare say most of the people buying a 16" AR-10 are thinking more of a shorter range rifle with more ass than 5.56, x39, 300BLK, etc.

    Generally speaking a hunter that likes the 308, but doesn't want to deal with a bolt/pump rifle. You know exactly who I am referring to.

    Last I checked the point of going .308 was for range. The additional energy is great, but for target shooting (considering the additional cost)I don't see people opting for a .308 ar10 over the less expensive ar15 in various calibers or a bolt action .308. And I doubt there are many hunters lining up for another AR10. (especially at this price)

    And I don't see it being difficult for DD to create an AR10 with say a ~22/24inch S2W profile barrel that easily comes in under 10 pounds (as long as they don't stick their "cheese grater" rail on it)

    And for the .308 at longer ranges (closer to 100 yards) the barrel length reductions have more of an impact than for .223/5.56 (for example going from the standard 20 inch to 16 inch barrel)

    http://rifleshooter.com/2014/12/308...ato-barrel-length-versus-velocity-28-to-16-5/

    Finally a .308 at 16 inches would be rather unpleasant to shoot unsuppressed compared to a 22/24 inch barrel length.

    For a lot of people it is the "My dick is bigger." syndrome. For others, it is a utilitarian kind of rifle for hunting, varmint control, or a truck gun. I will run a 16" barreled AR10 for deer season, and I would also run it as a varmint gun too. DD is trying to break into those markets, just like how RRA, Armalite, Ruger, and DPMS have done. The hunter market is a big one and if you can get your fingers in that pie, well you are going to make some serious money.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,922
    Messages
    7,259,142
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom