The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: Semi-automatics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 17, 2018, 03:38 PM   #76
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 7,330
Quote:
But given a Ruger AR-556, a couple of PMAGs, a Surefire x400, and a YETI cup full of coffee they know to fear the tubby guy on his patio.
Lack of adequate backstop prohibits firearms for me, sadly. Not that I haven't been tempted to introduce a few of them to my Ruger Mk3 and Sparrow combo.
Bartholomew Roberts is online now  
Old March 17, 2018, 10:47 PM   #77
JeepHammer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2015
Posts: 1,555
You hunt with what you have.
With the $300 farm store AR clones, it's used a lot.
I'm a big fan of states restricting caliber to the game hunted, forcing idiots to use an appropriate caliber for the game in season.
I've seen too many deer gut shot by some idiot with a .223 AR or SKS or AK clone.
Sickens me every time I see it.

In my state, the .458 Socom became legal for deer.
Idiots paid twice retail to get them, then shot deer to pieces just because they could click off a dozen rounds...

What you can't get through the 'Black Rifle' bunch is, it's always been, and always will be first shot placement.
If they think they don't have to practice shooting because they can click off 2 or 3 rounds per second, this crap is going to get worse.

Some history for the ignorant,
(Ignorant isn't stupid, just means you don't have an education in the particular subject, while stupid is you know the difference but do the same thing anyway)

The .218 Bee is the grand father of the current .223
It is a rimmed .22 cal, center fire round with .218 bore & .222-.223 rifled groove diameter.
Beginning to see where the .222-.223 family came from?
This was exclusively a small varmint round, never intended for large or dangerous game, and the predominant rifle at the time was tube fed lever action, so flat or round nose bullets in the 30 to 45 grain range.

Rifling was 1:16" or 1:14" depending on the rifle manufacturer.

The father of your AR-15,
When bolt action became popular, Remington being a bolt rifle maker, introduced the .222 Rem round.
This was a modern powder, high velocity bottle necked case specifically designed to outshoot the Winchester .218 Bee & .219 Zipper.
Rimless for smoother feeding in bolt rifles, and with a pointed nose, this round was designed to be fired from a post WWII rifle with available optics.
With 35-50 grain jacketed & pointed bullets, this round could reach 3,000-3,500 FPS and made a mess out of smaller varmints.
Again, light weight bullets out of a relatively slow barrel twist, usually 1:14" and later with heavier bullets, 1:12" twist.

The .223 Rem is slightly more powder volume version of the .222 and was adopted by the US military & NATO as the 5.56x45 NATO round.
The military, being schizophrenic, had to mess with everything...
Starting at 52 grain bullet weight, 1:12" barrel twist rate and IMR extruded (stick) powder, the little round retained it's 'Inherently Accurate' status,
And in the early Eugene Stoner rifles it worked fairly well in short range jungle enviormental.

Then the military got involved...
Bullet weights shot up because ballistic testing (at ranges the round wasn't intended to shoot, on animal sizes the round was never intended to be used on) didn't turn out well.

The next idiot idea was to change from much cleaner burning IMR powder to old military ball powder that was corrosive and murder on the gas system.

The next stupid idea was to declare the rifle 'No Clean', not developing or including a cleaning kit.

Now, the schizophrenia continues,
The military continues to shorten the barrel, increase bullet weight and expect the same or better results in velocity & terminal ballistics...
The stupid heavy bullets (77 to 99 grains) require barrel twist rates that damage the barrel, in the neighborhood of 1:6"-1:7" commonly...

And now that patents have expired & the design is in the common domain, every fly by night outfit that can crank out parts is doing so with little or no quality control.
Nothing like getting your $299 farm store & discount gun store special with it's $12 made in China barrel & plastic sights that shoots 'Minute Of Barn Door' groups...
But most guys buying AR clones don't care, there are 30-100 rounds in the magazine so accuracy of any kind isn't an issue...

"Hunting with an AR" is an oxymoron.
It's all about the FIRST shot, not the 30th!

I CAN build a sub MOA AR clone, it's not going out the door for $299 or even $599...
(A good barrel can run $500)
And it's not going to be sub MOA very long if you click off 30 round mags of discount ammo.
JeepHammer is offline  
Old March 18, 2018, 02:43 AM   #78
Cosmodragoon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2013
Location: Northeastern US
Posts: 1,239
JeepHammer, forgive me but I'm a little lost here. Are you saying that restrictions are good because they force stupid or inexperienced people to hunt with more powerful rounds at lower capacity?

I get it that a bunch of new or inexperienced people might buy what looks like the "coolest" rifle. Lower costs lower the entry barrier for more new people at the same time. A few of those people might then go out and act unsportsmanlike with their new sport rifle. When you say "black rifle bunch", are you assuming that this bad behavior is representative of anyone who hunts with an AR-15? (Also, is every bolt or lever guy a saint?)

