The Patrol Rifle Concept

[Cosmoline]

The AR itself is an old rifle, so if you're going to use an "evolutionary" argument many other rifles will have ousted it over the past sixty years. And indeed in some respects, particularly its odd gas system, they have. But I think it's a mistake to view each new rifle as an evolutionary improvement over prior designs. In reality, the last great evolutionary leaps came in the 1890's with the introduction of smokeless powder. Everything since then has been mere refinement. So the AR is a refinement of the same ideas that led to the Winchester '94. But is it actually more useful as a patrol rifle in practice? It has some advantages, and some disadvantages. The thing about engineering refinements is you have to take from one thing to add to another. It's always a question of balance. More power = more recoil. A gas system lets you increase the rate of fire, but it also puts inherent limitations on the kind of rounds you can feed and fire. The more pipes you put in, the easier it is for them to get stopped up. And no matter how you flip them around or how fancy you make them look, ALL smokeless powder cartridge firearms are dealing with the same basic elements and have to deal with the same basic issues. So there's far less evolutionary difference between a modern AR and a modern Marlin levergun than you seem to be assuming. It's mainly a question of what tradeoffs you want to make to acheieve a given result.

But I grant you if we were talking about rifles for COMPETITION SHOOTING, at least outside of Cowboy action, the AR seems to have some real advantages. It can be extremely accurate, for one thing. But we're not talking about getting high scores here. This is a discussion of rifles for rough field use.

 

[ghost squire]

If you're not going to count the self loading rifle as a great evolutionary step, at least include machineguns in there.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

First, evolution doesn't mean improvement - it just means better adapted to the environment. History is replete with ideas and animals that were perfectly adapted to one environment and died off when that environment changed. A modern urban environment is one that the AR15 is well adapted to and that older rifles developed in a different environment can compete in; but not at the same level. I think that is all anyone is really saying.

This is a discussion of rifles for rough field use.

The AR15 has certainly seen its share of rough field use; but I don't think you meant this to be an AR15 v. ???? thread. If I read your initial post right, you were just noting that the role filled by the AR15 now had been around for a long time and had been filled by a variety of rifles and were trying to determine some common characteristics?

 

[Eleven Mike]

You could just as easily create a course requiring such things as topping off the magazine that would put a levergun ahead.

Topping off a tube mag is faster than dropping and switching box mags? I guess if you were in dire need of ammo.

If you're not going to count the self loading rifle as a great evolutionary step, at least include machineguns in there

. According to Wikipedia, which is never, ever wrong, the Maxim was invented in 1885 and the first smokeless powder, Poudre B, was developed in 1886.

 

[LAK]

Bartholomew Roberts

Does it matter what a firearm is mechanically capable of if less than 1% of the population is even capable of appreciating that difference? From a practical perspective, semi-autos outrun bolts for a very good reason.

There is a direct relationship between practical capability and mechanical capability. The operator can make a difference either way - Mr Miculek being a prime example. But let's not confuse average operator with fastest, or most overall capable.

The Army just moved to a semi-auto sniper rifle and cited speed of the next shot as the major factor.

So? The Army has chopped and changed from one thing to another for more than a hundred years. The Army adopted a modification of the M14 when the Marines stuck with a bolt as a dedicated sniper during the Vietnam war. Let me guess, the Marine Corp was "behind the curve" at the time?

The current move neither surprizes me nor alters a sound position. One of the first rules of sniping is that you do not fire more than one shot, maybe two, unless you are in a position of invulnerability. This has been universal in sniper training and on the battlefield.

If current Army snipers operating in limited zones can fire with impunity against targets incapable of neutralizing them once detected, all well and good. But that does not change what has been sound doctrine for sniping in general over a hundred years.

If school-trained snipers find a semi-auto faster than a bolt, then it doesn't matter whether a bolt is mechanically capable of being faster (and I disagree even with that premise).

School-trained snipers are not new, and what the Army is doing now, as in the past, is not necessarily a good general policy and the last word warranting a complete change.

