Military/Serious Situation Rifle?


PDA






OneShot!
June 18, 2007, 10:02 AM
Which of the rifles listed is better for Military or in a serious fire fight situation? I hope to get some response from veteran or serving folks who have first hand experience. I would also welcome if any of you would like to share any frequent mal-functions that you experienced related to these rifles.

If you enjoyed reading about "Military/Serious Situation Rifle?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
LaEscopeta
June 18, 2007, 10:15 AM
I can't wait for "some response from veteran or serving folks who have first hand experience" with a FN SCAR.

OneShot!
June 18, 2007, 11:13 AM
I meant anyone who had experience in case if such weapon is not an army issue.

AZgunstudent
June 18, 2007, 12:51 PM
I doubt you will find many people who have much real-world combat experience with more than one of them. That said, I am in Afghanistan and my issue M4 is fine. Not that I have a choice, so it doesn't really matter which gun I would choose. I think most people who have spent time in combat zones are in the same boat: they shoot what they are issued.

mugsie
June 18, 2007, 01:06 PM
I voted for the AK47. I own an AR15 too. I was also in the Special Forces in Nam 68' & 69. I carried an AK then. The reason was if the enemy was in a bunker behind some serious logs, the M16 would not penetrate where as the AK would. It wasn't as accurate but in a spray and pray situation that didn't matter. It had more punching power at the short ranges we typically made contact at and ammo was always available.

Titan6
June 18, 2007, 01:17 PM
I think what LaEscopeta was saying is that the SCAR has not even been fielded yet so the chance of finding someone who has used it in the field is probably on the low side.

Some Special ops units have a choice of several of the above weapons (and some US Federal agencies) But I don't think either will be commenting on this thread. That said the information you are looking for is plentiful. Why not conduct a search?

Edit: (proven wrong yet again)

Aaryq
June 18, 2007, 01:35 PM
I voted M16 and M4. I've trained with them and they're pretty nifty guns. There was one period (during training) where I fired quite a few rounds, did an obstacle course, didn't clean my rifle and then went to another combat course. I wanted to see if my dad (a Vietnam vet) was right when he said they're unreliable. 0 malfunctions of any kind. It wasn't that much of a tortue test but the only time I've ever had a problem was when something went wrong at the range and I had to manually cycle each round until the ceacefire, when I turned it in to the armorer and got a different rifle.

General Geoff
June 18, 2007, 02:07 PM
What? No M14?

glockman19
June 18, 2007, 02:23 PM
I voted AK47 but feel the M1A/M-14 has just as good punching power. I have AR's but the 5.56 round just doesn't have the penetration power. the others do.

stiletto raggio
June 18, 2007, 02:51 PM
AUG, or rather, one of the TPD AUG clones. With a 20" barrel, it is shorter than an M4 clone with the stock collapsed and weighs just over six pounds. It takes standard M16/AR-15/STANAG magazines. It mounts accessories easily. Ergonomics are fantastic. It is battle tested and has been adopted by several respected militaries.

There is a reason I will be buying one ASAP. the only thing I might take over it is one of the Israeli Tavors, but I have enver handled one, so I can't say.

Essex County
June 18, 2007, 03:00 PM
I remain fond to the M16.....Esay to do when youhavent tried them all. Essex

OneShot!
June 18, 2007, 03:06 PM
AK 47 the most used rifle in the world. Only G36 was made in 7.62 NATO!

OneShot!
June 18, 2007, 04:10 PM
Sorry no M14 because as much as it is liked by Americans it does not compete in international arena. I am quite surprised that Americans like it so much, when the choices of modern weapons are myrid. :confused:

Nomad, 2nd
June 18, 2007, 04:33 PM
Military/Combat Rifle
SIG 551
M16
AK 47
HK G36
AUG
FN SCAR
FN FAL
M4
G3
AK74

My order:
M14
FAL
AK47
G3
SIG
AK74


I havn't shot the G36,

Havn't shot the AUG to know exactly where it stands, I like it but it has some decisive disadvantages (Ever try to fire a bulpup weakhanded?)

Know nothing about the SCAR. (I wait till something is IN production before I worry about it...)

Put the M16/M4 at the bottom of the pile (For me)

M16... I've dogged it enough... do a search if you really want details.

HK91: I like the .308, don't llike the placement of the controls, or the way it handles.

