If you could only have 1 rifle, the AR-15 is hard to beat.

[firestar]

Luckly I can have as many rifles as I can buy but if I could only have one, I would pick a AR-15.

It is not my favorite rifle but it has to be the most useful. You can hunt smaller than deer sized game, compeat in matches, plink inexpensivly, and use it as a home defense long arm.

What other gun is so versitile as the AR? Only a .308 or a .22lr even come close. Everybody needs an AR-15 in there gun collection.

 

[wanderinwalker]

A little friendly disagreement from me. Don't get me wrong, I like the AR-15/5.56mm combo, but it just doesn't do it for me. Even when I was learning on a .22LR I viewed my rifle more as a hunting tool than just a plinker/noise-maker.

Therefore, my vote for one good rifle would go to a 7mm/.300 magnum class bolt-action. One could hunt most game species with it (I can only imagine how impressive it would be on smaller animals!), plink (if one reloads, and doesn't mind the obnoxious recoil/blast), and you could theoretically compete in long-range matches with it.

But that it just my opinion. If you want to stay with a semi-auto platform I might recomend an AR-10, M1A, or even an old M-1 Garand.

 

[cratz2]

The AR is fine, but I think if we're talking overall versatility, a medium heavy sporter bolt rifle in 6.5-284 would be awfully hard to beat. Point blank to way out there (400 yards ?) and one of the winningest long range cartridges and benchrest cartridges of recent times. Plus a killing ability beyond the 6.5x55 and right on par with the 264 Winchester Magnum and 270 Winchester in a more effecient package. Very large selection of bullets for loading ranging from the 85 Gr Sierra and 95 Gr VMax up to 160 Gr Pro hunters with many 120s and 140s along the way including the stellar 139 Gr Lapua Scenar with a BC of .615 as well as being possibly the most accurate bullet around.

Gee... you can't tell my next project is going to be a 6.5-284 of my own, can youy?

In an easier to obtain package .243, .260, 7mm-08, .308, .257 Roberts, 6.5x55, 7x57 mauser, .25-06, .270 Win , .280 Rem and the .30-06 all come to mind as being extremely versatile. The older cartridges greatly benefit from handloading and/or Ackley improvements.

 

[biere]

The one thing I liked about my ar was the thought of all the uppers you could get for it. From 22lr to 50bmg there is something out there.

But I did not like my ar enough to want a bunch of uppers for it.

 

[curt]

What other gun is so versitile as the AR?

A 12 gauge shotgun.

 

[MarineTech]

A 12 gauge shotgun.

Ditto.

If it had to be a rifle though, .223 would not be my choice. My personal selection would be either .308 or .30-06. You have MUCH more lattitude in loads than a .223 with either cartridge. I have actually seen farmers in the area using downloaded (I believe cotton takes up the extra room in the case) .30-06 for varmint control. When reloading, plinking is not expensive at all.

Sorry, .223 just isn't the answer. It's marginal at best.

With those thoughts I'd pick either an M1A, an M1 Garand, or an AR10 over the AR15 any day of the week.

 

[cratz2]

Of course, if you're planning on using extremely downloaded amounts of powder, a semi auto may not provide ideal reliability. if I could only have one rifle, it would definately be a bolt gun. Very few reliability issues with bolt guns.

 

[Gewehr98]

Not being a victim of "Magnumitis"...

I'd stay in the .308/.30-06 family for a 1 rifle collection. Good ammo selection, and great selection of rifles chambered in them.

If you're looking to hunt things way up on the food chain, like Grizzly or Cape Buffalo, perhaps a .45-70 loaded with Garrett Hammerhead rounds or equivalent. A bit much for plinking or bringing home a little bit of venison, kinda like the belted magnums.

I love my 6.5-06, all the way out to 1000 yards, but without handloads, it's an expensive club.

 

[SteyrAUG]

If you could only have 1 rifle, the AR-15 is hard to beat.

This is true. If given the option I'd combine it with a nice 12ga. pump.

 

[Drue]

If I could have only one rifle, it would be an M1A.You can hunt up through deer to even elk with it. It is not a good a varmint rifle than a .22 CF or a 6mm but it is useable and those are not as useful for larger game. The M1A can be used on the national match course, 3 gun competition and even silhouette. With the "plinker" bullets it can be downloaded and used for small game. As has been pointed out, these loads might not cycle the action but for samll game shooting, a manually operated rifle is OK. For shootin' & blastin', the .308 surplus ball costs more than the Wolf .223 but less than the Winchester or Federal .223 ball. Of course, the M1A is a fine fighting rifle.

