Stoner 63A1 - AR15.COM

General » General Discussion

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Stoner 63A1

Posted: 12/24/2009 10:30:38 AM EDT

Coolest gun ever?

Posted: 12/24/2009 10:32:08 AM EDT

[#1]

Is that the gun Al Pacino used in...
...Scarface?

Posted: 12/24/2009 10:36:16 AM EDT

[#2]

Yes, it is...

Edit for MOAR GUN PRON...

Posted: 12/24/2009 10:38:41 AM EDT

[#3]

Quite possibly coolest ever IMO.

Posted: 12/24/2009 10:41:24 AM EDT

[#4]

YES..............anyone object............ban them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted: 12/24/2009 10:41:42 AM EDT

[#5]

Quite possibly, yes.

In before some lamoid comes in sarcastically naming it's "inferior" aspects as compared to whatever new WonderWeapon.

Posted: 12/24/2009 10:43:32 AM EDT

[#6]

Why didn't this weapon not become more popular with the U.S. Military?

Posted: 12/24/2009 10:43:34 AM EDT

[#7]

looks awfully like an ak

Posted: 12/24/2009 10:44:56 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
looks awfully like an ak

Posted: 12/24/2009 10:48:31 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Why didn't this weapon not become more popular with the U.S. Military?

According to some SEALs of that era like Dick Couch, the Stoner was notorious for malfunctioning. IIRC, there was also a problem with the pins walking out and causing the gun to run away, which led to the death of at least one SEAL.

Posted: 12/24/2009 10:49:32 AM EDT

[#10]

hell yes !

Posted: 12/24/2009 10:53:33 AM EDT

[#11]

watching the military channel are we

Posted: 12/24/2009 10:54:45 AM EDT

[#12]

So I'm still failry new to this, but I've never seen it before. What's the specs on it? The first pic it looks like an assualt rifle, but the subsequent pics look like a LSW?

Still looks

Posted: 12/24/2009 10:59:55 AM EDT

[#13]

MORE

Posted: 12/24/2009 11:04:27 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
So I'm still failry new to this, but I've never seen it before. What's the specs on it? The first pic it looks like an assualt rifle, but the subsequent pics look like a LSW?

Still looks

Stoner 63

"Soon after leaving Armalite, Eugene Stoner (one of the nation's most prolific and imaginative modern military small arms designers, responsible for the design of the AR-15/M16 assault rifles, AR-10 battle rifle and AR-5 survival rifle among others)[1] devised a revolutionary concept for a weapons platform that would be built around a common receiver and certain interchangeable components and could be transformed into a rifle, carbine or various machine gun configurations by simply fitting the appropriate parts to the basic assembly.[2]"

Now, back to more SEAL goodness...

Posted: 12/24/2009 11:05:35 AM EDT

[#15]

yeah it is

Posted: 12/24/2009 11:06:32 AM EDT

[#16]

The Navy SEALs in Vietnam that got to use them, LOVED them. Light, very reliable.... shit you could make a very good case to ditch other support weapons we have and use that one instead.

Posted: 12/24/2009 11:59:39 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Why didn't this weapon not become more popular with the U.S. Military?

According to some SEALs of that era like Dick Couch, the Stoner was notorious for malfunctioning. IIRC, there was also a problem with the pins walking out and causing the gun to run away, which led to the death of at least one SEAL.

This is what I've always read before as well. Still, it was an effective weapon and filled a gap for the SEALs who put it to good use.

Every once in a while, you see one for sale on the NFA boards for around $95k. I think the one I've seen a few times was made by Knight's.

Posted: 12/24/2009 12:10:02 PM EDT

[#18]

I would kill to get my hands on one of those. Such an interesting weapon.

Posted: 12/24/2009 12:16:12 PM EDT

[#19]

I have always had a soft spot for the 63 and want Robinson Armament M96 something horrible. I just can not afford it

Posted: 12/24/2009 1:06:33 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Why didn't this weapon not become more popular with the U.S. Military?

According to some SEALs of that era like Dick Couch, the Stoner was notorious for malfunctioning. IIRC, there was also a problem with the pins walking out and causing the gun to run away, which led to the death of at least one SEAL.

This is what I've always read before as well. Still, it was an effective weapon and filled a gap for the SEALs who put it to good use.

Every once in a while, you see one for sale on the NFA boards for around $95k. I think the one I've seen a few times was made by Knight's.

One sold a couple months ago asking 35K, and 50K with the belt-feed extras. It sold fast, but had me thinking about liquidating my collection for funds. I've always wondered if any ever actually sell for the 100 grand they list for.

