Battle rifles (223 need not apply)

[Ping]

Definitely M1A.

[tombogan03884]

Definitely M1A.

I'll agree with that, all the things that made the Garand great with a detachable box magazine. Funny thing is, the Italians came out with it first, after WWII they were rearmed with surplus Garands which they converted to take a 20 round box Mag.

[Hazcat]

I'll agree with that, all the things that made the Garand great with a detachable box magazine. Funny thing is, the Italians came out with it first, after WWII they were rearmed with surplus Garands which they converted to take a 20 round box Mag.

Any of those ever make it to the C&R market?

[tombogan03884]

Any of those ever make it to the C&R market?

 Yes, the BM 59

[Hazcat]

I'll have to see if there are any around.   They sound interesting.

UPDATE

Just did a quick search and WOW are they pricey!  ~3K!

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

There were never a whole lot of them imported.

[KCXD45]

Personally I like my Rock River LAR-8.   .308 M4 flat top.   It runs smooth with 0 FTF/FTE's .  It is compact but has the full punch of any battle rifle.  What's not to like.

[Badgersmilk]

Anyone carried a battle riffle in a defensive position all day long.  Day after day?  Any military will confirm over 97% of all kills made with a battle rifle are made within 75 yards.  Anyone that likes an M16 never defended their lives with one and watched their buddies getting killed all around them.

M1 - Total JOKE.  Maybe worse than m16...  Stripper clips!  WAY to heavy, wood stock, did I mention HEAVY, LOW ammo capacity, can't top off magazine!  LOW ammo capacity!  (worth saying twice),  Hopefully any future enemy I meet has one of these or an M16.  They were great when the only other choice was a bolt action.  They make a cute antique...  Fun to play with at the range because their in old movies. Thats it.

M14 - Not all bad.  Still heavy, still has wood stock, still difficult to clean in the field, accurate though, and good caliber.  Still bad choice.  Just a stupid M1 with a removeable magazine.  Still.  Not all bad.

G3/FAL - Makes a M1 or M14 feel like a feather! not real bad other than that.  But try holding one on target for a prone, long range shot after carrying it all day.  Bad triggers, expensive, hard to get quality parts for (watch out for dangerous, cheap knockoffs! (century arms)  Prone to jamming or worse.  Blowing up)

AK's - Super choice!  Why do you think they've killed more people than any other battle rifle?  Cheap, reliable as a Timex, a 2 year old can field strip it with their eyes closed.  Triggers easy to mod to your liking, Nice gun!  Spare parts everywhere, Spare ammo is very light and small to carry (we're talking hundereds of rounds you'll be lugging all day here!!!)  A LITTLE weak in the long range department.  Otherwise perfect.

SKS - Had to list it.  It beats a bolt action.  I might take an M16 over it though...  Nah.  Stripper clips STINK when you life depends on a quick reload and having more than 10 lousy rounds availble.  Yugo models still WAY muzzle heavy.  Fixed bayonet...  Dumb!

AR10 - Not bad.  Expensive, but how much is your life worth?  Worse of all:  Prone to stupid, gimmicky add on's (lights, electric sight, lasers, whatever other junk people want to show off with).  Not terrible to fields strip, though does have A LOT of parts, and can fail in the field due to things most foot soldiers wont be able to figure out under pressure (gas ring alighnment).  Larger, heavy ammo (ever carried a couple hundred rounds around with you!?!?!), VERY dirty to shoot due to gas being vented inside reciever.  This means a lot of cleaning is needed, and it's mighty rare that you'll get to really, honestly clean the thing living in the field (my experience was the military gave you access to cleaning kits and the time to do it about once a month!)

"Ultimate"?  I own all these weapons except the M1 (I'd consider owning one as a toy if it were mint WWII condition and free).  What you need to ask youself is:  If I had to flee my home tommarow and defend my life.  What would I take???

Probably the AR10. Nah, make it the AK.  Small light ammo goes a long way, it's NEVER jammed, shoots cleaner, weighs less, whats not to love???   Loaded with 123 grain max load rounds it'll reach out and touch your target nicely at 150 yards "just in case".  While everybody else is  dreaming of getting that nice, safe imaginary long range shot we see on TV with their higher powered rifles you can sneak up on them and...

Want to talk reality?  Walk outside right now.  Can you honestly see over 150 yards in ANY direction???  NOT!  Where can you see that far? Few places come to mind right?  Do you think an enemy is just going to sit there and let you sight in on him?  So what good is it to say "I can hit a birds eye at 500 yards with my gun".  You need a gun with stopping power "75 yards or less", full auto is for idiots that watched to much A-team!  Three - four round bursts get the job done everytime.  Think you can hold a 7.62X51 on target in full auto???  Put down that joint before you try!

Another BIG plus for 7.62X39?  It's VERY likely what your enemy is going to be shooting at you with.  Take him out and, Whalla!  You've got more ammo for on his friends!  (spare guns and parts even)

Anyone considered tactical shotguns?  HEAVY ammo, but a single slug will do the job on anyone!

It's always smart to have options!

[Badgersmilk]

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!

[warhawke]

Badgersmilk;
I don't know where to start, but I'll Give it a try;

"It ain't the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog", I think a PTR or FN or M1A has a lot more fight in it than any AK or M-16.  

AK's DO malfunction, not as often as others but it still does. In a recent tactical shooting class 90% of the AK's malfunctioned while the 3 or 4 M-4'geries had far fewer problems. Weird things happen and no weapon is guaranteed not to mess up, you just pay's your money and take's you chances. That being said, I would much rather bet my life on an AK, but would prefer a PTR-91 or FN. If your mileage varies that's cool but don't try to pontificate.      

Most engagements do happen at under 200 meters and that range has been dropping, but the US is fighting in built up areas (mostly) right now and buildings do tend to cut the range further. As for no 150 yard shots, where do you live? When I was still in Detroit I could step out my front door and take 300+ yard shots, streets and highways tend to be open and long you know, as do parking lots. Here in Montana I could stretch the legs of a .50BMG, heck I could use most of the range of a 155mm around here.

You hate the M-16 but want the same gun in .308? It may be lighter than other 7.62 NATO guns but I would want something that works a bit more often.

Full auto is bad but 3 and 4 round bursts are good? and you expect to get those how? I think maybe the bong is in your court.

As for ammo, I would rather have 200rds of 7.62 NATO than 400rds of 5.56 or 7.62x39 because I might want to shoot through something solid and I want something that won't need a passel of rounds to convince the other guy to fall down and stop bothering me. How much ammo you carry is not the issue, how effective the rounds you carry are is more important. The weight of the weapon is likewise a matter of how much you get for the weight. I would rather hump a PTR-91 all day that carry an M-4 a block, cause if the stuff hits the rotary impeller I know that I can handle just about anything that a rifle can. Oh, and if you expect to run 3 round bursts you will need 600 rounds to match my 200, where were those weight savings again?

As for "Anyone considered tactical shotguns?  HEAVY ammo, but a single slug will do the job on anyone!" You need to stop watching those movies, there are plenty of guys that slugs DIDN'T stop, or at least not right away. Shotguns are useful, but they are no more magic wands that anything else.

P.S. Millions of guys carried Main Battle Rifles all day long and they seemed to do alright. See most of the Twentieth Century as an example. Heck, a bunch of Brit's traded their SA-80's for FN L1A1's in Desert Storm, seems they preferred a rifle that worked, although the SA-80 don't weight a lot less than an FN anyway.