In other words, I like the M1A for the same reasons that firestar likes the AR but I am willing to trade the superiority of the AR in varmint hunting for the superiority of the M1A as a deer rifle.

The bottom line is that I would rather not be limited to just one.

Drue

 

[HSMITH]

If I could only have one rifle it darn sure would not be an AR-15. Mine would be a 7MM Mag bolt gun with a 3-9 quality scope, and it would look an awful lot like the one in my safe..........

The AR is a good match gun, plinker, fun shooter and all of that, but there is no way I would settle for it when I could have a rifle that will do anything I could ever want to do.

 

[bad_dad_brad]

Maybe an AR-15 Armalite upper in .243?

 

[HSMITH]

Maybe an AR-15 Armalite upper in .243?

Nope, a 7mm WSM maybe, but still very unlikely. Not with the simplicity and durability and accuracy of a bolt gun......

 

[Destructo6]

If I could have only one rifle, God forbid, it would have to be an autoloader in .308/7.62x51. Probably a FAL, M1A, HK, etc.

 

[greyeyezz]

Not an AR.

25.06 Rem 700 sounds real nice.

M1A1 sounds better.

 

[Nightcrawler]

Hard to beat?

FAL.

Huh, that wasn't hard at all.


See, I've owned two AR-15s. Granted I wasn't much of a "shooter" when I had them, but I did have them. I've trained on M16s in the Army; the M16A1 was the first centerfire rifle I ever shot, if you can believe it. I cut my teeth on it, so to speak.

Yet now I'm entirely bored with intermediate cartridge rifles of all sorts, and find myself quite happy with .308 autoloaders. I have a 21" FAL and am still debating getting a 16" carbine on a nice, light, DSA alloy lower.

Hmm....

 

[Kahr carrier]

M1A

 

[.45&TKD]

Then why's the military using .223?

For the people that wouldn't take the AR first, why is our military using that configuration if it is that inadequate?

Shouldn't the AR be the first choice for a Homeland Defense Rifle/Carbine?

I have a an AR-15 and was thinking of getting a semi in .308, but if the SHTF I would think that I should take the AR if for no other reason than to carry more ammo in the BOB.

 

[wanderinwalker]

"For the people that wouldn't take the AR first, why is our military using that configuration if it is that inadequate?"

The AR is only adequate against humans and game animals less than 100 pounds live weight, IMO. THAT is why so many of us want something else, also IMO. Where I live, in a SHTF situation, the likelihood of needing the weapon against people is very low. Of needing said weapon to provide food, more than likely. I guess it depends on where you live.

BTW, of everything I have at my disposal from mine and my dad's collections (AR-15, M-1 Garand, Mausers, Springfields, etc.), my grab it and go gun is a .260 Remington Mountain Rifle. Adequate for moose (if not overwhelming or hugely confidence inspiring, but it would work), easy to shoot, accurate, and reliable.

 

[Stephen Ewing]

if the SHTF I would think that I should take the AR if for no other reason than to carry more ammo in the BOB.

That was reason #1 the military adopted the .223. The other reason was that McNamara's "Whiz Kids" (ironically, the name now suggests what should have been done on them) decided that wounded enemy were more important than dead ones.

Personally, the One True Rifle? FAL.

Steve

 

[greyeyezz]

Politics, Colt worked with some Kennedy appointees who were working a special project in southeast
Asia. Some M-16's were purchased directly for this project and
McNamara liked them so much (he didn't have to use one) that it
eventually became the standard arm.

Light weight

Carry lots of ammo

Low recoil, favorable for undisciplined shooters.

Personally i have a problem with an auto rifle that shoots gas on the bolt, making the boltface, extractor, magazines etc very dirty quickly. I can hit man sized targets all day long at 150yrds with my Mini-14, without cleaning, reliably. And i have plenty of 30rd mags to boot.

 

[Drue]

The military uses the .223 M16 because battles are won by the shotguning use of massed fire and lightweight rifles and lightweight ammo combined with controllability in rapid/auto fire enhance this firepower. The AR is a superior military rifle that is more accurate than most of the others and has superior ergonomics.

