most reliable 308 battle rifle

[memphisjim]

im wondering what would the most reliable 308 battle rifle

m14,fal ,g3, ar10 (maybe i forgot some)
in terms of which will shoot longest without cleaning?

 

[GTSteve03]

I would guess the G3, as it doesn't really use a gas system at all, so fouling doesn't become much of an issue.

 

[everallm]

FAL/L1A1, long usage, demonstrated in multiple combat environments, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound......

 

[TexasRifleman]

Well there's "Old Dirty", a FAL in Texas that's into well over 14,000 rounds without cleaning.

The whole thread on the rifle is over at FAL Files if you want to read it.

 

[Prepster]

The FAL is a phenominal rifle. That said, I think a Saiga .308 would soldier on for quite some time as well.

 

[memphisjim]

i didnt expect the ar10 to get any votes
but i am suprised the m14 hasnt been mentioned

 

[Loomis]

G3

The downside is you can't reload spent brass.

 

[32 Magnum]

.308 Battle Rifle

From my experience, used the M14 in basic and advanced training, it can fire hundreds of rounds without malfunction during training and can tolerate a fair amount of dirt/crud build-up. I'm thinking that we should hear from some ex-Jarheads (Marines) who actually used these MBRs in combat in Viet Nam, pre M-16 days. The M-14 wasn't used very extensively in combat scenarios, other than RVN, by US troops, so I'm thinking the body of knowledge is somewhat limited. I DO know that there was, is and continues to be a very strong emphasis on cleaning personal weapons amongst all the US Military Branches. Sooo????

 

[W.E.G.]

In a harsh environment, I choose the FAL.

 

[Vaarok]

FAL, the M-14 has a more complicated gas system, the G-3 can tear caseheads, the Kalash derived rifles can have reciever issues over a very very long time. The FAL is pretty much impossible to break, besides the universal thread of a pulled extractor or snapped firing pin, and unless I'm mistaken, most of those competing designs don't have spring return firing pins.

 

[D-Day]

The "Old Dirty" FAL makes me want to challenge that with a basic M1A and do the same thing. Someone needs to do this.

 

[Click Click Boom]

Galil

 

[Detachment Charlie]

No Contest

Ishapore Enfield.
Ground-up .308 build and a bolt action that would feed rocks from a 10 round magazine.

[/IMG]

 

[elmerfudd]

For most of them, it's not really an issue. A properly built, FAL, M1A, G3 or .308 AK will function as well as an autoloader can be expected to, even in harsh conditions. I'd probably give the edge to the AK or the G3, but FAL's and M1A's really aren't at any disadvantage.

With the AR10, I think that reliability becomes an issue, but the modern day role of the AR10 seems to be as a DMR and in that capacity, accuracy trumps reliability.

 

[memphisjim]

ok lets go $1500 new semiauto 308
whats best

 

[TexasRifleman]

ok lets go $1500 new semiauto 308
whats best

Still FAL. You can get the DSA carbine for 1500 if you shop around.

 

[Speedo66]

I got into the army in 1967 and basic training was with M14s.

Did it at Ft. Ord, Monterey, CA. Rifle ranges on the beach. Saw many M-14s dropped in the sand, never saw one fail to fire.

 

[Loomis]

Hmm, I'm going to change my vote to match that of post #13.

 

[elmerfudd]

ok lets go $1500 new semiauto 308
whats best

Depends on what you want. The big three, (FAL, G3, M1A), are all very reliable, so that's not much of an issue. The FAL has the best ergonomics. The M1A has the best sights and trigger and is probably the most accurate. The G3 isn't as ergonomic as an FAL, but it's probably a bit more accurate and has better sights. The G3 and FAL have very affordable mags. M1A mags cost about $20.

Then you have the AR10 and a few AK's in .308. The AR10 blows everything else out of the water in terms of accuracy and scope mounting, but I wouldn't put an AR in the same class when it comes to reliability. The other rifles will work dirty, wet, dry, etc... An AR needs to be kept clean and lubed. Mags aren't cheap.

The .308 AK's out there are very reliable and for the most part reasonably accurate as well. With a Vepr, Saiga or Galil you can expect around 3 MOA or better. Unfortunately, they have AK ergonomics and .308 AK mags are pricey.

 

[Rifleman 173]

Over the years I have used a variety of rifles. When I was in Nam for 19 months I had an M-16 and then later on an XM-21 sniper rifle. I had zero problems with either of my rifles. They were both accurate for the job I was doing at the time. The XM-21 was a 7.62 National Match sniper rifle based off of the M-14 rifle system. That was really a fantastic rifle system. I would not hesitate to again carry another XM-21, M-14, M-21 or M-1A rifle into combat a second time. That rifle and the 7.62 bullet is fantastic. The idea that one rifle is all that a group of soldiers needs has always been ridiculous to me. No matter what job you have, you need a variety of different tools to get a job done. The same thing applies to our military and infantry personnel. Carpenters have hammers, saws, drills and so on to build with while doctors have all sorts of devices for their craft too. Where in the world did the moron come from that thought that one rifle would meet the needs of our infantry? Whoever it was must have been a Democrat of some sort. The M-14 rifle series gets my vote based off of experience.

 

[Proinsias]

Detachment Charlie, even better, it's actually 12 rounds I believe.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

I am guessing that in terms of intrinsic reliability, the differences between all of the Big Three are very small. I doubt the average user would ever notice a difference in reliability under normal shooting conditions. Of them, however, I would rate the FAL first with a slight advantage, the G3 second, and the M14 third by a hair of the female genitalia

I have to say the M14 has advantages in other areas that make up for a minute and largely theoretical disadvantage in reliability. Maybe I would rate the M14 higher in terms of reliability if my experience with it wasn't limited to a Springfield, but rather to an SEI or LRB. I hope to find out. In the meantime, I feel like having the better trigger and sights out of the group, and better accuracy, pretty much makes up for it, as they are advantages you can appreciate every time you drop the hammer.

I also find the ergonomics of the M14 to be superior to either the FAL or the G3. And as a lefty, control placement is much better.

 

[Vaarok]

I always consider accuracy secondary to sheer dirt-proof reliability. If you've ever seen a movie like Talvisota, where there's no wussy air-mortars and it's REAL sand-and-gravel getting kicked up by the effects guys, and watch that crap landing on the actors, it changes perception of dirtproof. Not dust-in-the-action-makes-it-gummy, but "what happens if you're getting a shovelfull of dirt thrown on the rifle every few minutes while in operation.

The FAL and AK, you pop it apart and shake. I know the G3 and AR are supposedly sealed feed-from-the-bottom-spit-empties-out-a-little-hole-in-the-side rifles where you'll never have to punch pins, but if you ever do...

 

[memphisjim]

mtmilitiaman
did you post infer that springfield mia's arent good?

 

[chauncey]

+1 what elmerfudd said.

environment might play a bit of a role.

the Israeli's apparently had problems with sand in their FAL's. hence, the sand cuts on the bolts and the Galil.

in a sandy environment, based on this info, I might give the G3 a slight edge. anywhere else, it's probably a wash.

one thought is that the G3 is one of the most difficult battle rifles to strip and clean. the M14 requires the least disassembly to field clean, and the FAL is the easiest. that's all I would add to elmerfudd's .02

without getting into it, magazine availability, commonality and price are the biggest drawbacks to the AR10 and the Saiga.