Battle Rifle? Do You Really Need One? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Battle Rifle? Do You Really Need One?


Restless28
01-01-2011, 11:07
The MBR, or battle rifle topic is all over the web. From what I read, most folks say that a MBR has to be a .308. I'm assuming the MBR is supposed to be a SHTF gun.

Why would you need a MBR if you're readily equipped with an AR15 or AK47 if SHTF? Aren't this both more than capable if you had to fight?

fran m
01-01-2011, 11:12
Those should be fine. Well, they should be if you are not overly paranoid. Who would want to be shot with either.

Glockdude1
01-01-2011, 11:16
Best to have it, than NEED it at a bad time.

:cool:

ArmoryDoc
01-01-2011, 11:18
I am very comfortable with a quality M4.

hogfish
01-01-2011, 11:20
The MBR, or battle rifle topic is all over the web. From what I read, most folks say that a MBR has to be a .308. I'm assuming the MBR is supposed to be a SHTF gun.

Why would you need a MBR if you're readily equipped with an AR15 or AK47 if SHTF? Aren't this both more than capable if you had to fight?


I thought those were both MBRs (equivalents?), just not in .308win. :dunno:

AK_Stick
01-01-2011, 11:23
the term MBR, is mostly a term used by shooters to differentiate between 7.62 caliber rifles, and 5.56 "assault" rifles.


The full power rifles have their place, but they're usually heavy, less accurate, and more expensive than their smaller brethren.

If you have a quality AR/AK, than no, you don't "need" a MBR. They'll do everything a 7.62 caliber rifle will do.

.45Super-Man
01-01-2011, 11:27
I think the MBR comes into its own if you're talking about one rifle to do everything. The ability to hunt or take out a threat at 500+yds is where the MBR has an advantage over the AK or AR.

mesteve2
01-01-2011, 11:29
I would get one if we had open carry.

Smashy
01-01-2011, 11:32
I wouldn't say you necessarily need a MBR, but they're awesome and I just like having one. They do have a couple of advantages, like more power if you need it and longer range.

My primary SHTF rifles would be my SKSs. They're probably enough to get me through any situation. But if I want something more, my MBR is my 8mm Egyptian Hakim. Some might say it's a bit much, but if an SKS isn't enough, I know there's always a bigger bat in the closet. Perhaps the thugs who want my generator in a SHTF situation have an AK. 25 rounds of 8mm in a light-recoiling semi-auto (fast follow up shots) might change their minds.

Here it is with a 10 round mag...

http://i863.photobucket.com/albums/ab200/alpha37/010-1.jpg

And here's a 25 round mag...

http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc298/Jumpshot2755/004.jpg

Here's a short video showing how the light recoil makes it easy to stay on target (no, it's not me in the video)...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rjobet41qmQ

But like I said, I'm still fine with my SKSs. Having a MBR is just another plus.

Deaf Smith
01-01-2011, 11:35
Well since I'm not in the military and any ammo has to be carried by ME, then the AR is fine for my 'Homeland Defense Rifle(HDR). I have a Bushie 'M4' style with the collapsable stock replaced with a fixed one and a 20 round mag in a buttstock pouch. Just grab the AR with a mag in the gun and one on the stock.

And my M1 Carbine is the house version (and I would not worry to much if that was my ONLY HDR.)

But with the AR there is so many parts and gizmos available.

But I sure don't need to lug around a 11 lb rifle (fully loaded) and 80 rounds in mags weighing a ton.

But if others want a .308/7.62x51 like a M1A or FAL, go for it. Just make sure you can actually run around with 100 rounds of .308 on you (100 rounds of 5.56 fits in a much handier and lighter package.)

Deaf

doktarZues
01-01-2011, 11:38
You gain range and penetration, both huge advantages. You lose quite a bit of mobility as most of them are significantly heavier than AKs/ARs. For anyone that has actually carried a "MBR" at the ready for longer than the walk from your tailgate to the firing line you know that the weight of a gun makes a HUGE difference.

I personally don't think that everyone NEEDS a "battle rifle" and the question doesn't fall far from 9MM vs 45 or AR vs AK--different strokes for different folks.

jhooten
01-01-2011, 11:46
Let's review some type of individual infantry arms.

A battle rifle is a military service rifle that fires a full power rifle cartridge, such as 7.62x51mm NATO.[citation needed] While the designation of battle rifle is usually given to post-World War II select fire infantry rifles such as the H&K G3, the FN FAL or the M14, this term can also apply to older military bolt-action or semi-automatic rifles such as the Mosin Nagant, Lee-Enfield or the M1 Garand

An assault rifle is a selective fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine. Assault rifles are the standard infantry weapons in most modern armies. Assault rifles are categorized in between light machine guns, which are intended more for sustained automatic fire in a light support role, and submachine guns, which fire a pistol cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge.


A submachine gun (SMG) is an automatic carbine, designed to fire pistol cartridges. It combines the automatic fire of a machine gun with the cartridge of a pistol.

A personal defense weapon (often abbreviated PDW) is a compact semi-automatic or fully-automatic firearm similar in most respects to a submachine gun, but firing an (often proprietary) armor-piercing round, giving a PDW better range, accuracy and armor-penetrating capability than submachine guns, which fire pistol-caliber cartridges. The class of weapon as it exists today evolved as a hybrid between a submachine gun and a carbine, retaining the compact size and ammunition capacity of the former while adding the ammunition power, accuracy and penetration of the latter.

Each is a different tool with a specific role to fill.

The internet commandos want call everything they intend to save the world with as an MBR. Some even go so far as to ask if a 22LR would make a good MBR. No, it won't

AK_Stick
01-01-2011, 11:54
You gain range and penetration, both huge advantages. You lose quite a bit of mobility as most of them are significantly heavier than AKs/ARs. For anyone that has actually carried a "MBR" at the ready for longer than the walk from your tailgate to the firing line you know that the weight of a gun makes a HUGE difference.

I personally don't think that everyone NEEDS a "battle rifle" and the question doesn't fall far from 9MM vs 45 or AR vs AK--different strokes for different folks.


Realistically, how much range do you think you actually gain?

Since the 5.56 weapons are typically more accurate, and recoil less, as well as accept scopes better, I would challenge that while the 7.62 carries more energy, the 5.56 is probably going to be the more effective choice at most distances. Especially considering the general lack of accuracy I see from most shooters, I don't think the majority could employ a 7.62 rifle well enough to enjoy the slight ballistic advantage is brings to the table.


Secondly, what good is penetration really in terms of a SHTF rifle? I know people toss around how a 7.62 will go through a cinder block, and a 5.56 won't. But in all my years as a soldier, I've yet to see someone shoot through a wall to get to the guy on the other side. Typically, if you can't see them, you can't hit them. Plus most things that stop 5.56, will stop 7.62. The notable exception being some body armor that will stop 7.62 ball, will not stop some various flavors of 5.56.

12131
01-01-2011, 11:57
"Need" should be deleted from any self-respecting gun owner's vocabulary.:supergrin:

AK_Stick
01-01-2011, 11:58
I would challenge, that due to the evolving world of combat, that the term "battle rifle" would apply to the full size rifles fielded, regardless of caliber.

The M-16, is todays battle rifle, combat has evolved to the point where the 7.62 no longer rules the battle field.

Petrie
01-01-2011, 12:05
Don't ARs win at Camp Perry all the time? They are shooting at targets 500yds away with irons aren't they? Are guys who pick a 7.62 x 51 chambered rifle imagining that they'll be shooting the guys with ARs from far enough away that the AR can't reach them? I think an AR or AK will serve the average internet comando just fine. :supergrin:

Jon_R
01-01-2011, 12:08
I like to cover my basis so I have rifle caliber carbines (.223, 7.62x39), pistol caliber carbines (9mm .30 Carbine), magazine fed battle rifles (.308 .303), and clip fed battle rifles (30-06). For the most part I own things because I like them and they are fun to shoot but if things went really bad I would use any of them.

I have a few people in my family that know how to run ARs so maybe they would get those and I would haul around my M1A SOCOM 16.

rca256
01-01-2011, 12:12
You gain range and penetration, both huge advantages. You lose quite a bit of mobility as most of them are significantly heavier than AKs/ARs. For anyone that has actually carried a "MBR" at the ready for longer than the walk from your tailgate to the firing line you know that the weight of a gun makes a HUGE difference.

I personally don't think that everyone NEEDS a "battle rifle" and the question doesn't fall far from 9MM vs 45 or AR vs AK--different strokes for different folks.

I'll take that a step further. Anyone who has not humped 180 round of 7.62mm NATO around for a couple of days, step to the left side of the bus. Those who have humped 100+ rounds of 7.62mm NATO know what I am talking about, namely that a 20 round magazine of ammo weighs a lot more, is a lot larger, and is only appreciated when you actually want to shoot something. Ah, but then it is all worth while... :)

gator378
01-01-2011, 12:18
The MBR, or battle rifle topic is all over the web. From what I read, most folks say that a MBR has to be a .308. I'm assuming the MBR is supposed to be a SHTF gun.

Why would you need a MBR if you're readily equipped with an AR15 or AK47 if SHTF? Aren't this both more than capable if you had to fight?

Although I have and prefer the 308 I would not turn down an AR or AK both of which have proven track records. today there are options such as 6.5 Grendel,
6x45 and the various 264s. Training and Tactics are probably more important than a particuliar caliber

DoubleWide
01-01-2011, 12:31
Don't ARs win at Camp Perry all the time? They are shooting at targets 500yds away with irons aren't they? Are guys who pick a 7.62 x 51 chambered rifle imagining that they'll be shooting the guys with ARs from far enough away that the AR can't reach them? I think an AR or AK will serve the average internet comando just fine. :supergrin:

The difference being that the 7.62x51 will have probably 2.5x the energy at that distance and for paper that doesn't matter.

It's a just different philosophies. I still know more people who hunt with deer with a .308 or .30-06 caliber than a .223. Some of that may tradition, some maybe deer size (northern state)

doktarZues
01-01-2011, 12:52
Realistically, how much range do you think you actually gain?

Since the 5.56 weapons are typically more accurate, and recoil less, as well as accept scopes better, I would challenge that while the 7.62 carries more energy, the 5.56 is probably going to be the more effective choice at most distances. Especially considering the general lack of accuracy I see from most shooters, I don't think the majority could employ a 7.62 rifle well enough to enjoy the slight ballistic advantage is brings to the table.


Secondly, what good is penetration really in terms of a SHTF rifle? I know people toss around how a 7.62 will go through a cinder block, and a 5.56 won't. But in all my years as a soldier, I've yet to see someone shoot through a wall to get to the guy on the other side. Typically, if you can't see them, you can't hit them. Plus most things that stop 5.56, will stop 7.62. The notable exception being some body armor that will stop 7.62 ball, will not stop some various flavors of 5.56.

Realistically you gain a more effective round at all ranges. I totally agree that for the average shooter asking "do I need an MBR" the ballistic advantage will be minimal. For those that have trained and are limited primary by their equipment, they're gaining an additional couple of hundred effective yards.

I completely disagree with "what good is penetration". Glass, car doors, interior walls, fences, debris, etc., penetration is a HUGE factor in almost any battlefield scenario.

doby
01-01-2011, 12:57
r u aware that 223 AR-15's beat 308 autorifles at 1000 yd matches, every weekend, dudes? Just Google for NRA matches, ask at CSP forums, or AR-15.com. Baloney on the penetration, because you ain got Uncle Sugar to bring you more ammo, and baill you out if you bite off more than you can chew. The REAL pros gave up on the 308 rifle for the military, 40 odd years ago. Only armchair commandoes on the Net claim that it's still useful enough to be general issue. At best, it's a specialized item, like a grenade launcher.

Smashy
01-01-2011, 13:01
The MBR, or battle rifle topic is all over the web.





Just curious... where are you seeing all these MBR discussions you referred to?

El_Ron1
01-01-2011, 13:04
"Need" should be deleted from any self-respecting gun owner's vocabulary.:supergrin::patriot:

Shadyscott69
01-01-2011, 13:07
r u aware that 223 AR-15's beat 308 autorifles at 1000 yd matches, every weekend, dudes? Just Google for NRA matches, ask at CSP forums, or AR-15.com. Baloney on the penetration, because you ain got Uncle Sugar to bring you more ammo, and baill you out if you bite off more than you can chew. The REAL pros gave up on the 308 rifle for the military, 40 odd years ago. Only armchair commandoes on the Net claim that it's still useful enough to be general issue. At best, it's a specialized item, like a grenade launcher.


That's EXACTLY why snipers use 5.56. :rofl: I am not saying a MBR is the best thing for Joe, just that you are using a very broad brush when you compare punching paper with 1000 yd shots against Haji.

GAFinch
01-01-2011, 13:22
r u aware that 223 AR-15's beat 308 autorifles at 1000 yd matches, every weekend, dudes? Just Google for NRA matches, ask at CSP forums, or AR-15.com. Baloney on the penetration, because you ain got Uncle Sugar to bring you more ammo, and baill you out if you bite off more than you can chew. The REAL pros gave up on the 308 rifle for the military, 40 odd years ago. Only armchair commandoes on the Net claim that it's still useful enough to be general issue. At best, it's a specialized item, like a grenade launcher.

You can only get that kind of accuracy from AR-15's by using 80 or 90 grain bullets, which have to be hand cycled. Hard to compare a single shot gun to a true auto-loading .308 for defensive purposes.

G27RR
01-01-2011, 13:40
"Need" should be deleted from any self-respecting gun owner's vocabulary.:supergrin:

Worth repeating. :rofl:

G27RR
01-01-2011, 13:46
At best, it's a specialized item, like a grenade launcher.