This thread (help me out here firestar) asked the question "If you could have only one rifle, what would it be?" Most of the people here on THR are recreational shooters so I assumed that the rifle would be used for recreational shooting unless and until it needed to be used as a homeland defense rifle. The .223 vs. .308 debate as to which is a better fighting rifle is a separate issue unto itself but reasonable people on either side would have to agree that either is a formidable weapon. If we accept the notion that either can be used as a fighter, the question boils down to recreational shooting. I hunt deer and most people would agree that a .308 is a better deer slayer than a .223. I shoot silhouette and a .223 will not knock down a 54lb ram at 547 yards as will a .308. This makes the "one rifle" choice easy.

.308 and .30-06 and other bolt rifles of that class cover the requirements as well but are not as capable as a highcap semi auto for defense. The FAL and HK are fine rifles but their sights and triggers are not nearly as suitable as those of the M1A for target shooting.

If I could pick a selection of various rifles for each particular need I would use my M70 .30-06 for hunting, a 700 in .22-250 for varminting, a Tubb2000 for match rifle and a souped up AR for service rifle, my HB 700 in .308 for silhouette and a FAL or AK for fighting, depending on how I felt that day. Note that the M1A is not in that list. However, if I could have only one to do it all, I would pick the M1A as the one rifle that can do good work at most of the tasks.

Drue

 

[Chris Rhines]

My "only one rifle" would have to be a lightweight, very accurate, .308 Winchester semi-auto, preferably one that can take large magazines. Probably a military rifle of some kind, as I don't really trust the long-term durability of your Remington 7400s and the like. They're also too damn pretty.

- Chris

 

[Nightcrawler]

For the people that wouldn't take the AR first, why is our military using that configuration if it is that inadequate?

People choose .308s over .223s for "one rifle" because you can kill a wider variety of game and do it at longer ranges with the .308. This makes it more versatile.

Yes, .223 is lighter, the mags are smaller, hold more rounds, and weigh less. I know this. I've slept with an M16 in my sleeping bag more times than I can recall. Yes the military (including myself) uses M16 variants as its duty rifle.

However, simply put, I don't care. If I'm shelling out the bucks for the rifle, I'm going to get what I really want, and in my case, that's the FAL.

Do NOT choose your weapons by what the military uses. How limiting is that? I have no desire to buy a Beretta 92, but that's what the troops are issued. I don't want a Sig P226, either. But the SEALs use it. Sure, it's a great pistol, I just don't want one.

The whole "SHTF" scenario was debunked quite thouroghly by Correia back on TFL, after an unpleasant rash of such threads. In the event of some kind of urban riot scenario, you'd most likely be sitting at home with your gun protecting your family and property, not running around alone.

I'm going to be buying a vest that allows me to carry either eight or twelve (I haven't decided yet) 20rd FAL mags. That's 160 or 240 rounds of .308 at my disposal. More than enough for most foreseeable adventures. Weighs a lot, yes, but it still weighs less than my SAW.

At any rate. Yes, the AR-15 is a great rifle (mostly...I've dealt with some Hydra-Matic M16s that I'm not fond of) and is fun for plinking, target shooting, 3-gunning, and just about any defensive situation in which a rifle might be called for. If you want more power than the standard .223, get a .458 SOCOM or .50 Beowulf upper for it (just have a reloading setup ahead of time).

However, having owned two and dealt with more than one genuine GI M16, I can say that I'm bored with them and have no real desire for another one. *shrug*

And Chris...while I don't mind a pretty rifle, I agree on the Remington 7400. It's a fragile, overly complex, difficult to take apart weapon with poor sights and a poorer manual of arms. A good Garand beats it in every way, I think.

 

[cheygriz]

It all depends on your personal tastes, your skill with rifles, your budget, your physical size and condition, and perhaps other factors.

If I could have only one rifle, it would definitely be the AR-15, absolutely no question about it. (AK-74 and AK-47 second and third choices)

I am completely comfortable with both the rifle and the 5.56X45 cartridge. (preferably in the M855 version)

There is no qiuestion in my mind that I can take game up to the size of moose and elk with a 5.56. I'd prefer the .30-06 or even the .338 WinMag for this of course, but in a pinch the AR-15 would do the job.

There's also no question that I could kill any man that ever walked the earth with one shot from it.