New DPMS .308 R-25 Gen II

Slide11

As most of you know I attended a Remington tactical products seminar at the world famous Gunsite Academy. That yielded the R51 announcement.

Well we have another product under the DPMS brand. This is an AR15 rifle in .308 caliber that has ben reengineered to a great degree with the purpose of not only upgrading the internals but shrinking the size and weight of the .308 to more closely resemble a 5.56 AR.

After having a chance to go hands on with this new model it is indeed very close to an AR15 in size as well as weight. While a 5.56 rifle weighs in at just over 6 pounds empty a .308 weighs in at a bit over 8 pounds. The new DPMS splits the difference at a little over 7 pounds.

Lets go through the various changes and steps involved in creating this innovative design.

Slide12

The photo above shows the lineage of the two rifles up to the soon to be released Gen II. The picture also shows the weights of each rifle in that lineage.

Slide14

This graphic shows the difference in receiver height and size of the magwell receiver from the magwell to the back of the receiver. The savings in size is significant.

Slide13

This graphic depicts the changes in the bolt carrier and the bolt itself. This is where the biggest change takes place and makes it possible to reduce the overall size of the Gen II.

First of all the extractor has been changed to be more durable. Most significantly the bolt has two ejectors rather than the one all other AR’s have. This provides more positive ejection combined with the new extractor. You can see the twin ejectors and springs to the right of the graphic. Another significant change is the gas key. The key is actually CNC’d as a solid part of the bolt carrier. Driving a pin out releases the tube that is the receptor for the gas tube entering the receiver from the front the gas system. The difference in the older .308 bolt and the new one is the new bolt is one inch longer than the standard 5.56 BCG. Circumference is almost identical to the 5.56 BCG. This not only reduces weight but allowed the engineers to start from this point in the design process of reducing the overall size.

Slide15

The above graphic explains the changes to the upper receiver comparing the standard receiver to the new Gen II receiver.

Slide16

This graphic displays the sequence of construction and design changes in comparison to the other standard receivers. Additional reinforced areas are shown which help the smaller receiver handle the increased pressures of the .308 round.

Slide18

The insertion of the steel feed ramp makes for more reliable feeding of all ammunition types.

Slide19

This illustration shows the revised extractor I mentioned earlier.

Slide22

This displays the stats and features of the new Gen II .308.

Slide20

Last we have a listing of the planned models available in the second quarter of 2014.. Price to be announced.

After having the opportunity to fire a couple of hundred rounds through the Gen II on one of the 200 yard ranges at Gunsite my impression was very good. The Gen II actually felt and looked more like an M4 than an AR10. Recoil was about what you would expect from a .308 AR10 in spite of the reduced size and weight.

Shooting steel plates at 200 yards was actually very easy with the supplied red dot that was mounted on the rifle I shot. It’s certainly more than accurate enough for longer-range hunting. If say you were shooting some of those huge hogs down in Texas you would no doubt drop it in it’s tracks. Between the power and reduced size it’s a good choice for traveling in a truck or other vehicle when you’re getting out of a vehicle to take your shot. The same would apply to climbing in your tree stand.

There you have it another new gun officially announced today by TFB at SHOT 2014!

Slide10

Related

Phil White

Retired police officer with 30 years of service. Firearms instructor and SRU team member. I still instruct with local agencies. My daily carry pistol is the tried and true 1911. I’m the senior writer and moderator at TFB as well as the review manager. I really enjoy answering readers questions and comments. We can all learn from each other about our favorite hobby!


Advertisement

  • Christopher

    Yawn. Another AR-15, because any other gun gets Lance-troll’s panties in a twist for some reason.

  • Will

    This could be a very big deal, but at the same time, I’m concerned about another branching-off of 308 AR specs.

    Bottom line: does it use AR-15 hand guards?

    • Esh325

      AR10′s/.308 AR’s never really had standardized specs.

      • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

        True—

      • Joe Blow

        Yet the industry refuses to come together to make one for their own good. I can site many industries/manufactures who all tried the proprietary game to have higher developmental costs and less customer buy accessories due to few options and companies requiring kickbacks. A mil Spec Style Standard would make this caliber take off as the 5.56mm has. But lock in and my company way is the only way and everyone will have to pay us a royalty license usage is the greedy business model. It is penny wise but pound foolish.

        • Jing

          Well, even if the industry want to come together, who’s spec will be picked as the “spec” of AR10? I guess there is no answer for this, as long as the AR10 was not officially picked by the military and one “spec” was adopted this way.

    • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

      I don’t see why not—

    • john jay

      will:

      while ar-15′s share a very common architecture, that is not the same w/ the ar-10 branch of the family. ar-10′s are all over the place in terms of parts, and indeed, it is questionable whether just any old .308 sized gun can call itself an ar-10.

      so i see no concern over “branching off” from “specs” that really don’t exist. there are no shared “specs” between the various ar-10′s.

      i welcome this. this holds the promise of being a lot of firepower in a platform that is not a pig. i would not own an ar-10 for the reasons of size and weight, … , who would want to carry one of the damned things around all day?

      if they are at all reasonably priced, and not exorbitant like the damned fn, i will buy one. probably two. one for the .308, another for a wildcat using a .473″ casehead that i have developed.

      let’s hope it delivers on its promise.

      l

  • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Alex C.

    I like this. I really do.

  • gggplaya

    Is the pricing going to be the same as the current LR308?

    • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

      The price is still to be announced but I would think the price would be very close.

      • Mark N.

        Prices are on their web page. app 1400-2400.

  • ColaBox

    That looks pretty damn great. Doesn’t seem like a big change from a current .308 model but the twin ejectors may be a promising fix to some failure to fire issues.

  • Raven

    This reads like a press release or an ad, not an article…

    • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

      I’ve heard that many times when we write a positive position on a new gun of any type.
      I assure you it’s not an ad. In a way it is part press release since we have to use information from the manufacturer on parts of the article.
      Check one out when they hit stores and decide for yourself if anything I said is untrue or incorrect.

    • sauerquint

      Instead of posting this now typical whine, why don’t you list your specific reasons for your criticism.

  • Lance

    Naw I want more weight on a AR-10 Less recoil and smother shooter. Id stick to a full size rifle not carbine for a large 7.62mm rifle. Or Stay with my M-1A.

  • Esh325

    I would be concerned about durability and safety from trying to cram a .308 in an AR15 sized rifle. It is certainly an interesting idea that I’ve never seen done before. If it’s successful it could further bridge the gap between .308 and 5.56×45 rifles. Perhaps they could even reduce the weight further if they utilized a polymer lower or new lighter alloy.

    • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

      They dedicated a great deal of time with materials and testing to ensure the rifle will have no problem handling .308′s. Certain areas have been strengthened to ensure longevity.

      • Esh325

        I’m sure they have, but time will tell.

        • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

          It always does:-)

          • Esh325

            I wonder will more companies do this now? Like will we see a shortened SCAR-H?

          • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

            How short a barrel are you talking about? I may have that answer for you.

          • Esh325

            Not the barrel the shortenended receiver like this rifle does. Like FN for example making a SCAR-H that similar in size to the SCAR-L.

  • John

    I prefer what Colt did with the LE901 with interchangeable 5.56/7.62 uppers. This is going in the wrong direction and I predict will be a marketing failure. If I want to shoot something more powerful in an AR-15 sized rifle, there are already many options.

    • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/ Phil W “Senior Writer TFB”

      When you compare prices I think the DPMS will have a greater appeal.

  • MOG

    I am bias to be sure. We trained in jungle warfare all over hell’s green paradise with M-14s. 7.62 NATO. Ammo, extra ammo, mortars, base plates, rounds, web gear, straps, and butt pack, leather boots and duct tape. No “body armor”. Little bunches of pissed off paratroopers. Then, they gave us those first M-16s……………Having choices is wonderful.

  • itsmefool

    As one who hunts (and even manages to kill) hogs in Texas with LR-308s, this sounds like welcome news…I’d love to lug less weight around White Oak Creek WMA while stalking those nasty spawns from Hell. Still, like a previous poster said, the weight of the “Gen I” is nice for keeping the muzzle down while you’re blasting away at a sounder flying toward the Sulphur River. To be honest, I’ve had no feed or extraction issues with my guns, so I don’t know that I’d trade ‘em in and ante up for the new models.

  • Hilmer Lindberg

    Love the exhaustive information. I hate marketing along the lines of “Our product is innovative and awesome. Why? Because we say so, that’s why.”, which seems to have become the norm lately.

  • Lt Dan

    About time DPMS put their obese hog on a diet. If the weight numbers are correct the new DPMS 308 should be even trimmer than the S&W. That’s good news. I’m getting rid of my fat sow LR308, tired of its weight AND bulkiness.
    The Olympic WSSM/OSSM uppers give far better ballistics and great handling on the trim AR15 receiver.

  • weasle94

    COST?

  • Sez Eye

    I sold my DPMS SASS because it was just too damn heavy. I have been looking for a replacement, this might be just the ticket.

