Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion' started by bsdavis4296, Nov 21, 2012.
If you were to buy ANY .223 on the market under $2500, what would it be? Why?
My own builds. Because they come just the way I want them! And I can put together two complete rifles with your budget.
LOL, yeah with that budget? Go crazy! Personally, Id build the baddest 3 gun rifle I could from the best parts on the market. The only time I every truly enjoy shopping. I'd spend a few months in research just for the fun of it.
+1 with build your own. Can build at least 2 rifles with best brands of parts.
Probably either a custom LMT or a Stag Arms
What are you wanting one to do. What type of shooting. You could buy a RRA varment, fully capible of 3/8" moa , instill a AR gold trigger and a sightron 8-32 30mm tube scope and be at 2500 dollars and have a rifle to shoot with any AR at 500 to 600 yards and be competive with the right load.
If you want a bench rifle go to 6mmbr/accurateshooters and find a builder near you and deside on there action brand of choice. Many top end shooters build rifles too. 1500 dollars build a heck of a rifle . spend the rest on rifle rest, loading equipment or optics
Good point. Does the $2500.00 budget include optics?
under 2500$ in 223... bravo company 16" midlength and an acog. still got room a few mags or spare parts
here is mine
$2500 should include anything and everything to put on your rifle.
I want an all-around awesome rifle for graduation coming up, but it's main purpose will be SHTF. I'm considering building off of an XCR or an SR556 right now.
No clue but i'd spend $2,000 on the gun and sights/optic and the rest on ammo.
I just fired the SCAR 16 and that was awesome, I think the guy at the range said it was 2400.
Heck ya, I build one with a complete BCM upper it was around $1200. BFH too. That's only iron sights. An acog would put it up there, and ammo.
Colt LE 6940, with enough money left over for a Trijicon ACOG.
My own FrankenAR
Stop passing your gurl's stick off as your own
Colt le6940 out of the box...aimpoint, acog or Eotec and rest on ammo
M1 Garand... Because .223's are silly
I assume that everyone interested already has a 14.5" or 16" barrel 5.56MM carbine, or both. If not, what's wrong with you?
Results of the "Best Gun Salesman Ever" Being in Office:
Prices being what they are for AR carbines, I'd look into building or purchasing AR rifles. They don't seem to fetch quite as high a price as the carbines.
Given what I would generally use a 5.56MM carbine or rifle for, I'd build a light rifle with a 20" pencil weight barrel, Picatinny rail upper receiver, and a polymer lower from NFA.
5.56MM M193 Cartridge Design:
The 5.56MM cartridge kills with velocity. The 20" barrel causes the most commonly available M193 cartridges to accelerate to close to or slightly over 3200 FPS, giving you a weapon that keeps the M193 bullets above the magic 2700 FPS for as great a distance as possible.
There are other cartridges available, all of which were designed to remedy problems associated with deviating from the original design of the AR-15.
Upper, Bolt, and Barrel Assemblies:
Heavy barrels are not needed for combat weapons if you are not firing full auto. Heavy barrels make some difference with respect to shot stringing in target rifles (differences in the strike of the round on the target as the barrel heats or cools from repeated rapid firing), but a combat rifle is not a target/sniping rifle. Most of the shot stringing is due to variances in the manufacture and installation of the barrel. There are many differing light barrel designs (bolt-action/semi/auto) that don't exhibit a great deal of shot stringing because the barrel was manufactured to "match" tolerances, the mating faces are perfectly plumb with respect to the bore of the weapon, and the rest of the parts that interface with the barrel (bolt and/or bolt carrier) have been manufactured to "match" tolerances. Even with bolt action rifles, there is such a thing as stacking tolerances and the greater the variance from "spec" that the collection of parts that interface with each other, the lesser the degree of accuracy which you can expect to achieve with quality ammunition. That said, quality ammunition and a quality barrel that has been installed properly can still achieve very high accuracy even if the bolt and/or bolt carrier are not perfectly machined.
As long as the upper receiver is forged 7075 with a Picatinny rail, the bolt is Carpenter 158, the carrier is 4140, the barrel is 4140 or 4150 (if you don't have full auto capability I'm not sure it really matters if you have the more expensive 4150 or not), and the machining and build quality is up to snuff, I could really care less who made the components. From reading some of my other posts, some readers may get the impression that I favor Colt. The reality is that Colt does not get their base materials or forgings from "special" sources. All major manufacturers get their receiver forgings and bolt/barrel materials from the same suppliers.
When it comes to lowers, I am ambivalent about forged aluminum, cast aluminum, billet aluminum, and injection molded polymer lower receivers. So long as the base materials are of high quality, the design is sound, the machining quality is high, and the parts are properly heat treated or, in the case of polymers, reinforced properly, I really don't think it matters. The military used forged aluminum lowers because modern polymer technology was not available at the time.
Clearly the military was concerned with weight and cost. Forged aluminum was cheaper and lighter than forged steel. With modern polymer technology, polymer is the superior choice. Polymer magazines are superior to aluminum magazines in terms of cost and durability. The durability of polymer versus aluminum with respect to magazines is pretty one-sided. It's possible to melt polymer at a lower temperature than aluminum, but that's about it.
Barrel Length and Suitability to Purpose:
I can't say I fully understand trying to turn an AR into a sniping rifle or semi-auto SBR (10.3", 11.5", 12.5" varieties). The platform may have the inherent accuracy necessary for sniping and you may be able to engineer a SBR that will run reliably, but there are better tools for those uses.
I prefer the adjustable carbine stocks to the fixed stocks and can think of no good reason to use a rifle stock when the MagPul CTR and Colt Defense / Rogers Super Stoc products are available. Other really good stocks are out there, but those two immediately come to mind. I would only use a fixed stock if dictated by law. Any way you slice it, the adjustable length-of-pull stock options are just plain better than the fixed offerings if you're not trying to turn the AR into a precision rifle.
I think military triggers are awful and prefer just about any aftermarket trigger assembly to the ones that Colt makes. A really good trigger makes shooting so much more consistent, for me.
I really like the Aimpoint Comp M3 and 3X magnifier combination in Larue mounts. I've tried the Aimpoint Micros, but they're just too small. I have an EoTech XPS 2 or 3 with a single dot aiming point. It eats 123 batteries and is no lighter than the Comp M3. I have never thought much of the Trijicon ACOG. Irons or 4X. Nothing in between. Any quality variable power scope is better than the ACOG if you want more or less magnification than the ACOG provides. I think 1-6/7/8 is about right.
I feel this should be changed because of the current situation we are in. The best AR you can get for $2500 right now?
S&W MP 15. Sorry it had to be said.
You said .223.
Not type of rifle.
If I Could, I would buy an
The only .223 I would want.
If I wanted a .223