Diversifying the arsenal


PDA






Skirnir
March 27, 2009, 04:00 PM
The AK is nice for 100m or less, but I am looking for something which could neutralise a target at about 400-500m.

I was advised a FAL + scope would be a wise bet, that and ,308 is more common than 7,62. Anything I should be looking for &/or avoiding in makes for both gun and scope? Trying to keep it under $2'000 or thereabouts, but I can go higher for quality.

Additionally, any recommendation on AK47 optics? Thanks :D

If you enjoyed reading about "Diversifying the arsenal" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
cbrgator
March 27, 2009, 04:15 PM
I don't know much about FAL's so I can't help you there. When looking at scopes for it, don't slouch on price. You'll want high quality for 500m. As far as optics for an AK, Aimpoint or Eotech. I prefer Aimpoint but it's merely a preference.

Gamera
March 27, 2009, 04:19 PM
(hey friend, for your own sake don't mention zombies around here)

CapnMac
March 27, 2009, 04:21 PM
Well, M1A has some things going for it that an FAL does not. But, so does one of the AR-10 variants--with a simpler ability to mount glass on board, too.
Either will let you use a sling better than an FAL, which will help on zombies out there near 1/4 mile away.

X-Rap
March 27, 2009, 04:26 PM
I would think a good bolt in 300 Win Mag with good glass would keep those souless humanoid shells at bay well past 500 m. With 2k to spend you shold be able to put a fair package together.

Titan6
March 27, 2009, 04:35 PM
Okay. At the 400-500 yard range an EOtech or Aimpoint is not suitable. I don't know what you are shooting at but at that range an AR-15 with a 3X9 scope would still be fairly reliable and accurate. I am not sure where you are getting your advice from but it is strange.

What kind of arsenal do you live in?

cbrgator
March 27, 2009, 05:27 PM
Okay. At the 400-500 yard range an EOtech or Aimpoint is not suitable.

Titan, The Aimpoint or Eotech was a recommendation for his AK47 for what he specified is for 100m or less. i think you misread.

Titan6
March 27, 2009, 07:19 PM
Titan, The Aimpoint or Eotech was a recommendation for his AK47 for what he specified is for 100m or less. i think you misread.

Well in that case it is near ideal.

RX-178
March 27, 2009, 10:45 PM
The situation you describe, the weapon I would reach for is my PTR-91.

For all intents and purposes, an FAL would be fairly equivalent. High-powered, HEAVY, accurate and reliable.

You can get a brand new DSA SA58 FAL for under $2000.

As for an optic, you really want to IGNORE THE PRICE when searching. That doesn't mean price is no object. It means that some of the most flimsy, unreliable, and delicate scopes in the world will cost you more than your rifle, and you just don't want an optic like that (nobody in their right mind would, but people do buy them). Schmidt and Bender for instance. The USMC uses them, and they cost over 3 grand. And the thickness of the metal of the scope tube is just pathetically thin. FLIMSY.

With the distance you're describing, you probably want to stay under 12x. a 3x-12x variable would be ideal, considering your intended use against... well... let's say 'steadily advancing targets, with a propensity of traveling in groups of varying size'. You want to look for a scope with a constant eye relief, if you can find or afford it (many scopes have an eye relief that moves closer and farther as you work the zoom). If you can find this information (most scope manufacturers do not list this information for their products), look for a larger exit pupil on the eyepiece, so you can get an image from the scope at an imperfect angle or imperfect eye relief.

What you should also look into is scope rings with built in picatinny rails on the top, for mounting a backup sight, such as a small red dot (Docter, Aimpoint Micro, etc.).


All this WILL cost you more than $2000, but I would advise making this a project in stages. Get the rifle. Then save up and get the optics.

In practiced hands, a .308 semi automatic rifle with iron sights is still effective against... 'steadily advancing targets'. A 3x-12x scope is also a very versatile optic, and with a backup red dot on top, should fill just about any role you will ever have for this weapon.

cbrgator
March 27, 2009, 10:47 PM
Titan, The Aimpoint or Eotech was a recommendation for his AK47 for what he specified is for 100m or less. i think you misread.
Well in that case it is near ideal.

Haha yea. That's why I said it ;)

RevolvingCylinder
March 27, 2009, 10:57 PM
Okay. At the 400-500 yard range an EOtech or Aimpoint is not suitable.
I have effortlessly hit man-sized targets/silhouettes repeatedly without missing at 500 yards with an EOtech mounted on an M4. The EOtech has a 1 MOA dot and should only cover 5" of the target at that distance. Unless there's something special about me, my EOtech or that M4 I would have to say that statement is untrue. The Aimpoint on the other hand... I have more confidence in ironsights at any distance.

RX-178
March 27, 2009, 11:14 PM
As for the AK.

There really is nothing wrong with the iron sights (properly ZEROED of course) of an AK style rifle.

Another thing is, MOUNTING optics on an AK is problematic. The receiver cover is not stable. It wobbles and shifts under recoil, so a receiver cover rail is not a suitable mount for optics under ANY conditions.

A sideplate mount is the best solution, but many AKs are not equipped with a sideplate.

Beyond that, things start getting quite expensive just to get a stable mount for your optic. Quad rail forends, for instance, which will only be able to mount simple red dots or reflex sights in a forward 'scout' position. A CAA quad-rail that includes a rail over the receiver cover for other optics will run you close to $500 (!!!)

So, be careful to weigh and balance how much of an advantage an optic might be on an AK47, compared to the cost and difficulty of effectively mounting the optic on that weapon in the first place.

A rail forend intended to mount a red dot in the forward position should be metal. Polymer is good enough for mounting vertical foregrips and flashlights, but is not the best material for mounting optics on. Expect to pay several hundred dollars for that. I know the polymer handguards are going to be tempting, at around $50, but frankly, an optic mounted on that is not going to give you much of an advantage as opposed to your iron sights.

Aimpoints and Eotech sights are not cheap either. Don't expect to pay less than $400 for either of them. A $100 Bushnell Trophy red dot would probably be a good choice here.

sarduy
March 28, 2009, 02:06 AM
Remington 700 in 30-06 ;)

Caliper_RWVA
March 28, 2009, 07:20 AM
I second the Rem 700. That'll take care of everything out to 1000m if you're up to it.

In the 400-500m range, what about the PSL?

possum
March 28, 2009, 07:29 AM
welcome to thr. i have to point out that an ak is good past 100yds, people that say they aren' t are either repeating what they hear on the web or they don't have the skill set to get hits with it, a bad rifleman with bad fundamentals won't help the ak platform out, however i have used with great success ak's from multiple makers and hit targets at 200m. of course there are i am sure bad rifles here and there, canted sights etc but for the most part 200m is an easy hit from any position well at least that is my experience.

Guero4179
March 28, 2009, 07:47 AM
Remington 700 in .270
every Wal*Mart has ammo for it.
Try finding .308 anywhere cheap?

If you enjoyed reading about "Diversifying the arsenal" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!