Would you take the AR15 or M1 Garand?

[Justin]

My understanding is that most of the current records for High Power rifle shooting are held by people shooting AR15s.

There are still competitors that use Garands in High Power, but the impression I've gotten is that those who run Garands do so more for reasons of nostalgia and personal affinity than anything else.

This is not to denigrate the M1. It's a capable rifle, especially in a National Match configuration. In its heyday, it was a state of the art design.

But in the intervening years, superior self-loading rifle designs have been released.

Again, this is for a range gun, not a competition gun, not a tactical match rifle, but a range piece for fun.

If all you're interested in doing is going to the range and plinking around without much intention, then get whatever gun strikes your fancy. If you want nostalgia, wood, and a big caliber, get the Garand.

If you want something modern, easy to shoot, more modular than Voltron, and more than capable of covering practically any niche short of hunting big game, get an AR15.

 

[inherentical]

I’m curious who would take an M1 or similar milsurp rifle over a modern day AR?

If it's for fun and price is no object I'll get both.

 

[General Geoff]

If you want something modern, easy to shoot, more modular than Voltron, and more than capable of covering practically any niche short of hunting big game, get an AR15.

.458 Socom and .50 Beowulf's got ya covered there.

 

[bigfatdave]

If all you're interested in doing is going to the range and plinking around without much intention, then get whatever gun strikes your fancy. If you want nostalgia, wood, and a big caliber, get the Garand.

If you want something modern, easy to shoot, more modular than Voltron, and more than capable of covering practically any niche short of hunting big game, get an AR15.

Or, if you're in a financial situation where you have to trade to get a new rifle, maybe you should be using rimfire and saving your cash.
.22LR kills paper just as dead as anything else, and you don't burn up all your shooting budget on ammo.

 

[mwcharger]

i use to shoot CMP/NRA highpower matches against civilians, army marksmanship unit, and the marine corp. in all honesty i cant remember the last time i heard of someone winning a national match with anything other than a AR-15 or M14.

in terms of combat, i would also go AR-15. it has a much simpler takedown, much more weather resistant, And accuracy isnt effected by tempature change as much (the wood on the garand will swell and shrink with temp changes).

ar has much higher round capacity and is far more accurate. BUT if i had my choice of any service rifle for competition or SHTF situations i would pick a M14 with a synthetic stock

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

My understanding is that most of the current records for High Power rifle shooting are held by people shooting AR15s.
Justin, consider this. The Army teams, and probably the Marines also, at the very least, are ENCOURAGED, if not downright "ordered" to use the M16 as modified by their armorers. That does throw the results a certain way. Take the best of the best, and give them a "money is no problem" rifle (I once had an Army AMU gunsmith tell me they use whatever barrel works; if they put in a Krieger, and it doesn't shoot, they just take it out, toss it in a pile, and start over with a different barrel....how many of us can do that?), and you will get an M16/AR that scores above the M1's and M1A's in the hands of guys like you and me, and our limited budgets. Basically, in the Nationals, throw enough money in the AR, and supply the best shooters in the world, and, well, you can figure the rest. I believe that the same top military shooters, if given an M1 or M14 of equal quality and tuning, would easily outshoot the comparable M16 they have been using. We are talking stationary targets at fixed ranges, but the distance are enough to challenge the men and the guns. Doping the wind for an AR is a nightmare on a windy day on Lake Erie. Come watch or partake in the fun. The heavy bores and bullets just make the job easier....they are MORE consistent, and I would have to say shy of estimating range in real combat, the wind is the thing that makes us miss the most. It certainly separates the men from the boys (and I am ALWAYS humbled by the wind.)

 

[Al LaVodka]

How about I split the difference and get an M1A? After all, that's what they're doing in Afghanistan right now!

Know what? That's the right idea!
Al

 

[USSR]

...the wind is the thing that makes us miss the most. It certainly separates the men from the boys (and I am ALWAYS humbled by the wind.)

+1. And that is why in 1,000 yard F Class T/R where only .223 and .308 are allowed, you rarely find the .223.

Don

 

[HatFried]

If it's purely a fun gun, then an AR15 with the sheer amount of aftermarket parts for it is pretty hard to beat. If caliber's your thing then an AR10-esque might be up your alley.

For a .30-06 rifle the Garand is one of the better values out there, especially when taking the nostalgia value into account.

 

[hillmillenia]

Hands down, the M1 Garand is a better rifle...and bigger, heavier and the ammo is heavier too. I would take the AR in the situation you describe.

 

[Guncollector1982]

Id pick the M1. I have fun with both but i must admit i have more fun shooting the M1 partly the nostalgia of it partly the obvious difference in the more powerful 30 06 round when you squeeze the trigger. I even like that "dreaded ping" when the en bloc clip is ejected If one still wanted a AR yet, remember they make them and parts to build them everyday. The AR is a spinoff of the military rifle but the M1 IS the military rifle with a lot of history and alot of heros that carried the rifle you may hold god knows where. The AR is alot of fun to though i have three of them

 

[M&PVolk]

I won't rehash my earlier post, but shouldn't this thread really be the Garand vs. the AR 10? That is a much better comparison, and certainly the AR 10 would be a far better choice for just about anything than a Garand. That is more apples to apples, and relegates the Garand to a nostalgia only gun. That's not a bad thing, as I love the Garand's history and have an affinity for all things nostalgic anyway, but it is what it is.

 

[230therapy]

AR-15

I cannot run a Garand with any sort of proficiency. I do find it to be a very fun gun to shoot.

The AR-15 is the current fighting rifle. Learning it on the range means you are ahead on learning to fight with it. Modern AR-15s have rails and can easily use optics, unlike the Garand.

 

[benzy2]

If all you're interested in doing is going to the range and plinking around without much intention, then get whatever gun strikes your fancy. If you want nostalgia, wood, and a big caliber, get the Garand.

If you want something modern, easy to shoot, more modular than Voltron, and more than capable of covering practically any niche short of hunting big game, get an AR15.

Exactly. The OP said his use for this rifle would be "just casual shooting, range time". For that you pick which ever seems like more fun. I wouldn't take an M1 to a tactical match and I wouldn't shoot it in the Service rifle matches either. I wouldn't take it as a HD rifle or a CQB rifle. But none of those is what the OP said he was looking for. The AR has many positives and a few negatives. The M1 has many positives and a few negatives. Both rifles can be a ton of fun and fit the range role well. It just comes down to what is more fun for the individual shooter.

 

[AH-1]

I really think it boils down to the shooter.I handload for my M1 and M1A.both can turn some excellent groups as I am sure the AR can also with ammo tuned for their rifles.
you have to sit back and chuckle a bit when you see rambo jr get on the firing line with his brand X AR that looks like a swiss army knife and the best he can do is 6" groups with walmart ammo or wolf steel case crap.all the high dollar stuff you can hang on a ar doesn't mean a thing if the shooter stinks.

pete

 

[Tirod]

Range gun only, the AR platform is distinctly superior, like it or not.

The reason the M16 dominates high power shooting isn't because the Army ordered the AMU to do it, it's because it's more accurate. The M14 has only two lugs that must be matched closely to the receiver, the receiver must be bedded to the stock, the gas operation has asymmetric loads on the bolt which also cause barrel bending during operation, the receiver can't accept a top rail to mount optics, any sling loads will transfer to the barrel thru the bands or by direct attachment which bends the barrel. You get an asymmetrically loaded receiver and bolt with a whipping barrel.

The AR uses a barrel extension that locks the barrel and bolt together with a ring of steel and 7 locking lugs to spread the load directly. The barrel can be free floated with the addtion of a simple adapter to hold the handguards off the barrel, with no sling load transferred to the barrel. The gas action has no operating rod to bend or bind the bolt (which got soldiers killed in the early days of WWII.) The pressure transferred to the inside of the bolt carrier actually compensates the load on the bolt and lugs allowing them to rotate with less stress. The barrel isn't bent with the stress of the piston and op rod pushing the bolt. The upper and lower receiver aren't stressed with anything more than bolt cycling, which is straight back only. It handles the pressure straight back.

The AR doesn't poop where it eats, that expression only has any value to those who are completely ignorant of the cycle of operation. Gas travels down the gas tube into the bolt key and then into the bolt carrier gas chamber, which is sealed by the gas rings on the bolt. As the carrier is pressurized, it pushes the bolt forward and the carrier back, exposing the gas ports on the bolt side to the chamber pressure, where it's exhausted out the ejection port. The bolt is rotated and THEN the gas key separates from the tube, while the cartridge case is pushing against the bolt face.

Once the case begins extraction from the chamber, any residual pressure in the barrel is exhausted by the open bore or the chamber. ALL SEMI AUTOMATICS EXHAUST GAS FROM THE CHAMBER INTO THE ACTION - DI OR PISTON.

It's Ok to love the Garand - for what it is. It's certainly less than acceptable to repeat misinformation and doesn't reflect well on the decorated heroes who have used either, in an effort to denigrate one over another. That's certainly reflective of a civilian attitude, not the character qualities the Army studies and works to adhere.

 

[Oceans]

Not frequently encountered? Hmm, the CMP has MILLIONS of rounds of HXP M2 ball ammo (on clips) available at a good price to anyone who wants it.

For the averag joe that has a Garand, and goes into Wally World, or his local bait and tackle shop, asking for M2 Ball ammo and some 8 round en-block clips, he will get strange looks, and will most probably not be coming home that day with either. Now on the other hand, if the average Joe goes into either of the above and would like to purchase some .223/5.56 for his AR-15, the results will be more satisfactory. Now as an aside, for just a fun range gun, hell I would pick the M1 Garand hands down No doubt in my mind. For most other applications, I would choose the AR-15.

 

[benzy2]

For the averag joe that has a Garand, and goes into Wally World, or his local bait and tackle shop, asking for M2 Ball ammo and some 8 round en-block clips, he will get strange looks, and will most probably not be coming home that day with either. Now on the other hand, if the average Joe goes into either of the above and would like to purchase some .223/5.56 for his AR-15, the results will be more satisfactory. Now as an aside, for just a fun range gun, hell I would pick the M1 Garand hands down No doubt in my mind. For most other applications, I would choose the AR-15.

Not real fair. When was the last time you saw 30 round mags in Walmart either? Without a mag or an enbloc clip both would be left with a single shot rifle. The adjustable gas nut solves not being able to use current 150-180gr factory loads and makes the point moot. it was the first change I made even though I have only shot M2 ball. It is an extra step but it is fairly cheap and easy to install making the point invalid to anyone who had the slightest drive to shoot modern factory loads.

 

[BudW]

I think it should be

BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG VS
PING PING PING...........................?

 

[Ignition Override]

USSR, SharpsDressedMan, HatFried, BudW etc have the experience to describe it much better than I could.

HexHead or whoever, reminded us that Garands are going up in price faster than the vast number of ARs, produced by about a dozen companies.
Somebody else pointed out that the CMP has enough Greek HXP GI ammo to last years (and is reloadable).

None of our troops fought/helped win a world war with an AR.
Along with the US and German cemeteries at or near Normandy Beach, I visited the largest US military cemetery in the Netherlands. You might be surprised at how many there are, even in that small country.

For me, the chance to own "their battle rifle" (even if built in the 50s) would be an honor and a privilege.

 

[SaxonPig]

Tim the student: Any process that involves the possibility of mashing my digit is complicated in my book.

General Geoff: OK, but I am not that guy. And even if a good Garand man can reload as fast as a magazine rifle guy after doing so he still has 22 fewer rounds before he has to do it again.

 

[opie4386]

HAHA Funny thing happend at the range today....

to my left a shooter was using a BAR

to my right a couple guys using a M4

i was shooting my 12 guage

the guys shooting the M4 commented to each other how a shotgun is a "BAD" choice and how they would choose a M4 over any anything because and i quote "IT MAKES MORE SENSE, ITS THE BEST RIFLE MADE AND A SHOTGUN IS TOO HEAVY" lol me and the guy to my left just stared at each other and laughed a lil

 

[wlewisiii]

M1 in 7.62x51.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

I'm still astonished at the gentlemen here who recognize the high level of accuracy that comes with a high quality, tuned AR, but don's seem to have the hands on experience of applying that accuracy in practical exercises. I was trained on the M16A1, and used similar rifles for fun, and sparingly as tactical weapons in law enforcement. It is a great rifle. For serious fighting, and hands down reaching out and really hurting someone, I still feel I can make a case for the .30-06 or 7.62 over the 5.56. The AR platform is handy, light, and maneurverable, maybe more so than the heavier rifles, but in a combat environment, at anything longer than a foot or so past the muzzle of the average AR, training with any given weapon kind of makes up for the handling and maneuverability. If you watch old films of our troops in WWII clearing towns, or pillboxes, etc, with the M1, you won't see too much different than videos of our troops in Iraq and such....the methods and subsequent "handling" of arms is so close, that you could almost take the AR out of the soldiers hands and substitute the M1, and very little would be lost in "technique" or "results". If a bad guy is around the corner, a practiced soldier with either will probably get the job done. Where the clear advantage of the bigger rifle is, is penetration, and retained energy at the longer ranges. And, as some above have pointed out, it is sure nice to be able to strike and kill your enemy at ranges beyond what he can do the same to you. PRACTICAL ACCURACY, that accuracy that a soldier can acutally attain from field positions, standing, fast seated, kneeling, etc, is going to be very different than the minute-of-AR that we all like to talk about. Try it. Go stand up, sling up if you want, and fire five shots at 200 yards at the torso of any given silhouette target. Do it with an AR, M1, and M1A if you have one. I have seen many a competitive shooter do this, and it is the SHOOTER, not the gun, that makes the difference. The inherent INABILITY of humans to be as good as the rifle pretty much puts these combat rifles on the same "playing" field with each other. That is another reason the obviously "inferior" AK does better than it should, being so cheap, loose, and less accurate than the AR, etc.

 

[Tim the student]

Tim the student: Any process that involves the possibility of mashing my digit is complicated in my book.

I take it you're not a carpenter then?