PDA

View Full Version : Which is better modern day service rifle?


Firepower!
March 17, 2008, 12:15 PM
Which is better modern day service rifle?

I think we might get a higher response for M16 since majority of the voters are in the US. But let us see...

Tikirocker
March 17, 2008, 12:18 PM
The last best modern service rifle we had was the Lithgow L1A1 SLR ... sadly since then it's been plastic junk. I think I can speak for the British there too ... as they had the SLR as well.

LJ-MosinFreak-Buck
March 17, 2008, 03:15 PM
The AK

azredhawk44
March 17, 2008, 03:19 PM
I think a fire team consisting of standard M16 infantry rifles, an M14 DM unit and an M249 SAW sounds pretty darn good.

B. Lahey
March 17, 2008, 03:28 PM
For most nations most of the time, the AK is still as good as it gets.

BlondieStomp
March 17, 2008, 04:46 PM
if you want a rifle that doesn't compromise on quality for the sake of price, you probably want a swiss rifle.

SIG 552 all the way :cool:

jpwilly
March 17, 2008, 04:48 PM
M4 is versitile and has my vote. Many fine rifles on that list this pole might end up a shooting war!

Lawyer Daggit
March 17, 2008, 04:57 PM
I also came to love the Lithgow L1A1 a Aussie made FN-FAL. A gun to be counted on.

Sadly, when Australian defence management were inspired by what Imperial Storm Troopers carried in Star Wars they bought the AUG and melted down the beloved FN instead of reconditioning them and holding them as reserves.

applesanity
March 17, 2008, 05:28 PM
I picked the Sig 550 series. Where was the FN FNC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_FNC) on the poll list?

bigghoss
March 17, 2008, 07:20 PM
m16 and variants

YukonKid
March 17, 2008, 09:52 PM
M14 and FAL...no need to mess around with little bullets.

YK

Tikirocker
March 17, 2008, 10:07 PM
I also came to love the Lithgow L1A1 a Aussie made FN-FAL. A gun to be counted on.

Sadly, when Australian defence management were inspired by what Imperial Storm Troopers carried in Star Wars they bought the AUG and melted down the beloved FN instead of reconditioning them and holding them as reserves.

Yes indeed ... the L1A1 was our service rifle during Vietnam and while the soldiers moaned about it's weight they never complained about it's fire power or reliability in the field - case in point the Battle of Long Tan where 100 Aussie diggers repelled 1500 Viet Cong/NVA with their L1A1's ... the Viet Cong were said to give the Aussie's a wide birth after this due to their excellent guerilla tactics.

And would you believe the Australian Government melted down 100,000 L1A1's ... our civil defense reserve?! Yup ... serious anti- gun agenda there. The F77 AUG is a joke by comparison. They wouldn't want our people to have anything reliable now would they? Did you know a soldier cannot field strip and repair his OWN F77 - It has to be sent in to the field shop ... you wouldn't want a fella to be able to repair his own firearm in the field would you.

blhseawa
March 17, 2008, 10:27 PM
My choices:

1st - G3 / HK-91 (.308)
2nd - FN FAL (.308)
3rd - M16, but not M4
4th - AK-47

BrunoNorway
March 18, 2008, 01:35 PM
the AK is a kommunist wepon, always has been and always will bee...
i realy cant picture a US (or in my case a Norwegian) soldier running around with a AK, yes i know some special forses use them but you never see them, so it dosent matter...
i used the G-3 when i was in the Navy and it realy kicks butt, i also used the M-4(C-8) it was of course mutch nicer, but i would feel more comfortable with more horse-powers at my shoulder...
i would go for the G-3 or M-14...:D

SPUSCG
March 18, 2008, 01:41 PM
ak....relible as hell, no accuracy
l85, no accuracy
m16, jams easy, prob better now but many vietnam vets hate the thing


m14.....heavy, but awesome

DMK
March 18, 2008, 01:43 PM
If I was in combat? I'd want a FAL.

I'd also want to be mechanized, 'cause I don't want to hump that heavy beast all over the country. :p

That said, I also keep a couple AR15s and an AK in the SHTF rack. They'd all get the job done.

http://mysite.verizon.net/dmk0210/myarms/ImblFAL2.jpg

http://mysite.verizon.net/dmk0210/myarms/GreenFAL2.jpg

Chui
March 18, 2008, 01:50 PM
Something that's still a sturmgewehr (intermediate cartridge, select fire) like the FN SCAR or Masada ACR. The FAL is the most balanced of the 7.62 NATO-calibered rifles and the M1A the most accurate at distance. How about a 6.8x45mm FAL with an adapted M1A rear sight assembly?? T44 "Improved" anyone??

