Favorite Rifle

Grey Death · Unread post by **Grey Death** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 1:42 pm

I thought this would be a good place for this question. What is your favorite rifle and why?

I'll start. My favorite is the M-1 Garand. Accurate and reliable. Its quite heavy, but is a pleasure to shoot. Described by General Patton as the "greatest implement of war devised by man". Can you get a better endorsement than that?

LJ · Unread post by LJ » Mon Mar 06, 2006 3:03 pm

98K Mauser. Bolt actions are fun.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 3:44 pm

Grey - unfortunately mr Patton had no experience witht he successor rifles to the Garand.

My personal favourite, that depends on what class of rifle you are talking about.

When it comes to Assault Rifles I look to the C7 family, a Canadian derivative fo the M-16.

When it coems to a Battle Rifle, I'm torn between the G3 and the FAL

When it comes to a Sniper Rifle, I really likie the SVD

When it coems to an Anti-Materiel Rifle I am fond of the NTW 20/14.5

glitterboy2098 · Mon Mar 06, 2006 10:38 pm

my personal weapon of choice is a Sporterized .308 mosper, with scope.
though i haven't fired it in years, that was a great rifle. nice and accurate. best Xmas present my grandparents ever got me.

Killer Cyborg · Tue Mar 07, 2006 1:45 am

Grey Death wrote:I thought this would be a good place for this question. What is your favorite rifle and why?

I'll start. My favorite is the M-1 Garand. Accurate and reliable. Its quite heavy, but is a pleasure to shoot. Described by General Patton as the "greatest implement of war devised by man". Can you get a better endorsement than that?

Never fired a Garand, but I like my M-1 Carbine just fine. :ok:

Trooper Jim · Unread post by **Trooper Jim** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 3:47 am

I have a stock 1903A3 Springfield in 30-06 t hat I am rather fond of.

maasenstodt · Unread post by **maasenstodt** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:41 am

I think the M14/M1A may be the best all-around battle rifle out there (though it's hard to knock the FAL, HK91, or even the Garand), and if I could only have one such rifle, one of Smith Enterprises' tweaked out M14s would fit the bill nicely. :-D

That said, high quality AK47/74 carbines are pretty sweet as well. I have my eyes on a VEPR right now that I'm close to (pardon the pun) pulling the trigger on. The thing that holds me back is that I'm intrigued by the .308 VEPR with 20 round mags that should make its way to market in the next 6 months. AK simplicity and reliability combined with the power (not to mention the ease of finding ammunition for) of the .308. Yum!

GhostKnight · Unread post by **GhostKnight** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:44 am

I have a custom 300 ultra mag, bipod, 18x scope, sighted in at 800 meters. A lot funner and easier to shoot than a 50 cal Barrett.

BigLEE · Unread post by **BigLEE** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 12:49 pm

Bolt gun - Swiss K31
Battle Rifle - FAL
AR - Swiss Stgw.90 (aka SIG 550)

maasenstodt · Unread post by **maasenstodt** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:36 pm

BigLEE wrote:Bolt gun - Swiss K31

Funny that you mention the K31 just now. I'm purchasing a couple of 'em tonight. I've heard nothing but great things about them... well, except for the fact that you're stuck using the 7.5 Swiss round instead of the more common .308. Still, I can't wait to get mine!

Have you accessorized yours at all? Myself, I'm looking at adding Mojo Sights.

BigLEE · Unread post by **BigLEE** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:01 pm

maasenstodt wrote:
BigLEE wrote:Bolt gun - Swiss K31

Funny that you mention the K31 just now. I'm purchasing a couple of 'em tonight. I've heard nothing but great things about them... well, except for the fact that you're stuck using the 7.5 Swiss round instead of the more common .308. Still, I can't wait to get mine!

Have you accessorized yours at all? Myself, I'm looking at adding Mojo Sights.

