If you had to choose a rifle and a handgun to go into a battle/armed conflict ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Utilizing weapons I currently own, it would be a WWII Remington Rand 1911A1 for the hand gun and for the long gun it would be the Marlin Camp 45. This is a good combination since they both use the same ammo (45ACP) and mags thereby making it easier to carry and resupply only one type of ammo.
 
Last edited:
Virtually every formal force in combat today wears body armor that will defeat 95% of the firearms posters here have listed.

If your gun can't defeat the enemy by shooting him COM then you need a different caliber.
If you think you are going to be going for head shots, especially during moderate to long range firefights while taking incoming fire...
Ballistic helmets are also standard issue now as well, so only a small portion of the head is even a valid target for many calibers, even more at longer ranges.


When most of Europe started using mail and then plate armor people didn't keep using weapons that excelled against flesh and failed against mail and plate. They adapted.
Adapt your weapon selection or fail.

You can't rely on the only opponent being civilians/poorly equipped insurgents. Even some of them will be well equipped. If the local police/military forces have body armor you can bet some of it will end up in use by insurgents that you will face.
If you face another formal military, they will be wearing body armor, including armor with rifle rated ballistic plates.
 
Virtually every formal force in combat today wears body armor that will defeat 95% of the firearms posters here have listed.

I am not a soldier, but this sounds like a silly statement. I have a very close friend who served in the first gulf war. He was clearing a residence, took a center chest AK round from about 10 feet. He was wearing body armor. It still fractured his sternum and nearly killed him. He was out of the fight & down. His buddies dispatched the enemy before anyone else got shot, and he got to spend some time in the field hospital.
 
Sir, have you ever worn the latest body armor in combat? or for that matter any type body armor in a combat situation?

Ever served in a forward area? Ever asked a man to put his life in your hands? Ever placed your life in another mans hands? We follow orders or people die. Are we clear?

Sorry--could'nt help myself. Carry on--
 
I probably already posted before, but my opinion might have changed ;).
For a rifle, a 20" Ar15 /w Eotech and BUIS, and of course spare parts and oil for the ar15. I realize the AK requires less maintenance and has bigger parts that are less likely to break. But, the advantages the AR15 has in handling and accuracy are worth the trade off in my opinion. For a pistol I would opt for an FN Five Seven.

Both the AR15 and FN Five Seven use very light ammunition that you can carry a lot of. That's a big advantage over say .45 or .308.
 
As a contractor overseas, a SCAR, and a P7 with two spare mags.

The battle rifle I prefer was the G3, I bought and used an HK91. BUT, they are heavy, especially in .308. The SCAR is the next gen better, with a common mag and caliber to keep filled up.

The P7 will do, as most pistol use is either deep urban or ceremonial. A 1911 is a dead giveaway, and will get you there, hard to find ammo for worldwide, and because of the multitude of versions, a hopeless basket case finding parts, unless it was GI issue. The P7 is more durable, reliable, and easier to shoot, with plentiful ammo.

From my closet - ready for this? A Winchester 94 and G19. I can find ammo anywhere in America. The .30-30 is the ballistic equivalent to 7.62 by 39, which gives better knockdown and range than our current US varmint round. It's public friendly in the US, as much as any other gun will get a 911 call, and the G19 nearly the same. Neither will make you as much a target as the elitist or boutique suburbanite guns mentioned, and in many cases are more reliable and accurate. After all, you aren't "capable" of full auto - but certainly capable of rapid accurate fire. That can remain a deadly misconception on their part.

Had I more money, a M1A Scout rifle, and Browning HiPower, which is what the Man himself blessed as a superior generation better than the 1911.
 
But the entire premise is silly

I'm done having to lug that s... stuff

What ever gets me out alive, like not getting in a gunfight and running away.
 
Carbine:
HK417
Reliable gas system, very accurate, select fire, good penetrating longer range 7.62x51mm .308 round.

Handgun:
Glock 19
Lightweight, reliable, compact, simple design, point and shoot, easy to find 9x19mm round.

It's difficult for me to get excited about a handgun when considering all of the stuff a soldier has to carry (40 - 50 lbs, not including vest, helmet, ammo magazines for the battle rifle, etc) in a battle/armed conflict situation but I would want one for a backup in case my carbine got damaged/disabled in a close-in firefight.
 
An M4 with something better than FMJ's will suit me just fine. I like the rifle a lot, just not the ammo we used.

For pistols, I'll defer to people who know about pistols, but an M9 did literally save one guy's life last time I was in Iraq.
 
I would choose a Mini-14 with a full length synthetic stock and PROVEN 30 round magazines. For a handgun I would choose my Ruger P90 or S&W 686.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top