Posted: 12/24/2009 3:48:53 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Why didn't this weapon not become more popular with the U.S. Military?

According to some SEALs of that era like Dick Couch, the Stoner was notorious for malfunctioning. IIRC, there was also a problem with the pins walking out and causing the gun to run away, which led to the death of at least one SEAL.

This is what I've always read before as well. Still, it was an effective weapon and filled a gap for the SEALs who put it to good use.

Every once in a while, you see one for sale on the NFA boards for around $95k. I think the one I've seen a few times was made by Knight's.

One sold a couple months ago asking 35K, and 50K with the belt-feed extras. It sold fast, but had me thinking about liquidating my collection for funds. I've always wondered if any ever actually sell for the 100 grand they list for.

Hard to say. IIRC it was the same one I kept seeing pop up every few months, so maybe not.

Posted: 12/24/2009 3:54:58 PM EDT

[#22]

Looks just like the Robarms rifle.

Posted: 12/24/2009 4:00:07 PM EDT

[#23]

If they were cheap ($800 or so), I wouldn't mind buying one for a while.

Last I checked, they are $1,300 in CA. The Robisons Arms clones.

Quoted:
Looks just like the Robarms rifle.

Because that is the same rifle. Maybe a few changes, but it is based off the Stoner 63.

Posted: 12/24/2009 4:00:35 PM EDT

[#24]

The Stoner collection from the old Infantry Museum at Ft Benning.

Posted: 12/24/2009 4:06:36 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:

I have always had a soft spot for the 63 and want Robinson Armament M96 something horrible. I just can not afford it

A buddy has the Robinson. I love that gun. I have to sneak one by the wife at some point.

Posted: 12/24/2009 4:10:48 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:

looks awfully like an ak

Someone just outed themselves.

Posted: 12/24/2009 4:15:15 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:
looks awfully like an ak

Someone just outed themselves.

In other news, the FAL is a copy of an AK, which is a copy of an STG-44, which is a copy of the PPSH-41, which is a copy of the ACR.

Posted: 12/24/2009 4:24:40 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
The Stoner collection from the old Infantry Museum at Ft Benning.

http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e201/jarhead2/Vacation%2007/PICT3196.jpg

OH SHIT! Someone's in trouble. They broke the one 2nd from the left.....

P.

Posted: 12/24/2009 4:32:49 PM EDT

[#29]

Those would have made one helluva squad automatic rifle for infantry grunts in Vietnam. Imagine the firepower a rifle company could have put out with one of those in every fire team. However, the weapon did require great attention to detail. Those who kept it clean and properly maintained loved it and reaped the benefits such a weapon provides. Those who didn't usually had trouble with it.

Posted: 12/24/2009 4:33:49 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:

From a photographers standpoint, I LOVE this picture.

The carefully cut out cardboards for a background and topped off with the chew can, cardboard toward the camera, propping up the rifle.

Not hatin here, I'm serious. That pic is awesome.

Then again, i also love this one by Tomislav

It has great balance, unity, focal point, rhythm..artistically is very good.

end hijack.

Why is the gas tube on top in one version and on the botttom on the other? cause it's belt fed? Interesting there were 2 models so different.

Posted: 12/24/2009 4:35:24 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
looks awfully like an ak

Posted: 12/24/2009 4:40:19 PM EDT

[#32]

It ranks right up there in the Top 5 for coolness

Posted: 12/24/2009 4:40:23 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
Why is the gas tube on top in one version and on the botttom on the other? cause it's belt fed? Interesting there were 2 models so different.

Because when you switch from bottom to top feed the receiver/barrel is literlly inverted and the grip stick is put on the opposite side...
with the Feed assembly taking the place of the grip stick.

Posted: 12/24/2009 4:43:30 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Why is the gas tube on top in one version and on the botttom on the other? cause it's belt fed? Interesting there were 2 models so different.

Because when you switch from bottom to top feed the receiver/barrel is literlly inverted and the grip stick is put on the opposite side...
with the Feed assembly taking the place of the grip stick.

WOw, so it's user switchable? that's pretty unique and cool imo.

ETA: did some looking up myself
"The M69W designed in 1962 was the first design to employ a common receiver that could be inverted for use as a light machine gun (LMG) or a rifle."
http://home.comcast.net/~sfischer397/stoner/index.htm

cool

Posted: 12/24/2009 4:45:02 PM EDT

[#35]

What cant you love it feeds from the top, the bottom, the left, and the right

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Stoner 63A1

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us