Firearms Talk banner

Best 30-caliber battle rifle?

27K views 154 replies 63 participants last post by  BLUNTTrauma72 
#1 ·
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 · (Edited)
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
 
#3 ·
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 ·
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.
 
#7 ·
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 ·
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?
 
#11 ·
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?
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 ·
Kudos Robo, great post.

My personal choice would be the M14. (kinda old-school)
 
#13 ·
"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.
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?

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!
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 · (Edited)
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.
 
#15 ·
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 · (Edited)
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
 
#17 ·
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.
The M-1 is En Block clip fed not magazine
 
#18 ·
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.
 
#20 ·
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...
 
#21 ·
hmmm... this is tough! the FN FAL was the right arm of the free world, but the G3 has a good reputation as well...

IMHO M1 Garand is too heavy and too small a clip for it to be the best battle rifle. It is accurate and reliable yes, but to lug it around all day to reload every eight shots... not my thing

1. FN FAL
2. HK G3

I haven't shot many "battle rifles" except the M1 and Mosin Nagant, so I am basing my choice off what I have heard.
 
#23 ·
Where would you put the M14??
Firmly in the Battle Rifle category. As I said Battle Rifles are "mostly" semi-auto. While the M-14 is capable of full-auto fire, few were fielded in this mode. Most had the selector removed to prevent full-auto fire because it was just not controllable. The normal procedure would be to have one or two full-auto capable rifles per squad, the rest were strictly riflemen.
 
#24 ·
For kicks, I did some looking into the HK-91. It is as complex as the AR-15, generally. The only reason I bring that up is this question:

Which of these most popular "battle" rifles on this thread are the simplest internally?

Why do I ask? If SHTF for real, I wouldn't mind maintaining my AR and 1911 (and already have bunches of extra parts!), but would love to have a relatively "simple" 30-caliber next to my side.
 
#25 ·
IMHO the HK is the simplest of the rifles as it has no gas system. It uses a delayed roller lock system. The only real drawback is that .308 commercial ammo is hotter than 7.62X51 Nato and has thinner brass. The fluted chamber of the HK allows the case to "float" on a cushion of high pressure gas. The thinner .308 cases will occasionally separate leaving part of the case stuck. A stuck case remover (cheaply available) will fix it relatively easily.

The FN has an advantage over the M-14/M1A because it has an adjustable gas valve that you can open up when it gets dirty. If I were to opt for the M1A or Garand, I would get a Schuster adjustable gas nut and get the adjustability.
 
#26 ·
If I were to opt for the M1A or Garand, I would get a Schuster adjustable gas nut and get the adjustability.
Boy that sounds like a .43 Kurz sort of thing. I know it's actually real, it just sounds like a whopper. That sounds like you're trying to pull someone's leg... Schuster adjustable gas nut... That's funny.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top