Moloch
March 18, 2008, 02:39 PM
Well, my Vote goes for the AUG. But not because of patriotism! :o

First its a quiet a bit shorter than most other rifles thanks to its bullpup-design, its only 31'' long where as the most standart military rifles have a length of 40+''. You really notice the length while shooting and handling it. And thats with a 20'' barrel!!

Shot both the military version (served army) and the civil version of the AUG, under full auto mode its incredibly controllable, no problem to burst out a half magazine with too much loss of aim.

Optical sights are really a big plus, instead of a rear and front sight you have a optical sight, much like a ghost ring sight without a front sight, aiming at up to 300 yds is no problem-without having a scope. You also have mechanical sights at the top of the optical sights for close quarter.

It eats any ammo, any weight without complaining, never had a single FTF or other problems during thousands of round of seim and full auto firing.

Its a breeze to field strip and full dissasembly is a breeze too. To get out the barrel you simply have to push a lever in front end of the stock, rotate the barrel with the front grip and pull it out. That technique is used with a bipod, the rifle tuns into a light machinegun with interchangeable barrels.- (+ a bull barrel for long series of shots) For fully dissasembly you only have to remove the barrel, pus another lever at the top of the trigger guard and out comes the whole action. As easy as abc.

It also has a foldable front handle, it has two ejection ports (one always covered), the trigger controls the firemode (press half: semi, full: auto)

Cant think of too many weapons with all that features...;)

Limeyfellow
March 18, 2008, 02:57 PM
l85, no accuracy

Since when? Now you can say the L85a1 had no reliability and that is pretty much fixed with the L85a2, but as far as accuracy it is considered one of the best out there and the few times I shot it, it was more than fine at blasting away on the target.

Firepower!
March 19, 2008, 08:01 AM
L85 A2- I have heard has greatly improved in accuracy complaints.

JKHolman
March 19, 2008, 03:37 PM
Daewoo

Running Gunfight
March 19, 2008, 04:19 PM
The AK with modern optics.

Tamara
March 19, 2008, 04:33 PM
At one time I owned an HK-91, FAL, M14, Daewoo DR-200, Beretta AR-70, AK, and an AR-15.

I still have the AR. More than one. I don't particularly like it, but it's a useful gun.

PanzerJager
March 19, 2008, 04:40 PM
AK in the x39 flavor. Other than the AR/M series it's the only one on the list with which I have any long term experisense.

rhgunguy
March 19, 2008, 06:15 PM
While the Sig 550 is much vaunted, the M-16 has proven itself adaptable to any environment. I will not disagree that there have been growing pains associated with each new environment that the platform finds itself in, but I will argue that it has been found to be supremly adaptable.

kgpcr
March 19, 2008, 10:08 PM
m-14 as the m4 is a joke in any thing but urban combat. It has no range and the .223 has had its problems. While at close range it will tear a nasty hole its just not going to reach out and touch some one line a good old M14. With the old 55grn ammo it would do a nice job up close but the new ammo is not doing that well i am told. When i was in the Marines we had 55grn ammo and i also was trained on the M-14 and that is what i would take in to battle!

SPUSCG
March 20, 2008, 02:01 PM
556ers pierce right through and if they dont hit anything major do very littlle damage they proved ineffective in somalia

Avenger29
March 20, 2008, 03:24 PM
556ers pierce right through and if they dont hit anything major do very littlle damage they proved ineffective in somalia

That's because the Rangers in Somalia (Black Hawk Down battle) carried rounds designed for punching through armored vests. If they were issued rounds meant for fragmentation or expansion, they would have done better.

Firepower!
March 26, 2008, 06:10 AM
Two very surprising things:
a) Ak and M14 scoring about the same
b) FAMAS and L85 not scoring a single vote.

okiewita40
March 26, 2008, 10:25 AM
I had to vote for M-14. Plenty of firepower. Manageable package. Not to mention it just looks better than a M-16 or M-4. I just like a full power .30 cal weapon.

ELMOUSMC
March 26, 2008, 12:33 PM
M14A1 with out a doubt ELMOUSMC

Crosshair
March 26, 2008, 01:12 PM
That's because the Rangers in Somalia (Black Hawk Down battle) carried rounds designed for punching through armored vests. If they were issued rounds meant for fragmentation or expansion, they would have done better.
Yea, but I don't see them being issued 55 grain Hornady SP loaded ammo. A civilian like myself, heck yea. (Gotta keep some of that AP on hand though for the kevlar coated zombies.:D )

Firepower!
March 31, 2008, 01:14 PM
AKSU-74 Krinkov all the way!