As to a bolt being mechanically faster; again, I thought we cleared that one up. I have used medium bore selfloaders and medium bore bolts - the recovery time is as near as makes no practical difference the same and during the recovery time a bolt can be worked sufficiently fast. I have used the smallbore M16 on a professional level, and others like the Mini-14, and as I have agreed they are another matter altogether when directly comparing to similarly chambered bolt-actions in shooting drills.

----------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[dm1333]

Hey Cosmoline!

I've been away for over two weeks and some of the posts here are giving me a headache! What I really want to know is how well the 527 has been shooting for you? I haven't found a shop around here yet that is quoting anything less than MSRP but once my motorcycle is up and running I think I really need another rifle.

 

[Cosmoline]

The 527 is a real hoot. I haven't worked up any standard handloads for it, so I don't know what its peak accuracy is. I'll be happy with 2 MOA. Mostly I've been experimenting with very light plinkers and a new 172-180 grain range of bullets. I've posted about these in the handloading forum. The end results were satisfactory, and show that the x39 can equal the 30-30 with heavy bullets. Indeed, I very much doubt any .30-30 of equal size (such as a Spikehorn) could beat the 527 in any range of loads. Though admittedly a .30-30 bolt action with a 22" barrel using handloads can reach .308 levels.

The carbine itself is very handy. It's well balanced and shoots easily off hand or kneeling. I added a Blackhawk cheek pad/ammo pouch and that's helped make up for the undersized stock comb.

 

[dm1333]

How smooth is the action? I judge all bolts against my Lee Enfield, which is pretty damn smooth. I had a chance to hold a CZ-452 Lux and was impressed with the gun and that has made me really want the 527. I wanted to get another Enfield rechambered in 7.62x39 but I think that might get put aside for the CZ. I have spent the last 12 years in coastal WA, OR and CA and have not seen too many deer taken past 100 yards. I think that little gun with the right loads would be great for deer and pig.

 

[Cosmoline]

It rattles a bit like any good Mauser should, but locks up nicely and cycles very smoothly. What I like most about it is how it's truly a mini '98. Everything about it is shrunk down a notch, not just the length of the action. As a result it's extremely packable and easy to handle. It's also very fast. On par with an SMLE once you get the hang of it. It shoots like my 452.

 

[benEzra]

One attempt at definition/criteria, from 2003:

Sheppard W. Kelly, "The Patrol Rifle," Police Marksman, Jan/Feb 2003, pp. 38-40:

- functional reliability

- capable of one-shot incapacitation with peripheral hit

- reasonably compact

- have easily acquired sights

- capable of accepting auxiliary sight systems

- durable and easily maintained

- semi-automatic and magazine-fed

- able to place 10 sustained fire shots in an 8" circle at 200 yds.

One could quibble about the the realism of #2 with ANY rifle caliber, but I'm just quoting the article. He recommends AR-15 type rifles as the best patrol rifle.

Going back a bit more, there's Dick Fairburn, "So, You're Ready for a Rifle?" Police Marksman, May/June 1997, who also strongly recommends the basic, iron-sighted AR-15 as the best choice for the general officer, as a replacement for the traditional 12-gauge pump shotgun in the cruiser's trunk or overhead rack.

I have a number of other articles on patrol rifles from Police Marksman, and all tend to recommend the AR-15 on its merits, rather than on cost/training issues. I think it is indeed a good choice for the average officer, and a lot of departments seem to agree, based on the percentage who are using AR's in that role.

That's not to say that a lever-action, pump-action, or even a smooth bolt-action couldn't fit the category of "patrol rifle," but one certainly cannot define AR-15's and such out of the category since in the real word they dominate the category.

 

[Cosmoline]

I don't think anyone is trying to define the AR out of the category. The debate is whether the AR is the ONLY CHOICE, as a number of ARphiles seem to believe. It's certainly *A* choice, and it may be the best one in some circumstances. But it's clearly not the only choice, and not the best for all circumstances.

Also, the class of rifles goes beyond LEO use to include an array of personal truck guns and home defense carbines.

