Firearms Talk banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I would be inclined to buy a Springfield M1a

But what would you suggest?

I want a PTR 91 or a FAL or an FHN FNAR, but I think the Springfield is my choice. SCAR 17S is just getting too expensive!

I would want an AR-10 but I already have an Ar-15 and I would like something not on the AR platform. Have a forgotten any better/other semi auto .30cals? What would you buy?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,374 Posts
Any would be fine, really. Every gun you listed is a quality gun. One thing to be said for an AR-10 is there is some parts interchangability. If used to the AR platform, you will be able to manipulate the -10 easily. Something to be said for commonality.

WTS, I have an HK-91 and a CETME. Mags are cheap. No gas system to foul. Stocks run a bit on the short side for many Americans. Uber reliable and simple. FAL offers adjustable gas system for a variety of loads. M1A is classic American. Good mags tend to be expensive.

If I had to replace my Battle rifles, it would be AR-10 platform.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
22,674 Posts
My first choice is the AR platform.
I have a DPMS LR308 A-P4

It has given me excellent service and it's light and handy.

The FNAR is another excellent choice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Sounds like the Ar platform is the way to go and honestly i dont disagree. I just want variety because I want to build another ar-15 later. It would be cool to have something totally different from it. Scar 17 is soooooo sweet but when looking at the price difference I still think I would want the Springfield or even the nicest FAL I can find.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,077 Posts
Unless you just want a M14, then the FNH FNAR has rails for all the accessories you'd likely mount on a battle rifle (optics, weapon light, vertical grip, and bipod).

The PTR-91's balance and ergonomics are, in a word, horrible.

The FAL has better balance and ergonomics. Availability of replacement parts will be better with the FAL than PTR-91 or FNAR. The ability to mount weapon lights and other forearm accessories will require a rail system.

AR-10 reliability and parts availability is a mixed bag. Even really pricey AR-10's like KAC can have reliability issues.

I have a SCAR-17S. I think the SCAR has the most going for it out of the box, assuming you have magazines and replacement parts.

If I did not already own a SCAR 17S, I'd seriously consider the FNAR because you don't have to spend a lot of money on rails for accessories. The rail systems manufacturers like Springfield Armory like to put on M1A's make the rifle as unbalanced as the PTR-91 is with no rail system on it.

I'm opposed to weight disrupting balance. The 16" barreled FNAR I handled at the local gun show was balanced properly and that's what I'm into.

I'm not sure how crazy prices are right now, but I'm sure the price of FNAR is slightly more sane than the price of a M1A or FAL.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
665 Posts
I've wanted a FAL for the longest time. I think I'm going to have one within the next 3 months.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
22,674 Posts
The FNAR is one sweet rifle. and it doesn't "look" evil.:p

I'd love to have an FAL, but only if I could get a genuine Belgian.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Unless you just want a M14, then the FNH FNAR has rails for all the accessories you'd likely mount on a battle rifle (optics, weapon light, vertical grip, and bipod).

The PTR-91's balance and ergonomics are, in a word, horrible.

The FAL has better balance and ergonomics. Availability of replacement parts will be better with the FAL than PTR-91 or FNAR. The ability to mount weapon lights and other forearm accessories will require a rail system.

AR-10 reliability and parts availability is a mixed bag. Even really pricey AR-10's like KAC can have reliability issues.

I have a SCAR-17S. I think the SCAR has the most going for it out of the box, assuming you have magazines and replacement parts.

If I did not already own a SCAR 17S, I'd seriously consider the FNAR because you don't have to spend a lot of money on rails for accessories. The rail systems manufacturers like Springfield Armory like to put on M1A's make the rifle as unbalanced as the PTR-91 is with no rail system on it.

I'm opposed to weight disrupting balance. The 16" barreled FNAR I handled at the local gun show was balanced properly and that's what I'm into.

I'm not sure how crazy prices are right now, but I'm sure the price of FNAR is slightly more sane than the price of a M1A or FAL.
Great post, thanks!!