Tamara
March 31, 2008, 01:17 PM
Yeah, 'cause that's what I would do: Take an AK with mediocre accuracy and then whack the barrel back to give it the sight radius of a derringer and the ballistics of a .22 Hornet.

Ignition Override
March 31, 2008, 11:41 PM
Just a novice here, but if the AK-47 is considered new, how about
a clean SKS, for plinking or self-defense?

Are they not quite effective at typically shorter ranges, readily available (as with the 7.62x39 ammo), quite reliable and durable?

Many guys claim that they would bet their life on an SKS, more than almost any other semi- rifle.
"GunBroker.com" has at least 40 SKS rifles or so.

My guns: Mosin 91/30, 44, plus Mini 14 and 30
(and really old Savage .22 bolt-action).

Firepower!
February 18, 2009, 07:43 AM
Yeah, 'cause that's what I would do: Take an AK with mediocre accuracy and then whack the barrel back to give it the sight radius of a derringer and the ballistics of a .22 Hornet.

No its for CQC- not really meant for accuracy beyond 100 meters.

JKHolman
February 18, 2009, 10:21 AM
I would opt for a Daewoo. It is a very accurate .223 platform and a very robust and reliable chassis. It even uses M16 magazines. I have an AR-100 and it is very reliable. Perhaps there should be another option on your survey? But going by the present menu, I will go with the Galil, followed closely by a later-generation M16. Larger calibres are nice, but when you have to hump the ammunition that goes with it, the .223 gets to be really practical. Fun survey, OP.

- JKHolman

SPUSCG
February 18, 2009, 02:19 PM
Two very surprising things:
a) Ak and M14 scoring about the same
b) FAMAS and L85 not scoring a single vote.

well i understand the FAMAS,Its sights are like 2 inches apart and a whole story above the barrel, zeroing is a nightmare, and having over 900rpm but a 25 round mag means you have an inaccurate, stupid weapon that runs out of ammo in a heartbeat. Apaprently newer famases have a 30 round mag and over 1000 rounds per minuite, makes no sense to me. IW-80, those are supposed to be okay now but used to be a jam-o-matic like our m16a1

I say, m14. Love them, love the caliber. 308 bolt guns dont kick hard to me at all I don't get the recoil argument. Peep sights are so easy to use too!

Para Bellum
February 21, 2009, 01:59 PM
the M-16 has proven itself adaptable to any environment
kidding, right? ;)
Just check your every day news from Iraq. GIs running around with AKs, why would that be?
My choice: AUG or SIG550.

Father Time
February 21, 2009, 03:31 PM
The first question I would ask is
"Is that Galil 7.62 or 5.56?";)

kraigwy
February 21, 2009, 04:16 PM
Maybe we can dig up some other year old post to argue over.

How about a 5 year old 45 v 9mm post.

FyredUp
February 21, 2009, 04:29 PM
Nah, let them go at it. I love listening to the combat veterans being told they are wrong about their weapons by the guys who the closest they have come to combat is deer hunting.

Creature
February 21, 2009, 05:01 PM
Just check your every day news from Iraq. GIs running around with AKs, why would that be?

For a couple of reasons. And not because the AK is a better rifle.

Ignition Override
February 22, 2009, 12:15 AM
It surprises me that an equal number of civilians in this country who have tried the AK, AR-15 (M-16) or M-14 have also tested the FN FAL, Galil or Steyr AUG etc, unless they 'tested it' by watching it on the History Channel or YouTube.

Or do the poll's results reflect mainly what military veterans have somehow had a chance to try?

By the way, some photos are posted at 'Perfectunion' in the main 'Mini 14' forum, where numerous NYC LEOs are trying out the Mini, so that they have exposure to (so-called) 'assault rifles', based on the article. The theme seems to be about what happened in Mumbai, India and being prepared for attacks in a city.
Why don't the LEOs instead get a chance to try a rifle in the generic AK category, and get instruction from some Iraq/Afghan combat veterans?
What is so difficult about that idea, or is this already the case?

STLRN
February 22, 2009, 06:40 AM
Just check your every day news from Iraq. GIs running around with AKs, why would that be?

The first time I carried one was because I wasn't issued a rifle, the second I carried one was because I was an adviser.

The first time was a real nice Russian milled folder, it went TU during a fire fight outside a lovely town called Ad Dywanyia.

dm1333
February 22, 2009, 07:18 AM
The first time was a real nice Russian milled folder, it went TU during a fire fight outside a lovely town called Ad Dywanyia.

An AK that went TU? Say it isn't so! It must have been an AR in disguise!:p