After his success with the AR 10/15/16/18 series of rifles, designer Eugene Stoner went on to develop the Stoner 63 weapons system with the Cadillac Gage company. The Stoner 63 was in many ways a natural evolution of the AR15 rifle, with a strong emphasis on modularity.
The driving idea behind the Stoner was to use a single receiver for an entire family of weapons. The stocks, barrels, sights, feed assemblies, trigger assemblies and other main components were all modular and interchangeable. Some configuration changes were relatively simply, like changing between rifle and carbine – the carbine used a shorter barrel and folding buttstock. The more impressive design achievement was the ability to flip the receiver over to change from shoulder rifle to light machine gun configuration.
The rifle and carbine designs use a gas piston on top of the barrel and magazine fed from the bottom. The accommodate a belt feed, though, the belt needs to be fed from the top of the gun, which thus requires the gas piston to be on the bottom (you can see this on virtually every gas operated LMG, like the Bren and BAR families). The Stoner allow the rifle receiver to be rotated 180 degrees and mount the LMG components in this way.
Other features included a fixed vehicle mount design fired by solenoid, and tripod adapter to allow the gun to be used with the standard US machine gun tripods of the day.
The Stoner was used experimentally by special forces in Vietnam, though it was eventually declined for regular issue due to high maintenance requirements.During the procurement process, a number of modifications were requested by the military, which resulted in the development of the Stoner 63A – most significantly a change to right-hand feeding for the belt fed models, to eliminate the problem of ejected casings bouncing back into the feed port and causing malfunctions.
Video: https://youtu.be/vCNw9Z2Q3T0?si=
If you want to see some of the original manuals or advertising materials check out Ian’s official blog: https://www.forgottenweapons.com/stoner-63-system/
Yes for sure the Stoner is handier if only because it’s got the bones of a rifle in its layout. I’d love to hold one to see how the weight balances some day. Seeing all the Vietnam pictures of guys holding Stoners one handed makes me think they are more butt heavy than an M249.
I’ve held a m250 which is about two pounds more and longer (if you include the suppressor). And that was shockingly light, to the point I had to ask wouldn’t even want a rifle.
If the 63 had a similar balance to that those one handed poses wouldn’t be hard at all.