I have "connections" so I've got most of the aftermarket accessories that are available for the K31. I have some Mojos, but I never use them. They only provide a small optical advantage over the issue sights (they sit too far forward.) Besides, my eyes are bad enough, that I don't use non-diopter iron sights very often these days.

High quality diopters are available from Graf & Sons, but they will set you back $300-350. There are also clamp-on scope mounts (that really work, and will even hold a zero if your remove and later replace the mount) if you don't like drilling your rifle. See http://www.grafs.com/vendor/735 for a list of useful accessories. There are also Scout-type mounts which replace the rear site available from a couple sources.

A translated copy of the Swiss K31 manual can be found at http://www.swissrifles.com/sr/english_k ... manual.pdf

It is possible to convert a K31 to .308, but the process is expensive, and you could but an entire reloading setup for what the barrel job would cost. There's a fair amount of reloading info at Swissrifles.com as well.

Check to see that the serial number of the magazine matches the rifle. Some of the recent rifles from the importer either came without magazines, or had their original replaced with aftermarket magazines. Also, be sure to check under the buttplate for the nametag of the former owner. About one-third to half of the K31s still have the ID tag of the rifles former owner still in place under the buttplate. Some K31 owners have actually maqnaged to get in contact with the former owners (although many of the owners have long since passed away.)

They aren't joking when they say the K31 is the swiss watch of rifles.

L.E.E.

gordyzx9r · Unread post by **gordyzx9r** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 8:08 am

The FN-FAL...for whatever I need to do it with it.

gordyzx9r · Unread post by **gordyzx9r** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 7:53 pm

Alejandro wrote:Rifle - PSG-1
AR - AK-47
MG - 240G

While I love the M-16A2 with a passion & own an AR-15, I don't like it for it's designated purpose. Required far too much cleaning in the desert, jammed too easily, too easy to fail-to-fire as well. Accurate as all hell though...but overall a poor choice for a line weapon. The AK-47 is by far its superior. Such is my personal opinion.

Except that you lose all that accuracy with an AK...I watched guys unload AKs in the desert and not hit a target 50 meters away. But, the darn things are like cockroaches...they're everywhere and can survive in any environment.

gordyzx9r · Unread post by **gordyzx9r** » Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:36 pm

Redemption0331 wrote:They couldn't hit a taregt at 50 yards? I guess they were out of practice

Well, when people are shooting at you, you're outnumbered, you're scared, you're not well trained on the weapon, the weapon itself is probably an antique, and you're just pulling the trigger and hoping it hit's something...the odds are against you hitting anything.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 4:17 pm

Anyone ever actually seen high speed camera footage of an AK going off on full auto? The barrel actually flexes up and down in quite a wide arc. The -16 has little if any flex in the barrel when used the same way.

gordyzx9r · Unread post by **gordyzx9r** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 7:22 pm

Jefffar wrote:Anyone ever actually seen high speed camera footage of an AK going off on full auto? The barrel actually flexes up and down in quite a wide arc. The -16 has little if any flex in the barrel when used the same way.

That's why they took full auto away from the standard issue M16s.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 11:00 pm

Alejandro wrote:
Jefffar wrote:Anyone ever actually seen high speed camera footage of an AK going off on full auto? The barrel actually flexes up and down in quite a wide arc. The -16 has little if any flex in the barrel when used the same way.

Full-auto is the devil. Adding it to any weapon not dedicated to the principle is just begging to run out of ammo asap & be shot

The AK was purpose built for full auto. Heck, you have to slide the selector past full auto to get to semi.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 3:51 pm

An Assault Rifle is dedicated to full auto in concept too. Otherwise they wouldn't use the lower powered rounds to keep a semblance of controlability in full automatic mode.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 4:17 pm

Yeah, the Assault Rifle does make more than a few compromises in design, which is why a lot of nations now employ Light Support Weapons or Machine Rifles or Automatic Rifles or just plain old Machineguns alongside their assault rifles for longer range suppresion fire. A lot of nations have also gone to a burst limiter approach on their assault rifles to keep the extra spraying down.

