AR-15 Review: Wilson Combat 6.8

The Wilson BUIS is spring-loaded. Press the lock button and it pops up on its own.

The Wilson BUIS is spring-loaded. Press the lock button and it pops up on its own.

If you want to do the work yourself, Bill is more than happy to accommodate you. You can order up a 6.8 barrel, in one of six length/profile/fluted or unfluted combinations, and a bolt and carrier combo made for Wilson by LMT, complete with NP3 plating. Magazines, ammo, flash hiders, and case gauges for the reloaders are all available from Bill. As I said, he’s a really good businessman.

The LMT-manufactured bolt, combined with the SPC II chamber, means many years of trouble-free 6.8 shooting lie ahead.

The LMT-manufactured bolt, combined with the SPC II chamber, means many years of trouble-free 6.8 shooting lie ahead.

The two things that jumped out at me when I had a chance to handle and shoot the Wilson 6.8 were the handguards and the front sight. The new FUFS is a sleek and clean folded sight that locks in either the up or down position. When it is folded, it is not just unobtrusive, it is almost hidden. And when it is up, it is locked there. The button to unlock it is guarded, so it is highly unlikely that you will accidentally brush the button and partially fold your front sight.

If you are wedded to sights on the rail, Wilson also offers a folding front sight that fits there, too.

The Combat Quadrail has full-length top and bottom rails, but the side rails are sculpted on the rear two-thirds or so. This gives you a firm hold without the “bite” of rails on the sides. It also give you a better index on the front hand, so you know if the rifle is vertical as it comes up, and you don’t have to hunt for the sights once you’ve shouldered it. As a bonus, there are eight threaded holes (1/4″X20) where you can bolt on something that needs more than just a rail or that can be bolted on and take up less space than a quick detach system requires.

Made from 6065 T5 and hard anodized, you’re going to have to work to wear this one out.

How did they shoot? Do you really have to ask that? With a Trijicon 3-9 on one Tactical Custom and an Aimpoint M4 on the other, the results were as expected: lots of easy fast, close-range hosing on drills, and nice, even, small clusters on the 100-yard targets. The Wilson triggers made shooting a breeze, and the rifles ran flawlessly.

You really do owe it to yourself to shoot a Wilson. You won’t be disappointed.

This article is an excerpt from the The Gun Digest Book of the AR-15 Vol. III.


More Recommended AR-15 Resources:

Gun Digest Book of the AR-15 Vol. 4New! - The Gun Digest Book of the AR-15 Vol. IV

The Gun Digest Book of the AR-15 Vol. III

The Gun Digest Book of the AR-15 Vol. II

The Gun Digest Book of the AR-15 Vol. I

Gunsmithing the AR-15, How to Maintain, Repair & Accessorize

New! The Gun Digest Buyer’s Guide to Tactical Rifles

Find more gun books, DVDs and downloads at gundigeststore.com.

2 thoughts on “AR-15 Review: Wilson Combat 6.8

  1. Matno

    Wow. I know this comment is old, but seriously? “…one of the most unreliable military rifles of all time.”
    You’re promulgating a myth that has no evidence whatsoever. I have not heard of any mass complaints regarding reliability of the AR-15 since early Vietnam. Please show us some evidence to back up your claim that it is “horribly unreliable.” I heard those groundless stories when I was a kid and believed them for years, until I started talking to people who had actually used them in combat. Still haven’t heard of any major malfunctions during combat.
    Also, you’re right that the .223 has decent lethality, and I used one for deer hunting for years growing up, but I would hardly call a 6.8 a “big bore.” Also, there is no way to argue that the 6.8 doesn’t have more energy than a .223. It also has a greater effective range” It sounds like you’ve made a lot of big claims based on anecdotal evidence (“shooters I have interviewed” – really?) I’ve heard the accuracy is at least as good as the .223, but wouldn’t base my opinion on what a few individuals think they know.
    I’m not going to say that “newer is always better” but for most big game hunters (who usually don’t have carefully placed shots on perfectly still broadside standing game), a larger caliber is a better option as it will somewhat compensate for minor inadequacies in the accuracy department.

  2. bhp0

    Same old advertisement hype: Newer is better, run out and get two right away.

    Competitive shooters I have interviewed tell me that the 6.8 and 6.5 clones are actually less accurate than the standard .223.

    How about lethality? Since the days of the king of charlatans “Elmer Keith”, who beat the big bore drums for years, the public has been brain washed into believing such hog wash. Real hunters have known for the last century that bullet diameter is quite meaningless. Shot placement and penetration are what counts the most.

    Real hunters of yesteryear like Jack O’Connor, Agnes Herbert, W.D.M.Bell and a host of others proved beyond doubt that small bore rifles with long heavy bullets penetrated far better than slower moving less penetrating big bore calibers. Roy Weatherby once stopped a charging African Buffalo with one shot from a .240 Weatherby. W.D.M.Bell who used big bore and small bore guns reported only his 6.5mm was able to consistently shoot right through an Elephants skull. He should now as he shot over 1,000 elephants, far more than Keith’s one or two.

    The .223 when used with the long heavy bullets has plenty of penetration and lethality and it does it with less recoil and the ability to carry more ammo. The only the thing the U.S. military should do is scrap the AR-15 system as it is one of the most unreliable military rifles of all time, it stands shoulder to shoulder with the horribly unreliable WWI French Chauchat. I could also mention the Rashid and others like it that used the same unreliable gas impingment system the AR-15 uses.

COMMENT