The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Tactical Rifle & Carbine => Topic started by: garand4life on February 21, 2011, 06:05:04 PM
-
Okay... I only put this out there because my local shop put an M1A Socom .308 in my hands as I was visiting my to be Ruger SR556. It was a 16" Socom with a tritium front sight and integral mounting rail. Absolute beauty and great feel. Now the reason I pose this poll is because if I were to buy one I think I would lean to the 556 due to cost of ammo and the more generalized nature of the platform. Being able to serve as a home defense, target/competition rifle and the like. I don't see it being likely a .308 would serve well inside of the 20 yard mark. Am I wrong. The price difference between the 2 is about $400 and I really like the M1 operating system as a whole but I feel more familiar with the AR honestly.
I am planning on going back home to NM in the next month or so and it brought a thought to my mind, with all the instability near where I'm going (near the southern border) the .308 seems to provide more flexibility at range. I don't know, would I be getting a little over my head by going M1A? Thoughts...
So as the poll says, if you had to pick one of the two to serve as a general multipurpose rifle which way do you go and why?
-
G4L..
Eric Lund, USSA-1, some time back gave a pretty good review of the SOCOM and I think that his gripe was the blinding flash of such a short barrel IIRC. Check the Tactical Rifle threads.
Short of that, I don't know nothing...
From Eric....
"If you want one fun the sheer fun of it then have at it; they are fun to shoot.
If you are looking for a serious social rifle, then I would look elsewhere.
I want to preface my comments by saying that what follows is not an indictment of Springfield Armory or the quality of their products. The SOCOM line is a very fine product, but I think SA is doing quite a disservice when they target the LE/ Home defense market with this particular product. I think somebody at SA is attempting to capitalize on the M1A's reputation and they didn't quite think through the needs of the end user for their target market.
Allow me a quick digression on the SOCOM design. The significance of this point will be illuminated later. In order for SA to shorten the M1A's barrel from 18" to 16" required a slight redesign of the gas system. A critical feature of any gas operated design is gas dwell time. In order for a gas system to operate reliably, there has to be a "minimum barrel length" after the gas port in the barrel for the venting gas to enter the gas system with enough pressure to cycle the action. There are several factors at work here, barrel length, gas port size, powder burn rate, etc. Generally, 4"-6" of additional barrel length past the gas port is a good standard. When you start reducing the barrel length, you start reducing the gas dwell time, or the amount of time the gas system will be pressurized before the bullet exits the barrel and your gas pressure drops off significantly and quite rapidly. There are two primary ways to offset this problem. The easiest way is to increase the size of the gas port, which allows a larger volume of gas to enter the system quicker to run the system. The problem with this is that you can only go so big. If you still need some gas dwell time to pressurize the system before it will operate, then the second way you can solve this problem is with a device called a gas booster. This device provides an area for expanding gases to collect with only a small opening to vent, creating an increase in back pressure. This back pressure increase provides additional gas and dwell time for short barrel setups, allowing them to operate more reliably. Examples of this are the Russian AK-74 "Krinkov's" with their booster/flash suppressor setups and the Noveske flaming pig brakes for the short barreled AR's.
Understanding this, SA needed to redesign their gas system on the SOCOM's to work with a 16" barrel. If you notice where the gas block is on the SOCOM, you'll notice about 1"-2" of barrel after the gas block (if that!) SA needed a way to increase the gas/back pressure to make the SOCOM work with such a short barrel. So they used a compensator/booster design. This compensator provided an area for gas to collect, increasing backpressure, to work the system. Additionally, they vented the gas in a vertical manner to drive the muzzle down, assisting with the controlablity of the rifle. And it works great! It seemed to be a win/win all around. There was just one problem. SA choose to market this rifle to primarily LE/MIL units. Of course they are also for the civilian market, but every advertisement I've seen shows some high speed SWAT team using it on a raid or some MIL guy dragging it through the mud.
Here's my issue with it. Have you ever fired a 308 round from a short 16" barrel? If you haven't then your missing out on some pretty impressive fireworks, not to mention quite a muzzle blast. Now try it with a compensator that increases muzzle blast and flash upwards in your face. You get an even bigger show. Now try all this at night or in a low-light environment. I am not exaggerating when I say, "Nuke mushroom cloud!" Considering that over 85% of all LE shootings are in a dark/low-light environment, you've got one shot before you see the "Nuke cloud" and your vision is completely destroyed. I don't mean the occasional white dots in the eye, I mean you are done! Your ride is over, get in the back of the line you want another turn.
On one occasion, I attempted to follow a student through a shoot house during the low-light portion of our rifle course. After the first shot, I couldn't see him. I was completely blind. I had to shine my flashlight at his feet to follow him around the house. I didn't see anything he did and I the only piece of advice I could give him was to consider another rifle. At the end of the run he only hit 3 of 8 targets and completely missed 2 of them because he couldn't see them. It was most unimpressive to say the least.
I really don't know what SA was thinking when they targeted the LE market for this setup. Until they can redesign the system to operate using a good flash suppressor, this particular rifle is completely unsuitable for LE or self defensive use if there is any chance it will get used in a low-light or reduced light environment. In its current form, I cannot recommend the SOCOM line for any serious social work, but it is fun to shoot in the daytime.
USSA-1"
-
Would the Scout Squad version of the M1A have the same problems? It's got an 18" barrel and costs a couple hundred dollars less (I think) than the SOCOM. Might be worth checking out.
-
Tough call.
18" barrel and updated compensator (side firing to reduce flash to operator) M1a will solve anything, including most 4 legged problems you could face.
5.56 does allow you to carry 2x the ammo and is a lot faster in an urban setting or facing overwhelming odds.
-
Not the Sig? ??? Either way, the SOCOM is bad ass. "Bring Enough Gun" is the Springfield slogan for the SOCOM. and it certainly is that.
For HD, if your considering a .308, you need to move... :o Follow up shots will be moot with a .308 at SD distances. :o
But your right a 5.56 fits more practicality for what you describe.
Although the M1A would certainly cover ALL bases....out to 500+ yds...if needed. For moving back to NM, however, .308 kinda creates a bigger is better mindset.
-
(http://i812.photobucket.com/albums/zz50/billt460/SpringfieldSOCOM-16.jpg)
(http://i812.photobucket.com/albums/zz50/billt460/SpringfieldSOCOM-163.jpg)
This is my Springfield SOCOM 16, and I have to say this guy is overstating things quite a bit! It's a .308 for God's sake, not a .338 Weatherby Magnum. The blast is a little more than from my National Match but it's not an earthquake. The gas system works perfectly, and the gun is inherently accurate, not to mention a ton of fun! The Springfield SOCOM 16, and others like it do what they were built to do. Yes, they are a bit louder and have more recoil, but let's face it not everything was intended to be shot like a .223 with a suppressor. Bill T.
-
I'm not moving back. Only a vacation for a week or 2. But it's any area where I know bad things can and have happened. And considering the craziness involving the cartels and such. I really want to know I have what I need no matter what happens.
-
It boils down to this. The M1A is a battle rifle, the AR is an "assualt rifle" (screw the PC BS, you all know what I mean). Two different jobs. In the SOCOM configuration there is nothing the AR can do that that .308 can't. It comes down to weight, penetration, ammo weight, and recoil (though I'm with Bill on it not being a big deal) and mag price. The M1A is just more gun period. Question is, do you want that? If could have only one rifle, I'd take the Socom in a heartbeat as it will do everything from hunting to defense and maybe reach out and touch someone. Still, I can have a few rifles. That being said, in any normal SD situation? I'l probably use a Glock or my 12 gauge. If I need a rifle? The AR would probably be a better choice. Still, if I need the .308 the .556 won't suffice, and I can't slap a 5 round mag in it and take it hunting. I gues if you've got a good hunting rifle buy the AR. If not, I'd get the SOCOM. FWIW.
