Best 30-caliber battle rifle?

Discussion in 'Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion' started by CHLChris, Jul 22, 2011.

  1. CHLChris

    CHLChris New Member

    2,523
    0
    0
    I'm not thinking 7.62x39mm!!!!

    I'm thinking .308/7.62x51mm, .30-'06, 7.62x54R.

    Platform is all-important. I'm thinking lowest cost, plus firepower, plus reliability, plus distance, plus availability of ammo.

    Some thoughts, but looking for your ideas:

    M1Garand
    M14
    Mosin Nagant
    AR-10
     
  2. CA357

    CA357 New Member Supporter

    19,847
    3
    0
    The M1 was the best battle rifle in WWII. Then the improved version, the M14 came along. The FN 49 which morphed into the FN FAL would be next.

    I don't think a bolt action will work anymore except as a sniper rifle. While the Mosin has a long history, I'd put the Mauser ahead of it, then a 1903 and next, the Enfield. (and the '03 was based on the Mauser)

    I have never been in combat, so this is based on what I know, what I've owned or at least fired:

    1. M14

    2. FN FAL

    3. M1

    4. Bolt Action
     
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2011

  3. BombDoc

    BombDoc New Member

    242
    0
    0
    The M14 is still use today. It would get my vote.

    The 1903 Springfield would be second. I still want an A4.

    I assume we are leaving out the .303. The INS here would vote it in.
     
  4. CA357

    CA357 New Member Supporter

    19,847
    3
    0
    I've owned a '43 SA M1, an SA M1A Scout and a DSA SA58 FAL. My favorite was the M1A followed by the M1, with the FAL trailing the pack.
     
  5. 75370

    75370 New Member

    204
    0
    0
    1st M-14
    2nd FAL
     
  6. Jake15

    Jake15 New Member

    131
    0
    0
    For platform I'd go with the FN SCAR heavy, but just what I like, I'd go with an M-14
     
  7. NativH

    NativH New Member

    215
    0
    0
    I'll pick the AR10 to be different, plus I have one. Very accurate even with the 16" barrel, and easy to operate, clean and maintain. The muzzle blast of a 308 out of that 16" barrel is something else though. Not a problem for me but the others around me tend to leave quickly.:D
     
  8. CHLChris

    CHLChris New Member

    2,523
    0
    0
    The reason the AR-10 doesn't really interest me is the cost involved. For instance, one can find a Mosin Nagant for $200, easy. AR-10's would cost 5x that at LEAST.

    The longer cases interest the the most, in the family of .30-'06.

    The FN-FAL gave the guys fits on Top Shot. Is that indicative of the platform?

    What does the M-14 fire, since that's a popular one so far?
     
  9. mrm14

    mrm14 Active Member

    2,705
    3
    38
    I'd have to go with the M14 / M1A for choice here. The last true battle rifle made.


    7.62X51 & .308 Win.
     
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2011
  10. orangello

    orangello New Member

    19,156
    0
    0
    SKS, just get a lil closer.
     
  11. robocop10mm

    robocop10mm Lifetime Supporting Member Lifetime Supporter

    11,380
    1
    0
    And the AR-10 is 5X the rifle the MN is. Considering the WWI/ WWII surplus relic in the same conversation with a moden battle rifle is frankly, silly.

    If longer cases are more "intersting" to you then get a Garand or FN-49. The Swedish Ljungman/Hakim may interest you.

    If you are going to base your acquisition on a TV show, we have a problem. Why not a Winchester 1982 because Chuck Conners carried one in "The Rifleman"

    "What does the M-14 fire"? Really? I do not know how to take this. The M-14 rifle fires the 7.62 X 51 (NATO) cartridge. It will also accept the .308 Winchester commercial cartridge. No, you cannot have an M-14 (unless you have a VERY stupidly large sum of money laying around. The M-14 is a selective fire rifle (machine gun) and there are very few transferrable specimens out there. They bring a premium even in comparision to other machine guns. IF you can find someone willing to part with one, it woud likely set you back $20,000 or more. Yes, I said 20K!

    WTS there are a number of M-14 clones out there. The Springfield M1A being the most notable. The Chinese made Polytech's up to the Smith Enterprises versions can be had for far less. ALL of these are semi-auto and should not be considered M-14's anymore than an AR-15 is considered an M-16. (don't get into the fact that the VERY early AR-15's made before they were accepted into military service were in fact select fire machineguns.)

    Onward;

    The 7.62 Nato rifles available are (certainly not a complete list)

    M1A and its various versions
    HK-91 from Germany or may other iterations
    CETME (kind a a Spanish HK, but not really)
    FN-FAL and others based on this design
    AR-10 (itself a slect-fire machinegun from Armalite and other rifles made semi auto by various makers)
    Keltec RFB (a bull pup configured rifle that is new to the market)

    I have an HK-91 and a CETME. They are great guns, but shooting commercial .308 ammo is not advised because of a design feature that makes it a bit iffy. Plus side? VERY cheap magazines available,$2-$5. No gas system to foul as it is a unique delayed blowback operation.

    I am considering an AR-10 in the form of a Rock River LAR-8.

    The Keltec offering is interesting, but IMHO unproven.

    The M1A is the standard by which all are judged. Not perfect, but available in a wide variety of trims from basic, synthetic stocked rifle to super accurate National Match and sniper grade rifles that are capable of accuracy on par with some of the best bolt action rifles. Down side? Good magazines are pricey.

