Robinson Armament Company M-96 Expeditionary Rifle

Anthony

New member
Hello Everyone,

Lately I have been reading many good things about the new M-96 Expeditionary Rifle from Robinson Armament Company. It appears to be an updated version of the old M-63 Stoner system used on a limited basis in Vietnam.

Does anyone have any experience with this rifle?

What do you think? Good? Bad?

Which conversions have you used? Did they work well?

As always, thanks for the input.

- Anthony
 
Haven't fired one, but was handed one to examine a month or so ago at the local shop. My impression at the time was that it was VERY well made, solid as a rock, but just too derned heavy for a .223. With a .308 carbine that weight would have made sense, but it just felt unwieldly to me for what it was.

In the end, I went with a Mini 14 'cause I was familiar with the M14 action, and liked having something that worked similarly and handled (to me) better.

Final analysis.. to ME, it seemed overengineered and clunky, though superbly built. I have no doubts it's a solid performer though, and if it feels good in your hands you'll certainly be happy with it. Hrmm.. I think George Hill mentioned something about having one of these.. he might be along presently if so...

-K
 
What Kaylee described seems to be SOP at Robinson, for the guns they make or import. I have one of their VEPR II's and it is very well made, very soild, and unfortunately, a little on the heavy side.
 
Use the "Search" button at the top of TFL and search for old threads about the M96. You will find many comments on the rifle by myself and others.

I sold my $800 Bushmaster after I bought a $1350 M96.

It is a good design and well-built. Someone here characterized it as a "battle rifle in .223", if I am quoting him correctly.

It lacks many of the most-complained-about problems of the AR-15 series, and is a better 1MOA rifle in my opinion. You cannot turn an M96 into a heavy-barrelled varmint rifle, but it is most likely a superior field rifle.

-z
 
Back
Top