FQ13
-
FQ, you really are a dope.
a SOCOM 16 is a 308 semi auto carbine, while the AR G4L is talking about is a .223 semi auto carbine.
Assault rifles are select fire, it's like Mags and clips or stupid and ignorant, only ignorant people use them interchangeably.
-
FQ, you really are a dope.
a SOCOM 16 is a 308 semi auto carbine, while the AR G4L is talking about is a .223 semi auto carbine.
Assault rifles are select fire, it's like Mags and clips or stupid and ignorant, only ignorant people use them interchangeably.
That would be the PC BS I was referring to. ::) Think only the left can come up with conversation stopping, debate deadening "words that cannot be said"? Read your post. I'm going to be honest an ASSAULT RIFLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! will henceforth be defined for purposes of answering the OP's question as a full OR semi-auto weapon that has a high mag capacity, low recoil, an intermediate cartridge, and is effective at intermediate ranges (in short, guns we all like). Sort of like the Wermacht envisiond it, but then, they never did worry about PC did they? ;) Point being Tom, anyone reading this board knows what I'm talking about. The question is do you want a battle rifle chopped to carbine lenghth, or a good assault rifle? Screw PC, its a good question. Me, I'd go with the battle carbine if I was going to have to hunt with it, otherwise, buy the AR.
FQ13
-
You are not being honest, you were being ignorant, now your just being stupid.
"Assault Rifle" is an English translation of the German phrase "sturm gewehr " that was coined to describe a specific fire arm previously referred to as the MP-44, it primary distinguishing feature was the ability to fire either semi or full auto at the flip of a switch.
Civilian mass market fire arms do not have full auto capability therefore they can not be classified as "assault rifles" since they lack one of the primary features of that category. The M-1 was a Carbine, the M-2 more closely resembles an assault rifle, however since it fires a pistol cartridge it does not fully fit in that category either since another feature of the StG, and therefore the entire class, is the use of an "intermediate cartridge", this is a rifle cartridge shortened to work in a smaller receiver.
Because the 3rd design prerequisite of the class was compactness even the M-16 is not a true "assault rifle as the 20 inch barrel disqualifies it. The only true "Assault rifles I can think of right now besides the StG 44 are the AK series and the M-4.
They fit the description of select fire carbines firing an intermediate cartridge.
If you are screwing up the phrase "assault weapon" you are equally wrong because there is no such thing, that was a marketing gimick dreamed up by Peter Helmke back when the Brady bunch called themselves Handgun Control Inc.
People wonder why I have so little respect for colleges and the assholes that get passed through them, it's because they come out dumber than they started.
-
Thanks for the history lesson neither of us needed. I find it odd you posted this as we are both about the most unPC people I know. Funny thing is, that you rail against PC on the left (as you should) and yet buy into it on the right. Let me try again. We will call the "weapon formely known as assault" Ziva. Ziva shoots an intermediate cartridge designed for medium range, is semiauto, has a large Mag capacity, low recoil and is low weight. "Ziva" can be distinguisghed from Battle rifles as the round has less penetration. "Ziva" weighs less, and has less ammo weight and its recoil is much lower Sadly, the battle rifle, even chopped to a carbine will give a longer potential range.. Is that PC enough for you? ::) Honestly, to answer Garandforlife, buy the SOCOM if you want a true multi-tasker. Buy the AR if your neighbors are close and you already have a deer gun. ;)
FQ13
-
neither, 22
I can care more ammo, in a smaller package and there is nothing in north america that I can not drop with one shot.
oh yeah, its also alot cheaper and I'm not going to attract as much attention when I light one off.
Out of the two, I'd most likly go with the socom for 1 reason and one reason only... the M1a platform has been around a lot longer then the rugers piston ar.