The FNAR is one sweet rifle. and it doesn't "look" evil.:p

I'd love to have an FAL, but only if I could get a genuine Belgian.
Why belgian?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
22,674 Posts
Great post, thanks!!



Why belgian?

Because that would mean it was manufactured by FN, the folks who designed it, and manufactured the military versions that are beloved by soldiers and mercenaries throughout the world.

There's nothing wrong with the ones available new today, they just aren't "Genuine FN."
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,077 Posts
If I were you, at this point I'd seriously consider a bolt-action rifle in .308 or .30-06. I keep a Remington 700 stainless in .30-06 with a 24" barrel for precision shooting. I have an older model with the checkered plastic stock, but the new SPS models are just as good.

You don't need a five thousand dollar rifle to hit the target at 600 yards. Having sub half MOA accuracy helps, but it's not a requirement. Most Remington 700's shoot pretty respectably out of the box. You can pay more for the PSS models if accuracy is really important to you. I'm not sure I'd bother paying more money for the actual M40 variant. My Remington just works and doesn't weigh 10 pounds or more. The optic I use cost more than double what the rifle costs, though.

Using cartridges in Hornady's Superformance line, you get an additional 150-200 FPS of velocity over standard ammunition. That's a nice little performance improvement for .308 and .30-06.

From looking at various auctions on GunBroker yesterday, I see that various new and used Remington .308 and .30-06 rifles are available at normal prices in both matte blued and stainless.

At distances where battle rifles become more useful than faster firing assault rifles, the advantages of a semi-automatic precision rifle over a bolt-action precision rifle are not as great.

Are you going to take on an advancing enemy unit the size of a squad or greater by yourself? Are you going to fire many rounds from one position before repositioning yourself to avoid incoming fire? Are you going to run your rifle unsuppressed? Do you have friends that you're providing overwatch or fire support for?

If you answered no to those questions, then having a semi-automatic .30 caliber rifle is probably not going to be as great an advantage over a bolt-action rifle. I purchased my SCAR 17S for fun, not because it's more useful than my Remington 700.

Any given Remington 700 or Winchester 70 in .308 or .30-06 will probably serve you just as well at a fraction of the price. Carlos Hathcock made many of his kills with a .30-06 Winchester bolt-action rifle. If there was any real problem with the 700, the Army and Marine Corps wouldn't continue to issue them to their soldiers.

In any event, get what you want but realize that there's no practical advantage over a quality bolt-action rifle if you're not trying to pin down a unit from the Chinese Army.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Because that would mean it was manufactured by FN, the folks who designed it, and manufactured the military versions that are beloved by soldiers and mercenaries throughout the world.

There's nothing wrong with the ones available new today, they just aren't "Genuine FN."
Oh ok make sense.

Who makes new ones today? Where do you get new ones? The only ones I can find are on gunbroker or local listings.


If I were you, at this point I'd seriously consider a bolt-action rifle in .308 or .30-06. I keep a Remington 700 stainless in .30-06 with a 24" barrel for precision shooting. I have an older model with the checkered plastic stock, but the new SPS models are just as good.

You don't need a five thousand dollar rifle to hit the target at 600 yards. Having sub half MOA accuracy helps, but it's not a requirement. Most Remington 700's shoot pretty respectably out of the box. You can pay more for the PSS models if accuracy is really important to you. I'm not sure I'd bother paying more money for the actual M40 variant. My Remington just works and doesn't weigh 10 pounds or more. The optic I use cost more than double what the rifle costs, though.

Using cartridges in Hornady's Superformance line, you get an additional 150-200 FPS of velocity over standard ammunition. That's a nice little performance improvement for .308 and .30-06.

From looking at various auctions on GunBroker yesterday, I see that various new and used Remington .308 and .30-06 rifles are available at normal prices in both matte blued and stainless.

At distances where battle rifles become more useful than faster firing assault rifles, the advantages of a semi-automatic precision rifle over a bolt-action precision rifle are not as great.

