Lovesbeer99
Member
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2006
- Messages
- 1,413
I don't have any of these but I've shot the M1 Scout Squad and I really liked it. I think it's a little shorter than the M1A loaded. I think these are used in combat also.
Looking for a .308 "battle" rifle
- Thread starter zooski22
- Start date
- Status
451 Detonics
Member
With all of the OP's platforms in my safe the one's that get range time are my FAL and CETME. I use the FAL with iron sights and the CETME carries optics. Both have excellent triggers and accuracy rivals my Springfield NM. Both of them are also reliable to a fault, only malfunctions with either were traced to the magazine. The FAl is single most battle proven platform of the 4 with use by over 90 countries in it's long history. It would be my first choice for a .308 MBR.
BADUNAME37
Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2008
- Messages
- 4,434
AR-10
Double Vision
Member
If push came to shove I'd go with an M1A.
Got my hands on a m1a socom today and absolutly loved it. Really handy little rifle shooting the .308. Dont know if I want to go with the socom or the scout though. I plan on putting an optic on it so the iron sights aren't that big of a deal to me. Any suggestions on an optic something that i can accuratly go out to say 200 yards.
HM2PAC
Member
Regardless of which platform you choose, I would recommend learning to use the irons before going to the scope.
There are numerous good scopes out there.
There are numerous good scopes out there.
With the budget you specified, my choice would be the M1A. There are many out there and my experience is they beat the AR-10 in accuracy (at the 1500.00 level). If you would spend twice that then I would steer you a different direction.
I have shot out to 200 yards, with iron sights with a standard M1A with exceptable results. At 100 yards I can punch 2" groups, again open sights. The National match should deliver better than that but your still talking $1800instead of $1500.
The AR-10's are not consistent with their manufacture. There are a lot of people making them but they are constructed differently. The LMT uses a proprietary barrel system as well as Noveske and Larue. Armalite uses proprietary mags and won't except anyone elses. Parts are inconsistent and unless you spend $ for some of the better systems, my experience is they will not deliver the accuracy of the M1A.
The FAL is a good battle rifle, tried and true, but IMHO it falls behind the M1A for accuracy. Parts are plentiful for the FAL as well. If you are a handloader then the FAL is hard on rifle brass. The ones I have shot in the past have crimped the mouth of the casing but if you don't reload that doesn't affect you.
The Scout model of the M1A is an excellent choice if this is the way you go. its a good compromise between the M1A standard and the SOCOM II.
I have shot out to 200 yards, with iron sights with a standard M1A with exceptable results. At 100 yards I can punch 2" groups, again open sights. The National match should deliver better than that but your still talking $1800instead of $1500.
The AR-10's are not consistent with their manufacture. There are a lot of people making them but they are constructed differently. The LMT uses a proprietary barrel system as well as Noveske and Larue. Armalite uses proprietary mags and won't except anyone elses. Parts are inconsistent and unless you spend $ for some of the better systems, my experience is they will not deliver the accuracy of the M1A.
The FAL is a good battle rifle, tried and true, but IMHO it falls behind the M1A for accuracy. Parts are plentiful for the FAL as well. If you are a handloader then the FAL is hard on rifle brass. The ones I have shot in the past have crimped the mouth of the casing but if you don't reload that doesn't affect you.
The Scout model of the M1A is an excellent choice if this is the way you go. its a good compromise between the M1A standard and the SOCOM II.
henschman
Member
I favor the M-14 platform, but I wouldn't go with a Springfield Loaded model. They have a heavier profile match barrel that makes them a heavier rifle. You want a battle rifle, not a match rifle. I would go with a standard 22" barreled model with a GI-profile barrel. However, I wouldn't go with a new production Springfield rifle, because they don't use chrome-lined barrels. Chrome lined barrels have a longer life, are more corrosion resistant, help with extraction reliability, especially in a dirty rifle, and are easier to clean.
I also wouldn't go with a short-barreled model, like a Scout or Socom. For one thing, they don't have chrome lined barrels either unless you get an aftermarket barrel; also, they have a large muzzle blast and flash which isn't good for shooting past evening-time, unless you want to impair your vision and give away your position. They also have reduced velocity, max effective range, and sight radius. I presume if you want a .308 battle rifle, you want something delivering greater power over a greater distance than an intermediate-caliber rifle. I say why compromise in that regard? Get a rifle that burns up all the powder in the barrel, for max velocity and minimum muzzle signature. Besides, a standard 22" barreled M-14 is not a very heavy or cumbersome rifle. It weighs somewhere around 9 lbs., which really isn't too bad.
I would go with an older Springfield or Armscorp built with a GI barrel and other parts, or a new rifle from 7.62mm Firearms, Fulton Armory, or LRB. Those will generally have higher quality parts on a better/more in-spec receiver, and chrome-lined barrels.