 

[shootinstudent]

I think compiling a good list of situations the patrol rifle will be called to handle will be a good way to start figuring out which rifle(s) will be best suited to the job.

I'm thinking of certain common features across the different action types, something like a making a "patrol package" for whichever handy-little rifle you have. Not sure what those features would be, of course...ghost ring sights, or a combo of more accurate and ghost ring sights (like the A2 setup) come to mind first.

For me, the ideal such gun is my Marlin .30-30...but I'm getting tempted to buy a new CZ after reading about all that Comsoline is doing with that 527. A nice little bolt gun in a medium caliber seems like a great idea, especially if I can find one with a stock that helps the gun to point naturally like my .30-30.

 

[mustanger98]

shootinstudent:

I'm thinking of certain common features across the different action types, something like a making a "patrol package" for whichever handy-little rifle you have. Not sure what those features would be, of course...ghost ring sights, or a combo of more accurate and ghost ring sights (like the A2 setup) come to mind first.

What I do... I like a small diameter target aperture sight for finer work, but if I need a ghostring in a hurry, I just unscrew the aperture and use the threaded hole. It looks just like the fuzzy ring of some ghostrings I've seen.

For me, the ideal such gun is my Marlin .30-30...but I'm getting tempted to buy a new CZ after reading about all that Comsoline is doing with that 527. A nice little bolt gun in a medium caliber seems like a great idea, especially if I can find one with a stock that helps the gun to point naturally like my .30-30.

Yeah. Much as I like my Enfield, I'm a levergunner too. I like Marlin and Winchester both- I know some people argue one's better than the other, but I don't happen to have a preference. My go to is this one '94 I have with the Lyman #2 tang sight because it generally fits me. If I need finer sights, I have a Williams foolproof that bolts right up to the side of the receiver and I know how to line it up in a hurry and adjust it finer from there. I'm liking the sound of Cosmoline's 527 too, for an intermediate caliber bolt, but for my preference of sights and what I do with any rifle, I got this old Remington 521-T which is .22LR. While I won't argue that a .22LR will do everything the bigger stuff will (because it won't), I'd still hate to get hit with it and I don't think anybody here will argue with that.

Cosmoline:

Also, the class of rifles goes beyond LEO use to include an array of personal truck guns and home defense carbines.

As much as we've talked up bolts, this statement has "levergun" wrote all over it. I was just talking about my .30-30, but another carbine I like is a '94AE w/ 16" barrel in .45Colt (to match a Ruger sixgun) slung muzzle down on my right shoulder. I can about get it into action faster than my sixgun or 1911A1. Either Winchester can ride on my saddle or in my pickup. I just figure where I'm headed before I choose which rifle or carbine.

 

[8x57mm]

Cheap, indestructable, jam-proof, accurate... and will stop... well, most anything with one shot...

milsurp M48 with a 4X LER scope mounted scout-style at the rear sight position.

Now play nice!

 

[s2brutus]

How about this:

An M-1 Carbine chambered for the new round, .357 Maximum Rimless - or we could just call it the .357 Brutus for short.

 

[Cosmoline]

Wow my own zombie thread come back to attack me.

 

[MASTEROFMALICE]

Wow my own zombie thread come back to attack me.

And it's still in perfect shape. Perhaps it was stored in cosmoline.

 

[zxcvbob]

Wow my own zombie thread come back to attack me.

You forgot to shoot it in the head. (been watching George Romero movies)

 

[sixgunner455]

What's in YOUR head, Zombie?!

 

[goon]

double post

 

[goon]

I'm inclined to think that the lever action 30-30 would work about as well as anything else for this use.