Seeing as the bulk of combat is still close range, the lack of ooomph in the standard assault rifle round is still not a problem. As for comparison with SMGs, well provided the opposition isn't wearing body armour, you are typicaly fine. Unfortunately, all the big boys play with body armour these days. Fortunately the big boys don't seem to want to fight each other.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:03 pm

Which do you count Russia as? They issue body armour now.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Mon Mar 27, 2006 5:56 pm

I get the impression that the regulars are getting it. Or were scheduled to get it at least during the 1990s. How much of it got delivered is hard to say.

Rockwolf66 · Unread post by **Rockwolf66** » Wed May 17, 2006 1:04 am

as far as rifles go I have to list them by type.

Lever action: Marlin 1894S

Bolt action: Remington M-24A2 sniper rifle

Semi-automatic: Colt CAR-15

Assault Rifle: Steyr AUG

Automatic Rifle: RPK

yeah I'm trying to bring things back on topic.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Wed May 17, 2006 10:02 am

RPK is overrated. The AK has a problem with heat as it is. In an RPK the problem is much worse.

If I want an Automatic Rifle / Light Support Weapon / Squad Automatic Rifle I'm going to go for the CIS Ultimax-100

Grey Death · Unread post by **Grey Death** » Wed May 17, 2006 10:49 am

the Ultimax is a nice piece. But myself I like Battle rifles over assault rifles. So I'm more inclined to go with issueing G3's and the HK21E with the magzine adapter in place. That way all the rifles and squad autos use the same ammo and mags. Which I realise you can do with the Ultimax. But what can I tell ya, I'm a 7.62x51 kinda guy.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Wed May 17, 2006 10:56 am

7.62 is too much for full auto hip/shoulder fire.

5.56 is too little for long ranged, armour piercing fire.

Need a trade off somehow.

Grey Death · Unread post by **Grey Death** » Wed May 17, 2006 11:24 am

I know the cartridge needed. But due to unfortunate luck it never went to mass production. .280 british that was designed for use in the EM-2. Which never when into production because of the 7.62x51 NATO standardization. Being unable to adapt, or adapt in a timely manner the EM-2. They went with the FN FAL. For those that have seen the EM-2. The L-85 is not based on it. They are completely different, besides being bullpup.

Just for comparison sakes (and yes all I have is metric handy)

5.56x45mm NATO
bullet weight 62gr.
velocity at muzzle 921 m/s
velocity at 300 yards 858 m/s
energy at muzzle 1700j
energy at 300 yards 686j

7x43mm (.280)
bullet weight 140gr
velocity at muzzle 745m/s
velocity 300 yards 570m/s
energy at muzzle 2519j
energy at 300 yards 1475j

7.62x51mm NATO
bullet wieght 150gr
velocity at muzzle 860 m/s
velocity at 300 yards 674 m/s
energy at muzzle 3594j
energy at 300yards 2207j[/quote]

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Wed May 17, 2006 12:23 pm

There are also 6.5 and 6.8 milimeter concepts I've heard tossed around.

Grey Death · Unread post by **Grey Death** » Wed May 17, 2006 12:26 pm

Isn't one of those the grendel? Based on an AR-15 platform?

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Wed May 17, 2006 5:10 pm

I think both can be chambered in an M-16 with a minimum of alteration. I thought the Grendel was a .50 version.

No, not full sized .50, but something akin to a fully automatic 20 guage.

Grey Death · Unread post by **Grey Death** » Wed May 17, 2006 5:29 pm

iirc the 6.8 is the grendel, and the .50 is the beowulf.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Wed May 17, 2006 6:47 pm

Grey Death wrote:iirc the 6.8 is the grendel, and the .50 is the beowulf.

Same story . . .