Not so sure a grenade launcher is such a specialized weapon these days. My brother carried an M203 on his rifle while he was in the sandbox, and he was a medic. Granted he was with a scout unit, but still....

Both 5.56 and 7.62 have their place. Different rounds for different purposes. I have and like both chamberings in the AR format.

Buy one (or more) of your choosing and enjoy it.

http://i1143.photobucket.com/albums/n634/G27RR/800600/EBRs800600.jpg

AK_Stick
01-01-2011, 13:58
You can only get that kind of accuracy from AR-15's by using 80 or 90 grain bullets, which have to be hand cycled. Hard to compare a single shot gun to a true auto-loading .308 for defensive purposes.

Actually, thats not always correct. In many of the service rifle matches, the pace is such that a hand cycled AR-15 will not make it. Quite a few of those rounds are shot with 70 grain match ammo.

The fact is, the AR is simply more accurate than the 7.62 Service rifles out there.


The difference being that the 7.62x51 will have probably 2.5x the energy at that distance and for paper that doesn't matter.

It's a just different philosophies. I still know more people who hunt with deer with a .308 or .30-06 caliber than a .223. Some of that may tradition, some maybe deer size (northern state)

But energy doesn't kill something you miss.



Realistically you gain a more effective round at all ranges. I totally agree that for the average shooter asking "do I need an MBR" the ballistic advantage will be minimal. For those that have trained and are limited primary by their equipment, they're gaining an additional couple of hundred effective yards.

I completely disagree with "what good is penetration". Glass, car doors, interior walls, fences, debris, etc., penetration is a HUGE factor in almost any battlefield scenario.


Like I said, with the exception of auto glass or car doors, which really isn't much of a barrier to center fired rifles, I've never seen anyone intentionally shoot through a barrier to get a target on the other side. You wait for him to come around the barrier and engage him.

I've spent quite a bit of time on the modern battlefield, and I haven't seen a whole lot of we need to shoot through x to kill the target scenarios. Mostly a we need to hit the target to kill the target scenarios.

Fed Five Oh
01-01-2011, 14:12
You need two.

TN.Frank
01-01-2011, 14:23
Since I don't hunt anymore I really don't NEED any rifle but a good shotgun might come in real handy.:supergrin:

John Biltz
01-01-2011, 14:29
Todays ARs are probably more accurate than the 7.62 rifles they replaced. That was not true a few decades ago but its true today from what I have read. Saying that, M4 type ARs are not. But those 20 inch ARs get a lot more out of 5.56. That is the platform, as far as the round goes 5.56 while accurate does not carry a lot of power out real far like a 7.62 does but it will hit out that far. When I bought an AR I went with 6.5. Eventually I'm going to take the aimpoint off it and put a scope on it, pick up a 5.56 upper and put the Aimpoint on that. My eyes are so old and bad I can't really get enough out of the 6.5 for the added expense of shooting it with the red dot. I need a scope.

carguy2244
01-01-2011, 14:29
The fact is, the AR is simply more accurate than the 7.62 Service rifles out there.


Can you provide documentation that a 556 round is inherently more accurate than a 308.
My experience, while anectodal, contradicts your claim.
I'd like to see proof.

doktarZues
01-01-2011, 14:30
I've spent quite a bit of time on the modern battlefield, and I haven't seen a whole lot of we need to shoot through x to kill the target scenarios. Mostly a we need to hit the target to kill the target scenarios.

This conversation is heading south but I too have spent some time on the modern battlefield including at least one scenario each where I wished I had a 7.62x51 and I wished I had better cover. While I mostly agree with what you're saying I refuse to concede that penetration is not a huge variable to consider in ALL battlefield scenarios, including "modern ones".

I don't even own an "MBR" so honestly I don't have a dog in this fight, I just think you're cleverly arguing semantics to support your opinion that an AR/AK is clearly the better choice when in fact there is merit to operating a 7.62x51. Whether the pros outweigh the cons is up to the individual but you need to give credit where it's due.

AK_Stick
01-01-2011, 14:46
I think anytime you get shot at, you wish for better cover.

However, I'm not arguing the AR/AK, or AR/AK/Whatever MBR vs another. What I'm saying is penetration is nice, but I've yet to see a real scenario where shots were intentionally fired through a barrier to reach a target on the other side. I have certainly fired plently of ammo at walls, and rocks to keep the guy on the other sides' head down, but I've never intentionally tried to shoot through something that was providing cover, with the intention of killing the guy on the other side. Nor do I have knowledge of it happening.

I think penetration is a good thing, and in an ideal situation, I would choose the bullet that penetrates more, so long as it doesn't give up anything to get that performance. The problem with many 308 MBR's is they give up accuracy, for the increased energy of the cartridge.

AK_Stick
01-01-2011, 14:50
Can you provide documentation that a 556 round is inherently more accurate than a 308.
My experience, while anectodal, contradicts your claim.
I'd like to see proof.



I don't, nor did I say I think the 5.56 is more accurate than the 7.62, or 308.

I said the AR is more accurate than the 7.62 service rifles out there. Its a platform difference, not a cartridge difference. If you go to a bolt gun, I think the 5.56 might hold an edge inside 300, maybe as far as 350-400m but between 4-600m the 308 definitely has the advantage.


If you want proof that the AR is more accurate than the M1a/other service rifles, proof lies no further than Camp Perry, and the rest of the Service Rife matches.

Shadyscott69
01-01-2011, 14:56
If you want proof that the AR is more accurate than the M1a/other service rifles, proof lies no further than Camp Perry, and the rest of the Service Rife matches.


While I agree the AR platform is more inherently accurate than say the M1, I also think the AR holds a huge advantage in ergonomics for the sustained strings.

Holding at 10lb rifle up for that long is a *****!

rem2429
01-01-2011, 15:05
First I think you need an AR, as I feel it is a much more versatile platform. If you need more power you get an MBR. In the military, if you need more power, you have many more options.

A good, modern .308 is practically accurate, and undoubtedly more powerful. An iron sighted FAL v. an AR with optics is a dumb comparison. The best role for the caliber in my mind is more the DMR, rather than simply MBR, and I see the military going to more powerful chamberings for sniper rifles.

We switched from the 7.62 to the 5.56 because hits matter, but an AR in 7.62, or new SCAR H with optics is a much easier platform to hit with than the old school standards. Perhaps it is still easier to hit with the smaller caliber, but the differences are less than in the past and can be improved, in both instances, with better training, optics, and ammunition. I think that is why we are seeing a new intrest in these types of weapons, and I cannot see the niche going away. For the needs of the civilian, other considerations must be taken into account.

.45Super-Man
01-01-2011, 15:10
This talk of AR accuracy @ extended ranges is ridiculous. Someone is forgetting to mention that they're referencing tuned, match AR's with optics not found on battle rifles. Furthermore, best to avoid the subject of how the feeble 223's exterior ballistics look when shooting at extended ranges AND in adverse conditions. You may be able to pry off a hubcap with a pocket knife, however this doesnt make it the right tool for the job. And as for "snipers using the 5.56".........:rofl:

rca256
01-01-2011, 15:12
The REAL pros gave up on the 308 rifle for the military, 40 odd years ago. Only armchair commandoes on the Net claim that it's still useful enough to be general issue. At best, it's a specialized item, like a grenade launcher.

You are so full of ****, doby.

m24swsbar
01-01-2011, 15:22
There is no discussion that the .308 has more power than the .223 but remember what makes the .223 so deadly. The bending, tumbling and fragmentation properties of the .223 in a soft target. Don't let the size fool you. It will **** you up.

Shadyscott69
01-01-2011, 15:36
There is no discussion that the .308 has more power than the .223 but remember what makes the .223 so deadly. The bending, tumbling and fragmentation properties of the .223 in a soft target. Don't let the size fool you. It will **** you up.


http://www.gogaminggiant.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/facepalm.jpg

Stupid
01-01-2011, 15:37
As a tool, unless you have specific application, you definitely don't need one. Find out where you plan to use it, then you can justify the need.

As a toy, yes, you definitely "need" one.

Smashy
01-01-2011, 15:46
...then you can justify the need.




Who needs to justify anything? If you want one, get one.

m24swsbar
01-01-2011, 15:48
http://www.gogaminggiant.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/facepalm.jpg
I'm sure there's a reason why my fellow brothers in arms and I are issued an m4/m16 standard, or a m249 which is also 5.56. Only time you really see a 7.62 is on an M240B mounted because no one carrys that heavy ass mg around. Please dont bring up anything with snipers because they arent all that common.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBqjAyhs56M that would do some decent damage don't you think?

Shadyscott69
01-01-2011, 16:00
I'm sure there's a reason why my fellow brothers in arms and I are issued an m4/m16 standard, or a m249 which is also 5.56. Only time you really see a 7.62 is on an M240B mounted because no one carrys that heavy ass mg around. Please dont bring up anything with snipers because they arent all that common.

Easy killer. I carried one too. The discussion is on MBR's. Just how much tumbling and killing do you think that 5.56 is gonna do @ 800 yds?

The reason the military went to the 5.56 had nothing to do with terminal ballistics. It is very common knowledge that 7.62 is a more terminal round from the muzzle to out yonder. It was a decision based on weight and supply logistics.

Boats
01-01-2011, 16:23
Easy killer. I carried one too. The discussion is on MBR's. Just how much tumbling and killing do you think that 5.56 is gonna do @ 800 yds?

The reason the military went to the 5.56 had nothing to do with terminal ballistics. It is very common knowledge that 7.62 is a more terminal round from the muzzle to out yonder. It was a decision based on weight and supply logistics.

The adoption of the 5.56 was also about the practical realities of firefights mostly taking place 300m and in from WW2 forward due to the rise of more fluid combined arms combat tactics. Only the peculiar terrain and elevations of Afghanistan have challenged the more recent conventional wisdom. In most of the built up areas of the CONUS one cannot even frequently encounter a 1000m firing range, let alone an unobstructed 800m-1k shot being commonly possible.

I'd side with those that say the 7.62x51 MBR has been made obsolete for all but a few specialized scenarios. I have a few, but they wouldn't make it out the door in a really general shooting emergency because they are too heavy, generally unhandy, and the ammo is too heavy on a per round basis for what very limited advantage is conferred by them over an AR in 5.56.

If I had to liquidate my long arms collection, mil-pattern semi-auto 7.62 caliber service rifles would be the first ones consigned. ARs and combat style pump shotguns would be last.

Stupid
01-01-2011, 16:37
Who needs to justify anything? If you want one, get one.

The word "need" requires "justification."

inzone
01-01-2011, 16:37
my plan A is to dig in and defend in place, so I don't need to worry about weight and carry capacity, so I say go with the biggest bang for the buck, that is why i like the 7.62 54 cartridge..... if I did have to shoot and scoot I would grab the AK for that.... there is some value in having a small group of folks with a balance of weapons.... that's my plan anyway .... I am the patriarch of my extended family and I have already purchased a signif. number of the mosin nagants and sks's that I fortunately bought back when they were much cheaper, I figure with the AK's added in and the scatterguns and the scoped hunting rifles we have a decent arsenal to lay down fire and put some heat downrange....

we are trying to save up for more 9mm's and get more into the Glocks for ccw/cqb.... anyway, for defending in place the MBR's "old school" semantics do seem be preferred...imho

CBennett
01-01-2011, 16:40
The MBR, or battle rifle topic is all over the web. From what I read, most folks say that a MBR has to be a .308. I'm assuming the MBR is supposed to be a SHTF gun.

Why would you need a MBR if you're readily equipped with an AR15 or AK47 if SHTF? Aren't this both more than capable if you had to fight?

I dont need one I know that much..im trying to think of a realistic reason id need one. I think having a FAL or a M14clone or a M1 would be cool..but just cool not as the title says "needed"

Plus I dont dwell on or believe a SHTF "situation" that id need a gun for is going to happen..so I dont dwell on that much.

Shadyscott69
01-01-2011, 16:41
The adoption of the 5.56 was also about the practical realities of firefights mostly taking place 300m and in from WW2 forward due to the rise of more fluid combined arms combat tactics. Only the peculiar terrain and elevations of Afghanistan have challenged the more recent conventional wisdom. In most of the built up areas of the CONUS one cannot even frequently encounter a 1000m firing range, let alone an unobstructed 800m-1k shot being commonly possible.

I'd side with those that say the 7.62x51 MBR has been made obsolete for all but a few specialized scenarios. I have a few, but they wouldn't make it out the door in a really general shooting emergency because they are too heavy, generally unhandy, and the ammo is too heavy on a per round basis for what very limited advantage is conferred by them over an AR in 5.56.

If I had to liquidate my long arms collection, mil-pattern semi-auto 7.62 caliber service rifles would be the first ones consigned. ARs and combat style pump shotguns would be last.

I agree. There are very few scenarios when an actual MBR is needed, yet when you do need one a 5.56 won't generally cut it. :tongueout:

Smashy
01-01-2011, 16:49
The word "need" requires "justification."





Yeah, I get that, but you kinda missed my point.

inzone
01-01-2011, 16:54
arsenal refurbished mosin nagants are now available for 65 bucks, excellent bores with deep rifling, get enough for your platoon! you can never go wrong having plenty of milsurp MBR's..imho

CBennett
01-01-2011, 16:57
arsenal refurbished mosin nagants are now available for 65 bucks, excellent bores with deep rifling, get enough for your platoon! you can never go wrong having plenty of milsurp MBR's..imho

Hey...I dont know much about these rifles..Question I have is how accurate are they??ive often thought of getting a Nagant,Enfield,1903(but too much $$ for my taste), or even one of those Swiss K31's as I hear they are one of the MOST accurate old rifles of that ilk.

RMTactical
01-01-2011, 17:23
Every american should own a battle rifle (.308) or a battle carbine (.223 or another intermediate cartridge). Just my opinion.

ScrappyDoo
01-01-2011, 17:30
See I think you should, and other things too, definitely. I just don't think it's fair to say you have to have .308 or bigger etc. for it to be a MBR. I guess my 5.56 Bushmaster isn
t an MBR or BR or whatever. But it's what I would grab if I suddently needed to go to battle. So you know what, regardless of what ANY of yal'll motherf*@*@#'s say, its's an MBR to me, ESPECIALLY if bad guys are shooting .22LRs or 50 BMGs at me.

dnuggett
01-01-2011, 17:40
And as for "snipers using the 5.56".........:rofl:

Do you consider the snipers on SEAL teams the real deal? If so, stop laughing.

Stupid
01-01-2011, 18:16
Every american should own a battle rifle (.308) or a battle carbine (.223 or another intermediate cartridge). Just my opinion.

My opinion too. :-) I'd further specify an AR15 and a M1A. :-)

DEADEYEGUY
01-01-2011, 18:54
If my M4, AKM, or Mossberg 590A1 can't do what I might need to d as a civilian I am in deep manure. YMMV of course. But except for hunting how far of a shoot could a civilian be required to take and justify it? End of the World? The three at the top could take game and kill zombies just fine.

skeeter1959
01-01-2011, 20:41
Split the difference and get a 6.8 SPC. Nuff said.

OrangePwr9
01-01-2011, 21:25
To me, SHTF=dig in and defend the homestead from attackers. So, with that in mind, where's the need to reach out 500 yards? How do I know someone's identity or intentions from 500 yards away? Will the baddies be wearing uniforms?

Why do I, a lone or outnumbered defender, want to give my position away to someone at that distance? If, for some reason, I do need that 500 yard range, why won't a .308 or 30-06 deer rifle do the job? If reach or penetration is that danged important, why not a good Rem 700 in .338 Win Mag? Seems that would give as much 'reach' as any would want.

It seems the real work of defense will be done at ranges under 100 yards. For that, an assault rifle or even a Mini-14 should be adequate. Better to buy more ammo or a spare AK/AR/Mini-14/Rem. 870 or practice shooting more than sink $ into an MBR...IMHO.

Other than the 'cool' factor, the justification for owning an MBR has always mystified me.
Bob

rca256
01-01-2011, 21:29
The adoption of the 5.56 was also about the practical realities of firefights mostly taking place 300m and in from WW2 forward due to the rise of more fluid combined arms combat tactics. Only the peculiar terrain and elevations of Afghanistan have challenged the more recent conventional wisdom. In most of the built up areas of the CONUS one cannot even frequently encounter a 1000m firing range, let alone an unobstructed 800m-1k shot being commonly possible.


There is a very good report on the effectiveness of US Army infantry weapons and lethality in the 'Stan. It is written by a US Army Major attending the Army Command and General Staff College after returning from deployment.

Personally, we knew that these issues existed after Somalia.

Sorry if this has already been posted elsewhere.

Here is the abstract:
Operations in Afghanistan frequently require United States ground forces to engage and destroy the enemy at ranges beyond 300 meters. While the infantryman is ideally suited for combat in Afghanistan, his current weapons, doctrine, and marksmanship training do not provide a precise, lethal fire capability to 500 meters and are therefore inappropriate. Comments from returning soldiers reveal that about fifty percent of engagements occur past 300 meters. Current equipment, training, and doctrine are optimized for engagements under 300 meters and on level terrain. This monograph reviews the small arms capability of the infantry squad from World War I to present. It then discusses current shortfalls with cartridge lethality, weapons and optics configurations, the squad designated marksman concept and finally the rifle qualification course. Potential solutions in each of these areas are discussed.

Full report at http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA512331

countsk
01-01-2011, 22:05
A good quality rifle chambered in either 7.62X39 or 5.56 NATO will be enough to handle most situations. However, if you can afford it, I would go ahead and add something in a heavier caliber to the collection. I've relied on various AR-15s and SKSs over the years. I finally made the plunge and got a M1A Scout last year. It now fills a niche that was previously unfilled. Just one more tool in the box.

chauncey
01-01-2011, 22:37
i train and use the "big 3" MBR's, and for 3-gun competition. i served in the peacetime USMC as an infantryman for 4 years, and qualified expert rifleman, so i'm very familiar with the M16 platform. i also own several AR's.

i will agree that it is easier to obtain an accurate shot with a 5.56 AR or M16 with a 20" barrel, at any range up to 500 yards. this is due to better ergonomics, light cartridge and recoil, and good sights used on the design. M4/16" barrel is a different animal imo, that is limited to 300 yards.

that said, i far prefer the downrange accuracy, energy and barrier performance that the 7.62x51 provides. i also prefer the roller-locked design of the G3 and the piston designs of the FAL and M14, to the DI system in the AR.

for an individual soldier, LEO or civilian operating without the benefit of support fire, i believe the 7.62x51 offers clear advantages over the 5.56x45. propely trained and equipped, the individual can shoot further and with greater lethality especially over 300 yards, and has the added benefit of barrier penetration when needed. that added need for barrier penetration may be as simple as the need to take down big game. i know there are stories about killing a bear with a .22LR but i don't want to be the one to try it, even with a 5.56x45.

if you are willing to train for 500 yard shots, are willing to hump the additional weight of 7.62x51 (or reduce the amount of ammunition you carry), and are willing to do the additional training these platforms require, then i say they are a better choice.

if you can't afford the difference between the 5.56 and 7.62x51 rifles and ammunition necessary to achieve this level of training, then you are better off getting proficient with your AR. just please understand proper maintenance and lubrication to keep the AR platform running, and buy some Pmags to significantly increase the odds of reliable operation.

if you aren't willing to give your AR the maintenance and lubrication it deserves, then i'd recommend you trade accuracy for reliability and get an AK or SKS, or a bolt-action milsurp. these rifles will continue to function with less maintenance and/or more abuse, in large part due to looser tolerances and more forgiving operating systems.

as another option, keep and train with your (properly maintained) AR or AK, and buy a decent Milsurp or commercial hunting rifle in 30-06 or .308, and practice enough with it so you can use it if necessary. you can buy a quality milsurp or lightly used hunting rifle for $200-$300. it's a cheap investment should the need arise.

the semi-auto MBR's are certainly more expensive to own and shoot. entry-level for a reliable and well-built MBR is probably $900-$1000 for a PTR91. M1A's go up from there. i think the FAL is a great platform, and the Saiga is very cost effective, but i don't believe these rifles offer the ability to consistently make hits at 500 yards, so you are giving up a lot of the advantages the 7.62x51 cartridge offers if you use these rifles. imo, a high-end milsurp like a Finn Mosin would be a better and more cost-effective choice that a 308 Saiga or the average FAL.

if you can't afford to get into the game, then stick to what you can afford, and get good with it!

Stupid
01-01-2011, 23:30
You don't "need" one but you should have one. :-)

furioso2112
01-02-2011, 00:05
The word "need" requires "justification."

'want' IS the justification; i.e., I wanted a .308 made out of peanut butter, so I made one. Why did I make one? because I wanted it. That is how I justified making a peanut butter .308.

cowboy1964
01-02-2011, 00:48
r u aware that 223 AR-15's beat 308 autorifles at 1000 yd matches, every weekend, dudes? Just Google for NRA matches, ask at CSP forums, or AR-15.com.

Not this again.

GlockFish
01-02-2011, 00:55
Yes.

Yes you do need a battle rifle.

rca256
01-02-2011, 01:19
No, I need doby to go shoot his magic 223 AR-15 at 1000 yd matches. His uber customized, uber hand loaded magic rifle that he would not know if it fell out of the sky and hit him on his noggin. Ah, there is a thought. :)

GlockFish
01-02-2011, 01:26
No, I need doby to go shoot his magic 223 AR-15 at 1000 yd matches. His uber customized, uber hand loaded magic rifle that he would not know if it fell out of the sky and hit him on his noggin. Ah, there is a thought. :)


Drinking tonight?

:wavey:

rca256
01-02-2011, 01:29
Drinking tonight?

:wavey:

Nope, just tired of someone (else)

silverado_mick
01-02-2011, 01:55
There is a very good report on the effectiveness of US Army infantry weapons and lethality in the 'Stan. It is written by a US Army Major attending the Army Command and General Staff College after returning from deployment.

Personally, we knew that these issues existed after Somalia.

Sorry if this has already been posted elsewhere.

Here is the abstract:
Operations in Afghanistan frequently require United States ground forces to engage and destroy the enemy at ranges beyond 300 meters. While the infantryman is ideally suited for combat in Afghanistan, his current weapons, doctrine, and marksmanship training do not provide a precise, lethal fire capability to 500 meters and are therefore inappropriate. Comments from returning soldiers reveal that about fifty percent of engagements occur past 300 meters. Current equipment, training, and doctrine are optimized for engagements under 300 meters and on level terrain. This monograph reviews the small arms capability of the infantry squad from World War I to present. It then discusses current shortfalls with cartridge lethality, weapons and optics configurations, the squad designated marksman concept and finally the rifle qualification course. Potential solutions in each of these areas are discussed.

Full report at http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA512331

So...this Gen wants the Army infantry to be trained and equipped like...Marines??? :whistling:


If a bunch of jerkoff 18 year olds can be taught to make hits at 500yards with iron sight equipped (not to mention beat on) M16A2's consistently in under two weeks time, I'd say that's a pretty powerful argument for the capability of the current US issue BATTLE RIFLE. The M16A4 is NOT a Vietnam era carbine...it is a truly capable main battle rifle regardless of chambering.


The Army's mistake was issuing an M4 to everydamnbody instead of on a case by case or unit by unit basis. I'd say that an Army grunt could benefit from an A4 just like a Marine grunt does, provided he receives proper marksmanship instruction.

In the end, if SHTF blah blah blah...a lot of people who spent a lot of time stocking up for the occasion are going to come to the startling realization that it's the tactics of the user and not the tools of the trade that make the biggest difference. Simply owning a scoped .308 and shooting tight groups at a grand does not make you combat effective.

TSAX
01-02-2011, 02:04
Forget the battle rifle get this instead :supergrin:

:50cal:

raven11
01-02-2011, 02:20
Hey...I dont know much about these rifles..Question I have is how accurate are they??ive often thought of getting a Nagant,Enfield,1903(but too much $$ for my taste), or even one of those Swiss K31's as I hear they are one of the MOST accurate old rifles of that ilk.

would 1000 yds convince you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2M1hC4c0tc

as to practical accuracy, I bought my 91/30 without checking the bore and such, but I can keep up with my buddies Remington 700 all day long

UtahIrishman
01-02-2011, 02:49
I have a FAL and a BLR in .308 ... sort of teamed them up for some of the reasons mentioned here and other reasons as well.

When I first started putting together a set of weapons to cover most eventualities I decided to standardize on NATO because I figured 7.62x51 for rifle and 9MM for pistol would always be available (yea I know...I also had a Pinto once too)

If I have to make a run for it though, I'm not toting the FAL, it's simply too heavy, I'll take the BLR. But the FAL would be at any fall back position I might have in mind if thinks really do go to hell.

I think the biggest deciding factor on picking a platform though is what you are comfortable with and works for you. There's a lot of choices that I think will work fine if they are practiced with.

fnfalman
01-02-2011, 06:38
The MBR, or battle rifle topic is all over the web. From what I read, most folks say that a MBR has to be a .308. I'm assuming the MBR is supposed to be a SHTF gun.

Why would you need a MBR if you're readily equipped with an AR15 or AK47 if SHTF? Aren't this both more than capable if you had to fight?

It's not a matter of need but a matter of want.

faawrenchbndr
01-02-2011, 06:54
Springfield M1 Garand works for me.........:supergrin:

j-glock22
01-02-2011, 07:06
So if it really gets that bad, you gonna walk around toting one? For us average joes looking to save our families or whathaveyou.... don't know if it is going to be benificial

Fox
01-02-2011, 07:24
Squad Designated Marksmen still use the M-14 rifle.

beemerphile
01-02-2011, 07:30
I have an SR-25 and a REPR that would argue with the assertion that 5.56 guns are more accurate. As far as "need", I don't "need" either one. I could make a better case of need for their 5.56 brothers the SR-15 and the M6A3. My 7.62's are fitted with longer range optics than my 5.56 guns and I don't conceive of any role for them that would have me humping them any distance. I have more of a "bug-in" than a "bug-out" SHTF plan. However, from inside or around La Casa de Beemerphile I'd probably opt for the bigger bang if I ever had to deter an advancing wall of Redcoats (or Homeboys).

So, yeah. I'd say there is an argument and a role for the "MBR" but I wouldn't try to argue a "need".

american lockpicker
01-02-2011, 07:43
If SHTF anyone thinking they are going to use a battle rifle won't last long...

ScrappyDoo
01-02-2011, 09:45
I think the gentleman who said something along the lines of "If you can afford it.. add it.." is dead on. My distinguished colleagues, let us not split hairs. If we can agree we would all like one of each caliber and then even more so , one of each type within the calibers, you just do , whatever you can do.

I finally got a Bushmaster in .223 and it's basically a present I gave myself, for surviving and thriving after my total disc replacement. Now other people bash it, whatever it's great for me. I love to "finish" it and then maybe add a larger caliber rifle. But when a go to .308, uhoh! Do I get a .308 Bolt Action scoped rifle? Or a Battle Rifle , like a M1A? Does an M1A fulfill both of those needs? What about adding a 7.62x39mm ? That counts as only an "assault" rifle on here, not as a Battle rifle? But I'd like one anyway... Who knows. Ideally I will have a safe full of options when I need to use them, like a bag full of golf clubs.

BUT,

You can't be MAD if you don't have every club option, just do what you can. And you know, if one or two of your clubs are particularly high quality or make you proud, then you're ahead of the game.

Shadyscott69
01-02-2011, 09:54
If SHTF anyone thinking they are going to use a battle rifle won't last long...


CRAP! I guess you should have told these guys...

http://bh3082.k12.sd.us/Event/invasion%20of%20normandy%20soldiers%20landing.jpg

arm chair kommando
01-02-2011, 10:27
the term MBR, is mostly a term used by shooters to differentiate between 7.62 caliber rifles, and 5.56 "assault" rifles.


The full power rifles have their place, but they're usually heavy, less accurate, and more expensive than their smaller brethren.

If you have a quality AR/AK, than no, you don't "need" a MBR. They'll do everything a 7.62 caliber rifle will do.


:headscratch: Last I checked my AK was a 7.62 caliber rifle....

Smashy
01-02-2011, 11:05
I don't understand what the fuss is about. If you want one, get one. It's just another option. And a fun one at that.

byf43
01-02-2011, 11:10
Everyone should have the following:

M1 Garand
M14 platform (M14, M1A, etc.)
AR

Personally, I've never been drawn to the AK platform. It does nothing for me.
IF I ever need one, I'll remove it from the cold dead hands of my adversary. :)

Smashy
01-02-2011, 11:25
Everyone should have the following:

M1 Garand
M14 platform (M14, M1A, etc.)
AR

Personally, I've never been drawn to the AK platform. It does nothing for me.
IF I ever need one, I'll remove it from the cold dead hands of my adversary. :)



Exact models you should have is really a matter of opinion. Some feel everyone should have an AK. I'm not an AK person either. I have a couple unissued Yugos, but I don't care for them and I'll probably sell them. I'm also not an AR person. There are other options that can fill the same roles.

AK_Stick
01-02-2011, 11:42
:headscratch: Last I checked my AK was a 7.62 caliber rifle....


Yeah, 7.62x39mm, not 7.62x51mm. MBR is usually used to reference the full power rifle rounds.

Kinda like saying the V-6 mustang is a real mustang.

AK_Stick
01-02-2011, 11:44
CRAP! I guess you should have told these guys...

http://bh3082.k12.sd.us/Event/invasion%20of%20normandy%20soldiers%20landing.jpg



Please tell me you intentionally linked to a picture where almost every soldier visible, is carrying a M1 carbine.


:rofl:


If you didn't thats hilarious.

faawrenchbndr
01-02-2011, 11:58
There is one with a M1903:whistling:

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c341/faawrenchbndr/invasionofnormandysoldierslandingedited-1.jpg

faawrenchbndr
01-02-2011, 12:00
Everyone should have the following:

M1 Garand
M14 platform (M14, M1A, etc.)
AR

Personally, I've never been drawn to the AK platform. It does nothing for me.
IF I ever need one, I'll remove it from the cold dead hands of my adversary. :)

I'll agree with most of this,......but I have no use for a M1A.
Had one, decided I like the .30'06 cartridge better than the 308.

I refused to own an AK for over 20 years,......finally got one.
Love it!

DEADEYEGUY
01-02-2011, 12:31
The M-14's were being and are being used indeed. Because they needed something quick. The M-14 like the M1 C & D that were pressed into service are far from ideal. If they still had the wood stocks a special side mount optics set up had to be added to install optics. The wood stocks themselves are a problem with accuracy in severe climates. The wood will expand or shrink under extreme weather conditions. Also on the wood stocked model their is nowhere to put the various lasers, rangefinders, and so on.
The Navy helped this some by coming up with the EBR stock set up. But their are few armorers that know how to work on the M-14's now. A shortage of parts for them. And they are not designed to be a snipers weapon in the first place. And to the Designated Marksman or Sniper the M-14 sticks out like a sore thumb. I'm not knocking the M-14.
I've fired them and really like the feel of the weapon. They were just designed in a time when electronic devices to aid the shooter were not even known. Except for the ART scope very little in the way of electronics was known or thought of. The rifles that were picked for the conversion to M-21 configuration were worked over by skilled armorers. Same with the M-1's. The various AR-10's and other .308 in this configuration are superior to the M-14/M-1 in almost everyway. And as some have pointed out more M-1 carbines were produced than any other U.S. made weapon in W.W. II.
Everyone talks about the shortcomings of the M-1 carbine. But lots of folks carried them. And we are not just talking about clerks and cooks who they were made for. The answer to needing to take shots at both long ranges and short ranges was addressed by the Russians in Afghanistan by throwing in several of their Dragonov's (spelling is probably wrong) with their AK74's. Same thing we are doing now. I guess the question is how far do you think you would be shooting at something to need an MBR? And
if your shooting that far why not get one of the .300 or .338 Magnums that our NATO allies are switching over to and we are also beginning to?
If you want a long shot they are far suprior to the .308. Hell if you want one for fun get it. But the MBR (not a Sniper rifle or MBR modified to be one) has all but disappeared off the battlefront for some real solid reasons.

Aceman
01-02-2011, 12:40
If you have a quality AR/AK, than no, you don't "need" a MBR. They'll do everything a 7.62 caliber rifle will do.

Absolutely false - but I'm sure we'll all here how it is the truth and we just don't choose to accept it. does the "A" in AK stand for Arthur?

A .308 has more knock down knock out power than either of those. It puts an AR to shame at any range and whips an AK after a short distance.

It has more range than either of them. It puts an AK to shame period, and will smoke an AR as well.

If you need to deliver serious thump at a serious distance - neither an AR or an AK will touch it.

.45Super-Man
01-02-2011, 12:57
Yeah, 7.62x39mm, not 7.62x51mm. MBR is usually used to reference the full power rifle rounds.

Kinda like saying the V-6 mustang is a real mustang.

Agreed. By that measure, the 5.56 would be a Geo Metro.:supergrin:

american lockpicker
01-02-2011, 13:21
CRAP! I guess you should have told these guys...

http://bh3082.k12.sd.us/Event/invasion%20of%20normandy%20soldiers%20landing.jpg

I know a guy who was there and he lost a lot of friends that day... Anyways your better off with a high powered bolt action(think .300 or .338 or .303) firing a single well aimed shot from far away then moving along. To do anything else against professional troops or police or who ever will just get you killed these days.

Aceman
01-02-2011, 13:27
Realistically, how much range do you think you actually gain?

For the purposes of being effective, we can't really consider a univariate model. Univariate is a big word that means single variable/factor. You need to consider other issues such as wind, energy, drop, ballistic coefficient. I can go on but you obviously aren't able to consider more than one argument at a time.

I won't disagree that 500+ in SHTF for engagement seems excessive - but there are no rules, so set your own parameters.

Since the 5.56 weapons are typically more accurate, and recoil less, as well as accept scopes better, I would challenge that while the 7.62 carries more energy, the 5.56 is probably going to be the more effective choice at most distances.
- It is typically more accurate than most 'MBR" But as I said - accuracy is NOT everything at a certain point of distance. and past 500 is about it for 5.56
- recoil is really only relevant if lot's of follow up shots are important. Not a factor based on your own "accuracy" argument. Learn to shoot and recoil is able to be overcome.
- 5.56 accepts a scope better? Who TF told you this. You are an idiot or you can't think think straight. Did you mean to say an AR accepts a scope easier? You need to check out a DSA SA-58. ever see a PSOP go on a PSL? I guess not...Again - you obviously have NO idea what you are talking about. That is just wrong. Lay down some parameters or don't talk about things you don't understand.


Especially considering the general lack of accuracy I see from most shooters,
Can't argue with that - finger on the trigger is USUALLY more important than the trigger itself. To a point...

I don't think the majority could employ a 7.62 rifle well enough to enjoy the slight ballistic advantage is brings to the table.
- I think that is BS based on your own arguments. The first pull is the same regardless of the gun. I don't think most could use the AR as well. The bullets are too light (even the heavy ones) and the drop/drif too much - especially when combined with the lack of energy it deliveres once we are "out there". Far more shooters would do far better with a .308 at longer ranges.
- And your definition of slight ballistic advantage is really skewed. I suppose that's why SCARS are in use by Sepc Ops in 7.62? I suppose that's why Snipers are using 7.62? Again - you are using "weasel words" slight is TRIPLE the energy at 500 yds. That's like saying a Toyota Corolla has a slight speed advantage over an Indy car.

I've yet to see someone shoot through a wall to get to the guy on the other side. Typically, if you can't see them, you can't hit them. Plus most things that stop 5.56, will stop 7.62.
- Again, a sound argument - if you can't see it don't shoot at it. If for no other reason it's a waste of ammo. But again, your ignorance is couched in a lot of mushy speech. There are a lot of car windows that 5.56 will deflect where at the same range a 7.62 will go right through it. same with car doors. Any redneck growing up near a junkyard can tell you that. But let's be clear: THERE aRE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WILL STOP 5.56 THAT WON'T STOP 7.62.


The notable exception being some body armor that will stop 7.62 ball, will not stop some various flavors of 5.56.
The other notable exception being some plates that at the wrong distance WON'T stop 7.62 but will stop 5.56.

But in all my years as a soldier,
And here is the issue I think. How old are you anyway? 25 I think. You have been a soldier for 7 years at most. I think you are just young and gung-ho and just really don't know any better.

There is a saying in Human resources: 20 years of experience doesn't equal a PhD. And a PhD doesn't equal 20 years of experience. And just because you haven't done the same exact job in the same exact doesn't mean you necessarily can't do this one. And just because you have done the same exact job doesn't mean your really know it.

Well guess what Sarge: I have been shooting Well longer than you have been ALIVE. And I have a PhD. So I have a hell of a lot of knowledge and experience compared you - while no military service. So the real question is does your ~ 7 years of whatever = my life. Based on what you say that I read here - not even close.When your mommy and daddy were humping to make you, I was helping pappy do custom reloads for competition on trap/target teams and hunting.

Just say it: All you know is the M4, and what they taught you in boot plus some combat (whatever that has been...which we don't know).

You will argue the superiority of the M4 into the ground because that's all you know. Hell - I bet you never shot a gun before the army.

I can't way to see your next expression of ignorance in this thread. So people really think you know something? I think you don't or you had better learn to type more precisely to express your thoughts.

Batesmotel
01-02-2011, 13:30
Buy one of everything then when you "need" it you will have it.

Aceman
01-02-2011, 13:39
I think anytime you get shot at, you wish for better cover.
- I am sure that is absolutely true. see, I don't think you are an idiot about everything. Just some some things.

However, I'm not arguing the AR/AK, or AR/AK/Whatever MBR vs another.
No but the OP really asked about opinions on if you need an MBR. And you clearly believe no - great. But you have managed to have diarrhea of the mouth and back up your opinion with a bunch of patently false opinions about 7.62x51. You exemplify my main problem with boards like this - inexperienced people reading crap and thinking it is true because GI Joe sid it and he's been in combat and he must know. Or worse...

The problem with many 308 MBR's is they give up accuracy, for the increased energy of the cartridge.
Great - there is an opinion. Yet I don't see you really explaining just how much of this "accuracy" is given up to attain this power. Like I said - you can't think in two variables. Fine - AR's ALWAYS win at Camp Perry at 1000 or whatever. Just how much does a .308 lose by????

You entertain me son. Keep talking. I'm gonna print a bunch of these a do a dramatic reading at the gun club or the campfire or wherever.

Aceman
01-02-2011, 13:46
Yeah, 7.62x39mm, not 7.62x51mm. MBR is usually used to reference the full power rifle rounds.

Kinda like saying the V-6 mustang is a real mustang.

See - you got that one right...&.62 is an intermediate round. We are talking big boomers here. Honest to goodness full size big game rounds!

Nice Mustang analogy

Aceman
01-02-2011, 13:49
Please tell me you intentionally linked to a picture where almost every soldier visible, is carrying a M1 carbine.


:rofl:


If you didn't thats hilarious.

Hey - .30 cal goodness. AK of the west! They knew what they were doing.

G29Reload
01-02-2011, 13:55
the term MBR, is mostly a term used by shooters to differentiate between 7.62 caliber rifles, and 5.56 "assault" rifles.

Fail. Assault Rifle is a term wrongly dumped on us by the gun control people like Sarah Brady.

A true assault rifle is a mid power rifle, the original of which would be the German's STG 44, more powerful than a pistol but not quite a full-power/hi-power rifle round (like 7.62x39) or an intermediate power rifle round with SELECT FIRE capabilities. No nation in its right mind would send its assault troops into battle without select fire capability.

Unless you have a Class III/Title II weapon, you do NOT have an assault rifle.

The full power rifles have their place, but they're usually heavy, less accurate, and more expensive than their smaller brethren.

MORE accurate. A .308 in the right hands, particularly the M1A/M14 can easily kill a man at 800 yds. M1A's are frequently used in competition.

If you have a quality AR/AK, than no, you don't "need" a MBR.

Not really. The .308 was designed to kill. The 5.56 was designed to grievously wound. Not that it can't kill.

They'll do everything a 7.62 caliber rifle will do.

No they will not. Not even close.

AK: 150yds effectively.
AR: 300yds effectively. (Current qual range for the USMC)
M14: 6-800 yds.

AK's are less accurate. That run-all-the-time no fail rep they have is due to loser tolerances. Less accurate. Power of a 30-30.

5.56 and 308 are more accurate.

Every man should own, and know how to use, a rifle capable of going to war. -Some famous general, I forget.

Aceman
01-02-2011, 13:57
Restless - my opinion on your question:

No I don't think you "need" one. as I have said before - someone with a .357 revolver and a 12g 870 is probably as SHTF armed as anyone really needs to be. Toss the carbine of your choice in there - and you are all set to hunker down and defend the home. If you feel you need mor umph than that - I will always say go with something .30 cal or better, be it a .30-.30 lever, an AK, or a full on M1/FAL or whatever.

I prefer the .30 cal because:

It simply has sufficient accuracy and more stopping power period at the ranges I am concerned about - 0 to 200 yards.

Hey - could there be a situation where stopping a large truck is necessary? Sure. Better have the Barrett handy! But whether its stopping with less shots, hunting, shooting through something, I like .30 cal.

Set your priorities and start buying from there. for me, for SHTF it was:

#1 Personal Handgun 9mm
#2 Shotgun 12g
#3 Carbine 7.62x39
#4 .22
#5 Bolt gun .270
#6 - everything else...

AK_Stick
01-02-2011, 13:59
Wow, must have hit a nerve.

For a guy who claims to have been shooting longer than I've been alive, and has a PHD, you make an awful lot of assumptions that are so off base as to be comical.

I'm not interested in debating you anymore, you're wrong, but you're so obsessed with proving me wrong that facts, and common sense aren't going to sway you. You're just going to focus blindly upon your attack of me, even if what you're saying is patently incorrect. All you are doing is clouding whats been a rather decent thread with a bunch of arguing and throwing out answers before you've even taken the time to understand what I've said.


Its really come down to a you're older, you obviously know more than me, which why you've gone to great pains to point out how long I could have been in the service, and taken some mighty assumptions about my experience both with the military and outside.


Congrats, you win.

Aceman
01-02-2011, 14:01
Cool! G29 is playing now too!!!!! Good points!!!

AK_stick - There is going to be more smack run on you than opium snorted off of an underaged thai hooker in a hookah bar Bangkok!

1 old 0311
01-02-2011, 14:07
I have a .357 lever action, and 2 pump shotguns. I am good to about 100 yards. I really don't think i will need more than that. I mean I don't live in the 'Green Zone.':whistling:

AK_Stick
01-02-2011, 14:09
Fail. Assault Rifle is a term wrongly dumped on us by the gun control people like Sarah Brady.

A true assault rifle is a mid power rifle, the original of which would be the German's STG 44, more powerful than a pistol but not quite a full-power/hi-power rifle round (like 7.62x39) or an intermediate power rifle round with SELECT FIRE capabilities. No nation in its right mind would send its assault troops into battle without select fire capability.

Unless you have a Class III/Title II weapon, you do NOT have an assault rifle.

I know this, thats why if you notice, assault rifle was quoted.



MORE accurate. A .308 in the right hands, particularly the M1A/M14 can easily kill a man at 800 yds. M1A's are frequently used in competition.

Yes, many M1a's are frequently used in competition, and in almost every single service rifle match I can find a posted listing of winners, scores and weapons used, the AR comes out on top. Including the king of all service rifle matches, at Camp Perry every year, where an AR has won for over the last decade. It also takes quite a bit more to keep a M1a in match winning accurate trim than a AR-15. They have to be continually re-bedded, and worked on. Where as a free floated AR-15 with a decent trigger and barrel, is almost maintenance free

The same thing has been found when we re-issued the M14 as a DMR rifle. While they could be made accurate, it takes alot more time, parts, and money to keep them that way.

You are correct, if you put a round into center mass at 800 yds, a 308 will cleanly kill a person at that range. Then again, if you put a 5.56 round into center mass at that range, it will also cleanly kill someone. It doesn't bring as much energy to the table, but energy is only one part of the equation.

[QUOTE=G29Reload;16569416]
Not really. The .308 was designed to kill. The 5.56 was designed to grievously wound. Not that it can't kill.

No, it really wasn't this is an old wives tale. Its directly against the Hague accords to do that. Why would we design a bullet to do something we've signed, ratified, and continually abided since its induction even when we don't have to?




AK: 150yds effectively.
AR: 300yds effectively. (Current qual range for the USMC)
M14: 6-800 yds.

AK's are less accurate. That run-all-the-time no fail rep they have is due to loser tolerances. Less accurate. Power of a 30-30.


Current USMC qual is all the way out to 500 yds with a known distance timed fire target, the Army trains to 300 yds on a popup rifle course.

1 old 0311
01-02-2011, 14:11
Wow, must have hit a nerve.

For a guy who claims to have been shooting longer than I've been alive, and has a PHD, you make an awful lot of assumptions that are so off base as to be comical.

I'm not interested in debating you anymore, you're wrong, but you're so obsessed with proving me wrong that facts, and common sense aren't going to sway you. You're just going to focus blindly upon your attack of me, even if what you're saying is patently incorrect. All you are doing is clouding whats been a rather decent thread with a bunch of arguing and throwing out answers before you've even taken the time to understand what I've said.


Its really come down to a you're older, you obviously know more than me, which why you've gone to great pains to point out how long I could have been in the service, and taken some mighty assumptions about my experience both with the military and outside.


Congrats, you win.


You been asleep? EVERYONE here is a PHD/olympic athlete/millionaire/medal of honor winner/SEAL/married to a super model/who taught Jeff Cooper to shoot.
Once you get past that it all makes sense.

Aceman
01-02-2011, 14:42
Congrats, you win.

No win - just providing an opportunity for you not to lose. Tragic you didn't pick up on that from the last round.

And just because I'm old doesn't mean I know anything. But as an "old" guy, I'll say that one of the best things a young guy can do is not cop an attitude like he knows more than an old guy. All age gives you is an opportunity to have learned some things. I have met some old guys that don't know crap.

And just because you are young doesn't mean you don't know anything either.

But just the way talk suggests you do a lot more talking than listening...

beauty of the internet - it's all anonymous. Worst place in the world to meet people who don't know jack but want to talk big and make themselves feel important. it's full of opinions. You have yours, I have mine. I just feel your opinions are not entirely accurate. The reader will just have to decide for themselves...

G29Reload
01-02-2011, 15:35
You are correct, if you put a round into center mass at 800 yds, a 308 will cleanly kill a person at that range. Then again, if you put a 5.56 round into center mass at that range, it will also cleanly kill someone. It doesn't bring as much energy to the table, but energy is only one part of the equation.

Wait, what?

At that range you'd have to carry it personally. It probably fell into the dirt 100 yds ago.

If it made 800 yds it would probably bounce off a t-shirt. All 62 grains of it!

What flavor of bourbon are you drinking?

G29Reload
01-02-2011, 15:39
[QUOTE=G29Reload;16569416]
MORE accurate. A .308 in the right hands, particularly the M1A/M14 can easily kill a man at 800 yds. M1A's are frequently used in competition.

Yes, many M1a's are frequently used in competition, and in almost every single service rifle match I can find a posted listing of winners, scores and weapons used, the AR comes out on top. Including the king of all service rifle matches, at Camp Perry every year, where an AR has won for over the last decade.

Not at 800 yds!

The same thing has been found when we re-issued the M14 as a DMR rifle. While they could be made accurate, it takes alot more time, parts, and money to keep them that way.

Irrelevant.

Smashy
01-02-2011, 15:43
AK_stick - There is going to be more smack run on you than opium snorted off of an underaged thai hooker in a hookah bar Bangkok!





I think you need to take that PhD and wipe all that snot dripping from your nose.

G29Reload
01-02-2011, 15:43
I have a .357 lever action, and 2 pump shotguns. I am good to about 100 yards. I really don't think i will need more than that. I mean I don't live in the 'Green Zone.':whistling:

OK, so you're hunkering down in the 'burbs.

By green zone, you mean where I live. Rural areas. Surrounded by farms and open land.

My M1A isnt getting sold anytime soon. I can put a circle of safety around my place in short order. It's 100 yds to the street, to say nothing of the 1000 yds of open land I can see from the roof.

AK_Stick
01-02-2011, 15:44
The current issue long range round for the 5.56 is the 77 grain OTM matchking bullet in the mod 262 LR loading.


I know everyone likes to poke fun at the 5.56, because it won't buck the wind like the heavier 7.62 rounds. But if you think its going to bounce off at 800 yds, you have a very rude awakening ahead.

rca256
01-02-2011, 15:48
Ah... religious wars! Or to put it another way: Huns to the left, Visigoths to the right!

Most people can't hit a barn door at 800 meters, much less kill something at that range. YES, there are specialists (dare I use the term sniper) who can successfully engage targets at that range and beyond. But if you want to KILL something that far out, it's often a .300 WSM, a .50 cal, etc., because of the requisite for decent TERMINAL ballistics.

Let's all take a break here and look at Glock pron. Personally, I save my AR15 porn for the web site that has that name, LOL.

OK, Fight On...

AK_Stick
01-02-2011, 15:53
[QUOTE=AK_Stick;16569498]



Not at 800 yds!



Irrelevant.



Actually, yes, they do win at 800 yds. The long High Power matches are 1,000 yds, and in the service rifle classes, those are again almost always dominated by AR-15's.

GlockFish
01-02-2011, 15:55
Plus - They piss off Liberals!

Liberals hate em!

byf43
01-02-2011, 15:58
The current issue long range round for the 5.56 is the 77 grain OTM matchking bullet in the mod 262 LR loading.


I know everyone likes to poke fun at the 5.56, because it won't buck the wind like the heavier 7.62 rounds. But if you think its going to bounce off at 800 yds, you have a very rude awakening ahead.

For me (at this time in my life), the AR platform does what I need it to do.

My M1A is a rifle that has been on my short list for many, many years, and I finally got it. (And I'm VERY pleased with it!) However, I won't be my first choice IF I have to 'do battle'.

Now, IF needed, I'd reach for my AR-HBAR.
What I'd really like to do is find the best flat-top (complete) upper with a 16" barrel and mid-length handguard/gas system. My eyesight is going (with age) and I'm wanting something with a 'dot' sight, or some other optical sight.
But. . . . I'm not sure of who makes the best for the $$$!!!!

chauncey
01-02-2011, 18:29
i would not trust any 5.56x45 cartridge/bullet combination to be lethal at 800 yards.

it may put clean holes in paper but i would not trust it to do much more. it may be lethal, it may not. however lethal the 5.56 may be at 800 yards, the 7.62x51 would certainly retain more energy, so, imo, is preferable.

G29Reload
01-02-2011, 18:37
The current issue long range round for the 5.56 is the 77 grain OTM matchking bullet in the mod 262 LR loading.

In platforms that have been twisted up to 1-7. The old 1-9 won't stabilize much beyond 62-68 gr at most.

The AR platform is not a 1000yd weapon.

Frog1
01-02-2011, 18:47
The caliber selection is dependent on the range. I am a fan of the .223 and the .308. The AR Platform can be very accurate. So can a bolt gun or semi auto in .308.

The .308 guns were not retired due to accuracy. It was due to weight and training. They really didn't retire. They are still used by special operations and sniper units world wide.

If a long range target needs to be engaged, and terminal energy and penetration is required, the .308 wins hands down. When I was much younger, with an M1 Garand, if I could see it, I could shoot it. The same for HK's, Fal's, M14's, Mausers, Springfields, Mosin's, and Lee Enfields.

The .223 guns are great out to 500 yds and beyond in target matches, but for shooting vehicles and cover, the big guns will win that match every time.

JTLIII
01-02-2011, 19:53
Realistically, how much range do you think you actually gain?

Since the 5.56 weapons are typically more accurate, and recoil less, as well as accept scopes better, I would challenge that while the 7.62 carries more energy, the 5.56 is probably going to be the more effective choice at most distances. Especially considering the general lack of accuracy I see from most shooters, I don't think the majority could employ a 7.62 rifle well enough to enjoy the slight ballistic advantage is brings to the table.


Secondly, what good is penetration really in terms of a SHTF rifle? I know people toss around how a 7.62 will go through a cinder block, and a 5.56 won't. But in all my years as a soldier, I've yet to see someone shoot through a wall to get to the guy on the other side. Typically, if you can't see them, you can't hit them. Plus most things that stop 5.56, will stop 7.62. The notable exception being some body armor that will stop 7.62 ball, will not stop some various flavors of 5.56.

I'm so very confused as to how you make out that the M14 is LESS accurate than the M16...

And that's very nice of you to assume all civilian shooters without your apparent expertise in shooting can't handle a 7.62MM

faawrenchbndr
01-02-2011, 20:03
......irrelevant.


do

you

have

to use

bold every time??!!!!

themighty9mm
01-02-2011, 20:19
i would not trust any 5.56x45 cartridge/bullet combination to be lethal at 800 yards.

it may put clean holes in paper but i would not trust it to do much more. it may be lethal, it may not. however lethal the 5.56 may be at 800 yards, the 7.62x51 would certainly retain more energy, so, imo, is preferable.
Well the 5.56 certainly is very leathal at 800 yards. Was talking to a buddy of mines brother last week. Was in iraq and afghanistan. Ofcoure the subject of guns came up. A few beers and stories later afghan was was in the mix. 5.56 does fine. He certainly prefers the 308 comin from a 240 or sr25 but the 5.56 will most definatly do. Lol the guy wont hardly say anything about any of it except with some beer. After some of his tales I understand much much better why

fnfalman
01-02-2011, 20:21
I'm curious but where in any military manuals; US and worldwide, I can find something that is called "Main Battle Rifle" or "Assault Rifle"? Definitions for these two things?

For the life of me, I never recalled any teachings in any TMs or FMs that called an M14 a "Main Battle Rifle" or an M16/M4 an "Assault Rifle".

themighty9mm
01-02-2011, 20:25
And that's very nice of you to assume all civilian shooters without your apparent expertise in shooting can't handle a 7.62MM
He said MOST. Funny thing is go to an average civilian shooting range on an average day good weather low wind. Indeed a good percentage of them can't shoot to save there lives. A 5 shot group shot slow from a rest at 100 yards, and still missing the target. If its a bit coudly or windy it gets even worse. Ofcourse with some exceptions. That has been my experience anyways

themighty9mm
01-02-2011, 20:26
I'm curious but where in any military manuals; US and worldwide, I can find something that is called "Main Battle Rifle" or "Assault Rifle"? Definitions for these two things?

For the life of me, I never recalled any teachings in any TMs or FMs that called an M14 a "Main Battle Rifle" or an M16/M4 an "Assault Rifle".
While I also have not seen those terms with the exception of the news. I beleive the m16a4 is the MBR of the usa

nipperwolf
01-02-2011, 20:29
Not really. The .308 was designed to kill. The 5.56 was designed to grievously wound.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

themighty9mm
01-02-2011, 20:33
I know this, thats why if you notice, assault rifle was quoted.


[QUOTE=G29Reload;16569416]
MORE accurate. A .308 in the right hands, particularly the M1A/M14 can easily kill a man at 800 yds. M1A's are frequently used in competition.

Yes, many M1a's are frequently used in competition, and in almost every single service rifle match I can find a posted listing of winners, scores and weapons used, the AR comes out on top. Including the king of all service rifle matches, at Camp Perry every year, where an AR has won for over the last decade. It also takes quite a bit more to keep a M1a in match winning accurate trim than a AR-15. They have to be continually re-bedded, and worked on. Where as a free floated AR-15 with a decent trigger and barrel, is almost maintenance free

The same thing has been found when we re-issued the M14 as a DMR rifle. While they could be made accurate, it takes alot more time, parts, and money to keep them that way.

You are correct, if you put a round into center mass at 800 yds, a 308 will cleanly kill a person at that range. Then again, if you put a 5.56 round into center mass at that range, it will also cleanly kill someone. It doesn't bring as much energy to the table, but energy is only one part of the equation.



No, it really wasn't this is an old wives tale. Its directly against the Hague accords to do that. Why would we design a bullet to do something we've signed, ratified, and continually abided since its induction even when we don't have to?





Current USMC qual is all the way out to 500 yds with a known distance timed fire target, the Army trains to 300 yds on a popup rifle course.
Lol not sure how you are catching so much greif But just about everything you have posted, has been my experience If not my direct experience then the knowledge I have gained from others with much more real world experience than I. The last bit about quals. Spot on. The bit about m1a's. Nobody can argue they see alot of competitions. Alot more work is most definatly involved to keep ir running competition ready. Thus from a SHTF/accuracy stand point the M1a wouldnt be the most likely best choice. Sorry bout the luck man

JTLIII
01-02-2011, 20:35
very true, but still he made it seem as though no military experience=no skillz.


I no great shot, I admit. But I can hold my own out to a few hundred yards, with the only formal training I received from Boy Scouts...and my Dad. I see the need for a "main battle rifle" but in a SHTF, I'll have my 10/22 match rifle and my R700 in 308. Screw a semi-auto battle rifle, I want hidden and super accurate.

fnfalman
01-02-2011, 20:40
While I also have not seen those terms with the exception of the news. I beleive the m16a4 is the MBR of the usa

Those monikers were coined by the dumbass gunzine writers of the 1980s.

crazymoose
01-02-2011, 21:31
I'm so very confused as to how you make out that the M14 is LESS accurate than the M16...

And that's very nice of you to assume all civilian shooters without your apparent expertise in shooting can't handle a 7.62MM

In stock form, it's less accurate. You can make an M14 pattern rifle more accurate, but it's expensive (if you're not a gunsmith), and requires work every few thousand rounds to stay accurate. With the AR, all you need is a better barrel, a free-float tube, and a torque wrench.

I like the SCAR 17. I think it's the best 7.62x51 fighting rifle ever made, bar none, and if it were my job to do what the Rangers, SEALs, etc. in Afghanistan were doing, it's what I'd want. However, I think quite a few people here do not have realistic expectations about what qualities would be most useful to them in a rifle to be used in the scenario we're talking about, and I also think that even accomplished shooters often overestimate their capabilities in such a situation. For example, in a truly chaotic situation where law and order have essentially ceased to exist, do you intend to engage in long-range ambushes and offensive sniping? Realistically, these comprise the majority of situations in which we're hearing about 700 yard+ kills in Afghanistan. Unless you want to attract the attention of the invading army, corrupt government forces, or band of looting cannibals, these sorts of attacks would be unwise.

If you don't intend to shoot at unsuspecting targets, consider the alternative situation. You're engaged in a firefight with a guy or guys at 600 or 700 yards. They're shooting back, which means your heart is probably pounding, and some adrenaline is kicking in. I don't care how cool a customer you think you are, kiss some of your potential accuracy goodbye. Your target knows he's being shot at, which means he's moving and keeping his head down. Your shot just got even harder. Also, remember that if you're smart, you'll be moving as well, which means that you won't be shooting from a prepared position; prone or an expedient rest like a log or tree is the best you can realistically hope for.

With the above situation in mind, think of the last time you shot at a man-sized silhouette at 500 yards. Have you done it kneeling, or from a hastily-assumed prone position? Had you been hiking around all day beforehand, or had you just sprinted ten or twenty yards and dropped to the ground or behind cover? For me, keeping rounds from a semi-auto even vaguely in the center of mass in a human-sized target at 500 yards is pretty challenging, to make no mention of a moving target that's partially (or mostly) obscured.

There are certainly things a 7.62x51 will do that a 5.56x45 will not do. If you choose a 5.56, it is possible that you will die because you lack the range and penetration of the 7.62. However, you have to weigh that against the possibility that if you choose the 7.62, you will be killed because you run out of ammo, cannot shoot as rapidly, or have to change magazines more frequently. Unless I found myself in one of a few very specific situations, I'd choose the 5.56 or 5.45 weapon for general use.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

dnuggett
01-02-2011, 21:48
Read through all these posts. Why is it that people think all ARs are .223 only? Some damn accurate .308s are ARs.

Rohniss
01-02-2011, 21:50
I don't think many folks can exploit the accuracy and range advantages of a 7.62x51 rifle over a 5.56x45 rifle in a combat situation. In fact I'd say most folks couldn't use a 5.56x45 rifle at 300 yards very effectively either.

Before anyone protests... how many have even looked at a "Q-target" at 300 yards? Its not that easy to hit it. Now, what if the Q was kneeling, or prone... What if it was popping up (like the Army course)... It gets harder and harder... Now imagine that your pretty hungry... pretty sore... pretty tired... you may have had to run (I imagine that's hard enough for most individuals nowadays)...

Is there situations where 7.62x51 is an advantage, hell yeah... But it weighs more (the ammo and the rifle both generally), meaning you can carry less, kicks harder (slower followups, which you'll likely be needing)...

Me personally, I like the plain old 20" AR-15... It does what I need it to, and it works. Its not, uber-tactical, but it can do everything pretty well, I restaked the gas-key on mine, but I haven't had any problem with it either before or after...

But personally, You probably wont need anything more than the old fashioned shotgun with a selection of slugs and buckshot... and a decent pistol...

Assuming you have the above, the AR is just icing on the cake, and the MBR (or whatever you wanna call it) is gravy.

TL:DR:

Spend as much as you want if it makes you happy, or you have precieved needs for a platform... just realize your only getting incrementally greater functionality.

american lockpicker
01-02-2011, 22:39
Plus - They piss off Liberals!

Liberals hate em!

Republicans hate them more they even banned them from import...

AK_Stick
01-02-2011, 23:04
very true, but still he made it seem as though no military experience=no skillz.


I no great shot, I admit. But I can hold my own out to a few hundred yards, with the only formal training I received from Boy Scouts...and my Dad. I see the need for a "main battle rifle" but in a SHTF, I'll have my 10/22 match rifle and my R700 in 308. Screw a semi-auto battle rifle, I want hidden and super accurate.



I've never said that, as far as I know, in any thread. I said most shooters will not be able to enjoy the slight ballistic advantage that 7.62x51mm enjoys over 5.56, because, A. the majority are not good enough shots. And B. The majority of MBR style rifles in 7.62x51mm, are not as accurate as rifles in 5.56.

UtahIrishman
01-02-2011, 23:31
I don't really want to take exception with people on here who I'm sure have more knowledge of fire arms than I do, but I've seen first hand a .308 against an AR at 300 yards. I had the .308 with iron sights...the guy next to me had an AR with a scope. I was hitting paper he was not...not even close.

I think it's training more than anything. The guy next to me kept fiddling with his scope and it was obvious he didn't know how to use it. While my BLR was sighted in for 200 yards and it only took a slight correction to hit at 300. The flatter trajectory of the .308 certainly makes that correction easy.

While he had to compensate considerably more (his AR was sighted in at 100 yards, or at least that's what he said) and I believe he set the clicks on his scope in the opposite direction from what he should have (just a guess since I don't use a scope).

To me training and practice with the tools you have whatever they are is the key. I'm sure there are guys who have ARs who can shoot circles around me, but in this case it was the other way around because of training and practice.

Your mileage may vary

JTLIII
01-03-2011, 06:30
I've never said that, as far as I know, in any thread. I said most shooters will not be able to enjoy the slight ballistic advantage that 7.62x51mm enjoys over 5.56, because, A. the majority are not good enough shots. And B. The majority of MBR style rifles in 7.62x51mm, are not as accurate as rifles in 5.56.

what I don't get is how you say the caliber makes it less accurate.

TheGrimReaper
01-03-2011, 09:53
Only .308 I got is a heavy bbl Savage. All my JIC guns are 7.62x39 or 5.56mm. I sleep just fine.

dnuggett
01-03-2011, 10:02
I don't really want to take exception with people on here who I'm sure have more knowledge of fire arms than I do, but I've seen first hand a .308 against an AR at 300 yards. I had the .308 with iron sights...the guy next to me had an AR with a scope. I was hitting paper he was not...not even close.

I think it's training more than anything. The guy next to me kept fiddling with his scope and it was obvious he didn't know how to use it. While my BLR was sighted in for 200 yards and it only took a slight correction to hit at 300. The flatter trajectory of the .308 certainly makes that correction easy.

While he had to compensate considerably more (his AR was sighted in at 100 yards, or at least that's what he said) and I believe he set the clicks on his scope in the opposite direction from what he should have (just a guess since I don't use a scope).

To me training and practice with the tools you have whatever they are is the key. I'm sure there are guys who have ARs who can shoot circles around me, but in this case it was the other way around because of training and practice.

Your mileage may vary

All that means is the guy next to you didn't know how to run his gun.

fnfalman
01-03-2011, 10:18
All that means is the guy next to you didn't know how to run his gun.

I don't know how to run my guns either. I know how to shoot them, but run them? I must admit that I am ignorant.

fnfalman
01-03-2011, 10:19
Don't blame the media for making use of the moniker "assault rifles". Blame the gunzine writers that came up with that crap.

dnuggett
01-03-2011, 10:26
I don't know how to run my guns either. I know how to shoot them, but run them? I must admit that I am ignorant.

Yes run. It's an intransitive verb, has a similar meaning to function. Does that help? :wavey:

dosei
01-03-2011, 10:51
To me, the question really should be:
"Battle Rifle, are they useful to the common man?"

And the answer...IMHO...is "depends".

If a person hunts, and some of what is hunted requires a larger caliber than .223/5.56 to be legal according to DNR regs, then it might be a useful gun. If the terrain is such that 400+ yard shots are commonly presented, and the person has the skills to consistently make such shots, then it begins to be a more and more attractive option. If you are a "300 yards or less" type of shooter and do not hunt game bigger than a deer/hog, then an AR-15 is a perfectly acceptable and useful tool. If the game is bigger or distances greater, then the .308/7.62 gets more and more useful. Me personally, I don't have a problem taking/making shots out to 600 yards. And where I hunt I get presented with those kind of shots a lot. I feel the RRA LAR-8 (AR-10) is an ideal choice for me. Everybody needs to look at what they do/need and what is best suited for those tasks. It's like saying "Framing Hammer...Does everyone need one?" No, everyone does not need one. But for some, they are very useful.

AK_Stick
01-03-2011, 10:57
what I don't get is how you say the caliber makes it less accurate.


Its not that being 7.62 makes the rifle less accurate. It is that the platforms in 7.62 are less accurate to begin with.

mac66
01-03-2011, 10:59
I have lots of different rifles. I don't plan on being in any "main" battles so none of mine are main battle rifles. :tongueout:

fnfalman
01-03-2011, 11:26
Yes run. It's an intransitive verb, has a similar meaning to function. Does that help? :wavey:

You should make this proposal to the US Army TRADOC so that they can learn the soldiers better.

"GI, you don't shoot your weapons, you run your guns!!!"

dnuggett
01-03-2011, 13:15
You should make this proposal to the US Army TRADOC so that they can learn the soldiers better.

"GI, you don't shoot your weapons, you run your guns!!!"

I can't take the credit for the choosing to use run as a synonym for operate.

Here is some homework- go to one of the other multitude of posts on GT that use term "run" instead of operate and seek out the origin of this mind blowing concept! :rofl:

.45Super-Man
01-03-2011, 13:22
The fact is, that regardless of whether you pick a carbine firing an "intermediate" cartridge or an "MBR", there's going to be a tradeoff. If you live out in a rural setting and are suddenly in a "SHTF" scenario the chances of needing to deliver more power at extended ranges may be necessary not only for defense, but for hunting. Conversely, if the same situation represented itself in an urban environment, then having roughly 30% more firepower with less downrange "punch" would be the better tool for the job so long as one realizes the limitations of the caliber and doesnt constantly place themselves in a situation where those limitations could be exploited(such as wide open spaces with no cover). This of course is based on the fact that most semi-auto MBR's have a standard capacity of 20 rounds (such as the FAL, M1A and the G3) and its various "clones". Whereas the pre-dominant carbines(AK, AR) have a standard capacity of 30 rounds. The question is...."which tradeoff would have the LEAST impact on you"? Odds are, that for at least 95% of us, the carbine is the better choice...all things considered.

UtahIrishman
01-03-2011, 13:37
All that means is the guy next to you didn't know how to run his gun.
Exactly my point.

Since I don't know how to 'run' an AR either I would never choose one for that reason. I could learn of course, but there are many guns that are much simpler to learn to use than an AR from what I've seen.

By the way my step-son, an ex-marine, swears by the AR...so different strokes for different folks and different levels of training.

fnfalman
01-03-2011, 13:53
I can't take the credit for the choosing to use run as a synonym for operate.

Here is some homework- go to one of the other multitude of posts on GT that use term "run" instead of operate and seek out the origin of this mind blowing concept! :rofl:

Probably the same origin as the idiots that coined the word "co-witness".

It's bad enough that rappers are killing the English vocabulary, but the mall ninjas have to contribute as well.

dosei
01-03-2011, 14:08
Probably the same origin as the idiots that coined the word "co-witness".

It's bad enough that rappers are killing the English vocabulary, but the mall ninjas have to contribute as well.

Do you know how to run a tractor?

Do you know how to run a fork-truck?

Are you certified to run that equipment?

The use of "run" as an alternative to "operate" is quite old.

Not surprising that fnfalman, someone who appears to be saying that the sum total of their vocabulary and understanding of the English language came from what the Army taught him, is completely unaware of it and unable to grasp it...the government can't run anything correctly.

:supergrin:

fnfalman
01-03-2011, 14:11
Do you know how to run a tractor?

Do you know how to run a fork-truck?

Are you certified to run that equipment?

The use of "run" as an alternative to "operate" is quite old.

Do you "run" a car? Do you "run" a motorcycle?

You don't "operate" a firearm. You "shoot" it.

Not surprising that fnfalman, someone who appears to be saying that the sum total of their vocabulary and understanding of the English language came from what the Army taught him, is completely unaware of it and unable to grasp it...the government can't run anything correctly.

:supergrin:

I studied English in school.:dunno:

dnuggett
01-03-2011, 14:23
Probably the same origin as the idiots that coined the word "co-witness".

It's bad enough that rappers are killing the English vocabulary, but the mall ninjas have to contribute as well.

You have a PM about this mall ninja crap.

dosei
01-03-2011, 14:23
Do you "run" a car? Do you "run" a motorcycle?

You don't "operate" a firearm. You "shoot" it.


I studied English in school.:dunno:

Do you "drive" a helicoptor? Seems they do in the army, yet you need a "pilot's" license and not a "driver's" license.

Face it, your only showing your own ignorance on this one.

Heck...the word "run" has 179 different "definitions" or "uses" listed at dictionary.com.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/run

Take a look at #69..."run" being used as a verb with an object.

Chonny
01-03-2011, 14:24
Nah...

fnfalman
01-03-2011, 14:47
Do you "drive" a helicoptor? Seems they do in the army, yet you need a "pilot's" license and not a "driver's" license.

Face it, your only showing your own ignorance on this one.

Heck...the word "run" has 179 different "definitions" or "uses" listed at dictionary.com.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/run

Take a look at #69..."run" being used as a verb with an object.

No, you "fly" a helicopter.

A car "runs" on gasoline.

You don't "run" a car. You "drive" it.

You don't "run" a horse. You "ride" it.

You don't "run" a jack hammer. You pile drive it. Or you "operate" it.

Just because it's been used willy nilly doesn't make it right.

fnfalman
01-03-2011, 14:48
Do Special Ops "operators" "run" their ops?

fnfalman
01-03-2011, 14:49
You have a PM about this mall ninja crap.

You have a replied PM about this mall ninja crap.

cowboy1964
01-03-2011, 14:53
The flatter trajectory of the .308 certainly makes that correction easy.

A .308 is faster than a .223? What am I missing here?

fnfalman
01-03-2011, 14:55
A .308 is faster than a .223? What am I missing here?

At long ranges, it may very well be faster depending on bullet design, drag coefficient, etc. All things being equal, the .308 round would retain velocity better than the .223 - the laws of inertia.

dosei
01-03-2011, 16:04
A .308 is faster than a .223? What am I missing here?

Faster at the muzzle does not, in and of itself, result in a flatter trajectory, bullet weight and ballistic coefficient must be taken into account. The 223 is flatter at closer distances. But past 400 yards the 308 is faster, and past 700 yards the 308 is flatter.

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i170/dosei/Hornady308168grchart.jpg
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i170/dosei/Hornady22355gr.jpg

UtahIrishman
01-03-2011, 16:54
A .308 is faster than a .223? What am I missing here?
I'll owe up and admit that my remark was off the cuff...I didn't look at any comparable trajectory tables. The ballistics tables shown would suggest the .223 is flatter at shorter ranges.

My remark was based on apparently incorrect off-hand observations.

mea culpa

AK_Stick
01-03-2011, 17:03
You skewed those numbers a little by using the light 55 grain TAP bullet against a 168 grain match bullet.


If you use the 75 grain match bullets you get a slightly different chart. With those bullets, the 5.56 shoots flatter all the way out to 1,000 yds.
http://www.hornady.com/cgi-bin/ball10.cgi?firearm=Match&desc=75+grn+BTHP+Match&wght=75&coef=.395&vel=2910&sight=1.5&temp=59&barom=29.53&zero=0&wspd=0&calcbutton=Calculate

AK_Stick
01-03-2011, 17:14
Here's another one, using a 223 match load, showing similar performance, Notice that 7.62x51 only catches up at the 800 yd mark, and surpasses it at the 1,000 yd mark.


http://www.hornady.com/cgi-bin/ball10.cgi?firearm=Match&desc=75+grn+BTHP+Match&wght=75&coef=.395&vel=2790&sight=1.5&temp=59&barom=29.53&zero=0&wspd=0&calcbutton=Calculate


However, when looking at these, you also have to take other things into account to get a grasp on performance. The 7.62, is moving just over twice the bullet, so it will resist wind drift better, and deliver more energy at that range.

chauncey
01-03-2011, 17:54
Here's another one, using a 223 match load, showing similar performance, Notice that 7.62x51 only catches up at the 800 yd mark, and surpasses it at the 1,000 yd mark.

However, when looking at these, you also have to take other things into account to get a grasp on performance. The 7.62, is moving just over twice the bullet, so it will resist wind drift better, and deliver more energy at that range.

to me the difference that is even more important in the difference in energy at any range (55 vs 168).

also, please note that over 500 yards, anecdotal evidence i have heard is that 150 gr and 175 gr bullets shoot flatter than 168 gr

i qualified expert in the USMC and can pretty easily hit a 12x24 target at 500 yards with iron sights, using an M1A. my two shooting buddies have zero military experience, and we all shoot about equally well. their practice has more than caught up with my training. on many occasions, they have the ability to outshoot me. often it is a function of how familiar we are with the weapon we are using, and how old or young the eyes feel that day, or how much caffeine we started the day with...

military training and shooting skills are perishable. anyone who believes that a military-trained shooter will always outshoot a civilian shooter may be in for a surprise. it's all a function of training and perfect practice.

should the need arise, i expect to be able to reliably kill medium to large game (whitetails) and at 500 yards if necessary. if that's as close as i can get to the game, and i need to eat, then it is necessary. and i feel prepared to do it with iron sights and a 308.

glockpacker
01-03-2011, 18:31
r u aware that 223 AR-15's beat 308 autorifles at 1000 yd matches, every weekend, dudes? Just Google for NRA matches, ask at CSP forums, or AR-15.com. Baloney on the penetration, because you ain got Uncle Sugar to bring you more ammo, and baill you out if you bite off more than you can chew. The REAL pros gave up on the 308 rifle for the military, 40 odd years ago. Only armchair commandoes on the Net claim that it's still useful enough to be general issue. At best, it's a specialized item, like a grenade launcher.

Tell you what, Doby-do...

I've been shooting 600 and 1,000 yard matches for five years, including state, regional, and national championships. And I've won at least one state and one regional match. For 1,000 yards, the .284 Winchester caliber has taken over the F-open class, and the .308 is used for F-Target Rifle class. I haven't personally seen anyone shooting a .223 at a 1,000 yard match.

The .223 AR-15 is often used at 300- and 600-yards for F-Target Rifle, and can rule if the wind is light. But if the winds stiffen up, then the .308 with 175-grain and heavier bullets rule. I shoot in the Tennessee/ North Carolina and south area. Perhaps you've been shooting in a different area than I do.

The AR-15's need at least a 20- inch Heavy Barrel to be competitive. On mine I have a 26-inch, 1 in 7 twist, match barrel from White Oak Armory, and in light wind, it's deadly at 600.

If we get in a shooting war, I'd prefer to shoot my .284 from the roof of my 12-story building at 1,000 or so yards. I'll let you youngsters run around with your AR's and do the dirty work on the ground.

AND YES, the word NEED has NOTHING to do with firearms and ammunition.

The word WANT RULES!!!

Upstate Glocker
01-03-2011, 19:07
You been asleep? EVERYONE here is a PHD/olympic athlete/millionaire/medal of honor winner/SEAL/married to a super model/who taught Jeff Cooper to shoot.
Once you get past that it all makes sense.

You failed to mention my Nobel Prize...

themighty9mm
01-03-2011, 19:34
Do you "run" a car? Do you "run" a motorcycle?

You don't "operate" a firearm. You "shoot" it.


I studied English in school.:dunno:
No when I drive my car it tends to run though.
I dont shoot my firearms, that would be a very expensive target. I operate the trigger wich inter drops the hammer, then ingniting the primer that cause the powder to burn. The hot gas from the burning powder seperates the bullet from the case. The bullet then exits the barrel at high speeds and intern lands on the given target. This is also know as operating a firearm. Can be replaced with running a firearm. Can also be replaced with "shooting" a firearm. It's all in reading comprehension The english language is a funny one isnt it?

dosei
01-03-2011, 20:01
I dont shoot my firearms, that would be a very expensive target.

:rofl:
I'm with you and prefer to not shoot my guns...I'd rather go shooting with my guns!

...yet there are indeed those that insist on "shooting their guns"...
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i170/dosei/shotglock.jpg
(must have been fnfalman)
:rofl:

dnuggett
01-03-2011, 22:04
:rofl:
I'm with you and prefer to not shoot my guns...I'd rather go shooting with my guns!

...yet there are indeed those that insist on "shooting their guns"...
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i170/dosei/shotglock.jpg
(must have been fnfalman)
:rofl:

:rofl:

fnfalman
01-04-2011, 10:19
You don't "shoot" your gun in this case. You "shoot at" your gun in this case.

And yes, I was the culprit. Glocks are junkers that deserved to be destroyed.

:rofl:
I'm with you and prefer to not shoot my guns...I'd rather go shooting with my guns!

...yet there are indeed those that insist on "shooting their guns"...
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i170/dosei/shotglock.jpg
(must have been fnfalman)
:rofl:

fnfalman
01-04-2011, 10:21
I operate the trigger

No, you pull the trigger. Unless you stand facing the gun and then push the trigger.

dosei
01-04-2011, 10:29
Hey fnfalman...
Is your refrigerator running?


















Better go catch it!

combatmedic78
01-04-2011, 10:43
I think anytime you get shot at, you wish for better cover.

However, I'm not arguing the AR/AK, or AR/AK/Whatever MBR vs another. What I'm saying is penetration is nice, but I've yet to see a real scenario where shots were intentionally fired through a barrier to reach a target on the other side. I have certainly fired plently of ammo at walls, and rocks to keep the guy on the other sides' head down, but I've never intentionally tried to shoot through something that was providing cover, with the intention of killing the guy on the other side. Nor do I have knowledge of it happening.

I think penetration is a good thing, and in an ideal situation, I would choose the bullet that penetrates more, so long as it doesn't give up anything to get that performance. The problem with many 308 MBR's is they give up accuracy, for the increased energy of the cartridge.

I have seen it and it was something called a 120mm HE round from a M1. Seriously, just get a Abrams tank and call it good. Oops, you all are talking about MBRs, not MBTs (Main Battle Tank). My bad!!!! Carry on. :wavey:

1gewehr
01-04-2011, 10:55
What you 'need' is a rifle that you would feel comfortable using under a wide variety of unpleasant situations. Only you can define what that rifle is.

Military combat experience is something that is extremely valuable. But people tend to want to apply a tool that they have been successful with to situations where it may not be ideal. And in most situations, I would agree that having experience and confidence with a 'less-than-ideal' weapon counts for a lot. Someone who can reliably hit their targets under adverse conditions with a .22lr is a LOT more valuable than the person with a .400 UltraShreikinLoudenBoomer capable of 2500 meter headshots who flinches when a sparrow farts.

