View Full Version : FN FAR 308 or DPMS 308

December 17, 2009, 02:30 PM
Which would you choose?

(And why?)

December 17, 2009, 07:14 PM
I'd buy the FN just to be different.

December 17, 2009, 07:18 PM
I'd buy the one that felt better to me.


December 17, 2009, 08:15 PM
AR has more customization available and is more tacticool looking.

FN is likely more accurate, softer shooting and more comfortable to shoot.

I have owned an FNAR and now own an AR10. The AR is more "fun" which was what I was after, mostly due to the stuff I can buy for it, but the FN was definitely softer shooting, more comfortable and more accurate than the AR10.

If you can get past the looks and the price of the mags, the FN is a great rifle.

If you like to play and tinker with things and make something your own custom look, the AR is likely a better option.

December 17, 2009, 09:48 PM
Dont be silly, get the SAIGA and save your money !

The SAIGA will be more reliable and easier to clean and
service due to the AK-47 mechanism vs the hi maintenance

December 17, 2009, 09:53 PM
I would go for the FN just becuase I don't see the point of an AR10 type.

I mean I dont hold ANYTHING against it, it's just, if I'm going to be buying a .308 I'm going to buy a dedicated .308 rifle, not a platform that also shoots it.

December 17, 2009, 10:28 PM
I love my FNAR. Super clean, reliable, and accurate. Under moa all day with good ammo. 1/2 moa easy with handloads. Easy to adjust with the supplied inserts, and piston driven. The mags are expensive, but are built tough. They are also long, so you can seat bullets way out if needed.

BTW, Cabelas had a special for $1300 with 2 20 rnd and 1 10 rnd mag. Awesome deal for this firearm.

On a side note, this gun is coming out under the Winchester name also, SuperX-AR Varmint, or SXAR. Same gun, different name and in camo.

December 17, 2009, 10:32 PM
I just can't get use to the looks. it looks more like a benelli shotgun than a semi auto rifle. Quality is top notch, but I would probably pick the AR style because I am shallow.

December 17, 2009, 10:38 PM
The AR 10 may look better, but that is just because they are everywhere and what you are used to seeing. For the same price though, the FNAR whips it up and down the range.

Dean1818, you must decide what is more important, form or function.

wayne in boca
December 18, 2009, 04:04 AM
I knew a girl in high school.She adored me,looked at me like a pork chop.She could cook too.But I blew her off and married another woman,because she was butt ugly, just like the FNAR is.I got standards.They are low,but I got 'em.

December 18, 2009, 08:18 AM
lol, yup. you take an AR-10 to the range and you get people making comments about your gun. you can dress it up and make it look even more badazz than stock. you take an FNAR and no one gives a crap. It is the ugly fat girl that can cook, clean and work. The AR-10 is the supermodel. Finicky, unreliable and a real beeatch, but she is hot!!!!

If I wanted a hard working supermodel I'd get a DSA FAL...lol

December 18, 2009, 10:15 PM

December 18, 2009, 11:03 PM
Why limit the choice to a DPMS .308? If you're going to get an AR-10 get a real one from Armalite.


December 19, 2009, 12:14 AM
I have a DPMS .308 and really like it. The biggest con that comes to mind is that it gets DIRTY very QUICKLY. I haven't put it through any sustained (100 rds or more) strings of fire and therefore have never had any issues as a result of it being dirty, I just know it gets dirty in a hurry. Here's a scan of 6x 3 shot groups. (loaded 18 rds in a mag and fired the groups... No time for cooling) Ammo was Federal Gold Medal Match 168 gr., range was 100 yards.


And here is my rifle.

December 19, 2009, 12:37 AM
ive always wanted a FNAR... i like pretty much any thing made by FN.. i think its the ultimate .308 semi-auto..but like i said im pretty partial to FN.. im not knocking any other rifle, SHOOTER JOHN yours is cool..ROLL TIDE!!!!!!!!!!!

December 19, 2009, 12:46 AM
Thanks for the comment... ROLL TIDE!

