U.S Marines; What would you use?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
5,957
Location
NE Ohio
as a fighting rifle if you could purchase your own and use it? There are many of you that are retired, and your thoughts are welcome, too. I picked the Marines, as they are the branch of our services where all are considered combat troops first, and whatever they are additionally trained, second. Is this not correct? That makes them more combat orented than the average Army serviceman.
 
I would choose my good ole M17, as it uses a proven operating system (based upon the AR18), STANAG magazines, is short (32in.) with a long bbl (21.5in.), has superb balance (balances on the PG) and ergonomics, and fits me well (but I do want my customized one)...lefties be darned...you ask ME! :D

EDIT: No combat experience (Marines or otherwise) here...just wanted to comment. :)
 
Last edited:
Quick question about your question: Do we HAVE to purchase it ourselves? Or are you asking what we would purchase if given an allowance to buy our own gun?

I'd probably just stick with the issue M4 if it were to come out of my pocket. Given an allowance, I'd get a SCAR-H. I feel more confident in the 7.62, and like the ergonomics the SCAR offers over the M14.
 
While doing a little research for poli sci class last semester, I found that part of the requirements for belonging to a continenental militia was the the member had to provide for himself at his own expense sic" a suitable rifle, flintlock,, powder, and ball" as well as "eight (?) lead balls for ammunition". It was also interesting to note that the militiaman, if he were an officer, also had to provide himself a suitable horse, and pistol with sufficent ammunition. The member had 6 months to procure these items.
Armed with that argument, let's say that you would have to provide you arms at your own expense.

Here is a link to the item I researched. It is the "Militia Act of 1792"
For armaments, see Art.II
http://www.constitution.org/mil/mil_act_1792.htm
 
I was going to originally say, cost be no object, but I like the criteria above: you are a professional, supply your own. You can write it off on taxes. Spare parts are also on you, so choose wisely. There will be no support from the Marine Corps. This makes it more interesting!:evil:
 
USN Here, with plent of "Sand Sailor" time , Ill take an M-14 .. maybe the SCAR-H,

I dont have a lack of confidence in the 5.56 mm. I just prefere the 7.62x51
 
It would depend on the mission and or terrain a little bit, but it would either be the M1A or the XCR. I have both. U.S.M.C. 1982 to 1987
 
I'd choose the M40-3A Sniper Rifle - 1000 yards of pure killing power.

800px-M-40A3.jpg
 
Last edited:
7.62x51mm was always a mistake, it's unnecessarily powerful and the rounds are too large and heavy to carry a useful load, 5.56mm is questionable at the other end of the spectrum.

Personally I'd go with an HK416 with a 6.8SPC upper and an AimPoint.

If SPs/JHPs are allowed, then a regular 5.56mm HK416 would do just fine.
 
Well, if it was "bring you own" right now I could take my Ak47 and I wouldn't feel the least bit bad about it. I wouldn't mind bringing my 7mm for the longer shots though.
 
The 7.62x51 was always a mistake???? Wow. I can think of several platforms where the 7.62 has proven itself a very good performer. I would take many iterations of the 7.62 battle rifle over the M4.
 
The 7.62x51 was always a mistake???? Wow. I can think of several platforms where the 7.62 has proven itself a very good performer. I would take many iterations of the 7.62 battle rifle over the M4.

I think I can see Newton's point. Several true intermediate calibers have been tossed away over the years in preference of full power rounds. The Garand, for one was chambered in .276 Pederson. The British EM2, and some of FN's offerings, IIRC, also were at least experimentally chambered in various intermediate rounds. These cartridges, had they been adopted, would have provided good balance in range and power for a rifle cartridge and would have been more controllable in rapid/full auto fire. Instead, the 7.62x51 was pushed through and then the 5.56mm round was adopted, replacing the 7.62 in rifles (with the result of the gun world moaning and gnashing teeth for the past 50 years).
 
McBuck:
Far off topic here, but you mentioned the original militia.
Our first govt. was only one vote from selecting German as our official language, due to so many Deutsche and Nederlands settlers.
 
Last edited:
+1 on the piston-driven AR in .308 Win, but make it a carbine. Unbeatable all-around system.

-1 on the M14... great at range, but not so good for CQB

... I would also trust a well-made AK to wreak havoc in the urban battles of today.

Having fielded the M4 in combat, I have a complete lack of faith in 5.56mm. I would never do that again. I'll take any quality rifle in .308 Winchester or 7.62x39mm over anything in 5.56mm... any day of the week... absolutely. I would even prefer a 7.62x54R-chambered SKS in a toss-up. You can keep your broken varmint rifle.

Just give me something reliable, handy, accurate, and powerful. I'll take care of the rest... and I won't need 3000 rounds to do it.

.
 
Last edited:
Piston driven AR in .308 or the SCAR-H, or my Norinco SKS.

I'd love to find a way to mount an ACOG or EO Tech sight on my Norinco, I could use confiscated ammo and mags in a pinch, I'm a good shot with it out to 250 yards, and because its short I can CQB/room clear with it.

USMC 91 - 95, and 97 - 99.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top