And now, for something completely different – an AR-16 in .276 Pederson

Okay, I know I should be writing Reset, but my mind is stuck on a time-travel idea where modern infantry wind up in pre-WW2 America, and they need to convince the Department of War to produce the Armalite AR-16 (not AR-15 – if you don’t know the difference, Google it) in .276 Pederson instead of the M-1 Garand. I think that would make an awesome MBR for WW2 GIs/Marines.


6 thoughts on “And now, for something completely different – an AR-16 in .276 Pederson”

  1. .276 Pederson was the right caliber but MacArthur insisted on the ‘o6. Perhaps for economy, but the ’06 just has a lot more power than the .276 for penetration of light armor.
    The new .277 Fury the army has now adopted is something else. With a special design of case, it generates 80K PSI pressure; enough to send a 140 grain bullet out of a 16 inch barrel at 2900fps.
    That most definitely is a WOWSER.


  2. McArthur’s reasoning was that since the US already had 2 billion (with a “b”) rounds of .30-06, it didn’t make any sense to go to another round and had the Garand converted from .276 Pederson to .30-06. The .276 was an ideal infantry round. Dimensions are almost the same as the .277 Fury (but without the extra oomph of the modern powder).

    Of course, the trials took place in the mid-30s during the height of the Depression (a story for another book), so economics was another factor. Bad choice by McA IMNSHO.

    I’m hoping the AR-10 platform can handle the .277 Fury (or 6.8x51mm), as I’d love to try it out.


  3. Sounds good to me! The .276 makes more sense for an infantry rifle than the .30-06. And I love my AR180, and had often wished that someone had made an AR16 copy, AR160, perhaps.
    The greater sectional density of the smaller diameter bullet would give excellent penetration with a hardened core.
    I am amused that the US Army finally decided that the 5.56mm was too small and weak. So, they go almost all the way back to 7.62NATO specs instead of a sensible move like a 6.5Grendel or similar that performs better than 5.56, but without the excessive performance (and chamber pressures!) of the .277 Fury
    Anyway, I have enjoyed the Explorer series and look forward to your next efforts.
    Andrew Asnip
    Mount Juliet, TN

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I did boot camp with the M-1 and carried the M-14 the next 3.5 years. and I loved both of them. but now I know about the AR plateform and it'[s verability, an AR-10 could be changed to the .276 with almost just a barrel and a different follower in the mag. maybe a different spring in the recoil plug. so it could work. kinda like a 6.8SPC but the “New one”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: