mrpackwolf
Member
I am trying to decide on a 308 battle rifle. Style points are a must but I really dig accuracy capable rigs as well. Would the M21 be as awesome as the price would indicate? (Drool)...
What is the most impressive 308 battle rifle?
- Thread starter mrpackwolf
- Start date
- Status
FLCowboy49
Member
M1A, Style and accuracy.
FAL. Built like a tank, will eat a tank, and keep on rocking like a tank. They have their faults, not big fans of fine sand, but they are just really good rifles. Field accurate, think 2moa, rugged and great ergonomics.
mrpackwolf
Member
Gus, I have a buddy who is also a huge fan of the FAL. I shot his and it is a blast to shoot but i was unsure about how accurate it is capable of being. Any thoughts?
SharpsDressedMan
member
I hear the SIG AMT is a work of art. Never handled one myself, as they are rare and al little pricey.
mrpackwolf
Member
Vaarok. Great point!
mrpackwolf
Member
Its just that every now and again i really get a rise out of pulling off a great distance shot. I guess as with anything, practice often, use quality ammo and learn your weapon.
I hit a 425y steel plate 5 out of 5 times using only the iron sights in competition with mine a few years ago. It is not a MOA rifle so if you want to make tiny little groups at long ranges pass it by. But if you want to hit what you are aiming at everytime and want a rifle that is rugged and dependable then I'd give it a look. Again, it is not a precision rifle, it is a battle rifle. Think AK in a NATO round with better ergonomics.
The iron sights are not the best but DSA makes a flat top dust cover that you can scope easy enough. Throw an ACOG, TA11E, on top and call it a day.
The iron sights are not the best but DSA makes a flat top dust cover that you can scope easy enough. Throw an ACOG, TA11E, on top and call it a day.
jmstevens2
Member
Isn't the M1 Garrand a .30-06 and the M1A a .308?
Does an M-60 count!
If not I go back to the FAL or M1A. Kinda depends on what you want to be able to do with it.
Does an M-60 count!
If not I go back to the FAL or M1A. Kinda depends on what you want to be able to do with it.
mrpackwolf
Member
Gus, you make a fine point and a DSA FAL is at least half the cost of an M21. And jmstevens, unfortunately the 60 is out. That would eat me out of house and home. ha ha ha.
Yeah, that would make for a nice bit of kit but for a working rifle the ACOG would hold up better. Try sending in the SUIT for repairs...
The SUIT was an L1A1, SLR, sight correct? You don't want an inch pattern rifle. Best to stick metric.
mrpackwolf
Member
is that some kind of H&K clone? not familiar with it?
The PTR 91 is an HK 91 clone. I do not have direct experience with one but reports are hit and miss as far as accuracy and reliability. Granted most of what I read/ heard was from a few years ago, things may have changed. And they destroy brass. Not a reloader friendly firearm.
Personal fav for aesthetics, function, sights and historical - M-14
FAL is close 2nd, but only because of function as I don't like the look as much as M-14
HK91 is fun to shoot, eats everything I've fed it, no last shot bolt hold open.
That's counting out the M-60 and Garand....
Since I am not at battle, I prefer my FNAR for 7.62x51 needs personally.
FAL is close 2nd, but only because of function as I don't like the look as much as M-14
HK91 is fun to shoot, eats everything I've fed it, no last shot bolt hold open.
That's counting out the M-60 and Garand....
Since I am not at battle, I prefer my FNAR for 7.62x51 needs personally.
allaroundhunter
Member
In all honesty, I would not consider the M21 a "battle rifle". The M21 is the semi-automatic "sniper adaptation" of the M14 battle rifle.
I consider a "battle rifle" a select-fire weapon firing a substantial round (i.e. 7.62x51 NATO, not 5.56x45 NATO), but I can understand the term applying to a semi-automatic platform (just not one designed as part of a sniping platform).
That being said, my opinion is that the M14 is the most impressive .308 battle rifle
The M-60 is a machine gun, not a battle rifle. And the M1 Garand is not a .308 (though it can be converted to it), it is a .30-06 by design.
I consider a "battle rifle" a select-fire weapon firing a substantial round (i.e. 7.62x51 NATO, not 5.56x45 NATO), but I can understand the term applying to a semi-automatic platform (just not one designed as part of a sniping platform).
That being said, my opinion is that the M14 is the most impressive .308 battle rifle
The M-60 is a machine gun, not a battle rifle. And the M1 Garand is not a .308 (though it can be converted to it), it is a .30-06 by design.
Ranger30-06
Member
The Garand is by far the battle rifle that changed the way of warfare.
That being said, I think the best battle rifle ever built is the M14 which is built off of the Garand. A close second is a tie between the FAL and the G3. Both are accurate but have only an okay reliability track record.
That being said, I think the best battle rifle ever built is the M14 which is built off of the Garand. A close second is a tie between the FAL and the G3. Both are accurate but have only an okay reliability track record.
A rifle that shoots a .308 bullet or the 7.62x51 ?I am trying to decide on a 308 battle rifle. Style points are a must but I really dig accuracy capable rigs as well. Would the M21 be as awesome as the price would indicate? (Drool)...
The PTR 91 is indeed an HK clone, the GI model has the original HK spec chamber flutes allowing it to fire just about any old garbage ammo. Its man sized target accurate to 500 or so. It will throw brass 10-15ft in stock form and is not particularly reloader friendly without a port buffer.
mrpackwolf
Member
Then would it be a safe assumption that the M21 sights are of better quality or usefulness than the M14?
- Status
