Author Topic: WHATS YOUR PICK FOR A BATTLE RIFLE? (Read 19768 times)

phalanx · « **Reply #30 on:** January 09, 2008, 05:45:57 AM »

No debate on that at all ,But 72gr.JHP heavy jacket on a 223 loaded with Varget will half a Coyote down the middle.

blackpowderbill · « **Reply #31 on:** January 15, 2008, 12:09:27 AM »

I have a (circa 1970s) FN LAR and a Kar98k. The Fn has a definite an firepower advantage but it is heavy and cumbersome. The Kar98k is compact, powerful and accurate. Its handling qualities are more nimble than the FN. I would feel confident with either but if I believed I was going to be mobile I'd take the Kar98k.

S.S. · « **Reply #32 on:** January 21, 2008, 04:35:01 PM »

HK 91 hands down...

sphpkr · « **Reply #33 on:** January 25, 2008, 04:24:58 AM »

A new M4 or an old AK.

phalanx · « **Reply #34 on:** January 25, 2008, 04:34:21 AM »

This needs to become a poll .
Seems it is with the top contenders.
H&K 91
M1A
AK 47
What do you want to bet side arm would be the 1911?

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #35 on:** January 25, 2008, 04:41:56 AM »

you might be correct !
when choosing one must also have a supply of parts and the 1911 and M1A most likely have the largest supply of replacement parts aval. to the general public .

phalanx · « **Reply #36 on:** January 25, 2008, 05:29:31 AM »

The 91 isn't real hard to find things for ,sometimes it is after market but most of it isn't to bad.
If you go 9mm on the side arm there is a lot of parts for the Glocks.
But if push came to shove i think i would stick to the 1911.
But it seems these 3 rifles have pretty well made a name for themselves.

blackpowderbill · « **Reply #37 on:** January 25, 2008, 07:24:36 AM »

Pistol? I will give my two cents; Glock, any calibre! The perfect soldiers pistol. Having said that, I carried a 1911a1 for half a military career and a M9 for the second half. I can think of no category that the the 1911 beat the M9 in my experience. I have (in civilian capacity) carried a Makarov for the last 15 years as a CC weapon. It has never failed to fire no mater how cruddy I got it. I currently carry a Sig 226 for work; I hate it. It has (IMO) the worst ergonomics of any pistol I have ever been issued.

poncaguy · « **Reply #38 on:** January 25, 2008, 07:32:05 AM »

Ruger P90 because of durability.............

phalanx · « **Reply #39 on:** January 25, 2008, 07:42:31 AM »

BPbill : I have heard a lot of people say that about the M9 ,but then you anger the Gods of the 1911.
I have a Clock 34 long slide and i do like it ,but it is hard to get used to a Pistol without a hammer.
I would take an IMI baby eagle over a 226 any day.
Still the three rifles i mentioned are hard to choose from .
Nice thing about an M1A is if you run out of ammo and it becomes hand to hand , with its butt stock it is a known head basher.

GregP42 · « **Reply #40 on:** January 25, 2008, 07:48:50 AM »

I guess mine would be a M1 Garand or a FN/FAL

Greg

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #41 on:** January 25, 2008, 07:57:56 AM »

the weak point of the glock is the mags , have had them split .

phalanx · « **Reply #42 on:** January 25, 2008, 08:21:03 AM »

FN/FAL is a good rifle , the guys i know who have them say as long as it isn't the rat tail bolt ,and is the the newer stoner recoil spring system.
FN offered a kit to change this out some time ago ,I don't know how hard it was to do but it was a needed upgrade.
Like the early H&K 91s had recoil buffer problems , they beefed up the recoil spring ,and went with a better buffer to cure that.

teddy12b · « **Reply #43 on:** January 25, 2008, 08:24:57 AM »

I've always thought the FAL rifle just looked so cool when I'd see them in movies. I have never fired one and have no idea of how accurate they are but they still just look awesome to me. Who makes these FAL rifles you are all talking about? DSA?

phalanx · « **Reply #44 on:** January 25, 2008, 08:42:33 AM »

The one i had traded for in the 80s was an FN/FAL ,Herstal Belgium ,the real ones.
It shot as good as anything else ,it even had the rat tail and it never gave me a lot of trouble ,but i didn't keep the rifle very long.
The FAL is the French designation for LAR ,Light automatic rifle.
I just didn't like the ergonomics of the gun ,just my own deal .
But an H&K 91 is shaped like a 4x4 wooden block .
The M1A to me is the most comfortable.

teddy12b · « **Reply #45 on:** January 25, 2008, 09:41:42 AM »

If I had to pick a 308 as a battle rifle I'd go with a DPMS LR308. I've read a lot of incredible things about their accuracy, and they don't cost as much as an M1A. I don't like that I'd have to be careful with my left hand with an M1A. The FAL is still the coolest looking out of the bunch, but I'd still have to go with a DPMS LR308 if I had to pick a 308, which about everyone on this topic is doing.

phalanx · « **Reply #46 on:** January 25, 2008, 10:00:23 AM »

I don't know much about them or the Armalight 308s ,people who have them like them a lot.
To me the coolest looking one is the 30-06 BAR with a bipod.
But all around ,depending how close in you were ,the 1927 Thompson rules it all.
Shotguns are great but really they are a support weapon ,unless you are in a one on one ,in that they take to much time to reload.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #47 on:** January 28, 2008, 08:39:00 AM »

A good friend has 2 AR-10's both are problems !
the shot gun or the Thompson are not rifles nor are the powerful enough in rifle terms .

phalanx · « **Reply #48 on:** January 28, 2008, 11:23:49 AM »

I still want the Thompson.