Reasons to go with the M-14 over the other designs? It has a great blend of all the things that make a good battle rifle. Good iron sights, reliability, accuracy, and availability of spare parts. Other rifles do some things better and some things worse, but the M-14 is a good balance. The AR is more accurate and easier to mount a scope on, but is less reliable. The FAL is as least as reliable, but is less accurate and has poorer sights. The G-3/PTR is as least reliable and accurate, but has even poorer sights than the FAL. The Saiga is probably at least as reliable, but has even worse sights than the G-3, and has either less accuracy (with the long-barreled version) or a shorter max effective range (with the shorter-barreled version).
I also wouldn't go with a short-barreled model, like a Scout or Socom. For one thing, they don't have chrome lined barrels either unless you get an aftermarket barrel; also, they have a large muzzle blast and flash which isn't good for shooting past evening-time, unless you want to impair your vision and give away your position. They also have reduced velocity, max effective range, and sight radius. I presume if you want a .308 battle rifle, you want something delivering greater power over a greater distance than an intermediate-caliber rifle. I say why compromise in that regard? Get a rifle that burns up all the powder in the barrel, for max velocity and minimum muzzle signature. Besides, a standard 22" barreled M-14 is not a very heavy or cumbersome rifle. It weighs somewhere around 9 lbs., which really isn't too bad.
I would go with an older Springfield or Armscorp built with a GI barrel and other parts, or a new rifle from 7.62mm Firearms, Fulton Armory, or LRB. Those will generally have higher quality parts on a better/more in-spec receiver, and chrome-lined barrels.
Reasons to go with the M-14 over the other designs? It has a great blend of all the things that make a good battle rifle. Good iron sights, reliability, accuracy, and availability of spare parts. Other rifles do some things better and some things worse, but the M-14 is a good balance. The AR is more accurate and easier to mount a scope on, but is less reliable. The FAL is as least as reliable, but is less accurate and has poorer sights. The G-3/PTR is as least reliable and accurate, but has even poorer sights than the FAL. The Saiga is probably at least as reliable, but has even worse sights than the G-3, and has either less accuracy (with the long-barreled version) or a shorter max effective range (with the shorter-barreled version).
There is a book that deals with this matter in a very definitive manner. Boston's Gun Bible. It compares all of the battle rifles down to the most minute detail against each other. Get it, read it, and then handle the M1A/M14 and FN FAL platform and see which one tickles your fancy the best.
In this book the M1A/M14 platform is the most accurate and deemed the best battle rifle out of the lot. The FN FAL is much cheaper and parts/mags are much cheaper and it came in number 2. Both are solid and reliable. I think both rifles are very close to a tie and it just comes down to which you personally are most comfortable with or can afford.
I own a Socom and a Scoped National Match. I have never had a FTF or any other issue. Just rock solid reliabilty. I like them both for different reasons. The Socom replaced my Savage 99 in .308 as my ultimate brush gun and the open sights are perfect for this application and I have no need to scope it. It is a little on the heavy side for a brush gun though but it's fast handling and little recoil makes up for it. The National Match is my paper puncher and is just as accurate as my bolt action rifles.
In this book the M1A/M14 platform is the most accurate and deemed the best battle rifle out of the lot. The FN FAL is much cheaper and parts/mags are much cheaper and it came in number 2. Both are solid and reliable. I think both rifles are very close to a tie and it just comes down to which you personally are most comfortable with or can afford.
I own a Socom and a Scoped National Match. I have never had a FTF or any other issue. Just rock solid reliabilty. I like them both for different reasons. The Socom replaced my Savage 99 in .308 as my ultimate brush gun and the open sights are perfect for this application and I have no need to scope it. It is a little on the heavy side for a brush gun though but it's fast handling and little recoil makes up for it. The National Match is my paper puncher and is just as accurate as my bolt action rifles.
triggernick
Member
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2010
- Messages
- 11
I was recently wondering the same questions as the OP. What I did. Purchase a LRB M14 clone and a POF 308 (piston AR). I'm in the process of shooting the hell out of both and seeing which I like best. I will most likely keep both, as I am liking them both, but for different reason.
conclusions:
M14
Pros:
Reliable
accurate (amazing)
great iron sights
cons:
if you plan on scoping the rifle, it's design isn't conducive to a rail (however I bought a LRB with M25 receiver which has an integral rail making scoping easier and secure).
heavy (the rifle is slightly heavier than the AR but when a scope is added, that small difference is very obvious).
if something breaks, i have to find a gunsmith that works magic on m14s
POF 308
Pros:
better for lefties
easier to scope
light weight
easier if something breaks
Cons:
not as accurate
not as reliable (had some FTF issues -sent it back to POF - 3 year warranty - found it was "short stroking" so I got a larger piston and haven't put it through it's paces yet)
iron sights not as good as the m14 (troy flip up battle sights)
both have ups and downs. I think I'll keep both. but the M14 is just plain fun to shoot.