-
My STHF, TEOTWAWKI rifle is a CETME or H&K91 or an FN FAL (18" barrel) or a standard M-1A or even an M-1 Garand. I want a rifle that will kill large game as well as people. I want to put them down with as few rounds as possible. I want to hit out to 600 meters and hit with authority at that distance. I do not plan to run around with 1000 rounds of ammo when I'm doing other things to stay alive. I'm not assaulting Son Tay, I'm trying to keep my ass alive when I cannot depend on others, survival is like a recon mission, I want to see the other guy first and avoid him I only want to shoot if I have to and I want to get the hell out or put the other guy down quick, noise draws attention and attention is the last thing I want or need.
The SOCOM 16 is a special purpose rifle not a main battle rifle, the short barrel makes it lighter and handier but increases noise and flash while reducing velocity, hitting power and range. I want at least an 18" barrel on a 7.62NATO rifle to give me the best performance across the whole spectrum of engagements. Yes a long barrel and a heavy rifle is a PITA but then the chips are down you want every advantage you can get. For those who will inevitably pipe up about how they don't need 600 yard range in their urban environment, I live 42 years in Detroit and I can tell you that there are 600 yard and longer shots around every corner and down the street and across the parking lot and everywhere else you want to look. Besides even if you never need the range you might well need the power. Brick buildings, telephone poles, hedges, houses, cars and all kinds of other cover can be turned into concealment if you have enough gun. I want to hit the guy I'm shooting at even if he hides behind a tree, a 7.62 can do that, .223's mostly won't.
For the record though, If I could get a 6.5 Grendel in a decent platform and 123 and144 grain rounds at a decent price I would trade in my 7.62's in a heart-beat, but so far that hasn't happened. I drool for a Beretta ARX-160 in 6.5 Grendel with an ACOG optic, it's not the best design I've ever seen, but it is close.
-
My STHF, TEOTWAWKI rifle is a CETME or H&K91 or an FN FAL (18" barrel) or a standard M-1A or even an M-1 Garand. I want a rifle that will kill large game as well as people. I want to put them down with as few rounds as possible. I want to hit out to 600 meters and hit with authority at that distance. I do not plan to run around with 1000 rounds of ammo when I'm doing other things to stay alive. I'm not assaulting Son Tay, I'm trying to keep my ass alive when I cannot depend on others, survival is like a recon mission, I want to see the other guy first and avoid him I only want to shoot if I have to and I want to get the hell out or put the other guy down quick, noise draws attention and attention is the last thing I want or need.
The SOCOM 16 is a special purpose rifle not a main battle rifle, the short barrel makes it lighter and handier but increases noise and flash while reducing velocity, hitting power and range. I want at least an 18" barrel on a 7.62NATO rifle to give me the best performance across the whole spectrum of engagements. Yes a long barrel and a heavy rifle is a PITA but then the chips are down you want every advantage you can get. For those who will inevitably pipe up about how they don't need 600 yard range in their urban environment, I live 42 years in Detroit and I can tell you that there are 600 yard and longer shots around every corner and down the street and across the parking lot and everywhere else you want to look. Besides even if you never need the range you might well need the power. Brick buildings, telephone poles, hedges, houses, cars and all kinds of other cover can be turned into concealment if you have enough gun. I want to hit the guy I'm shooting at even if he hides behind a tree, a 7.62 can do that, .223's mostly won't.
For the record though, If I could get a 6.5 Grendel in a decent platform and 123 and144 grain rounds at a decent price I would trade in my 7.62's in a heart-beat, but so far that hasn't happened. I drool for a Beretta ARX-160 in 6.5 Grendel with an ACOG optic, it's not the best design I've ever seen, but it is close.
[/quote
Funny you mention the 6.5 Grendel because I'm just finishing my Grendel build. I got rid of all my .308/7.62 rifles except 1 bolt gun because of the cost, weight and storage size of the ammo. I would never plan on carrying around 1000 rds of anything if I could help it but when it comes to the 7.62 platform it's hard to afford those 1000 rds. Grendel ammo has become very doable, there is Wolf Gold 123 gr that is made by PRVI and imported by Wolf. I just bought 2 cases (2k rds) at $12 a box. Not 5.56 pricing but still much cheaper than any decent 7.62 or 6.8SPC. I really like the SOCOM and was looking to get one but decided against it because of ammo costs and the fact that everyone in my family is now familiar with the AR platform. We'll stick to our AR's in 5.56 (or .22LR) for most uses and training but will eventually have a few in the family armory for larger needs. I will initially have a Leupold CQT 1-3 mounted to it since I have one sitting on my bench but I plan to change that to a GRSC 1-4 in a LaRue mount fairly soon.