Rockwolf66 · Unread post by **Rockwolf66** » Thu May 18, 2006 1:31 am

RPK is overrated. The AK has a problem with heat as it is. In an RPK the problem is much worse.

If I want an Automatic Rifle / Light Support Weapon / Squad Automatic Rifle I'm going to go for the CIS Ultimax-100

the problem with the Ultimax-100 is that the magazines are known to fall out of the weapon. That is not a good thing, as you run out of ammo a bit too fast. I personally don't mind useing short burst to engage multiple targets.

7.62 is too much for full auto hip/shoulder fire.

well I have a friend who has been photographed fireing his HK-21E from the shoulder. This particular machinegun's cyclic rate is recorded as 1,100 rounds per minute. Another example is dound on Differents http://www.imageseek.com/m1a website. go into the photo gallery on page 14 of the commecial M-14 pictures, click on the hot asian video. it is of a small asian woman controling a fully automatic M-12E2. you may also note the huge grin on her face.

jedi078 · Unread post by **jedi078** » Thu May 18, 2006 1:30 pm

Grey Death wrote:I thought this would be a good place for this question. What is your favorite rifle and why?

I’ve only used an M-16A2 and M-4, so my choices are limited...

I like both weapons, and aside from effective range are literally the same weapon.

I never did have any problems with cleaning my M-16A2 out in the desert, just used a little bit of CLP, in Okinawa on the other hand you basically had to bathe the weapon in CLP or it would turn orange after a water op.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Thu May 18, 2006 10:30 pm

Rockwolf66 wrote:
7.62 is too much for full auto hip/shoulder fire.

well I have a friend who has been photographed fireing his HK-21E from the shoulder. This particular machinegun's cyclic rate is recorded as 1,100 rounds per minute. Another example is dound on Differents http://www.imageseek.com/m1a website. go into the photo gallery on page 14 of the commecial M-14 pictures, click on the hot asian video. it is of a small asian woman controling a fully automatic M-12E2. you may also note the huge grin on her face.

Well then, I'll take your anecdotal evidence and a video from the internet as gospel and throw out the results done by qualified researchers in virtually every major military in the world. Thanks for settling this for me.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Thu May 18, 2006 11:46 pm

So I checked the link.

If you call what that girl was doing controlled automatic fire we need to have a talk.

I would like to see the grouping she made, but I allready know that she didn't actually make one because to make a grouping you have to hit the target.

Rockwolf66 · Unread post by **Rockwolf66** » Fri May 19, 2006 10:57 pm

Well then, I'll take your anecdotal evidence and a video from the internet as gospel and throw out the results done by qualified researchers in virtually every major military in the world. Thanks for settling this for me.

Well those "qualified researchers" have political agendas. I much rather trust people who have instructed others for 20+ years and know their way around a firearm.

If you call what that girl was doing controlled automatic fire we need to have a talk.

that is called fireing controled bursts from the hip. the next video over is aimed fully automatic gunfire. Still Mrs. Different is a small woman, and the M-14 has a 750 round per minute rate of fire( according to Jane's guns recognition guide 2nd ed). Your blanket statement is false. Now I would love to be able to show you video of someone useing a G-3 from the shoulder but I don't think that the video's out yet and it's copyrighted to boot.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Fri May 19, 2006 11:26 pm

Then I shall ammend my statement for accuracy:

After exhaustive study, many millitary experts working seperately for seperate millitaries each concluded that the fully automatic full powered rifle produced too much recoil, was too heavy, didn't carry enough ammunition and so switched to a weapon firing a smaller, intermediate powered round.

Further, before such rounds wer eavaialble, many militaries relying on battle rifles removed the fully autmoatci fire capabilities from the weapons because of the difficulties that fully automatic fire posed.

Seeing as this same conclusion was reached several different times in several different nations who were opposed to each other we can eliminate political agenda as the reason for the result.

