Seeking testimonials regarding Browning BAR (/ Winchester SXR2 semi) reliability in adverse conditions

[Begle1]

I live in Hawaii. Axis deer, goat, and hog hunting often borders on "eradication", and conditions can vary between high altitude, dry and long-distance, to crawling around with pigs in rain, mud and steam. But never any freezing weather at least.

I've been using a stainless/ composite bolt action for stalking deer in the clear areas and I acquired a stainless/ composite Mini30 to abuse while ambushing hogs and whacking through vegetation. But sometimes I cross between dry brushland and high-grass swamp on the same trek and find long shots on deer when I have my Mini and think wouldn't it be nice to have one rifle that could do it all? So I've been considering, among other things, one of these imported Euro Winchester SXR2's, which I gather shares enough mechanically with a Browning BAR that I can ask about the BAR as a proxy.

My question is, would a rifle like this survive being rolled around in mud, pushed through thickets and getting rained on? Would it be possible to keep one from rusting over the long term? Is there a good way to field strip one and dry it out after going for a swim in an irrigation ditch? What could I really expect?

 

[RockAndSage]

I don't have any personal experience with those, but if you're dealing with Hawaii's gun regulations and still want a semi-auto, CMMG came out with a couple of guns that largely seem designed to get around AR bans, called the Dissent. The BR3 Dissent is larger, for .308, 6.5CM, etc, while the BR4 is the smaller frame variant, and comes in some cool rounds that might be perfect for you if you're looking for something bigger than .223, including 6ARC and 6.5 Grendel.

 

[Begle1]

Hawaii doesn't actually have any bans on guns with barrels longer than 16". So most of the logical thought progressions for what I want end with a Ruger SFAR. But for the sake of ergonomics, travel possibilities, and other hard-to-state reasons I am exploring options before I end up there.

A cheap BAR variant in 30-06 with 10 round magazines available that weighs 8.5 lbs with a scope is a somewhat tempting proposition. If it would survive getting drenched and muddy on the regular, which I'm skeptical of.

I'm also considering trading my Mini for one in 6.8 SPC, or maybe converting my current one to 6.5 Grendel.

What I really want is a simple stainless/ synthetic newer version of a Winchester 100-type gun in 308 or similar that takes droppable mags, weighs 7 pounds, and shoots better than 2 moa. But as far as I can tell those specs don't exist outside of a lightweight AR10. (Or perhaps a Remington Woodsmaster, particularly a "Weathermaster", which I have also been considering and have read so many positive things about.)

Ultimately I'll probably end up doing nothing. But I'm hoping to fall in love with something.

The Dissents are neat. A little on the chonky and expensive side.

 

[RockAndSage]

They are a bit on the expensive side, for sure. I've also enjoyed various Minis over the years, so please take what I say next with that in mind: The AR is a far more reliable platform than any of the guns you've mentioned. Keep the dust cover closed, and keep it lubed, and it's essentially a closed system where mud really can't get into the friction surfaces. Most of the hate on the reliability of the design since Vietnam generally came without the guys realizing it was due to the gas systems being shot out and leaky/inefficient. Not saying any of this to be contrarian, but they're super reliable and just about the most accurate semi-auto you can ask for, especially if you make that a criteria on one you'd select.

That said, falling in love with a given gun design has a satisfaction and quality all its own.

 

[Slickhill]

The Remingtons are junk. The 7400 and 750 variants are better but it doesn’t take much to be better than the 740 and 742.

I have no experience with the Winchester/FN variants of the BAR, but quite a bit with the actual BAR. For the conditions you describe, I’d say no, you’re not going to be happy. The BAR is better than the Remington offerings but it is still a pretty tender rifle. They like to be kept very clean and well lubricated. They do not handle dirt or even slight amounts of corrosion. They are not readily field serviceable. Plus they are heavy.

If you’re fine with irons get yourself an M1 Garand. Maybe a Springfield M1A if a scope is a must. Of course these are both heavy too.

A possible alternative that’s quick to shoot and, pretty tough compared to either of your other prospects is the Remington 760 pump. 30/06s are the cheapest ones and somehow they are reliable and accurate rifles unlike the autos built on the same receiver.