conclusions:
M14
Pros:
Reliable
accurate (amazing)
great iron sights
cons:
if you plan on scoping the rifle, it's design isn't conducive to a rail (however I bought a LRB with M25 receiver which has an integral rail making scoping easier and secure).
heavy (the rifle is slightly heavier than the AR but when a scope is added, that small difference is very obvious).
if something breaks, i have to find a gunsmith that works magic on m14s
POF 308
Pros:
better for lefties
easier to scope
light weight
easier if something breaks
Cons:
not as accurate
not as reliable (had some FTF issues -sent it back to POF - 3 year warranty - found it was "short stroking" so I got a larger piston and haven't put it through it's paces yet)
iron sights not as good as the m14 (troy flip up battle sights)
both have ups and downs. I think I'll keep both. but the M14 is just plain fun to shoot.
Last edited:
sschudalla
Member
Have had a DPMS LR308 for a year now, about 500 rounds. Really, really, like it. Great rifle and accurate. I have been really surprised at 200 yds. Had a hiccup with the trigger but was really minor and fixed it myself. I highly reccomend an AR10 for accuracy. I agree the FAL is cool though! I do hear great things about the PTR91's. I looked at the CETME for low cost but backed out--folks have told me they are pretty decent for around 550 out the door.
For a Battle-rifle to plink and have fun with, go a CETME or a FAL, or even better - an AK variant. I'd recommend them more, as a .308 is EXPENSIVE to just blow through. Plus, AK's are more reliable generally than most of the others. Sure, an AR-platform can be steady, but they're much more expensive to get to that point, and their design lends itself to more frequent cleanings anyways.
Fecal-matter-distribution-via-spinning-blades, there's a reason we shun it. Our military is so advanced, so mobile, and our spending on it is so overgrown, that we can put the brunt of it wherever we want within 12-24 hours. Besides, if SHTF on this soil, with how aware and in-control the Gov't is, you'd have military on your doorstep requisitioning your weapons (on grounds of preventing looting and social uprising) WELL Before you could finish putting on your tacticool wardrobe.
Thus, for acting out a post-apoc scenario with friends in a backyard...go AK. Or move to Chernobyl, it's close to it...and Wait - what gun is the most popular over there? Certainly not anything teflon coated..
One other trick - clearing a jam in an AR requires a bit more than an AK. AK is Crank handle, tip gun, round falls, release handle. OR yank handle and smack on a local hard vertical surface (Doorjam, tree, post, etc), release handle. Yes, I've done it, it works, and is LOTS of fun. Good luck doing that trick to a $1,200 AR platform, or a well-stuck blowback CETME platform.
Just my $.02
Fecal-matter-distribution-via-spinning-blades, there's a reason we shun it. Our military is so advanced, so mobile, and our spending on it is so overgrown, that we can put the brunt of it wherever we want within 12-24 hours. Besides, if SHTF on this soil, with how aware and in-control the Gov't is, you'd have military on your doorstep requisitioning your weapons (on grounds of preventing looting and social uprising) WELL Before you could finish putting on your tacticool wardrobe.
Thus, for acting out a post-apoc scenario with friends in a backyard...go AK. Or move to Chernobyl, it's close to it...and Wait - what gun is the most popular over there? Certainly not anything teflon coated..
One other trick - clearing a jam in an AR requires a bit more than an AK. AK is Crank handle, tip gun, round falls, release handle. OR yank handle and smack on a local hard vertical surface (Doorjam, tree, post, etc), release handle. Yes, I've done it, it works, and is LOTS of fun
. Good luck doing that trick to a $1,200 AR platform, or a well-stuck blowback CETME platform. Just my $.02
I dunno dude, clearing an AR-type rifle isn't really that involved, and best of all the process for fixing a malfunction is absolutely well known. Millions or billions at this point rounds of competition AR rounds fired has it's advantages beyond just hardware. Training has advanced because of it too.
HorseSoldier
Member
One other trick - clearing a jam in an AR requires a bit more than an AK. AK is Crank handle, tip gun, round falls, release handle. OR yank handle and smack on a local hard vertical surface (Doorjam, tree, post, etc), release handle. Yes, I've done it, it works, and is LOTS of fun
Or if you have a type 3 malf in an AK -- remove top cover. Attempt to remove bolt. Swear. Try to move bolt handle. Swear some more. Shake and rattle the thing while praying to the gods of gun design something good will happen. Continue until fixed, or you pick up another gun off the battlefield, or you're killed.
wrs840 im not sure on the weight, plus with mine i added a ultimak to mount my aimpoint so now it is heavier. my understanding is that if you plan on using the sai scout mount it may get to hot for a red dot. so if i were to us ethis i would go with a burris or leupolde scout scope. i too thought that the bush/scout squad is the perfect compromise between the 3 and it will still reach out to 600yds, which is farther then i have ever shot.
