Garand vs. AR

[SaxonPig]

The Garand was the best rifle... in 1945. Its time as king of the hill is long passed.

The only argument favoring the Garand vs. the AR is if you can't stand the 5.56 caliber.

I would choose the AR in any conceivable circumstance except maybe as a sniper rifle.

 

[notorious]

The AR can make a decent sniping rifle if you don't shoot into barriers or glass.

 

[innerpiece]

"I dont think Innerpiece read when I said PRECISION IS KEY go back and read before you make your statement... I also stated that I wouldn't have to reload as much if I had a AR but I feel comfortable with a garand because I can load it quite fast... READ and post..."

Yessum boss!
sorry, I spend more of my time practicing then reading....

but hey, to each their own, I was merely adding my EXPERIENCE.

take it easy chriso

 

[chriso]

I am not upset nor do I mean to be a ass I just clearly stated what you said before... Your not the only one on the forum who actually trains buddy, your talking to somebody who trains all the time and has to qualify. Im sorry if I seemed to offend you I wasn't trying to.

 

[sdj]

G-Rand

JPWilly summed it up nicely: "soul".

 

[benEzra]

(Correct me if I am wrong on that, we don't have the castle doctrine in California)

Actually, you do.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=187-199

197. Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in any of the following cases:
...
2. When committed in defense of habitation, property, or person, against one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a felony, or against one who manifestly intends and endeavors, in a violent, riotous or tumultuous manner, to enter the habitation of another for the purpose of offering violence to any person therein...

That's Castle Doctrine. Although it appears that in CA, the entry has to be both unlawful and forceful for the Castle Doctrine to apply, rather than merely unlawful. I'm sure CA case law probably delineates this a bit more clearly, but I don't have access to that.

In any state, the Castle Doctrine does NOT apply if you shoot someone who is merely on your property; it only applies to unlawful entries into an occupied structure (or car, in some states), NOT mere trespassing.

 

[notorious]

Our "Castle" doctrine, as interpreted by local courts, includes the right to not fight and defend youself and if you do hurt the cretins, he gets to sue for loss of income because until you shot him, he was well on his way to medical school and making $2M a year as a brain surgeon, even though he hasn't gotten a GED yet and he spent more time in prisons than at home.

 

[chriso]

HAHA notorious nailed it...

 

[notorious]

Makes a grown man cry.
, no?

 

[chriso]

Yes indeed... What part of California are you in notorious???

 

[notorious]

The City of Lost Angels where mayor Villarocorruptus runs the show and has decided to ban 50 cal bullets even though there are really no 50 cal guns sold in the State since 2002.

 

[Doc_Jude]

Stopping power is a myth. All kill/stop shots come down to shot placement. Any caliber out there will stop a zombie with good placement. The fact that you don't want to worry about placement doesn't make it any less real. If you want to be able to simply squeeze the trigger and get a drop, you want something that explodes, not a rifle.

The fact that you said "stopping power is a myth" and then proceeded to cite shot placement on zombies... you lost all credibility. ^_^

Riddle me this: say you accidentally miss the head, and shoot the target in the shoulder. Can you imagine the effect of a supped up .22? Now, imagine catching a .30-06 in the shoulder.

M1 Garand (.30-06 round) w/ muzzle energy around 2700 ft/lbs & the M-16 w/ .223 round & muzzle energy around 1200 ft/lbs. Less than half.

Most of ballistics concerns itself with what equates to stopping power, the appropriate weapon and ammo for the job at hand.

We're talking about STOPPING POWER. If you say it's a myth, you're arguing with a whole mess of experts.

 

[notorious]

If you miss the head of a zombie, it doesn't matter where you hit him really. A hit to the shoulder of a zombie with a 5.56 won't stop him anymore than a 30.06 or 475WinMag or 50BMG. Sure, you might rip an arm off the zombie but he will keep coming. Remember, shot placement is everything with the undead.

 

[innerpiece]

chrisso, right on. it can be hard to read tone from text.. no hard feelings.

Doc Jude. while what you are in favor of is quite obvious.. the .223 has plenty of stopping power. both rounds have pleny of bodies under their belt.
but personally I wouldnt want to get shot anywhere with either.. or anything for that matter. But Im certian a .223 would do much more to the shoulder than you would lead people to believe.. tho I do agree, a 30-06 would likeley do more!

while M&PVolk was quite obviously wrong about stopping power being a myth.. there is really only one place on the human body for a "one shot stop" and its not easy to hit, nor is it garuenteed. I would rather attempt that shot with a 30-06, but Im not a sniper, so Id still preferr the .223 overall.

ip.

 

[Doc_Jude]

...But Im certian a .223 would do much more to the shoulder than you would lead people to believe..

"you would lead people to believe"???? What you mean by that?

 

[chriso]

Haha well thats no worse than stockton ... haha...

 

[High Planes Drifter]

The fact that you said "stopping power is a myth" and then proceeded to cite shot placement on zombies... you lost all credibility. ^_^

Riddle me this: say you accidentally miss the head, and shoot the target in the shoulder. Can you imagine the effect of a supped up .22? Now, imagine catching a .30-06 in the shoulder.




M1 Garand (.30-06 round) w/ muzzle energy around 2700 ft/lbs & the M-16 w/ .223 round & muzzle energy around 1200 ft/lbs. Less than half.