This change has proven so successful that in the 50 or so years since militaries have started to switch from Battle Rifles to Assault Rifles, not one military has felt the need to switch back.

As for the girl: Those were not controlled bursts. A controlled burst includes accurate shot placment. Given the movement of the weapon while she fired, I would be unsurprised if her accuracy with those shots approached the level of the proverbial broadside of the barn.

Rockwolf66 · Unread post by **Rockwolf66** » Sun May 21, 2006 1:54 am

Further, before such rounds wer eavaialble, many militaries relying on battle rifles removed the fully autmoatci fire capabilities from the weapons because of the difficulties that fully automatic fire posed.

can you name countries besides the US and the UK that used Battlerifles converted to semi-automatic.

This change has proven so successful that in the 50 or so years since militaries have started to switch from Battle Rifles to Assault Rifles, not one military has felt the need to switch back.

Ok you have some of the British Units in the Faulkland war who were armed with M-16's, the unit had to switch back to the L1A1 because the Argentinian's outranged them with the FN-FAL.

Russian troops who have had experience with both the AKM and the AK-74 prefer the AKM.

Read Black Hawk Down and the comments about one man's choice to use an M-14 and his team mates comments after the bullets started flying.

Finally you have Afganistan and Iraq. the US Militaries demand for the old M-14 is so high there is no more seconded to police agencies.

Finally if you want to see what a trained person can do with a 7.62X51mm I sugest that you watch a copy of Stressfire:III The Defensive Rifle. in it one of the rifles demonstrated is a selective fire G-3 Battle rifle.

As for the girl: Those were not controlled bursts. A controlled burst includes accurate shot placment. Given the movement of the weapon while she fired, I would be unsurprised if her accuracy with those shots approached the level of the proverbial broadside of the barn.

Well given that her husband collects M-14 I am quite positive that she was only haveing fun, with that Battle rifle. Still you made the blanket statement:

7.62 is too much for full auto hip/shoulder fire.

As I have experience with both the M-60E3 and the M-240 Machineguns( the joys of both Camp Pendlton and Nevada) and I do use the 7.62NATO round I have to disagree with that statement.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Sun May 21, 2006 11:37 pm

Rockwolf66 wrote:
Further, before such rounds wer eavaialble, many militaries relying on battle rifles removed the fully autmoatci fire capabilities from the weapons because of the difficulties that fully automatic fire posed.

can you name countries besides the US and the UK that used Battlerifles converted to semi-automatic.

Of the top of my head, I beleive Australia, Canada and India all used the Semi-Auto version of the FAL, though I need to double check that.

Rockwolf66 wrote:
This change has proven so successful that in the 50 or so years since militaries have started to switch from Battle Rifles to Assault Rifles, not one military has felt the need to switch back.

Ok you have some of the British Units in the Faulkland war who were armed with M-16's, the unit had to switch back to the L1A1 because the Argentinian's outranged them with the FN-FAL.

And what do the Brits use now? At the time of Faklands, as pointed out, the Brits were still transiting from Battle Rifle to Assault Rifle so there was not a full switch to go on. They have since completed the switch, even after their Faklands expeirience the 5.56 was chosen.

Considering the bulk of units were using the FAL and they were half a world away from their supply bases, the switch to the FAL of the few units that were using 16s could have as easily been a logistic concern.

Rockwolf66 wrote:Russian troops who have had experience with both the AKM and the AK-74 prefer the AKM.

Both of which are assault rifles firing intermediate cartridges anyway. So the Russkies have still been using an intermidate powered assault rifle as their primary weapon since the AK-47.

Rockwolf66 wrote:Read Black Hawk Down and the comments about one man's choice to use an M-14 and his team mates comments after the bullets started flying.

The M-16 performed quite well in the Battle of Moghidishu seeing as outnumbered about 20 to 1 the force fought its way out. I also bet when it came time for that fellow to do the Moghidishu Mile, he wishes he was carrying a '16.