The argument between a 16" or 18" barrel on a 7.62/.308 is way overblown. When I decided to cut down my .308 bolt gun to make a scout setup I did a lot of research on this. Anything shorter than 16" suffers heavily in this platform but the difference between 16" and 18" can be almost completely covered by proper ammo picks. With most ammo about 80% of the powder has burned in 16" but if you handload with a faster burning powder or try some different factory ammo that is hotter or has faster burning powder (Hornady has one for sure) you can totally close that gap. We went to the range with a 16" .308 bolt gun and a 18" FAL and the velocities were never more than 50 fps faster on the FAL with the same ammo. We used at least 6 different loads. The lockup of a bolt gun held enough pressure compared to the auto loader to close the gap but even in a 16" auto loader (SOCOM) which we later tested on a different day the numbers didn't go down much at all. Another 15-37 fps depending on load. So at the most the difference between loads in a 16" SOCOM was 82 fps with some ammo coming in at less than 20 fps difference. I know it's not totally scientific since it was on different days in different conditions but I live in Central Florida so it's not like I'm dealing with huge weather extremes a couple weeks apart. By the way the Grendel load burns so fast they say you can go down to a 12-14" barrel without much loss. I'll be testing this down the road as soon as I can procure a short Grendel barrel at a decent price. Right now I haven't been able to find anyone who makes one so I'd have to get one cut down.
As far as this thread my vote was the piston AR although I would take the Sig out of the 2 you were considering. I have a Sig 556 and really like it and don't know enough about the Ruger. As nice as the Sig is though I'd trade mine in a minute for another PWS Mk. 116 http://www.rainierarms.com/?page=shop/detail&product_id=2199 (http://www.rainierarms.com/?page=shop/detail&product_id=2199) which I also own. This rifle puts anything I've ever owned to shame and is totally compatible with all AR parts less the piston/gas system. I really don't think you can buy or build a better 5.56 rifle for the money.
-
FQ, There is nothing "PC" about using proper terminology.
Your defense of ignorance and stupidity not only aids the anti's by blurring facts, it also contributes to the dumbing down of America by encouraging the misuse of words and phrases that have specific meanings.
And quit trying to pass yourself off as "unPC". If you drank any more of the kool ade you would burst.
-
The BEST survival rifle is the one IN YOUR HANDS when you need it. The SECOND BEST is the one you already own and have trained with. The THIRD is the one you own and haven't trained with. The FOURTH....wellllll....I'm sure ya'll get the idea by now.
IF I could only grab ONE and GO, it would take me a sec to decide on the Garand or the FN-FAL. The Garand has been proven by the millions, and the FN has been proven by my experience IRL.
I am a NON "supporter" of 5.56, and I consider the "carry more ammo" argument specious. The "rounds-fired per kill" statistics, (oh...google it), were something I FOUND OUT about..."the hard way".
If you haven't trained, then LOTS of ammo is good. If you HAVE trained, you know where each round is GOING. YES, you CAN drop a moose with a .22, but I would HATE to be there when you miss...
(Edit to add...) While I DO OWN some foreign-made firearms, (M-N M91/30's), ALMOST ALL decisions I make are based on USA made if I can "have my druthers"...THEN I make decisions based on mission-specific issues...
-
In this case the best would be the one he already has a down payment on ;D
-
In this case the best would be the one he already has a down payment on ;D
Yup. That would be the way it rolls!
-
The more i think about the 2 I start to really push to the SR556. I'm not in a situation where large game is a likely target.
