A lot of people are very attached to the "AR Platform"; some people (mostly oldtimers) swear by the M14; the 7.62x39 imports are widely regarded as low-budget better-than-nothing.
I have the impression that a person's preference is often based on what weapon they were first trained on!
The AR enthusiasts point to three things as being advantages: the ammo is light, so one can carry more; the charging handle is on the "right" side; in a domestic civil conflict or breakdown of civilization one can resupply from battlefield pickups.
Deer hunters generally evaluate the 5.56NATO as lacking stopping power, which is echoed in some after-action reports from Afghanistan. That sort of constrains the operator to use multiple rounds per target, and encourages high - volume suppressive fire. What's your tactic for when a half-way competent opponent hunkers down, speads out, and starts picking shots?
Comrade Kalishnikov put the charging handle on the support-hand side, and the user can keep a grip on the "go" button while changing mags...
Now consider the source of those battlefield pickups. Are you going to shoot a Guardsman?! Or a cop?!! And if you do, how long are you going to stick around? :eek:
The AR operating system blows products of combustion into the guts of the feed system, and requires more cleaning and maintenance than anything else out there. Furthermore, after you pay a price with a comma in it for the basic weapon, you still have to upgrade with wedge-thingies, rails, stocks/grips, and other reliability and accuracy doohickies.
The civilian M14 is a bit pricey also, but you get value for the money. They're not available through CMP - why? - because the military is sending every one it can clean up over to the G-WOT!
The Ruger Mini-14 (&Mini-30) was a great idea - M14 operating system for the 5.56NATO round - but it doesn't seem to have panned out. I've never owned one - I'd like to hear from those of you who have...
Now - just to stir you up a little more - look at the lineup of offerings by Remington. Many LEOs and rabbit hunters are comfortable with the 870 pump 12gauge "trench broom" ( a WW I reference). The 7400 (now remodelled as the 750) handles the same, has the same controls, looks less "politically incorrect", operates by a rod not by gas impingement, comes in a wide variety of chamberings including good-old .308, the-standard-by-which-others-are-measured 30-06, and the flat-shooting .270Win. One nuisance is that it's REEALLY hard to find a mag larger than 10 rounds. But if you just can't get over that high-volume-of-fire mindset, look at the 7615 (7615LE): chambered in .223Rem, runs on AR mags, pump action reliability, handles like an 870, affordable, and looks pretty. Yes you can get a black plastic one if you must. You can also get a barrel long enough to let the cartridge do its job.
I believe in Democracy, which is, The Wisdom of Consensus. Therefore, I believe that I have just as much right to have a stupid idea as the next person, and the the next person has the right to tell me why my idea is so dumb. Enjoy the debate!
Well if you want some discussion, then let us start one.
Battle Rifle vs. Battle Carbine. I do not lump them into the same thing. 5.56 and 7.62x39 are Carbine rounds. To get to Rifle territory you have to get up to 6.5 and up.
As for what platform you prefer to shoot your Carbine or Rifle round from, that is a lot of personal opinion. If you have not seriously used a certain platform, then don't keep passing around what you believe to be true. Get one, use it a lot, and then pass judgment on to other. For instance, if you don't like the conventional Stoner design in an AR, then maybe a gas piston upper will suit you better. Oh, and that Mini-14.. yes I owned 2 and put them through a lot of rounds. Not one failure, and each rifle had at least 10K through it. I drug them through muck, 500+ round count days, Wolf ammo. I have also taken deer with .223, zero problems, the farthest went 20 feet. Shot placement and bullet make a big difference. I hunted Elk with a .243, and yep, all of them have gone down right where I shot them. Well, there was one that went 30 yards... The neighbor girl (14) borrowed the rifle since she could not shoot the .270 that her dad got her 2 years ago. So far, 4 deer, 2 Antelope, and 2 Elk.
I cannot and will not comment on the AK series. I have never owned one, much less shot one.