    FN. Well, the FN-FAL and its various iteraions made by England, Canada, Australia and Belgium (and a few others) are considered the shoulder arm of the free world. There have been more examples of this rifle made and distributed throughout the world than any other battle rifle in history. The AK-47 (an assault rifle) is/was made in greater numbers by the "enemy", but the FN has seen action on nearly every continent. The magazines are plentiful and relatively cheap (make sure you get the right kind as there are "inch pattern and metric" magazines.
     
  12. canebrake

    canebrake New Member

    21,833
    2
    0
    Kudos Robo, great post.

    My personal choice would be the M14. (kinda old-school)
     
  13. CHLChris

    CHLChris New Member

    2,523
    0
    0
    That's all I was asking. Was there a better way I should have asked the question so I didn't sound like the novice I actually am?

    Also important to know. And, NO, I guess I don't want an M14, just like I don't want an M16 for the same reason. I purchased and built an AR-15, just as the M1A, per your response, would be the civilian equivalent.

    Lastly, the only reason to discuss the AR-10 and Mosin in the same breath is that, with a limited budget, is it better to buy an inexpensive rifle with a load of ammo for it NOW...or save for 3 years and buy the best LATER? It is a rhetorical question. I know where I'd fall on that continuum. Some guys in this world can buy firearms like they can buy the newest rig to pull the Chris Craft. That's not me so I'm just talking through the balance.

    I do appreciate your help, though, Robo. The huge resource of knowledge here is why I even bother to ask the question.
     
  14. robocop10mm

    robocop10mm Lifetime Supporting Member Lifetime Supporter

    11,380
    1
    0
    Sorry, the semantical arguments put forth by the anti-gun left have spoiled the fun. They have twisted the definitions of various gun terms to the point they are mostly moot.

    IMHO there are some things one should understand

    Assault rifle. Shoulder fired, air cooled, selective fire (capable of firing full auto), fed from detachable magazines, firing an intermediate powered rifle cartridge. Examples; M-16, AK-47/AKM (the full auto variety), British SA-80, French FAMAS, M-2 carbine (arguable), STG-44

    Battle rifle. Shoulder fired, air cooled, mostly semi-auto, magazine fed, firing a full power rifle cartridge. Examples; M-1 Garand, FN-49, FN-FAL, HK-91, CETME B, M-14/M1A.

    Light machinegun (LMG). This one has morphed a pit over the years. Originally it was a belt fed machinegun, air cooled, and one man portable. The Browning M-1919-A6 filled this bill, but is heavy by modern standards. Today the M-249/FN Minimi is the archetype.

    Medium machinegun. There was a time the heavyweights like the MG-42 was a medium machinegun

    GPMG or General purpose machine gun. This has mostly supplanted the previous medium machine gun. The M-60 and the M-240/FN GPMAG are the common examples.

    SAW or Squad automatic weapon. Perhaps interchangeable with the LMG concept. The M-249 is the modern rendition. The BAR was the most famous of this ilk. Some are/were magazine fed, some are belt fed. The BAR was a heavy beast firing the .30-06 full powered cartridge from 20 round magazines. By comparison the M-249 fires an assault rifle cartridge from either metal link belts or M-16 magazines.

    Heavy machinegun. In the early days they were water cooled, tripod mounted affairs that were crew served, that is to say it took a crew of (usually) 3 to transport and service (fire). The Browning M-1917, Hotchkiss, Vickers and Maxim guns come to mind. Today these are obsolete and the genre is almost wholly represented by the M-2 Browning .50 caliber machinegun and the Russian DsHk 12.7mm

    To avoid the stigma of the mis-labeled "Assault rifle" many are now referring to semi-auto magazine fed military look alike rifles as Sport Utility Rifles or SUR's. If the anti-gunners can arbitrarily call an AR-15 an Assault rifle, we can arbitrarily call it an SUR :)
    Enough of my diatribe. This is just a teaser of an introduction to arms.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2011
  15. CHLChris

    CHLChris New Member

    2,523
    0
    0
    Robo, would you fit the 1903 Springfield under the same "Battle Rifle" category as the M1 Garand, even since it is bolt action?

    I seem to be drawn to the bolt action, internal box, rifles. I always have my AR-15 for large amounts of high-velocity lead, if necessary.
     
  16. robocop10mm

    robocop10mm Lifetime Supporting Member Lifetime Supporter

    11,380
    1
    0
    No, a bolt action rifle is not a battle rifle (in my book). The 1903 is a very fine bolt action rifle, just not a battle rifle. I know it is confusing, it was used in many, many battles. Same cartridge, different action. The BAR uses the same cartridge, but it is a Squad Automatic Weapon
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2011
  17. armsmaster270

    armsmaster270 New Member

    755
    0
    0
    The M-1 is En Block clip fed not magazine
     
  18. JonM

    JonM Moderator

    20,110
    12
    38
    My definition of battle rifle is any rifle firing any cartridge that was issued to main front line infantry units to fight in combat and must have the capability of mounting a bayonet for hand to hand combat. This includes everything from m1 carbine m16 and the old brownbess muskets of the revolutionary war and everything in between. Doesnt require tual rifling.
     
  19. robocop10mm

    robocop10mm Lifetime Supporting Member Lifetime Supporter

    11,380
    1
    0
    The ammunition is indeed loaded into an en-bloc clip, but that clip is loaded into an internal magazine which in turn feeds the ammo from the clip to the chamber.
     
  20. Glockcurmudgeon

    Glockcurmudgeon New Member

    58
    0
    0
    Okay...

    I'm prejudiced, mainly by my own experience...

    PTR 91, especially the MSG-91 variant.
    M1A
    HK91
    FN FAL

    There are lots of rifles out there that are used around the world, today, in combat... There are even more types that have been used in combat in years/wars past, that are still man killers.

    The above four would be my choices...

    Glockcurmudgeon, out...