Suwannee Tim
December 19, 2009, 07:03 AM
I'm a pretty practical guy but when it comes to girls and guns, they gotta look good. That excludes the FN. And I'm a big FN fan. I've got a couple of pistols and a FS2000 which looks like a ray gun. In fact I had my daughter convinced that it was a ray gun.:D Though to give the devil his due, I did handle one in Gander Mountain and it felt good, real good. That's another thing I require in a females and guns. Gotta feel good, gotta look good. Both. In the same woman. Or gun.:D Then again, I might buy the FN just to be different.:D:D I'll bet it would be a great hunting gun. I don't remember, what does it weigh?

December 19, 2009, 08:39 AM
the FNAR is 8.2 lbs

The AR definitly is more sexy, but........

Everything I hear about the FNAR says it is an AWESOME rifle.

Very rugged, very very accurate, and not "run of the mill"

As far as hot chicks....... in between marriages, I tried to date all the hot chicks that I could get to go out with me......

What I found is the hotter the girl..... the more of a nut case.......

AND..... the more they wanted to spend my coin.....:eek:

Is there a true comparison with rifles?????:confused:

December 19, 2009, 10:49 AM
The 308 was actually the first design of the AR. My 308 only shoots that and 7.62X51.

I ran 700 rounds of Wolf thru without cleaning just to see, no problems. I have never had a problem, no jams, no FTF, no FTE. After about 3000 rnd I just replaced the firing pin, (as a precaution). I will continue to use the old one at the range until it fails so that I can get an accurate rnd count.

I used it for deer season and it worked out splendidly. It is everything I could ask for in a MBR, accurate, reliable, consistent. Parts and mags are plentiful and affordable and now PMAGS.

I have heard people say that DPMS uses poor quality metal, really, then why is it that the Knight and the Fulton armory rifles customs based on the DPMS lower?

I always love the posts from people that have never shot a gun, much less touched one and say it is crap.

December 19, 2009, 01:20 PM
FNAR, reliable in the few outings? so what. It is a relatively new gun and there is no history behind it. You really have no clue how it will hold up. The AR's are not the most reliable, but they have had many improvements and are much better than they use to be. Really, if you are looking for reliability and a hunting rifle look, get the M1A/M14. It is a much better platform and the extra money you spend on the rifle will be outweighed by the 5-6 extra magazines you buy at $40 less each. I have nothing against the FNAR, but to say it is proven reliability and strength would be a misnomer.

December 19, 2009, 02:14 PM

The FNAR is just a 308 BAR with a heavy barrel and tacticool stock. They have been proven reliable.

In fact, one of the coolest things about the BAR is that is was considered for the Army's sniper rifle during the testing phase in the mid 1980's. At Ft. Benning you can go to the Infantry Museum and see the BAR in 300 Win Mag that was used for the testing. In the end the Army wanted a 308, but that BAR shot TIGHT.


December 19, 2009, 02:30 PM
The modern BAR has not been proven as a battle rifle firing thousands of rounds. The old BAR was an overbuilt beast that may only have it's action in common with the FNAR, which is built more like the modern BAR, which again is not tested as a rifle that can fire hundreds of rounds continuously. Remember, the old BAR was so heavy it was replaced quickly by the M1 garand.

Don't get me wrong, I have had a few modern BAR's one in 300wm and one in 338 wm. Great guns and I wish I had kept them. However, it is one thing to shoot as sniper or hunting versus battle conditions where you lay down lots of fire in short periods of time and get guns really dirty. The FNAR may be good as a battle rifle, but that has not been proven and when one compares it to an AR10 style weapon I assume that is what they are wanting. Remember the remington semi autos in 30-06 and 308? Ok rifle for hunting, but not overbuilt for much more.

December 19, 2009, 02:53 PM
I don't like the way the FN shoulders. AR fits me much better.

December 19, 2009, 03:02 PM
If the FNAR makes it past 10 years of life it may get some nice alternative stocks which will fit better. Problem is that you are trying to combine a hunting rifle stock with a pistol grip of an assault rifle. that is hard to do unless you do a total redesign like the sage stock for the M1A.

December 19, 2009, 03:31 PM
The modern BAR has not been proven as a battle rifle firing thousands of rounds. The old BAR was an overbuilt beast that may only have it's action in common with the FNAR, which is built more like the modern BAR, which again is not tested as a rifle that can fire hundreds of rounds continuously. Remember, the old BAR was so heavy it was replaced quickly by the M1 garand.