 

[Begle1]

They are a bit on the expensive side, for sure. I've also enjoyed various Minis over the years, so please take what I say next with that in mind: The AR is a far more reliable platform than any of the guns you've mentioned. Keep the dust cover closed, and keep it lubed, and it's essentially a closed system where mud really can't get into the friction surfaces.

AR's are great, I won't argue otherwise. I prefer the "traditional" ergonomics, so am considering an SCR lower with a side-charging Grendel upper, or I guess the AR10 equivalent to that in a real caliber would be the Dissent.

But the BAR/ Winchester comes in 30-06, 9.3x62, or magnums, and is lighter than the Dissent while doing it, so it does carve something of a niche for itself. (Benelli R1 is somewhere in that conversation too.)

The Remingtons are junk. The 7400 and 750 variants are better but it doesn’t take much to be better than the 740 and 742.

I have no experience with the Winchester/FN variants of the BAR, but quite a bit with the actual BAR. For the conditions you describe, I’d say no, you’re not going to be happy. The BAR is better than the Remington offerings but it is still a pretty tender rifle. They like to be kept very clean and well lubricated. They do not handle dirt or even slight amounts of corrosion. They are not readily field serviceable. Plus they are heavy.

Thank you. That seems to be in agreement with everything else I read.

For as many as they sold, Woodsmasters seem to be the most unpopular rifle out there, which is a doubly unfortunate distinction. The best praise I've heard about them is "they work". I find it a little funny. Accuracy Systems advertises an accurizing/ rebuild for the Woodsmasters for like $1400 and that made me say hmmm, I wonder how many offers they get for that.

760's seem to have really appreciated recently. They're competitive with new lever actions at this point. Which is also kind of funny, that Remington can't seem to fall into a succeasful product, yet their discontinued stuff is so popular. A new handy pump 35 Whelen carbine would be a success, I think.

 

[MountainDew]

My dad had a BAR for at least 15 years. I borrowed it a lot as a kid. Lovely rifle with good ergonomics, decent accuracy and very smooth recoil. It was generally reliable, except for when it got very dirty and its lube got old and sticky. There is a lot of metal on metal gliding going on in that action. If the lube is kind of dirty and dried out at beginning of hunting season, it will be sticky when the winter comes.

The typical malfunction is that the bolt carrier goes almost all the way forward, but not quite. It's easy enough to bump the bolt handle. Having to do that often prompted dad to tear the gun down, wipe it down and apply new oil. I could imagine it faring better with almost no lube at all, but if it was my gun, I'd at least keep it reasonably clean.

Another factor is that my dear father shot his own handloads, which were neither very hot nor very clean. And I don't think he wanted to mess with the gas piston setting. Addressing those things could keep reliability up.

The third thing I'd say is that it's kind of a pain to take apart. Look it up on Youtube. It's the same as the FNAR. There are springs and screws to keep track of. You don't have to go all the way to do a quick clean up, but I don't think dad took the bolt out of his BAR for the first 5-10 years of owning it.

So my verdict is that it's a very nice design, but it' optimized for being moderately priced while more accurate than the Remington autoloaders, while just as light (or lighter?). This is not the same parameters as when FN Herstal designed the SCAR line of rifles. I think it would fail a mud torture test completely, and I'm not sure a simple rinse would get the gun going 100% again, if it was badly submerged in mud.

I know for a fact that it can last you a long time, and I miss shooting it. And it's very light.

 

[Deere_Man]

The BAR is a pain in the ass to disassemble and reassemble. I wouldn’t trust it to operate in the environment that you have described. A lever action 30-30 would be a better solution.

 

[gbflyer]

I’ve had 3 BAR’s. A 300 win mag that got sent back twice for locking shut but it was accurate as all get out. A 270 that was a workhorse. A 30-06 that was an old Belgium build that wouldn’t hit the side of a barn standing inside.

Good dry county brush guns with shotgun like point ability. I don’t think I’d use one in the mud. Someone mentioned M1A. Look at the 18” model or the 16” SOCOM if legal there. Either of those would work well albeit a little heavy.