In the Rifle class, there is the Garand, M1A, FAL, Cetme, HK91, AR-10, and others. Each one has it's up's and downs. The reason that the CMP has not sold M14's is that the receivers are Full Auto capable. They do know how to render the receiver so that it cannot be converted, but at this time they won't do that. Of course there being a war on now and them bringing the stocks back out doesn't help much.
So what was it you wanted to discuss?
I'm only 30, so I don't have extensive training on the M14. It is a proven platform, firing a proven round. The issue of ammo weigh is just BS. A soldier will carry what he needs to survive. I've humped 60s and SAWs and was usually comforted by the fact that I had the extra ammo, even though it was breaking my back.
By going to a light, much less lethal round, the military assured that the 'spray and pray' technique would be used in combat. However, there have been recent stories of Marine and Army scout units equipped with M14 DMRs that were able to engage an AK equipped enemy at 800 to 1200 yards. They were able to eliminate the threat at 3 to 4 times the effective range of the AKs that the enemy forces had.
The M14s are becoming popular with USASOC snipers in current combat areas. They're willing to sacrifice a few hundred yards worth of shot distance for quick follow up and full auto operation if necessary.
Keep in mind, that should a DM/sniper's rifle fail to operate, they may not live to tell about it, so that is a testament to how much faith these guys are willing to put into a 40+ year old rifle. The SEALS are digging up all of the M14s that they can find for the NAVSPECWAR Mk14 Mod0 EBR project.
The M14 was an outstanding rifle that was killed off by politics. It's good to see that the military has realized the error of it's ways and is now trying to bring them back into service. It's a shame that the numbers aren't high enough to equip more soldiers with them.
I've had a Springfield Armory M1A Scout Squad on order for about 6 months now. I wish it would hurry up and get here. Once Fulton Armory can get their M14 receivers back in stock, I'm going to order one of them also and begin construction on a Krieger heavy barreled, McMillan stocked pillar bedded bad ass.
I seem to remember a study done years ago that found an "unbelievable" number of soldiers (infantry types, not REMFs) never fired their weapons in combat and I believe it was during the Vietnam era. This gave more credence to moving away from the M14 and toward the M16. Since soldiers were not engaging in "aimed" fire then "spray and pray" worked well with the M16. I have killed my fair share of cans with both weapons and prefer my M1A by a wide margin. The only thing that would compel me to pick up an AR (to supplement my M1A) would be the availability of mags and ammo (savanged from the "battlefield").
The term "Battle rifle" refers to FULL power rifles, IMHO. The 7.62 X 51/ .308 is the minimum caliber for consideration in that category (I know, the FN-49 in 7 X 57). I have an HK-91 and CETME, both in 7.62 X 51. I also have a Remington 7400 carbine in .30-06. I have lots of 10 round mags and like it alot.
The M-16 and AK-47 (both in selective fire) are "Assault Rifles", not battle rifles. The semi-auto versions of these two are good weapons (I have 2 of each). They fill a different place in the arsenal.
I do not have an M-14/M-1A or an FN. I do not have anything against them except the gas systems that will foul much faster than the delayed blowback operation of the HK/CETME system.
I say, get what you can afford/are familiar with and practice.:)
During my time in the USMC (1964-1968) I had the pleasure of firing both the M-14 and the M-16. Probably more than I wanted too but thats another issue all together. I qualified with the M-14 and to this day still like it better than the M-16. Maybe it is because I was trained with it? Maybe it was because I could actually hit what I was aiming at? lol Anyway, I do not feel that the M-14 and the M-16 are in the same catagory. But thats probably just me. :)
I had no problems qualifying with the M16 at thr 500 yard line in Parris Island, in the fleet we actually took some shots from around 600 yards and with nothing but the stock sights. No problem hitting the man sized target from that distance.
I don't have any trigger time on the M14 or any other older rifle but I'm sure they aren't bad either.
My Battle Weapons
Yugoslavian M70AB2 UF AK-47
Olympic Arms M4 AR-15
Springfield Armory M1 Garand
Mossberg 500 Cruiser
,,them be some nice battle armory..:cool:
|All times are GMT. The time now is 02:53 PM.|
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.