5.45x39/5.56x45: I do not consider them adequate for humans in FMJ configuration.
(I have never shot a human with the 5.45x39... I will SLIGHTLY withhold judgement... but give me a .30 anyday)

I like the way the M14 handles, it is accurate, and packs a punch

The FAL suffers from the sites. DSA has developed a AR style site... which makes up for this...

AK: I used to somewhat like this... then due to ammo costs I have been training with this almost exclusively... the more I shoot it the more I like it...
It takes a different manual of arms (Don't think if it as an M4) but when you know how to handle it... it is FAST.

LoadedDrum
June 18, 2007, 10:28 PM
M16, M4, or FAL are the only rifles I would consider on that list because parts, ammo, and/or mags are hard to come by for others (except perhaps the G3). Plus they have they better egros than most of that list and won't melt on full auto.

buck00
June 18, 2007, 11:28 PM
Ask yourself:

"Are you getting this rifle to impress your friends, or your enemies?"


Five decades of combat have proven the AK-47 is king. :evil:

http://meekmok.com/muaddib/images/blog/wolverines.jpg

Gunsnrovers
June 18, 2007, 11:57 PM
FAL. The free worlds right arm. :)

Jordan
June 19, 2007, 02:12 AM
The G3 is coming in LAST!?

I guess the G3 is out of vogue amongst the cool guy crowd. Ergonomics and handling are range hound's concerns. In a "hard" situation one needs better than average accuracy (not an AK) and absolute rugged reliability (HK is tough to beat in this regard). In my opinion and in my experience the G3 deserves a damn site better than last place!

Nomad, 2nd
June 19, 2007, 02:49 AM
Ergonomics and handling are range hound's concerns.

Umm, no.
It's the concern of someone who has to LIVE with his rifle.

A slow mag change can get you killed.

Jordan
June 19, 2007, 04:22 AM
A G3 has the same mag system as the AK or FAL... two of the leaders of this poll.. A "rock in" insertion and a paddle release.

Gun geeks (like us here on the internet) spend a lot of time debating things like which rifle has an edge in ergonomics. Operators are more concerned with the two factors I mentioned above.

Nomad, 2nd
June 19, 2007, 04:31 AM
No, mags are harder/slower to insert.

It's funny that you know who all the rest of us are/What we do for a living.

OneShot!
June 19, 2007, 05:46 AM
I have to agree with JORDAN: G3 has proven itself around world for decades, and deserves better then last spot. Plus, the Mag reload system it quick and easy. I cant imagine some one saying its difficult or slow???

Bartholomew Roberts
June 19, 2007, 08:35 AM
In a "hard" situation one needs better than average accuracy (not an AK) and absolute rugged reliability (HK is tough to beat in this regard).

Have you ever been in a "hard" situation and how do you define that?

5.45x39/5.56x45: I do not consider them adequate for humans in FMJ configuration.
(I have never shot a human with the 5.45x39... I will SLIGHTLY withhold judgement... but give me a .30 anyday)

Have you ever shot a human in any caliber? If so, feel free to elaborate on your experience.

Both of you seem to be implying some professional knowledge or experience in this area. If you have that experience, then by all means, please share it with us. If for some reason you can't discuss it, then it probably isn't a good idea to make posts on THR hinting at it. Either way, please cut to the chase and state your past experience so others know whether your situation relates to their needs or belay the shadowy hints of secret squirrel stuff.

Sniper4Life
June 19, 2007, 09:23 AM
I was talking to a local store owner yesterday about reloading, he is a vietnam vet with a few tours. We got to talkin about the M16 vs the M14 and the thing that really stuck in my mind was...." The first time I ever shot at somebody, when they were shooting at me,.. the first shot jammed" and so on. He did say the M14 was heavier and you couldnt carry as much ammo, but it had alot more firepower.

trueblue1776
June 19, 2007, 09:34 AM
M-16A2, when DoD finds something better I may change my tune. I like direct gas systems, and I've never jammed because of one.

If it ain't broke...

OneShot!
June 19, 2007, 11:20 AM
Since M4 is a military weapon, I am not sure if got the response it should have. I have fired about 400 rounds today with it, and absolutely loved it. I like AK since its the king of automatic rifles around the world with no maintainance and minimum cleaning requirements. However, once you fire M4 and expereince its stabilty versus AK's- you just get double minded, because then it become very hard to chose from the two. Both are about the same size and .223 is becoming more popular in countires outside NATO. In fact, there is about 10 cent difference in the AK and .223 ammo where I live.

