Evolution of the Dutch-Made AR10

The AR-10 rifle was developed in the United States (Hollywood California, specifically) by Eugene Stoner, but the Armalite company did not have a suitable large scale manufacturing facility to produce the number of guns they expected to sell to military forces. Instead, a deal was struck to license production to the Dutch firm of Artillerie Inrichtingen in Delft. Production would only run for about 4 years before the Dutch government shut down arms production for political reasons, but during that time the AR-10 rifle would undergo significant evolution.

Today were are looking at three examples of the rifle. First is a Cuban pattern, second is a Sudanese pattern, and third is a Portuguese pattern. These do a good job of showing the changes from the early (pre-Dutch military trials) and late patterns of the rifle, as it gradually traded increased weight for increased durability and more features.

Many thanks to Movie Armaments Group in Toronto for the opportunity to showcase their AR-10 rifles for you. Check them out on Instagram to see many of the guns in their extensive collection!

19 Comments

  1. This is not exactly on subject, so disregard if you wish. But let’s spill it out anyway.

    This Movie Armament Group makes me wonder, and at more than one level. First of course is that (we) dully certified firearms owners (or better said holders) are not entitled under any circumstance to posses fully auto/ select fire weapon. They can; how come? Who established this exception and for what reason?

    That brings me to actual purpose (if any) for “type purity” of firearms used in movies. Frankly, I do not think it matters a smack. Most of moviegoers do not have a clue what’s shootin’. Blast away 1000 rounds without mag change and they will not spot it.
    And here comes the nugget of my ‘wiggly’ thinking. Why those people do not setup a permanent exhibition/ museum to show all their treasures to public? They could make some buck on side. I would be interested and even ready to pay modest admission.

      • Ya, right 🙂

        Here is page from Marstar Canada. They do offer full auto weapons…
        https://www.marstar.ca/dynamic/category.jsp?catid=74905
        … and question remains the same: to whom?

        Anyway, I do not think it puts generally accepted rule into question, less to say jeopardy. One has to be ready to accept that specialities do exist. I am not asking same rules for all.
        Just for most of us 🙂

        • Hi Denny
          Equally off topic 😉
          I’ve been doing a little bit of searching around on the subject of the Steyr 98/17 Steyr solothurn 30 and type 13 Manchurian Mausers.

          I haven’t turned up any Steyr patents yet, but I have found both a patent by Fidel Federle for the work done at Obendorf and some detailed photos of a protype of the Mauser 1918 update of the 98 rifle.

          It’s very very different.

          The Obendorf prototype has been very well sporterised (?possibly a factory job for presentation?) And last info I found, it was in a private collection in France.

          It’s in beautiful condition and still has the temper colours on the trigger mechanism and the bolt stop and ejector mechanisms.

    • “to posses fully auto/ select fire weapon”
      Just today I become aware of so-called S333 Volleyfire twin-barrel revolver:
      http://www.stdgun.com/s333-volleyfire/
      it is chambered for .22 WMR cartridge, but I do not know why it is not machine gun in sense of NFA 1934? Also I am not sure about whole concept, is not better to have 1 bigger barrel than 2 smaller?

  2. I wonder what was going on in the Dutch government in the early 1960s?

    They had a Dutch company making the most modern 7.62mm rifle in the world, with a big order from Portugal, its NATO ally. But the government refused to let them fulfil this order, as the Portugese were being mean to Communist revolutionaries in Africa.

    Then, when the Dutch army was looking for a 7.62mm rifle, the Dutch government did not support its local factory, but went for the FAL instead, thus killing off the Dutch firearms industry.

    There were a lot of very dodgy arms deals in Europe at this time, which ended up being shown as corrupt, such as the Lockheed scandal over bribes paid to ensure the Starfighter was bought, and as I recall a member of the Dutch royal family was caught up in it. I cannot help but wonder if something similar happened here?

    At least corruption makes a kind of sense. If not, the Dutch government had to be a special kind of stupid. They cancelled a contract with their ally Portugal, which then bought G3s instead, and killed their own industry to support FN next door in Belgium. I know the Dutch smoke a lot of pot, but surely not back then?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*