    • Robert Buck

      Try the M&P 10 love mine spec are about the same

  • Joe Blow

    Just want we need another .308 with no standards. Not even with their own product line. This will screw up the customers who bought generation 1 (I) for parts and retailers who have to stock dual sets of the parts for stupid insignificant changes. They have done nothing to bring the rifle inline to a an industry agreed “mil – spec” style as so many other industry’s have for products. They all benefit in many other industries, some companies loose out but those are the ones that refused to listen to customers and clung to the we have the power because we build the product, not grasping people that have the money are sick of brand lock in and the pain for matching parts.
    But DMPS choose to make yet another a proprietary lock in, which only screws up the market place for parts,(gotta order from the source great for them not great for the customer who has to wait several weeks….. if the manufacture are even selling parts at all to customers/owners like the last ban scare/rush caused). Now all the owners have to go buy all the BCG and fire control parts because it won’t be long before things get mixed up or the older ones aren’t available. Greed and profit designing at its best, make each year model not work with the last so you can charge more for older stock not available as the market as dwindle down. Especially at gun shows and even online…

    Did they help owners out by making it use the cheap G-3 mags like another .308 on the market did? NO! So save a few pounds is about all you gaining for a whole lot of getting screwed.

    While the bolt carrier is an interesting improvement but let us hope this rifle doesn’t sell and they go back to the previous model and not have a bunch of branch offed proprietary models in a greed attempt to lock people in. If they could have, they would have made a special bullet size to lock you in even harder but that is a death for most AR platforms. So they couldn’t do anything but the popular calibers, and they didn’t bring interchangeability parts to the table for these generation 2 / two / II .308

    Did they make the lower a basic AR/M4 M16 family? No
    Did they make the upper assemble a .308 swap out that had these “improvements” (over the bolt which in itself is a risk for future repairs, the weight isn’t worth an upgrade cost)? No.

    Bad deal, and has an owner of the previous model i can only hope this fails before the DPMS Panther .308 line becomes as confusing and frustrating as the FAL inch and metric issues because that all I see in this review and announcement.

    The first rifles were over priced for what you received and lacked the ability to get parts . Things like a simple end plate with a disconnect pin won’t work because of the upper’s body size prevents the pin from seating fully in the plate. Pure sloppiness in design, maybe the new upper is smaller in size so a regular plate will work but for the cost, why bother. Buy something better and that has established market base and parts readily available.

    As a now generation 1 / one / I user, I already felt screwed over with DPMS .308 model, now the getting screwed over is even worse. Not because of new features(nothing worth it for me in the new design) but because of the hassle of having to verify parts that aren’t easy to spot with the naked eye and get down to the accuracy level of the small variations. I guess i’ll have to bring calipers to a gun show and to many gun shops or tote the beast around while dealing with every person trying to see if they can sucker you into a deal despite no for sale sign. Even with a “not for sale”, they still do….. I may unload it in the next scare but have hard time with conscious selling someone something that will make their time in the sport a hassle and not as fun and easy as it should be.

    Don’t buy this version. Or you’ll be trapped just like the others who bought the first. Buyers remorse years later.

    While they attempted to address some complaints about the DMPS Panther .308 series of rifles, these are not a model you want to invest your money in. Unless you like being traped and forced to only buy parts from the manufacturer, which we have all learned how hard that can be.
    Spare parts? So you don’t loose use of your rifle for several weeks, better start the crying and bleeding now if you can find the parts. You can find regular AR parts but not the parts DMPS .308 in stock unless you have some super absurd delusional seller who thinks you’ll pay the highest panic price. The kind you go to and have the part milled as a one off for less.

    So while the bold might be nice was there an issue with the gas key break off, to warrant a design change. or is it just so DPMS can sell you more over priced spare parts to go with an overpriced rifle for the lower quality. There is a buyer beware.

    By the way no I wouldn’t like to subscribe to your newsletter :(

    • john jay

      joe blow:

      there is no “mil spec” standard for the ar-10, for the simple reason that the u.s. gov’t has never entered into a procurement contract for a whole bunch of ar-10′s that would meet contract “specifications,” for a general model to be called the ar-10, or m-__ (whatever.)

      without the contract specifications defining the product the u.s. gov’t wants delivered to it, and which must be made in conformity to those contract requirements, there is no such thing as a “mil spec” ar-10. for the simple reason there has never been a contract w/ the u.s. to build one.

  • brad.deshano

    Picked mine up tonight….cant wait til the AM..,,

  • Lil Wolfe

    It makes sense to differentiate even more for rifle manufacturers, so they aren’t competing for critical components with smaller shops and customers in a volatile marketplace. Smith & Wesson M&P10 is another example of that.

    The Freedom Group GII is one of the main things that really stuck out to me from SHOT. There is a lot of innovation in it, especially with the evolution of the gas system from a production and performance standpoint.

    DPMS has already been working with after market handguard manufacturers to provide them with technical data on the barrel nut design so they can offer products for what is going to be one of the most popular .308 AR rifles in the years to come.

  • martin

    So what is really going to make this better, DPMS has just made a lot of new parts that will not work with G1 guns, why more money out of your pocket into theirs. They must have stopped production on G1 parts to make G11 parts, just throw the G1′s away. A light 308 semi-auto is going to be harder to control.

  • julian

    How much would this cost me?