Get what you like and practice with it enough to decide whether you wan to change. Use it in the rain, snow, and windy conditions so that you feel confident that you can hit regardless of the weather. Learn it's proper operation and practice immediate-action drills blindfolded. Don't be afraid to let your rifle get dirty, and look upon it's worn finish as a reflection of your ability with it.

dosei
01-04-2011, 11:01
I've yet to see a real scenario where shots were intentionally fired through a barrier to reach a target on the other side. I have certainly fired plently of ammo at walls, and rocks to keep the guy on the other sides' head down, but I've never intentionally tried to shoot through something that was providing cover, with the intention of killing the guy on the other side. Nor do I have knowledge of it happening.

Really...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRYwMrsaLxs
Now you do...
:cool:
Granted, the 50 is by no means a MBR. It is more of a hand-held shoulder-fired artillery piece.

themighty9mm
01-04-2011, 11:10
No, you pull the trigger. Unless you stand facing the gun and then push the trigger.
You operate any mechanical device. Operate is a broad term. Can mean to push, pull, turn, crank ect

fnfalman
01-04-2011, 11:27
You operate any mechanical device. Operate is a broad term. Can mean to push, pull, turn, crank ect

The trigger is not a mechanical device. It's a lever. The whole gun is a mechanical device. So, yes, you can "operate" a gun but that just means you're doing something with the gun and not necessarily "shoot" it. You can yank back the bolt and that "operates" the gun. You "shoot" the gun and the bullet comes flying out of the muzzle.

fnfalman
01-04-2011, 11:28
My refrigerator runs like a top.

But I don't "run" my refrigerator.

Do you "run" your refrigerator?

Hey fnfalman...
Is your refrigerator running?


















Better go catch it!

themighty9mm
01-04-2011, 11:42
The trigger is not a mechanical device. It's a lever. The whole gun is a mechanical device. So, yes, you can "operate" a gun but that just means you're doing something with the gun and not necessarily "shoot" it. You can yank back the bolt and that "operates" the gun. You "shoot" the gun and the bullet comes flying out of the muzzle.
Dude it's all in reading comprehension like I already said. The english lanuguage is a pretty screwy language when it comes to this kinda thing Lol this could potentially get real technical and borderline retarded. So I have to assume you are just bored? As in the mental state of mind, not the wooden or planke type. (Sure the spelling is different so that should be a given. If one were to verbally say it though, they would sound exactly the same so you would used comprehension skills) The end result of all this is there are no winners. I'm right, your right, and thats that.
Well played on the trigger. So just for kicks. It is indeed a lever. A lever does do a function but needs something to "operate" the lever. A lever in itself is a simple mechanical device.
You "operate" a loaded gun and the bullet comes flying out of the muzzle
Again all the exact same meaning.
Can you comprehend it? lol

AK_Stick
01-04-2011, 11:46
Really...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRYwMrsaLxs
Now you do...
:cool:
Granted, the 50 is by no means a MBR. It is more of a hand-held shoulder-fired artillery piece.



I've seen bradleys' LAV's MK19's and M2's used to knock holes in walls too, but not quite the same thing.

dosei
01-04-2011, 11:47
The trigger is not a mechanical device. It's a lever.

:rofl:
You just can't stop digging yourself deeper! Good grief, I hope the schools you went to no longer exist, or at least the teachers have retired/passed away.

The lever is one of the three fundamental "simple machines" (A simple machine is a mechanical device that changes the direction or magnitude of a force).

These three are:
The lever
The pulley
The inclided plane

...just stop while your behind, your only making it worse...

AK_Stick
01-04-2011, 11:58
Websters dictionary:

Run

"a : to cause or allow (as a vehicle or a vessel) to go in a specified manner or direction (ran the car off the road)

b : operate (run a lathe) "

If you can run a lathe, I don't see why you couldn't run another machine.

themighty9mm
01-04-2011, 12:00
Websters dictionary:

Run

"a : to cause or allow (as a vehicle or a vessel) to go in a specified manner or direction <RAN road the off car>

b : operate <RUN a lathe>"

If you can run a lathe, I don't see why you couldn't run another machine.

Shoulda just went this route instead. Seems so much less hassle looking back on it

beemerphile
01-04-2011, 12:01
The .50 BMG is a great device for turning cover into concealment. We all "need" one.

RECO: Let's shelve the MBR discussion and discuss our "need" for a SASR. I'm in. I have some good Peltors to keep the sparrow farts from spooking me. If I can only figure out how to operate/run/pull the mechanical device/lever/simple machine.

Mochahooligan
01-04-2011, 12:05
Just to answer the title of thethread..........Yes!

fnfalman
01-04-2011, 12:24
Dude it's all in reading comprehension like I already said. The english lanuguage is a pretty screwy language when it comes to this kinda thing Lol this could potentially get real technical and borderline retarded. So I have to assume you are just bored? As in the mental state of mind, not the wooden or planke type. (Sure the spelling is different so that should be a given. If one were to verbally say it though, they would sound exactly the same so you would used comprehension skills) The end result of all this is there are no winners. I'm right, your right, and thats that.
Well played on the trigger. So just for kicks. It is indeed a lever. A lever does do a function but needs something to "operate" the lever. A lever in itself is a simple mechanical device.
You "operate" a loaded gun and the bullet comes flying out of the muzzle
Again all the exact same meaning.
Can you comprehend it? lol


Yes, the English language is a bit unconventional because it's an almagamation of several languages. So, it doesn't need any more help from mall ninjas and rappers killing the poor language even more.

fnfalman
01-04-2011, 12:28
Hmmm...I guess I don't know anything.:dunno:

A trigger is a mechanism that actuates the firing sequence of firearms, or a power tool. Triggers almost universally consist of levers or buttons actuated by the index finger. Rare variations use the thumb or weak fingers to actuate the trigger. Examples are the M2 Browning machine gun and the Springfield Armory M6 Scout.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trigger_(firearms)

:rofl:
You just can't stop digging yourself deeper! Good grief, I hope the schools you went to no longer exist, or at least the teachers have retired/passed away.

The lever is one of the three fundamental "simple machines" (A simple machine is a mechanical device that changes the direction or magnitude of a force).

These three are:
The lever
The pulley
The inclided plane

...just stop while your behind, your only making it worse...

fnfalman
01-04-2011, 12:29
The trigger looks suspiciously like a device called a "lever" to me.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7c/Trigger_mechanism_bf_1923.jpg

fnfalman
01-04-2011, 12:33
Do you "run" the bulls? Or do you run "with" the bulls?

http://www.digitaljournal.com/img/8/9/9/i/4/2/0/o/RunningOfBulls.jpg

fnfalman
01-04-2011, 12:36
You can "run out" the guns, but you don't "run" the guns.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51NX39pFddL._SS500_.jpg

dosei
01-04-2011, 12:53
Hmmm...I guess I don't know anything.:dunno:

You are sucessfully making it look that way...

Lever:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lever
A lever is one of the six simple machines

Simple Machines:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_machine
A simple machine is a mechanical device that changes the direction or magnitude of a force.

Wiki lists 6 simple machines:
Lever
Wheel and axle
Pulley
Inclined plane
Wedge
Screw


I only listed 3 because:
The wheel & axle is essentially a form of the lever
The wedge is just two inclined planes
And a screw is just an inclined plane (wrapping around a cylinder)
...so the calculations boil down to Lever, Pulley, & Inclined Plane.

cowboy1964
01-04-2011, 12:55
This cracks me up. Arguing over whether or not a trigger is a lever?? :rofl:

fnfalman
01-04-2011, 13:09
Making it look what way? The trigger is a lever. Nothing you've posted contradicted that.:dunno:

You are sucessfully making it look that way...

Lever:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lever


Simple Machines:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_machine


Wiki lists 6 simple machines:
Lever
Wheel and axle
Pulley
Inclined plane
Wedge
Screw


I only listed 3 because:
The wheel & axle is essentially a form of the lever
The wedge is just two inclined planes
And a screw is just an inclined plane (wrapping around a cylinder)
...so the calculations boil down to Lever, Pulley, & Inclined Plane.

dosei
01-04-2011, 13:20
Making it look what way? The trigger is a lever. Nothing you've posted contradicted that.:dunno:

Trigger is a lever.
Lever is a simple machine.
Simple machines are mechanical device that changes the direction or magnitude of a force.

Trigger is a mechanical device.

This statement:
The trigger is not a mechanical device. It's a lever.
...among several others by you in this thread, are only serving you make you bad. And as long as this has gone on, the word "Troll" comes to mind...

So with that, I'll stop feeding the troll.
:wavey:

BleedNOrange
01-04-2011, 13:43
All this talk of 800yd kills and energy...blah blah The majority of us, myself included couldn't hit a target the size of Obama's ego at that distance.

fnfalman
01-04-2011, 14:52
direction or magnitude of a force.

In engineering parlance, that's called a "vector".

...among several others by you in this thread, are only serving you make you bad. And as long as this has gone on, the word "Troll" comes to mind...

So with that, I'll stop feeding the troll.
:wavey:


You seem to have gleefully participated in it, so what does that make you? :dunno:

Don't stop now, the fun just barely began.

JTLIII
01-04-2011, 15:10
I like battle rifles, they feel like you are shooting something. My AR feels like a toy compared to my M1A. Personal choice.

Aceman
01-04-2011, 19:52
Tell you what, Doby-do...

I've been shooting 600 and 1,000 yard matches for five years, including state, regional, and national championships. And I've won at least one state and one regional match. For 1,000 yards, the .284 Winchester caliber has taken over the F-open class, and the .308 is used for F-Target Rifle class. I haven't personally seen anyone shooting a .223 at a 1,000 yard match.

The .223 AR-15 is often used at 300- and 600-yards for F-Target Rifle, and can rule if the wind is light. But if the winds stiffen up, then the .308 with 175-grain and heavier bullets rule. I shoot in the Tennessee/ North Carolina and south area. Perhaps you've been shooting in a different area than I do.

The AR-15's need at least a 20- inch Heavy Barrel to be competitive. On mine I have a 26-inch, 1 in 7 twist, match barrel from White Oak Armory, and in light wind, it's deadly at 600.

If we get in a shooting war, I'd prefer to shoot my .284 from the roof of my 12-story building at 1,000 or so yards. I'll let you youngsters run around with your AR's and do the dirty work on the ground.

AND YES, the word NEED has NOTHING to do with firearms and ammunition.

The word WANT RULES!!!

:yourock:

M&P Shooter
01-05-2011, 05:21
What fnfalman (http://glocktalk.com/forums/member.php?u=7836) is watching now:supergrin:

http://i852.photobucket.com/albums/ab89/Glock40guy/Run1991cover.jpg

AK_Stick
01-05-2011, 06:33
Tell you what, Doby-do...

I've been shooting 600 and 1,000 yard matches for five years, including state, regional, and national championships. And I've won at least one state and one regional match. For 1,000 yards, the .284 Winchester caliber has taken over the F-open class, and the .308 is used for F-Target Rifle class. I haven't personally seen anyone shooting a .223 at a 1,000 yard match.

The .223 AR-15 is often used at 300- and 600-yards for F-Target Rifle, and can rule if the wind is light. But if the winds stiffen up, then the .308 with 175-grain and heavier bullets rule. I shoot in the Tennessee/ North Carolina and south area. Perhaps you've been shooting in a different area than I do.

The AR-15's need at least a 20- inch Heavy Barrel to be competitive. On mine I have a 26-inch, 1 in 7 twist, match barrel from White Oak Armory, and in light wind, it's deadly at 600.

If we get in a shooting war, I'd prefer to shoot my .284 from the roof of my 12-story building at 1,000 or so yards. I'll let you youngsters run around with your AR's and do the dirty work on the ground.

AND YES, the word NEED has NOTHING to do with firearms and ammunition.

The word WANT RULES!!!

F-class ≠ Service rifle

garander
01-06-2011, 07:21
i have shot in service rifle competitions since 1988. the reason many shooters switched to the ar15 is because it wont kick you out of position during the rapid fire stages like the 30 calibers will. the average shooter can do much better with the ar. the military likes em because they dont have the bedding issues the m-14 does. a tuned m-14 however was always capable of clean scores at all competitve distances. in fact i believe the m-14 was back in the winners circle at 1000 yards at camp perry last year

ak74auto
01-11-2011, 01:47
So...this Gen wants the Army infantry to be trained and equipped like...Marines??? :whistling:


If a bunch of jerkoff 18 year olds can be taught to make hits at 500yards with iron sight equipped (not to mention beat on) M16A2's consistently in under two weeks time, I'd say that's a pretty powerful argument for the capability of the current US issue BATTLE RIFLE. The M16A4 is NOT a Vietnam era carbine...it is a truly capable main battle rifle regardless of chambering.


The Army's mistake was issuing an M4 to everydamnbody instead of on a case by case or unit by unit basis. I'd say that an Army grunt could benefit from an A4 just like a Marine grunt does, provided he receives proper marksmanship instruction.

In the end, if SHTF blah blah blah...a lot of people who spent a lot of time stocking up for the occasion are going to come to the startling realization that it's the tactics of the user and not the tools of the trade that make the biggest difference. Simply owning a scoped .308 and shooting tight groups at a grand does not make you combat effective.


When I went thru Infantry School at Ft.Benning, we were issued A4's, but that was several years ago.

youngvr4
01-11-2011, 01:59
I think the MBR comes into its own if you're talking about one rifle to do everything. The ability to hunt or take out a threat at 500+yds is where the MBR has an advantage over the AK or AR.

thats not a mbr, thats a sniper rifle.....anything in war at 500 yards and further is usually handled by snipers or 50's