Most of ballistics concerns itself with what equates to stopping power, the appropriate weapon and ammo for the job at hand.

We're talking about STOPPING POWER. If you say it's a myth, you're arguing with a whole mess of experts.

hmmm..... experts also say that shot placement is key. A hit to the foot with a .50 BMG isnt as lethal as a hit to the temple with a .25acp.

 

[Matrix187]

The M1 is obviously alot better through barriers, and is less affected by a crosswind. It's also more reliable with gunk in the action, and is more powerful (durrr).

But both are accurate.

The AR is easier to control, easier to modify to ones liking, lighter, and uses 30 round detachable mags. The .223 is flat shooting on a day without a powerful crosswind, and has plenty of "stopping power" if a hit is made in the upper body.

Overall I think the AR is a better gun. While the .30-06 has more power I think an upper body body shot from either gun will produce the intended results.

 

[HeavenlySword]

A hit to the Head with .308 is win.

G3 For all!

 

[M&PVolk]

Innerpeace wrote:

while M&PVolk was quite obviously wrong about stopping power being a myth.. there is really only one place on the human body for a "one shot stop" and its not easy to hit, nor is it garuenteed.

That is my point. When I hear this one shot to any spot on the body creating a stop, it is just plain myth. I am unaware of any 30-06 or .223 ever stopping someone hell bent on your destruction because it delivers more foot pounds of energy. Knockdown is usually a psychological effect. I am not intending to say that a bullet can't "stop someone", but it does so based on shot placement and psychology, not because of a few foot pounds of energy.

FWIW, all the foot pounds of energy in the world don't mean anything without proper yaw or expansion. The bigger and heavier 30-06 will often zip through cleanly, leaving all those foot pounds wasted. A .223 through a proper twist barrel yaws excellently and will fragment creating a massive wound cavity. Again, the military chose this round for a reason.

 

[notorious]

Even with the entire amount of kinetic energy transferred into a body, it would not knock someone down from the physical force.

A person falls down because of shock or of the sudden expansive temporary wound cavity caused by the supersonic pressure waves built up in the body, which is mostly fluid.

A 6" deep permanent wound channel measuring .55 inch wide from a 30-06 would probably have with it at least (conservatively) temporary wound channel more than 10x as wide on average from the speed it carries through the body.

That's what causes the sudden shock that drops someone as the body overloads on the sensory input, not any magic points being hit on the body from 1 projectile.

A person can also fall from pain or a mechanical failure such as if you blew his ankle apart or if you cracked the pelvis but that still leaves him able to fight from a prone position.

 

[Doc_Jude]

hmmm..... experts also say that shot placement is key. A hit to the foot with a .50 BMG isnt as lethal as a hit to the temple with a .25acp.

Is that your scientific opinion?

The AR is easier to control, easier to modify to ones liking, lighter, and uses 30 round detachable mags. The .223 is flat shooting on a day without a powerful crosswind, and has plenty of "stopping power" if a hit is made in the upper body.

... & yet imagine the enemy wearing flak & LBV full of loaded steel mags. How's your "stopping power" now? It might tickle a lil' bit, but...

A 6" deep permanent wound channel measuring .55 inch wide from a 30-06 would probably have with it at least (conservatively) temporary wound channel more than 10x as wide on average from the speed it carries through the body.

That's what causes the sudden shock that drops someone as the body overloads on the sensory input, not any magic points being hit on the body from 1 projectile.

YES. This is the reason so many in the military are begging for upping to the 6.8, the 5.56 just ain't doing it. Any little bit of increase in BALLISTIC PERFORMANCE will help, esp since they won't have to replace mags, just barrels and a few other bits.
& I'm not saying that you can shoot someone in the foot with a .308 for "stopping power". The goal is for the enemy to go down NOW, ending any further threat. The same shot, to the same anatomical structures, will be much more effective with a .30+caliber than a .223. It's not complicated. Imagine a .223 compared to a .308 or .30-06 running by the liver. The cavitation from the average .223 would require a very close pass to rupture the liver, but a .30-06 wouldn't have to be near as close, especially a hollow point.
The .30-06 was the standard military rifle round for almost half a century BECAUSE IT WORKS. The .223 was choses for various reasons, some of them being "greater ammo capacity" (read: spray & pray) & lack of lethality ("more humane"), hence the 5.56NATO. It's A VARMIT ROUND. If I can't legally hunt large 150-200lb game with it, why in the world would I want to shoot at a 150-200lb armed&armored (& possibly drugged up) enemy combatant with it???

 

[JImbothefiveth]

Just to throw something in to the mix: What about a tanker Garand?

 

[amprecon]

Why is it that fans of the .223 are always trying to convince everyone else how great and necessary the .223 is?
Why is it that this is not necessary from those that favor the .30-06?

 

[DarkCharisma]

77gr. 5.56mm will do some damage--big reason why (according to the rumor mill) that the military is not pushing for the 6.8mm anymore--It wasn't a big enough increase in 'stopping power' over a good 77gr. 5.56mm.

Regardless, .223 and 30-06 is going to do some nice damage. I've asked for first-hand accounts from a military friend stationed in Afganistan, he says that there is no lack of stopping power with the 5.56mm against fleshy or Kevlar-protected targets. Take that with however much salt you wish.