I think it's best to understand the BAR-10 and LAR-8 as 1994-2004 Clinton-era solutions to the magazine restrictions of the AWB at the time.
We simply weren't allowed to manufacture new magazines with a capacity of over 10 rounds for peasantry use.
Building the gun around the FAL mags was a great solution at the time, and the bolt catch assembly on the BAR-10 and LAR-8 is what all AR family weapons should have.
The expiration of the Clinton AWB basically made the LAR-8 obsolete, since we could now have newly-manufactured 20rd mags, even though most of us shooting distance do better with 10rd mags anyway. The DPMS LR-308 and AP4's really took off after AWB expired, and the market hasn't looked back.
If RRA would have made a new receiver that took SR25 mags with their bolt catch assembly, and used common BCG's to KAC and Armalite, common extensions, and common handguards, they would be in a much larger market position in the 7.62x51/.308 Winchester and variants world. They would be raking it in.
I personally don't buy factory guns because of trust issues, as I trust myself more to source and assemble the parts more than about any manufacturer, sans a very select few. For me, RRA is not on that list, although I have owned their products before, and run them until they died a respectable death.
I have to agree with ORD on this. RRA is in too deep now supporting an existing customer base with the LAR-8, but I still think they would be best served looking at the market trends in hunting and variant caliber Stoner designs, and find a way to be competitive with lightweight, lower-profile guns.
They headed in that direction with the X-series, and they actually don't look half bad.
http://www.rockriverarms.com/images/products/LAR8XS.gif If they are going to stick with the LAR-8 receiver set and massive BCG, they might consider introducing a hunting model with a low-mass carrier and carbon fiber handguard.
Machine off the forward assist from the forgings, and incorporate lightening cuts on the receiver set, like a longitudinal lightening cut down the top of the 1913 rail on the upper, re-profiling the brass deflector and ejection port, and skeletonizing some of the receivers. They could also drop a little weight off the lower by introducing an exaggerated funnel magazine well.
Balance out the gas system with the skeletonized bolt carrier, then kick in a top-notch marketing campaign for both a hunting line-up, as well as competition blaster.
With those improvements, they could shave off at least one pound, if not more. Either do that, or wipe the table clean and start from scratch on something else.