Don't get me wrong, I have had a few modern BAR's one in 300wm and one in 338 wm. Great guns and I wish I had kept them. However, it is one thing to shoot as sniper or hunting versus battle conditions where you lay down lots of fire in short periods of time and get guns really dirty. The FNAR may be good as a battle rifle, but that has not been proven and when one compares it to an AR10 style weapon I assume that is what they are wanting. Remember the remington semi autos in 30-06 and 308? Ok rifle for hunting, but not overbuilt for much more.

LOL, neither the FNAR nor the AR-10 are battle tested to your criteria. The closest thing to "battle tested" is the SR-25 which is, yup, a sniper rifle not meant for thousands of rounds of torture testing....


December 19, 2009, 04:02 PM
I've had my DPMS LR 308B for three years now. In that time, and about 2000 rounds down range, with decent ammo it has never jammed or failed in any way. Accuracy runs with good ammo (My reloads mainly) at between 5/8' ~ 7/8" @ 100 yds, consistently. Federal cheap 150 gr WalMart ammo runs 1 ~ 1 1/4".
This is with a bipod and a mark 1 mod 1 shoulder. No sandbags. Other commercial ammo runs up to 3" groups.
The rifle has been everything I wanted in an Eeeeevil black rifle. Accurate beyond my expectations, totally reliable and just thinking of it makes GFWs wet their pants.


December 19, 2009, 04:31 PM
LOL, jimro, the AR platform is battle tested. you can't see the trees for the forest can you. M16, M4 etc. The platform has not changed, it has just been adapted. By the way, the popular notion that the M16 was adapted for 308 is incorrect. The AR platform started out as a 308 and was reduced to 223 in it's final design. Yes, the AR is proven the FNAR is not. The AR platform is much more versatile as well. you can change calibers with uppers, so long as the magazines can hold them. It is really a great design. Not the best, but definitely a classic.

December 19, 2009, 07:59 PM

This is where you tell me that you are some special secret squirrel who has run AR-10's all over the world on dark ops or something and aren't just talking out your fourth point of contact.

First off, the AR-10 was beat out in trials by the M14. Whether that was a fair trial or not is a different story. Secondly, even though five decades of service has mostly ironed the kinks out of the M16 lineup, the AR-10 hasn't had that. The SR-25 (ala M110 or Mk11mod0) is having a bunch of problems in that you know, actual combat testing arena.

It makes a decent sniper rifle, when it's working. I like the M110 a lot because it fills a niche in our inventory left by the M21.

The BAR, fully automatic 30-06, was never replaced by the Garand. The BAR was used up through Korea and was replaced by a change in doctrine that made squad automatic weapons obsolete since everyone had full auto capabilities. The commercial BAR has jack and squat to do with the old .mil version. The commercial BAR has been a great hunting rifle for a long time, even competing with another hunting rifle, the Remington M700 in sniper rifle trials for the US Army.

And lastly, if you think that you need a "battle tested" thirty caliber 308 you could go ahead and recommend the M1A or FAL. Both are in the same price range, both are battle tested and still currently in service.

Seriously, school me oh mighty fount of all knowledge. Who knows, it may save my life one day when the zombies rise from the grave and I have to break into a gun store to arm myself and fight my way to my secret bug out location I'll be stand there and run through my head what rifle Brenten told me was "battle tested"....


December 19, 2009, 08:50 PM
Jimro, I was pointing out how incorrect you were plain and simple. you can say what you will. The reason why the AR-10 was beat out was because of the inferior materials used in it's construction. Again, back to the point that you seem to be avoiding. The FNAR is not tested or proven anywhere. it is a hunting design, no more no less. Until it goes to war and proves itself, call it what it is, a high capacity hunting rifle like the BAR before it and the remingtons before it. It is by no means a battle rifle...PERIOD!!!

December 19, 2009, 08:54 PM
I will, however agree with you that the FAL, M1A and the HK91 are more proven platforms than the AR.

December 20, 2009, 12:41 AM

Thank god you've given up the "AR10 is battle proven" line.

Just remember that is was those hunting rifles, Win M70 and Rem 700, that became sniper rites. Like I've written before, head down to Ft. Benning and take a look at the BAR in the Infantry Museum that went through the original sniper trials in the mid 1980's.

