GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-01-2011, 12:22   #26
GAFinch
Senior Member
 
GAFinch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 5,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by doby View Post
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.
GAFinch is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 12:40   #27
G27RR
Senior Member
 
G27RR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 609
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12131 View Post
"Need" should be deleted from any self-respecting gun owner's vocabulary.
Worth repeating.
G27RR is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 12:46   #28
G27RR
Senior Member
 
G27RR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 609
Quote:
Originally Posted by doby View Post
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.

The SHOT ShowCase
G27RR is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 12:58   #29
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,148
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAFinch View Post
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.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleWide View Post
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.



Quote:
Originally Posted by doktarZues View Post
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.
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 13:12   #30
Fed Five Oh
NRA Member
 
Fed Five Oh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: MO
Posts: 3,782
You need two.
Fed Five Oh is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 13:23   #31
TN.Frank
Mad Hatter
 
TN.Frank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Down the Rabbit Hole
Posts: 4,142
Since I don't hunt anymore I really don't NEED any rifle but a good shotgun might come in real handy.
__________________
*Glock G19 Gen3, RTF2*
TN.Frank is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 13:29   #32
John Biltz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 997
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.
__________________
A little government and a little luck are necessary in life; but only a fool trusts either of them.
John Biltz is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 13:29   #33
carguy2244
Senior Member
 
carguy2244's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 847
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post

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.
carguy2244 is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 13:30   #34
doktarZues
I'm anti-anti
 
doktarZues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brevard County, FL
Posts: 2,056
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
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.
__________________
Liberalism is the final stage of evolution that precedes extinction.
doktarZues is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 13:46   #35
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,148
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
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.
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 13:50   #36
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,148
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Quote:
Originally Posted by carguy2244 View Post
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.
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 13:56   #37
Shadyscott69
GT Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Lexington, SC
Posts: 3,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
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 *****!
Shadyscott69 is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 14:05   #38
rem2429
Senior Member
 
rem2429's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Llano, TX
Posts: 2,008
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.
rem2429 is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 14:10   #39
.45Super-Man
Senior Member
 
.45Super-Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Smallville
Posts: 4,836
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".........
__________________
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent"- Thomas Jefferson
.45Super-Man is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 14:12   #40
rca256
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by doby View Post
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.
__________________
G21, G22, G23, G27, G36, SIG P228

"Hey, let's be careful out there." - Hill Street Blues (1981)
rca256 is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 14:22   #41
m24swsbar
Senior Member
 
m24swsbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: South FL
Posts: 108
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.
m24swsbar is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 14:36   #42
Shadyscott69
GT Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Lexington, SC
Posts: 3,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by m24swsbar View Post
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.

The SHOT ShowCase
Shadyscott69 is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 14:37   #43
Stupid
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,778
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.
Stupid is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 14:46   #44
Smashy
Senior Member
 
Smashy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Southwestern Oregon
Posts: 14,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stupid View Post
...then you can justify the need.



Who needs to justify anything? If you want one, get one.
Smashy is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 14:48   #45
m24swsbar
Senior Member
 
m24swsbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: South FL
Posts: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadyscott69 View Post
The SHOT ShowCase
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?
m24swsbar is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 15:00   #46
Shadyscott69
GT Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Lexington, SC
Posts: 3,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by m24swsbar View Post
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.
Shadyscott69 is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 15:23   #47
Boats
Not Assimilated
 
Boats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Somewhere in Oregon
Posts: 1,297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadyscott69 View Post
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.
Boats is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 15:37   #48
Stupid
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smashy View Post
Who needs to justify anything? If you want one, get one.
The word "need" requires "justification."
Stupid is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 15:37   #49
inzone
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 501
digging in

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
inzone is offline  
Old 01-01-2011, 15:40   #50
CBennett
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: PA/Covered by LEOSA
Posts: 10,967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Restless28 View Post
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.
CBennett is offline  
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:00.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,045
329 Members
716 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42