Rockwolf66 wrote:Finally you have Afganistan and Iraq. the US Militaries demand for the old M-14 is so high there is no more seconded to police agencies.

For specialists within the units, not as a primary arm. I do beleive a full powered rifle has a palce in the infantry squad for providing the ability to engage the few point targets that will appear outside of the effective range of the assault rifles. However, that would only be 1 to 2 per squad with a specialist (Designated Marksman equivalent) rather than as a standard arm of all troopers.

Rockwolf66 wrote:Finally if you want to see what a trained person can do with a 7.62X51mm I sugest that you watch a copy of Stressfire:III The Defensive Rifle. in it one of the rifles demonstrated is a selective fire G-3 Battle rifle.

I have never said the weapons weren't effective. I am saying it has been found that a Battle Rifle has been rejected as the primary combat weapon of the infantry for a number of reasons I outlined above.

Rockwolf66 wrote:
As for the girl: Those were not controlled bursts. A controlled burst includes accurate shot placment. Given the movement of the weapon while she fired, I would be unsurprised if her accuracy with those shots approached the level of the proverbial broadside of the barn.

Well given that her husband collects M-14 I am quite positive that she was only haveing fun, with that Battle rifle. Still you made the blanket statement:
7.62 is too much for full auto hip/shoulder fire.

As I have experience with both the M-60E3 and the M-240 Machineguns( the joys of both Camp Pendlton and Nevada) and I do use the 7.62NATO round I have to disagree with that statement.

Those are machineguns, not rifles. They are two to five times as heavy as a rifle firing the same cartidge. The recoil factors on such weapons are totally different. But if you want to use them as an example, tell me why no army has had the foresight to equip every trooper with a MAG or a '60 since they are obviously so effective?

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Wed May 24, 2006 10:14 am

Incidently, about 7.62 mm rifle controlability in fully automatic:

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-14 :

Also, because of the M14's powerful 7.62 × 51 mm cartridge, the weapon was virtually uncontrollable in fully-automatic mode. This is understandable considering that the M14 was developed as a means of taking the place of four different weapons systems — the M1 Garand, the M1 Carbine, the M3 "Grease Gun" and the BAR. It was thought that in this manner the M14 could simplify the logistical requirements of the troops if it took the place of four weapons. Although it proved to be an impossible task, the weapon excelled as a replacement for the M1 rifle, fixing many of the previous rifles shortcomings. It was simply too light to provide as a light machine gun replacement for the BAR. The M60 machine gun better served this task.

The US Army has this to say about the M14 http://tri.army.mil/LC/cs/csi/sahist.htm#M14 :

Some M14s were equipped with a bipod for use as a squad automatic weapons. However, the M14 displayed an erratic dispersion pattern, excessive recoil, and muzzle climb when fired as an automatic rifle.

If you prefer the anecdotal - From the Guns and Ammo forums at http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk

Shooter2000 wrote: When I was activly teaching people to shoot, I used to bet the class $100 at 10-1 odds, that none of them could fire an entire 20 round magasine in a single bust, from my M-14E2 from any standing or squating poss and keep all the shots on a full sized tank target board. About 10 by 25 feet.

In nearly 15 years, no-one ever won the money all though many tried!

jedi078 · Unread post by **jedi078** » Wed May 24, 2006 4:17 pm

Juicer-Mak wrote:Going from the cold air to heated tents/vehicles is horrible for the Sixteen.

The same thing happens when you take the weapon from the air-conditioned Armory into the humid heat of Okinawa.

I'm sure all the metallic parts of most any rifle rusts up in either situation.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Wed May 24, 2006 4:52 pm

Condensation rusting?

Grey Death · Unread post by **Grey Death** » Wed May 24, 2006 5:10 pm

Flash rust, thats what my roommate calls it. For everything else its not a big deal. But with the close tolerances of the 16, it screws stuff up.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Wed May 24, 2006 5:33 pm

All other modern rifles wll have the same close tollerances and the same vulnerability.