Hell, wasn't it not too long ago that Mr. Barret made his semi-auto 50 caliber M82 for the civilian market?

Give it a rest on the "proven in the field but not on the battlefield" line. I carried my rifle MUCH more than I ever shot it in Iraq.


December 20, 2009, 02:33 AM

2nd choice: M1A

Given these two choices, my question about the FNAR is, why?

December 20, 2009, 03:49 PM
and what rifle did you carry:D ?

but you are right the AR-10 has never been to war:rolleyes:


December 20, 2009, 07:17 PM
AR-10, the original AR: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWZyaM66OGM


December 20, 2009, 10:56 PM

M4 and M249.

What rifle did you carry?


December 20, 2009, 11:08 PM

You are so right, I had no idea that the Portugese used the AR-10 for a whole 16 years! I mean wow, that's a hell of a record for length of service! I mean that's gotta be like number one or something. But wait, it seems the Sudanese used it from 58 to 82! That's gotta beat out EVERY OTHER battle rifle on the planet!

Then again, we are talking Africa here, where 300 mercs overthrew a country....

I am so lucky that you'll be in the back of my mind when I need to choose a weapon to defend my life from the hordes of blue helmeted NWO drones. I'll be able to choose the one that is "battle tested" and simply by picking up such a rifle I'll automatically be transformed into an Airborne Ranger ready to kick ass like Chuck Norris.

Seriously, a weapon is just a weapon. There are good battle tested weapons, and there are good untested weapons. There are crappy issue weapons, and wonderful civilian weapons. The weapon doesn't make the warrior.


December 20, 2009, 11:25 PM
Agreed on your last point. I never claimed the AR to be the best, in fact there are other rifles that I would pick first. However, the OP only asked about these two. I have had issues with my 223 ar's, but none with my AR10. Plain and simple, the AR platform has so much aftermarket going for it that it is worth getting one. The same cannot be said for the FN.

January 14, 2010, 10:32 PM
I just bought a DPMS 308 Sportical yesterday. I had looked at the FN, found it expensive, heavy and ugly. With the current exchange rate between dollars and euro the idea of buying european seems silly.

Buying american make sense now on multiple levels. If money is no object then get whatever your heart desires. But if money matters the difference in price/performance ratio should be self-evident.


January 14, 2010, 11:10 PM
In my opinion the FN has proven itself time and time again. Not being a fan of AR's, i like the idea of having something diffrent. If you like the AR then get yourself an AR. If i was going to buy one or the other i would get the FN.;)

January 15, 2010, 08:30 AM
Love my FNAR!!! Had it about six months now and it just gets better with age. Once adding the scope and bipod, the ugly gets tamed a bit but I like it and it shoots where it's pointed. For me, it's not a beauty contest anyways. The big 20 rounders were swapped for 10s and all functioned flawlessly while getting 1" or better performance on paper. The critters in the cornfield are nervous!! :D


May 3, 2012, 09:34 PM
One thing I don't get is how so many guys indict a .308 rifle because it's not a "proven battle rifle". How many of us will be going into battle? And even if there is some SHTF scenario where we are getting in regular battles with our rifles :rolleyes:, don't we have our AK-47s and AR-15s for that?

The FNAR .308, by all reports, is an incredibly durable, accurate rifle, and would probably perform magnificently in real battle conditions.

4V50 Gary
May 3, 2012, 10:05 PM
The FN design is one of the most ergonomic there is for rifles. It feels good.

The AR isn't bad either. Of the two, I'd go with the AR. Besides being more accurate thanks to fewer moving parts, it's a Lego kit. You can do a lot of the work yourself.

May 3, 2012, 10:38 PM
Are you going to be prone shooting more? or off hand shooting? Cause that would change everything o_o

May 4, 2012, 12:09 AM
Wow....someone dug this thread up out of the archives. :eek:

That being said, I'll agree with that 4V50 Gary said as it does feel good to shoot. Recoil is a non-issue, IMO. The thing I like the least about it is the placement of the safety. For me, it is awkward to manipulate without moving my strong hand. Were it a non-pistol grip stock, it's location would be perfect.

Here is mine..... (http://www.stu-offroad.com/firearms/fnh/fnar/fnar-1.htm)