ibtl
And I never understood how AR's are overrated. Most of what people say is, they jam, they need cleaned constantly, and that they don't work with steel cased ammo. They do jam, but so does every gun if you push it hard enough. You never hear, "AR's never jam, you could bury them for a year" but you do hear that with AK's.
#2 Eugene Stoners bastard.
Even the M16 and its offsprings are abominations, plastic, paint,aluminum
and in an anemic caliber. Now how in the world can you call any of the firearms in that category a RIFLE?!.
Actually, nobody can be "wrong" about any of this, because what constitutes "overrated" (as well as "best" or "worst") is entirely subjective. It's all entirely a matter of opinion, and you can take two men with identical experiences and get two completely different responses out of them.Okaaaaaaay, you are wrong. You, like many others, aren't looking at the rifles intended purpose. You have a twisted view of what an AR15 is supposed to be.
Andrew wyatt 10/22, followed by anything by HK, the XCR,
anything made by FN in .223,
followed by the m-14, and that's only because of H2o man.
I love my SUB-2000, I don't see the downside to a pistol caliber carbine that takes the same magazine as whatever pistol you carry. And it folds in half to be able to fit into tiny spaces 16"x7".-- Pretty much all pistol-caliber carbines
The pre-'64 Winchester never advertised "controlled round feed." They called it a "claw extractor" and it does its job and does it well.The pre-64 model 70 winchester is sort of overrated though, im not sure how much the controlled round feed helps when i'd probably only be using the gun for target practice.
Ross Siefried once pointed out that the pre-'64 Winchester is a good example of the whole being more than the sum of the parts -- 3-position safety, claw extractor, simple and easily adjusted trigger, good hinged floor plate that doesn't pop open under recoil, and generally very good accuracy add up to something that matches its reputation.