Are you going to take on an advancing enemy unit the size of a squad or greater by yourself? Are you going to fire many rounds from one position before repositioning yourself to avoid incoming fire? Are you going to run your rifle unsuppressed? Do you have friends that you're providing overwatch or fire support for?

If you answered no to those questions, then having a semi-automatic .30 caliber rifle is probably not going to be as great an advantage over a bolt-action rifle. I purchased my SCAR 17S for fun, not because it's more useful than my Remington 700.

Any given Remington 700 or Winchester 70 in .308 or .30-06 will probably serve you just as well at a fraction of the price. Carlos Hathcock made many of his kills with a .30-06 Winchester bolt-action rifle. If there was any real problem with the 700, the Army and Marine Corps wouldn't continue to issue them to their soldiers.

In any event, get what you want but realize that there's no practical advantage over a quality bolt-action rifle if you're not trying to pin down a unit from the Chinese Army.
Thanks for the insight but this is a just for fun gun. I have a bolt action .30-06 and .270 , among others that I just less. I just want a big semi auto..... for fun.

However since you mentioned it I will say its comforting knowing I can engage multiple targets quickly if the need arises, lol
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
22,674 Posts
Oh ok make sense.

Who makes new ones today? Where do you get new ones? The only ones I can find are on gunbroker or local listings.l

Do some research on the FAL subforum. Lotsa good info there.


There are a couple of makers who make receivers, and I'm not an expert on them by any means, so I'll defer to the folks on FAL subforum..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,482 Posts
Come to the FAL forum!!!

Imbel metric receivers are what you want.

I love my FAL. It's a little long, but I also have a 21 inch barrel.

Its the easiest gun to clean and disassemble. 308 hits hard, recoil is really manageable.
It's the 'right arm of the free world'.

I mean, it really does have AK reliability.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
438 Posts
ArrizX said:
I would be inclined to buy a Springfield M1a

But what would you suggest?

I want a PTR 91 or a FAL or an FHN FNAR, but I think the Springfield is my choice. SCAR 17S is just getting too expensive!

I would want an AR-10 but I already have an Ar-15 and I would like something not on the AR platform. Have a forgotten any better/other semi auto .30cals? What would you buy?
The PTR is not reloader friendly if you reload it may be a concern. The HK platform has greater felt recoil IMO. I would choose either the M1A or a DSA. FAl but scoping them might be a problem.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,077 Posts
Why buy a PTR, ArrizX?

If you have money to purchase several battle rifles and you don't dig the SCAR or the M14, why not purchase a quality FAL or the FNAR?

Failing that, why purchase a PTR when you could have put more money into quality glass for the M&P 10?

What's the thinking behind having several different battle rifles? Do you already have glass, are you collecting, or did you just want one of each?

The only reason I ask is because I've never shot any PTR or HK-91 variant (even ones with the machine gun buffer and HK-21 stock) that were particularly pleasant to shoot. The stock is just too short and the recoil is jarring. I've shot various .308 and .30-06 bolt and semi-autos and the HK is the worst. It's not painful, it's just jarring. It's like you put your cheek on the side of a piece of sheet metal and hit the other side with a hammer, except without the metallic twang.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Ended up getting the PTR a few weeks before the M&P 10 in a trade for a WASR AK-47. I dont get rid of guns but I had two AKs. Traded the WASR and kept the Tula made one. Ended up getting the M&p 10 wholesale a few weeks there after for 1060 plus shipping to my FFL. PTR is a blast to shoot, and I love how it shoots. I dont find it jarring or too painful. I find it very pleasant.

M&P10 has been built since I got it with a Troy TRX free float tube, vortex 6x18 and bi-pod. Its a great shooter too. I like both alot for what they are and look forward to getting more. Yes I am a collector
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
22,674 Posts
kbd makes a damn good good point. Get what you WANT! You'll enjoy it more!:)
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top