Garand vs. AR

[dispatch55126]

I put my AR up for trade on the site and wonder what other's opinions are.

AR
Pros
-detachable mags
-higher capacity
-readily available ammo
-parts readily available
-pisses off the left wingers

Cons
-gas system
-smaller caliber

Garand
Pros
-history
-larger caliber
-more effective hunting rifle

Cons
-surplus ammo or adjustable gas block
-8 rounds with no top off

I like my AR but I also need a practical purpose with my rifles. The AR would be a good coyote rifle but at the reduced ranges, my SKS can do just as well. The M1 would be a far better hunting rifle plus the added benefit of having history.

 

[longdayjake]

I voted for the garand but I dont know why since you didn't put a question in your poll.

 

[elmerfudd]

I also voted for the Garand, but I think the AR is a more practical rifle. The AR is a good modern fighting rifle that is also suitable for target practice and varmint hunting. If you get an AR10 copy, then you've got something that's good for larger game and long range shooting as well.

The Garand is an obsolete fighting rifle and has a number of serious disadvantages as a hunting rifle. It can't use heavier bullets, it's difficult to scope and it's heavy, but having said all that, the Garand is way cooler than an AR.

 

[Dutchman01]

I also voted for the Garand, but I think the AR is a more practical rifle. The AR is a good modern fighting rifle that is also suitable for target practice and varmint hunting. If you get an AR10 copy, then you've got something that's good for larger game and long range shooting as well.

The Garand is an obsolete fighting rifle and has a number of serious disadvantages as a hunting rifle. It can't use heavier bullets, it's difficult to scope and it's heavy, but having said all that, the Garand is way cooler than an AR.

I beg to differ. I shot my first deer with a garand. In regards to the ar, modern isn't always better. The garand has a tendancy to work and is chambered for a great cartridge.

 

[Coronach]

Apples and oranges.

The rifles serve different purposes. the rifles have different histories. The rifles fill very different niches, practically, politically, and ballistically.

It's like asking me "Honda Accord, or Honda Valkyrie?"

I dunno, dude. Do you want a motorcycle or not?

Mike

ETA: I own both.

 

[taprackbang]

If I had to make a choice, I would opt for the Garand. I actually would want to kill my enemy (30.06) with one shot and not just wound them. (.223)

 

[jpwilly]

I voted AR but frankly I like my Garand more than my AR's...it's got soul.

 

[Geno]

Different purposes, and I own both. I can say that the one I fear more is the M1 Garand. Eight rounds of .30-06 is a Hades of a lot of firepower, with excellent reach and excellent accuracy.

 

[sharkhunter2018]

I also shot my first deer with a Garand. It may be a bit heavy for a hunting rifle, but I don't mind lugging it around in the field.

While I don't own an AR, I have nothing against them and enjoy shooting them. But I still like my Garands.

 

[rem2429]

(M14/ M1a best of both worlds?)

I guess I'd say AR. People forget it arose out of a need to increase the number of hits obtained. Given time for a well placed shot, a garand is great, but in combat I would think targets would be fleeting. The AR is easier to put multiple rounds on multiple targets quickly.

 

[Geno]

I have been considering taking my Garand for the Michigan late deer season (Dec). That would create a great memory.

 

[elmerfudd]

I beg to differ. I shot my first deer with a garand. In regards to the ar, modern isn't always better. The garand has a tendancy to work and is chambered for a great cartridge.

I don't think it is chambered for a very good cartridge at all actually. Now the 30-06 out of a good bolt action is a fantastic cartridge, but out of a Garand it's very limited. You've got to stick to 150 grain bullets or lighter and that's kind of like having a Corvette with a 4 cylinder in it.

It's still a great rifle, but I just don't think it's as practical as a .308 AR. I also don't think that matters much though. If practicality were the only issue we were after most of us would just have synthetic stocked bolt actions and given the choice between an AR and a Garand for anything but combat, I'd reach for the Garand. I just wanted to make it clear that I made that choice purely for personal reasons.

 

[longdayjake]

You've got to stick to 150 grain bullets or lighter and that's kind of like having a Corvette with a 4 cylinder in it.

Not true. You can safely load heavier bullets just fine. In fact the wwII ap bullets were somewhere in the 160's and they were used just fine out of the garand. You can shoot heavy bullets like the 180 grainers too but you have to be careful not to load them too hot. There are handloading manuals for the m1 garand that you can find online. 150 grainers are more than enough for anything in the u.s. anyway.

 

[Almond27]

I vote AR because I'm a younger guy and the AR would be easier to feed then me purchasing .30-06. I think I'd also rather have an 03-A3 than a Garand don't ask me why I am just more in awe of the bolt action.

 

[cracked butt]

Have them both.
The M1 looks nicer and feels better in my hands, but the AR does everything better.

 

[M&PVolk]

I would love to have a Garand. That said, I voted AR. If I am going to shoot a 30-06, I want it in a very accurate package. I see no advantage in a Garand over a great bolt action 30-06. With the AR, you get excellent accuracy with a ton of rounds. Can't go wrong with either though.

 

[RustyHammer]

Both!

 

[adelgado0723]

Garand is great just for its history, but the ar does piss off liberals. hmmmm, it's tough, but I voted for garand

 

[RockyMtnTactical]

The AR15 is WAYYY more practical and useful for home defense and a variety of other uses. The Garand is fun, has a lot of history, and is a solid rifle and all... but it aint practical.

Give me an AR15.

 

[RX-178]

I went with the AR.

The AR has many more potential uses than a Garand.

A Garand just does what it does better than an AR.

 

[Kind of Blued]

This is the dumbest thread ever.

On that note, depending on what I needed a rifle for, I could easily pick one of the two.

 

[RyanM]

Cons
-gas system

That's easily a pro, especially compared to a Garand.

You can feed an AR-15 pretty much any ammo, with any powder, and 90% of the time it'll work. And if it stops working, it'll be because it's dirty, not because the operating rod broke.

Can't even really say that of the vaunted AK-47. Those are very sensitive to changes in bullet weight and powder, just like the Garand. Half of the AK's famed reliability is because all the ammo out there is 122, 123, 124, or 125 grain (the other half is the magazines).

 

[H2O MAN]

AR or Garand?

Why not consider something between the two?






Consider the M14

The M14 shares the soul of the Garand and it's able to share the accessories of the AR.

 

[Mac Attack]

Buy a AR now while you can before they are banned again.

You will always be able to pick up a Garand.

I have both and each serves a different purpose. I like shooting my M1 more but can only shoot 100 or so rounds before my shoulder calls foul. My AR I can shoot all day long.

 

[TEDDY]

vis

no you wont get a garand much longer.there were only so many made and a lot were used up.and a garand will take 172 gr as the reason they stopped making 172 was production they could make 150s quicker.and the garand is quite accurate out to 600 yrds and more.before WW2 many civilians and NG,practiced at 1000yrds.I know because I was there.