It's a choice between a rifle that works really well most of the time or a rifle that works okay all of the time.

jedi078 · Unread post by **jedi078** » Wed May 24, 2006 6:33 pm

Jefffar wrote:Condensation rusting?

I guess so, I mean at times it seemed you could look at the rifle and watch the rust grow.

Grey Death · Unread post by **Grey Death** » Thu May 25, 2006 7:19 am

Jefffar wrote:All other modern rifles wll have the same close tollerances and the same vulnerability.

It's a choice between a rifle that works really well most of the time or a rifle that works okay all of the time.

I understand that. I was just focusing on the 16. I would tend to put the 16 in the works okay all the time catagory. But thats only my opinion. Course anything more reliable that comes to mind is a battle rifle or AK. Which brings us back to the debate of Battle rifle vs. Assault rifle. I tend to agree with you that a happy medium inbetween cartridge would be best. But lacking that I think the AK (chambered for 7.62x39mm specifically) has the things I would look for in a military rifle. It has the reliability. I realise its not accurate at long range. I dont think thats as needed. I dont think its realistic to exspect someone to make a snap shot at a 1000 yards and drop a target with a single round. Also the caliber/weight of the bullet is large enough to have some penetration and stopping power. Of course I maybe a little jaded toward the .223 Being a civilian when I think of .223 I think varmit round. So for larger target I automatically gravitate toward a .30 cal rifle.

Grey Death · Unread post by **Grey Death** » Thu May 25, 2006 4:41 pm

I have an AK (semi-auto civilian of course). I got a ton of different size mags for it. Anything over 30 rounds seems a little ackward. I also have a 72 round drum, which I'm sure is mean for an RPK. Seventy some odd rounds rattleing around when you fire is a little disconserting. That and the extra weight is a bit much.

Grey Death · Unread post by **Grey Death** » Wed Jun 07, 2006 9:57 am

I had a rifle thought for you. Do any of you think we see a caseless rifle put into production in the next 20-30 years? Germany came very close. But the unification of East and West Germany pretty much put an end to that. The OICW seems like the future. Everyone seems to have their own advanced infantry rifle system in the works. But will we every see a rehash of other things. Like the Armys advanced rifle program (before OICW) like rifles firing flechettes. Or Duplex loads (where one cartridge has 2, or three bullets)?

lather · Unread post by **lather** » Wed Jun 07, 2006 10:45 am

Probably most of it comes down to production costs.

.223 and .308 can be made in bulk and cheaper than specialty rounds.

The Russian Vintorez fires a 9mm round that costs about $10 each. I imagine flechette and such specialty rounds are expensive as well.

Jefffar · Unread post by **Jefffar** » Wed Jun 07, 2006 4:35 pm

It looks like the rifle of the fture will be the following:

A light weight base model with a number of modular assemblies including:

Caliber changes from 5.56 to 7.62 with perhaps something in between

Barrel changes for configuration as a carbien or PDW out to designated marksman's weapon or heavy barrelled light machinegun

Customizable ergonomic fittings allowing for change for different sizzed users and different roles.

Sighting system attachements ranging from the telescoptic, to the night vision, to the thermal, with optional camera attachments.

A variety of other aiming aides including laser pointers, range finders and ballistic computers.

Attachable, repeating, explosive munition weapon - likely with an air burst capability if so programmed via the ballistic computer.

Attachable, repeating shotgun type weapon for firing door breaching or less than lethal rounds.

All of this with the goal of allowing each man in the rifle team to carry a different weapon, but have interchangable parts, magazines and features.

Overall it's a great idea, and within reach, though the repeating munition launcher has been difficult to get light enough.

Forums of the Megaverse®

Favorite Rifle

Favorite Rifle

Re: Favorite Rifle