Flatlander's First Effort

[def4pos8]

Being new here, I've noticed how so many images of your firearms have these purple/white hazards to navigation in the backgrounds. Interesting terrain. . . .

I've spent spare time during the past four months screwing together my first Stoner rifle. Other than its general physical profile, it has little in common with the AR-15, so I prefer to label it a Stoner rifle or, if someone out there is sensitive about patent/copyright infringement, a Stoner Special. If all those AK fanatics out there can call their rifles "Kalashnikovs", we can cut Eugene a break and call ours "Stoners".

Glen Zediker's book from Brownell's was extremely helpful in doing this. Online links are informative, but my computer doesn't live on my workbench. The book does.

I've been a shooter long enough that I had a general idea of what I wanted from this rifle. Zediker calls 'em "field rifles". I've also read other labels: squad marksman's rifle, special purpose rifle, designated marksman's rifle, etc. I wanted something more accurate than the run-of-the-mill M-4 clone without the weight and bulk of a varminter.

I couldn't find a vendor to give me the 20-inch Lothar Walther barrel I desired, so I settled for an 18-incher from Spike's Tactical. The "Biohazard" upper receiver is also from Spike's. Other bits came from Magpul, Timney, Yankee Hill, Smith Enterprises, DPMS and KNS. I like LaRue mounts for optical things.

The current Nikon and its mount are intended for a PTR-91 rifle. That's why they look as though they're too tall for this Stoner.

I've had good success with early test shoots. I retain all of my original body parts. Accuracy and speed with a few "cookbook" / "WAG" handloads have been very satisfying. When weather improves, I suspect I'll not make mistakes attributable to numb/gloved hands.

The rifle works.


KAPLACH! Images added. Apologies for the delay!

[def4pos8]

I'll add a set of Troy, tritium, folding, primary sights in a few weeks. A dedicated 'scope will be added closer to the end of this year. I'm partial to the conventional Trijicon 'scopes with a mil dot reticle but that decision is not a concern today.

[def4pos8]

The Troy/Trijicon sights fell off of the Brown truck today.

I describe them as primary sights as they are much more simple than any optical device.

The 'scope had to move forward a bit and with the slight mass of the front sight so far forward, the rifle now balances at the forward edge of the magazine well. This is, still, very satisfactory for handling.

I like the H&K-style front sight ears rather than the standard, AR-15 flared ears.

[def4pos8]

Weight wasn't a big concern as I built my Stoner. Accuracy and shooting comfort were primary. For not selecting a varmint or bull barrel, I knew the weight would be OK. After all, my days of toting a rifle all day are in the past as I enjoy my current status as a certified, Old Fart.

Still, I had to know, so I weighed the Stoner and a couple of other rifles on my bathroom scale. The scale night not be the most accurate thing in the world but the relative weights might be interesting.

No magazines or cartridges are included in the numbers as that would introduce a slew of confusing variables.

SOCOM-16 w/EOTech 512 -- 11.2 lbs
SIG 556 w/ACOG & LaRue mount -- 8.8 lbs
PTR-91 nekkid -- 9.6 lbs
Stoner w/scope & LaRue mount -- 10.8 lbs
Stoner nekkid -- 8.8 lbs

The 2.0 lb scope & mount on the Stoner will eventually live on the PTR-91 after I purchase a "dream" optic for the Stoner. I'm sure that you can do the math regarding how that will affect the weight of the PTR-91.

Now you know!