Example: Last summer in south western NM, just shy of the AZ border, a rancher encountered two pickup trucks with multiple armed individuals crossing his property as he was working. It is believed that these individuals where picking up couriers bringing drugs or illegals over the border. Fortunately he managed to get out of the area without incident but judging by the number of similar incidents along the border I would not want to put myself in a worse situation since it's in these areas that i"ll be visiting family.
-
If we are talking about a SHTF thing then picking your ammo is fine, till you run out, then it is catch as catch can. Just like the 9mm vs .40 vs .45 argument, sure with the best ammo there is little difference, but what about the surplus South American FMJ you might get stuck with? This is one huge strike against the 6.5, I can't find it at Walmart and people are not stockpiling it like 5.56, 7.62x39 or 7.62 NATO. As far as Modern Self Defense Rifles, I have an AK-47 for home defense and for the wife as she has issues with 7.62 NATO recoil and it is in 7.62x39 for good hitting power inside it's 300meter envelope. As for big game, what do you think a truck full of drug runners is? Likewise, if the SHTF, how close is a zoo from you? A circus? The jackass with a tiger for a pet? Planning for the unexpected is what we are talking about.
-
Another age old question, IMHO, the 556 is a great indoor rifle, and on open territory, will take down big animals, but when your target is concealed, or just behind substantial cover, will not deliver, that's when the .308 shines or even 762x39 does a much better job. Sometimes 1 is too much, another, not enough, but in the end, my .308 and my 762x39 will come with, probably my .556 as well, as it is next to me in the bedroom and easiest to grab.
-
Another age old question, IMHO, the 556 is a great indoor rifle, and on open territory, will take down big animals, but when your target is concealed, or just behind substantial cover, will not deliver, that's when the .308 shines or even 762x39 does a much better job. Sometimes 1 is too much, another, not enough, but in the end, my .308 and my 762x39 will come with, probably my .556 as well, as it is next to me in the bedroom and easiest to grab.
M25, I was thinking much the same thing. I plan to use this very little against up armored enemies. More the paper kind. But when I had my AR last time it was my primary long gun for self defense and I anticipate this one will as well. This would mean being a bedside gun and I just don't trust .308 at close range not to be extremely over penetrating. In the unlikely event I am ambushed in the backwoods of the NM desert I would imagine a good 60 grain FMJ out of an AR will be sufficient. Plus I know coyote is plentiful where I'm going bas I said before I am only going for a few weeks at best and I will be carrying my G21. This is my oh $h1t gun so to speak.
-
M25, I was thinking much the same thing. I plan to use this very little against up armored enemies. More the paper kind. But when I had my AR last time it was my primary long gun for self defense and I anticipate this one will as well. This would mean being a bedside gun and I just don't trust .308 at close range not to be extremely over penetrating. In the unlikely event I am ambushed in the backwoods of the NM desert I would imagine a good 60 grain FMJ out of an AR will be sufficient. Plus I know coyote is plentiful where I'm going bas I said before I am only going for a few weeks at best and I will be carrying my G21. This is my oh $h1t gun so to speak.
The heaviest "armor" most of us will come upon is a vehicle. My employer recently did a study with 62gr M855 green tip / steel core round against vehicles. They took a pair of car doors and placed a recently killed hog, around 250 lbs. between them. From a firing position 25 yards away (14.5" barrel M4) the M855 penetrated the first door, the hog right through the shoulders, causing some major damage, through the next car door and then stopped right at the back of a Nashville phone book denting the 3/4" plywood behind it to the point you could feel the dent on the backside. I feel pretty good with this round out in the open and won't load it for a home defense scenario.
-
All snarkiness with tom aside, the diference between "the unmentionable word rifle" and the battle rifle comes down to ammo weight, recoil, range and penetration. Lets take recoil off the table as we are deailing with semi-auto. Lets also lose ammo weight as you probably won't be humping 500 rounds of either. So, range and pentration. If neighbors are an issue, go .556. If its knockdown power at 500 yards? 7.62x51 wins every time. For most of us, the AR/AK is probably enough gun.
FQ13