HM2PAC
Member
Drop 2 take down pins, remove buttstock, kick charging handle, remove fouled round, re-assemble. Shouldn't take more than 30 seconds.
It's called the "Field Stripping Queen" for a reason.
TexasPatriot.308
Member
you got to look at price too, the RRA .308 or the Springfield Armory M1a or a high dollar custom AR10, they all do the job if you got extra cash, spend it.
I've had all of the OPs choices. Currently, I don't own any of them...I have the RFB. I am putting it through it's paces, but it has a lot of promise thus far. I like many of the features offered on the RFB...compact size for having an 18" barrel...the OAL is a little over 27"...weight with optic and loaded mag is 11.5lbs...true ambi for left hand shooters.
The RFB isn't a precision rifle, but it is shooting a tad over 1MOA.
If your budget can handle it...take a look at the SCAR17 (make sure if you can afford the rifle that you budget for the mags since they are proprietary) CProduct mags don't count since they don't seem to be up to par (no surprise).
The Larue OBR is also very nice.
I personally like the SCAR17 because it's light for a 308 rifle.
The RFB isn't a precision rifle, but it is shooting a tad over 1MOA.
If your budget can handle it...take a look at the SCAR17 (make sure if you can afford the rifle that you budget for the mags since they are proprietary) CProduct mags don't count since they don't seem to be up to par (no surprise).
The Larue OBR is also very nice.
I personally like the SCAR17 because it's light for a 308 rifle.
I had both the M-14 and M-16 in the Army, and really like the M-14. That is why I have used and M14S for years and love it. However, the US couldn't give them away, nor the M60 for that matter. We were the only NATO country who used them. Most of the worlds army's went with the FN FAL in one configuration or another. I'd like to have a FAL, they are really nice, but not at he cost of my M-14!
Scipio Africanus
Member
I have a National Match M1A. It is fantastically accurate and dependable. If the world were ending and I could only have one gun; this would be it.
For $1500 you have several options. I went with the M1A for my .308 and I love the rifle but I feel like I didn't do enough research. The Kel Tec RFB bullpup felt great in my hands and its light weight and very maneuverable and it uses FAL metric mags which are pretty easy to find at $20 a pop. My shooting buddy owns the DSA SA58 and I don't really prefer it. Its not very comfortable to shoot in my opinion and he has had a few troubles with it feeding for some reason. Another option for would be the DPMS SASS (http://www.nelsontactical.com/products/dpms-762-lrtsass-p-380.html). Its a little over your price you mentioned at $1750 but it comes with a few upgrades including a $200 stock, cushy grip, quad-rail and flip up iron sights and I believe it would be a very accurate rifle with some nice optics.
It really comes down to how you intend to employ the rifle. Like others have said, you really should hold the rifle you want before you buy it so you know how comfortable it will be for you.
It really comes down to how you intend to employ the rifle. Like others have said, you really should hold the rifle you want before you buy it so you know how comfortable it will be for you.
stubbicatt
Member
Using handloads, my PTR91, manufactured by JLD Enterprises, the name of the firm before it sold, is very accurate. It will shoot at about an inch with 155 Amax bullets in handloads at 100 yards, or at least it has done so. The rifle has one of the fabled "tight" chambers, so it is beset by limitations on what ammo I can shoot through it very often. It becomes a single shot sort of "modified slide action" if I shoot much of the tar sealed milsurp through it.
There is little doubt that the FN "SCAR" (lordy, why that name?) will be a more modern, easier rifle to use than the PTR, but for awhile there one of the big features to me about the PTR rifle, aside from its accuracy and durability, was the ready availability of magazines and cool surplus furniture and accessories at bargain basement prices. That and it is very easy to mount a scope on it, which retains zero.
The rifle is very easy to clean and disassemble.
I agree with Mr. Eatman that there is no "best" rifle. Hold a few, shoulder them, see if folks at the range will allow you to shoot one of theirs. Heck for me this is purely a part time hobby, there is no battlefield anywhere near here that I know of. Get the one which moves you, and enjoy it.
Regards.
There is little doubt that the FN "SCAR" (lordy, why that name?) will be a more modern, easier rifle to use than the PTR, but for awhile there one of the big features to me about the PTR rifle, aside from its accuracy and durability, was the ready availability of magazines and cool surplus furniture and accessories at bargain basement prices. That and it is very easy to mount a scope on it, which retains zero.
The rifle is very easy to clean and disassemble.
I agree with Mr. Eatman that there is no "best" rifle. Hold a few, shoulder them, see if folks at the range will allow you to shoot one of theirs. Heck for me this is purely a part time hobby, there is no battlefield anywhere near here that I know of. Get the one which moves you, and enjoy it.
Regards.
- Status
