Battle rifles (223 need not apply)

[Texas_Bryan]

It easy to say "use this for urban warfare" or "this for wilderness war", but it sounds like it comes down to "how do you plan on fighting".  Are you the guy that would want to carry alot of ammo and have to fire and maneuver, or are you going to just try to shoot through a wall, or two.  Are you going to try and work at a distance or get close.  I'm pretty sure in Viet Nam you had 50 yard engagements and you had battles during the Tet Offensive out to hundreds of yards.  What if your in the desert, what if your in the city, or the woods.  The reality is it don't matter, you've got what you got, and you need to make it work.  Where I live I can drive two hours in any direction and be in the woods, the hills, the city, or on the plains.  Get the rifle for the fight you think is most likely and then figure out how to make it work for the other stuff, that's what I'm doing.  As for shotguns, in urban warfare I thinks its a viable option.  And when I say urban I'm talking towering buildings and city streets. 

But this sounds like a new thread waiting to be made.

[tombogan03884]

Both the vietnamese and our own government has stated that we "fired over 20,000 rounds for each vietnamese soldier we killed with small arms"...  Full auto is only good for TV and playing with (yeah, I admit its REAL fun).  Foot soldiers / battlefield rifles have no use for full auto.  Each squad should have TWO guys with SAW's, M60's, something along those lines.  The rest should be semi-auto. 

If your on your own or in a small group using full auto your nothing but a REALLY good target.  You MIGHT hit ONE guy before they kill you all!

I've seen your first post before, I went through ALL the rifle, and politics threads looking for it with out finding it, I'm NOT going through the 60 some odd pages of Downrange Cafe to find it.
To get to my point, it's bullsh!t published as a joke to show that no matter what rifle you like some pin head will have a problem with it. Even the guy who first wrote it didn't believe it.
As for  "real soldiers" having no use for full auto, I'm betting that you never were one because you do not know what you are talking about. Do you really believe that full auto weapons have been purchased at great cost to the govt for 140+ years (first Gatlings were bought in the 1860's, The design is STILL in service ) because they LOOK cool ? or because they are "fun" ?

[Texas_Bryan]

Both the vietnamese and our own government has stated that we "fired over 20,000 rounds for each vietnamese soldier we killed with small arms"...  Full auto is only good for TV and playing with (yeah, I admit its REAL fun).  Foot soldiers / battlefield rifles have no use for full auto.  Each squad should have TWO guys with SAW's, M60's, something along those lines.  The rest should be semi-auto. 

If your on your own or in a small group using full auto your nothing but a REALLY good target.  You MIGHT hit ONE guy before they kill you all!

I'm going to agree with Tom on this.  If it didn't serve a purpose it wouldn't be on the gun.  And correct me if I'm wrong, but the M16 is a RIFLE with a full auto option, and the AK47 is a MACHINE GUN with a semi auto option.  The AK was made for peasants to fight in cities at close range and fight effectively with little marksmanship training, so it shoots alot of bullets fast, its whole purpose, at least as it looks to me, was to be used almost exclusively in full auto.  And I think the AK has probably killed more folks because the Rooskies flooded the world with a cheap and easy to use gun.  And lastly I don't think its far to compare the M1 GARAND with 50's and 60's battle rifles.

[Badgersmilk]

Some GREAT points warhake!  I'd agree with 99% of everything you said.  Thats where the forums get to be a problem.  We'd have to type a full book to fully explain our points!  I think most of everything I said, and most of everything you said amounts to.

You need to match the gun to the situation.

But that takes us out of our "ultimate battle rifle topic"...  I guess there IS no "ultimate", and it surely seems from the other posts I just read some kiddies (mental only perhaps) are pretty bent out of shape to hear not everyone thinks what they spent their money on is the "ultimate"!  At least those people are reading this and MAYBE learning...

I think the .308 is as close to the perfect battle caliber as 7.62X39.  BUT, they both have disadvantages depending on where and how your using them.  At close range I've seen evidence that the slower AK will do more internal damage than the .308.  Only a fool counts on "caviatation damage", but to each their own.

When I say I'd consider the AR10 Its because I know the rifle better than the average person.  As I've seen proven.  The average soldier/person WONT remember things like checking the gas rings.

I still like the AK better because I've known them to work dirty or clean and be indiferent.  I've know the AR to be as if it were intended to jam every round when dirty!

Keep praying for those 300 yard shots!   Good luck with that.

[tombogan03884]

 The only draw back of the Garand was the "no detachable box mag. otherwise it would easily hold it's own.

[Sponsor]

[twyacht]

"Whoever said the pen wass mightier than the sword obviously never encountered AUTOMATIC weapons."--General Douglas MacArthur

I'd say that's a pretty good accolade...

quote from Badgersmilk....
Foot soldiers / battlefield rifles have no use for full auto.

Uh,....sorry to disagree. Starting with the Maxim, Gatling, pick one.

[Badgersmilk]

Interesting "you've seen the post before".  I never posted it.  Just put down a few of my thoughts from experiences I've had, but seems somebody else is of like mind...  Hmmm.  Maybe somebody who didnt just drop a couple grand on a gun that never gets shot anywhere but the range, and then get all bent out of shape because not everyone thinks its the best gun in the world...

[Badgersmilk]

Everyone stop and breath!  I'm still saying there IS no "ultimate".  And you can argue that all day long no matter what you wasted money on.  My personal choice stays with the AK...  AR10 very close second.  But I'm considering "urban self defense", "stick and move" tactics, along with my own personal experience, familiarity with the weapons, and taste.

DEAL WITH IT!

[tombogan03884]

 Gatling came first by about 15 years. There was a poem in the late 1800's to the effect that the difference between the British Army in Africa and the Natives was that  "we had got the Maxim and they had not".
An interesting historical note, The 4 competitors for the American machine gun market in the late 1800's (Maxim was in Europe though he was FROM Me.) Gatling, Nordenfeldt,  Hotchkis,and Browning, were ALL manufactured at the Colt plant in Hartford Ct.
Hotchkis moved to Europe, Gatling and Nordenfeldt eventually opened their own factories across the street from each other in Hartford.


 AK is not a "battle rifle". It is an "ASSAULT RIFLE" (AKA Sturm Gewehr)  select fire , carbine length, intermediate cartridge.

[Big Frank]

The topic is battle rifles not assualt rifles, and not carbines. That means no AK-47, SKS, M16, M4, SA-80, etc.
BTW, AR-15s and AR-10s will function just fine with the bolt rings lined up. It's only a myth that they won't.