As was already stated, it does have adequate power, holds "enough" ammo, is lightweight and quick handling, and pretty common to most areas.
It also has the benefit of being quite inexpensive compared to most choices - even with prices on everything going up I still see good used Marlin 30-30's for around $250. Nothing against the AR, but I have never seen an AR in that price range and I doubt I ever will. Add in magazines and there is just no comparison as far as price goes.
This may or may not be a consideration to a police department but it would certainly be a consideration to me. Point blank, I don't have $900 of disposable income for an AR. But I and most others could probably come up with $300 for a Marlin and a few boxes of ammo.
As an added advantage, there isn't any need to add a shotgun with slugs for stopping larger animals in most of the lower 48. The 5.56 seems to work about as well as anything else on human threats but the 30-30 has it outclassed if you need to shoot at anything larger or meaner than a medium sized deer.
I won't argue against the advantages of a semi-auto because I can't. They're true. An AR does hold more ammo, is at least as accurate as a lever action 30-30, and could probably deliver a quicker second shot for most shooters than a lever action. But the advantages of lever actions like cost and the added penetration if you need it are real too.

If it's not "fair" to exclude the merits of an AR, then it is also just as irrational to exclude anything that isn't semi auto without looking at the benefits that might be gained.

By the way - this is an old thread !
Might as well keep it alive...

 

[benEzra]

Also, high capacity is only needed if you're going to use the firearm for military-style suppressive fire or the sort of marsh-clearing they do in Iraq. For legal reasons these aren't really on the table for LEO's or civilians. You could have a patrol rifle with a high cap, but you wouldn't really need it.

I disagree, because an officer who grabs the rifle out of the roof rack on the fly to pursue a suspect/engage a situation will typically do so with only the ammunition in the magazine, as officers don't typically walk around with .223 mag carriers on their duty belts. That is doubly true of homeowners, unless you normally sleep in a tac-vest.

If an officer typically carries 30 to 45 rounds of 9mm/.40 on his/her person to cover contingencies, I think it is entirely reasonable to have 20 or 30 rounds available for the carbine; 5 to 15 could leave the officer with no reserve if things go south.

 

[Cosmoline]

Officers do walk around with multiple sidearm reloads though, which become superfluous if they have a patrol rifle.

Besides, if you have a proper long gun you don't need nearly as many rounds. And it's not as though LEO's are going to be laying down suppressive fire on some general area.

Frankly I think today's LEO is hugely overloaded with junk. They would do better with a carbine, a small optional sidearm and some extra rounds. Not 30 or 40 or 60. That's just dead weight.

EDIT: I've been pulled back in by the zombie, and it's eating my brains! Don't be surprized if I start replying to myself and debating myself, thereby creating a warp in the time/space whatzit and folding this dimension back in on itself like the worm ouroboros.

 

[zxcvbob]

I'm inclined to think that the lever action 30-30 would work about as well as anything else for this use. As was already stated, it does have adequate power, holds "enough" ammo, is lightweight and quick handling, and pretty common to most areas.

I think the .357 Magnum lever action has it beat, just from the extra magazine capacity. The .30-30 holds 5 rounds. The .357 holds 9 or 10. The .357 is a lesser cartridge than the .30-30, but not *that* much less from a carbine.

 

[ArmedBear]

LOL @ Cosmoline's post.

The problem with the police carrying around carbines is as much about image as anything else. I think the idea of an officer getting out of his patrol car on the side of the highway with a carbine hanging from a tactical sling evokes "Gestapo" or "Cold-War Communist Secret Police."

There are also practical problems. Patrol rifles are sometimes in racks, sometimes in trunks. Either way, the cop is unlikely to have the carbine when he needs it.

Sidearms are very practical weapons. They can be carried in a holster and deployed whenever and wherever the officer needs them.

That said, I do wonder whether there's been too much emphasis on sidearm capacity and extra magazines. A revolver, a speedloader and a small backup revolver, as many cops already carry, would probably serve quite well. It's not reasonable to expect to fight a small-scale war with a Glock, anyway. There's a point where an officer ought to have a carbine, and ammo for that, instead of more rounds for a handgun.

The .357 is a lesser cartridge than the .30-30, but not *that* much less from a carbine.

It might even be a bit "more" at the ranges where it would be used, given various factors. LE snipers don't usually shoot past 100 yards in real "situations".