this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2023
55 points (89.9% liked)

Forgotten Weapons

1882 readers
9 users here now

This is a community dedicated to discussion around historical arms, mechanically unique arms, and Ian McCollum's Forgotten Weapons content. Posts requesting an identification of a particular gun (or other arm) are welcome.

https://www.youtube.com/@ForgottenWeapons

https://www.forgottenweapons.com/

Rules:

1) Treat Others in a Civil Manner. This is not the place to deride others for their race, sexuality, or etc. Personal insults of other members are not welcome here. Neither are calls for violence.

2) No Contemporary Politics Historical politics that influenced designs or adoption of designs are excluded from this rule. Acknowledgement of existing laws to explain designs is also permissable, so long as comments aren't in made to advocate or oppose a policy. Let's not make this a place where we battle over which color ties our politicians should have, or the issues of today.

3) No Advertising This rule doesn't apply to posting historical advertisements or showing more contemporary ads as a means of displaying information on an appropriate topic. The aim of this rule is to combat spam/irrelevant advertising campaigns.

4) Keep Post on Topic This rule will be enforced with leeway. Just keep it related to arms or Forgotten Weapons or closely adjacent content. If you feel you have something that's worth posting here that isn't about either of those (and doesn't violate other rules) feel free to reach out to a mod.

5) No NSFW Content Please refrain from posting uncensored extreme gore or sexualized content. If censored these posts may be fine.

Post Guide Lines

These are suggestions not rules.

-Provide a duration for videos. eg. [12:34]

-Provide a year to either indicate when a specific design was produced, patented, or released. If you have an older design being used in a recent conflict provide the year the picture was taken. Dates should be included to help contextualize, not necessarily give exact periods.

-Post a full URL, on mobile devices it can be hard to tell what you're clicking on if you only see "(Link)".

-Posts do not have to be just firearms. Blades, bows, etc. are also welcome.

Adjacent Communities

If you run a community that you feel might fit in dm a mod and we might add your's.

Want to Find a Museum Near You? Check out the mega thread: https://lemmy.world/post/9699481

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

After his success with the AR 10/15/16/18 series of rifles, designer Eugene Stoner went on to develop the Stoner 63 weapons system with the Cadillac Gage company. The Stoner 63 was in many ways a natural evolution of the AR15 rifle, with a strong emphasis on modularity.

The driving idea behind the Stoner was to use a single receiver for an entire family of weapons. The stocks, barrels, sights, feed assemblies, trigger assemblies and other main components were all modular and interchangeable. Some configuration changes were relatively simply, like changing between rifle and carbine – the carbine used a shorter barrel and folding buttstock. The more impressive design achievement was the ability to flip the receiver over to change from shoulder rifle to light machine gun configuration.

The rifle and carbine designs use a gas piston on top of the barrel and magazine fed from the bottom. The accommodate a belt feed, though, the belt needs to be fed from the top of the gun, which thus requires the gas piston to be on the bottom (you can see this on virtually every gas operated LMG, like the Bren and BAR families). The Stoner allow the rifle receiver to be rotated 180 degrees and mount the LMG components in this way.

Other features included a fixed vehicle mount design fired by solenoid, and tripod adapter to allow the gun to be used with the standard US machine gun tripods of the day.

The Stoner was used experimentally by special forces in Vietnam, though it was eventually declined for regular issue due to high maintenance requirements.During the procurement process, a number of modifications were requested by the military, which resulted in the development of the Stoner 63A – most significantly a change to right-hand feeding for the belt fed models, to eliminate the problem of ejected casings bouncing back into the feed port and causing malfunctions.

Video: https://youtu.be/vCNw9Z2Q3T0?si=

If you want to see some of the original manuals or advertising materials check out Ian's official blog: https://www.forgottenweapons.com/stoner-63-system/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

The Stoner 63A is very much on the same wavelength as the cutdown RPD for use in Vietnam.

While the M249 is arguably overbuilt in places and it is heavier than a Stoner, weight wise it’s only about 16-17 pounds empty, depending on the model (closer to the lower end for anything not the original configuration). Which is more but not by a ton. Don’t forget to check if charts are listing loaded or unloaded weights.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Don’t forget to check if charts are listing loaded or unloaded weights.

Yup that 249 weight was the loaded weight unlike the Stoner's. My bad.

Here's the weights for the 63's variants. At least according to Wikipedia.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Yes for sure the Stoner is handier if only because it’s got the bones of a rifle in its layout. I’d love to hold one to see how the weight balances some day. Seeing all the Vietnam pictures of guys holding Stoners one handed makes me think they are more butt heavy than an M249.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

I've held a m250 which is about two pounds more and longer (if you include the suppressor). And that was shockingly light, to the point I had to ask wouldn't even want a rifle.

If the 63 had a similar balance to that those one handed poses wouldn't be hard at all.