AZgunstudent
June 19, 2007, 11:25 AM
I realize this thread is very hypothetical for most people, but I notice a lot of the rifles mentioned have fixed stocks with long LOPs. Bullpups like the AUG are bad in this respect. One of the things I like about the M4 is the adjustable/collapsible stock. A long fixed stock is very tough to use in a squared-up fighting stance while wearing body armor.

Chuck R.
June 19, 2007, 12:02 PM
For me itís the M4 I think it provides the best bang for the buck when it comes to:

Size
Weight
Ergonomics
Effectiveness
Accuracy
Modularity
Recoil for fast follow up shots


After retiring in 05 I tried like hell not to like the AR platform after spending 26 years with them. I owned a M1A and bought a nice DSA SA58 Para FAL which I still own. Iíve shot the AUG (in Austria), G3 (in Germany) AK 47 (Germany, we had 4 of them in my Squadron). It still comes down to the AR family when I look at the rifle as a balanced tool. Now Iíve got a LE6920 that has been flawless, itís light, accurate enough that by swapping scopes/mounts and ammo I can go between QCB scenarios to mid-range varmint hunting.

It really is a versatile platform.

Chuck

Nomad, 2nd
June 19, 2007, 05:31 PM
Originally Posted by Nomad, 2nd
5.45x39/5.56x45: I do not consider them adequate for humans in FMJ configuration.
(I have never shot a human with the 5.45x39... I will SLIGHTLY withhold judgement... but give me a .30 anyday)
Have you ever shot a human in any caliber? If so, feel free to elaborate on your experience.

Both of you seem to be implying some professional knowledge or experience in this area. If you have that experience, then by all means, please share it with us. If for some reason you can't discuss it, then it probably isn't a good idea to make posts on THR hinting at it. Either way, please cut to the chase and state your past experience so others know whether your situation relates to their needs or belay the shadowy hints of secret squirrel stuff.

Only SS109 in Iraq. It takes 5-7 rounds to put someone down typically.
Observed .308 did not have this problem.
Read post #9 http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=282564

I was not hinting any 'secret squirrel stuff', It's just that I've posted details in the past and I try not to act like:
1. I know anything
2. I'm anything special.

Knowledge mearly reveals to us the depths of our ignorance.

pablo45
June 19, 2007, 08:26 PM
m4

Curare
June 19, 2007, 11:04 PM
The M4 has serious issues.

M855 will fragment out to only 65 yards from a 14.5" barrel. Beyond that it's a non-fragmenting .22. This was found out to tragic effect in Somali and we have yet to change things.

Also of concern is 5.56mm's inability to penetrate concrete and other intermediate barriers that 7.62x39 penetrates like warm butter. Insurgents can hide behind the concrete walls that frequent Iraqi construction, as their AK rounds turn "cover" into concealment.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Concealment+does+not+equal+cover

Even the Mk262 is not a magic bullet. It has serious difficulty even penetrating VEHICLE doors, and forget about concrete barriers.
Please see slide 22 of 24.

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2006smallarms/gandy.pdf

Ammo development in 5.56mm has come a long way, but it has yet to equal the awesome penetrative cabability of 7.62x39--essential in the MOUT environment. I look forward to continued 7.62x39 development--perhaps a thin jacket, deeply cannulered FMJ?

buck00
June 19, 2007, 11:16 PM
Only SS109 in Iraq. It takes 5-7 rounds to put someone down typically.
Observed .308 did not have this problem.
Read post #9 http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=282564

I was not hinting any 'secret squirrel stuff', It's just that I've posted details in the past and I try not to act like:
1. I know anything
2. I'm anything special.


I respect this attitude. There are times on THR where members go into a hushed-awe mode where someone starts bragging they were deployed overseas. It's awesome and their knowledge/contribution can be very valuable to the discussion, but they shouldn't always be the end-all authority on the matter. And of course, just to cover myself, that doesn't mean a super gun-enthusiast who shoots every weekend somehow knows what rounds would work best in a shoot out. We can learn from each other.

* A sign that you are truly intelligent is when you can admit you don't know everything.

If you enjoyed reading about "Military/Serious Situation Rifle?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!