I wasn't going to bad mouth an AR 10 because i have never had one ,and i didn't want to start a flame.
But a friend of mine is a distributor for full auto stuff in Washington State to Police Departments.
He sold 10 semi AR 10s to a PD in California.
He told me he got 8 of them back and had to refund the money.
But guys i know seem to like them ,But the PD sure didn't.
Another one he said he was having a lot of trouble with was the FN ,PS 90 and the FN ,FS 2000.
The H&K 416 seemed to be a good gun ,as was the Robarms XCR.
He said the XCR he supplied for testing had 20k rounds through it and not one failure ,the Mag release got a little squirrelly but Robarms overnight-ed an update.
Sorry i got off topic.

canon6 · « **Reply #49 on:** January 31, 2008, 06:15:11 AM »

FN FAL, pistol, Browning HiPower. Doug

phalanx · « **Reply #50 on:** February 01, 2008, 07:10:57 AM »

Doug:
Of topic a little .but what caliber is your High Power ?
I got one for Christmas in a .40 S&W and it is great !
Its a toss up between it and the Baby Eagle , but the FN is very nice.

canon6 · « **Reply #51 on:** February 01, 2008, 11:17:31 AM »

My HiPower is in 9mm.I have been carrying one since 1961 and it has never failed me.I had a chance to fire a 40 and it was sweeet. Doug

lukewiersma2007 · « **Reply #52 on:** February 04, 2008, 12:01:57 PM »

AK-47 all the way...no question about it...powerful...barely any recoil...7.62x39 is much better of a "man stopper" than the 5.56NATO and its a comfortable gun....you sacrifice a little accuracy going from the M16 to the AK but the pros definitely out weigh the cons

Turk · « **Reply #53 on:** February 24, 2008, 02:34:05 PM »

I would pick the rifle I've fought with the M-16A1.

lukewiersma2007 wrote:

AK-47 all the way...no question about it...powerful...barely any recoil...7.62x39 is much better of a "man stopper" than the 5.56NATO and its a comfortable gun....you sacrifice a little accuracy going from the M16 to the AK but the pros definitely out weigh the cons

That is not my experience. I've seen quite a few hits from 7.62x39 ball and M-193 ball and to be quite frank the M-193 made a bigger mess but then I think the AK is a piece of crap.

Turk

Turk · « **Reply #54 on:** February 24, 2008, 02:37:10 PM »

Someone mentioned pistols in combat. My recommendation is to leave them in the arms room and carry a couple extra frags.

Turk

AtlLaw · « **Reply #55 on:** February 24, 2008, 04:06:02 PM »

Quote from: Turk on February 24, 2008, 02:34:05 PM

I would pick the rifle I've fought with the M-16A1.
Turk

My thought exactly! I never had reason to question the suitability of my A1

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #56 on:** February 25, 2008, 01:51:07 AM »

someone please straighten me out the AK-47 and M16 are assault rifles both MEDIUM POWER guns or at least they were !
the M-1 , M-14 ,and other guns firring high power rifle rounds are BATTLE RIFLES .
the difference is being acknowledged in the current battles we are engaged in as we post . Both are necessary for sure but different !
my choice is still the M1-A

S.S. · « **Reply #57 on:** March 07, 2008, 07:54:07 PM »

I agree ShootAll, I thought we were talking about Battle Rifles (those designed to actually KILL the enemy)
not assault rifles (designed to wound and tie up more enemy resources). If we are talking Assault rifles,
I'll take the Galil of Israel.
Handgun would of course be a 1911

AtlLaw · « **Reply #58 on:** March 08, 2008, 07:36:10 AM »

Quote from: S.S. on March 07, 2008, 07:54:07 PM

I thought we were talking about Battle Rifles

To me, any rifle you carry into battle is a battle rifle.

Quote

(those designed to actually KILL the enemy) not assault rifles (designed to wound and tie up more enemy resources)

This reminds me of the long discussion on this very thing on the "Battle Rifle" newsgroup years ago. I would sure like to know where, and by who's authority, the above statement became the official definition of the two terms.

Anyway, the original poster said: "If you were going (back) to war or if it was coming here to you, what would you want to carry? I started Army life with an M16A1 and ended with a M24, but I had an opportunity to carry a few other weapons of friends and foes. If I got to choose today it wouldn't be a M16."

By this statement, he includes the M16, and one could assume others of it's - to use your definition- "assault rifle" ilk, in his thread.

blackpowderbill · « **Reply #59 on:** March 09, 2008, 09:23:37 AM »

I think "battle rifle" is a made up term. In over twenty years in the US Military, I heard the phrases, carbine, rifle, infantry rifle, assault rifle. I never once heard the term "battle rifle" used by anyone in an official capacity.
As for the M-16, I never had a problem with it, found it to be reliable and very accurate. I cleaned mine at every chance, perhaps that kept it reliable but its accuracy needs no qualifiers. I found it to be more accurate than the m-14 out to 200 meters (we never shot past that). The M-14 may have been mechanically more accurate but I felt the M-16 was easier to shoot accurately.
I carry a Bushmaster carbine every day in my current job. With our ACOG sight I can routinely shoot 1.5 inch groups at 100 meters during prone timed fire events. I'd like to have it for myself.