BTW, most of the woodchucks and coyotes I've taken have been taken with .218 Bee. Given, that was largely before internet and cell phones.
Cosmodragoon is offline  
Old March 18, 2018, 04:49 PM   #79
Danoobie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2017
Posts: 323
JMHO, no stats.( Which, BTW, I believe would clearly show an advantage to scoped
bolt action rifles , primarily 308, 270, and 30.06) IF you do due diligence, get a solid
AR lower/upper, with a 22- 24" bull barrel, and quality parts, with a good scope, you can build
an AR-15 every bit as accurate as mine; @ .5 MOA, and more accurate than any bolt action
hunting rifle I've got. There is credence to the accuracy of a well-built AR-15 as a MSR, which by nature of the caliber, would not be optimal for use as a weapon.
Danoobie is offline  
Old March 18, 2018, 05:36 PM   #80
stagpanther
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 4,267
I also hunt archery--you should hear the absolutely compelling reasons why any hunter worth their salt should never need a firearm of any kind to hunt with.
__________________
I screw things up--so you don't have to.
stagpanther is offline  
Old March 18, 2018, 05:55 PM   #81
benEzra
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 2001
Location: Down East in NC
Posts: 217
Quote:
Most gun owners won’t admit that the AR is indeed an Assault Weapon.
A civilian AR is not an Assault Rifle, but it is an Assault Weapon as defined by the AWB and several state laws.
An AR was not an “assault weapon” under the 1994-2004 Federal AWB if it had a smooth muzzle or pinned-on brake, a non-adjustable or pinned stock, and no bayonet lug.

An AR is not an “assault weapon” in New York or most other AWB states if it meets those same criteria and has a straight-back grip instead of a pistol grip. Just like a Ruger Mini-14 isn’t an “assault weapon” with a straight stock but is with a protruding handgrip.

“Assault weapon” is an intentionally deceptive scare term for a Title 1 civilian semiauto that has a certain style stock, and that’s it.



Top rifle, 50-state legal; middle rifle, “assault weapon” in NY, CA, etc.; bottom rifle, “assault weapon” under 1994 Federal AWB.

That’s the same gun, 2 minutes apart.
Attached Images
File Type: jpeg 6C44E779-E7B3-4FC7-8AB5-061F25E71B53.jpeg (56.2 KB, 91 views)
benEzra is offline  
Old March 18, 2018, 07:31 PM   #82
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 6,587
My point was:
An Assault Weapon is defined by many laws and is a real term. I understand that neutered ARs don’t fit the current definitions, but I’m sure in the future the definition will be expanded.
rickyrick is offline  
Old March 18, 2018, 07:47 PM   #83
raimius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 1,807
JeepHammer, can you explain how faster twist rates damage barrels? I have not heard of this before.
raimius is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 12:15 AM   #84
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 11,723
Quote:
I also hunt archery--you should hear the absolutely compelling reasons why any hunter worth their salt should never need a firearm of any kind to hunt with.
I know a guy that hunts with a knife. You should hear the absolutely compelling reasons why any hunter worth their salt should never need any sort of projectile to hunt with, LOL.

Just sounds like more of the "If you don't hunt the way I hunt, you are doing it wrong" mindset.

Quote:
JeepHammer, can you explain how faster twist rates damage barrels? I have not heard of this before.
"Damage" may not be the best wording, but a faster twist rate will wear more. That is because the twist converts forward motion into spin. This process involves friction. The more spin involved coming from more twist (everything else being equal) means more friction and more friction means more wear. The result can be a shorter barrel life.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 01:27 AM   #85
stagpanther
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 4,267
Quote:
Just sounds like more of the "If you don't hunt the way I hunt, you are doing it wrong" mindset.
precisely my point, thank you.
__________________
I screw things up--so you don't have to.
stagpanther is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 01:38 PM   #86
SPEMack618
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 21, 2010
Location: Central Georgia
Posts: 1,806
My cheap, heavily discounted Ruger AR-556 will shoot pretty good groups at 100 yards with Sierra MatchKing bullets as factory loaded by Federal in thier premium lines. And that's with my crappy eye sight and iron sights. Must be that miliatry training with that "military grade" fully semi auto rifle.

You realize, not everyone hunts with a AR for quick follow up shots. And those lovingly hand crafted bolt guns often wouldn't shoot worth a cuss right out of the box.

Functionally, there is nothing different between a Remington Model 8, as first designed in 1906 by J.M. Browning and a modern day AR- pattern rifle. They are semi automatic rifles feeding from a magazine.
__________________
NRA Life Member
$25 FFL Transfers in the West Georgia Area
678-673-6565
"The answer to any caliber debate is going to be .38 Super, 10mm, .357 Sig, or .41 Magnum"
SPEMack618 is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 01:57 PM   #87
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 6,587
I bet the bolt gun guys have more than round loaded in the rifle to hunt, if the rifle is capable of it. I bet there’s some
Guys that only load one as well. Like I posted earlier, I usually just load 3-5 rounds in a semi to hunt anyway and very seldom needed a second shot. Sometimes never got the chance to fire the first shot.
We are not just spraying rounds in the general direction of the game.
rickyrick is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 02:33 PM   #88
Don Fischer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2017
Posts: 976
I've had a lot of bolt action's rifle's that would do .5" any day if I did my part. In fact I have several right now. I have heard of very accurate AR type rifle's in fact have a brother that think's his is the cat's meow! He brought it over a few years back bragging about it so we went out shooting and he got his eye wiped. Can't doubt that there are AR type's than can shoot very well though.

The first AR type rifle nobody ever complained about and in fact don's still today, Ruger Ranch Rifle! I have never had a desire for one of them either but they do resemble an AR type just not named after some military term! I think between that and the looks is what really started the problem. And of course the imagined need for high capacity magazine and the final blow the bump stock. So manufactures design and sell these military appearing rifle's and name them to sound like military weapons and now some idiot bring's out the bump stock that appears to make the thing run with a full auto rifle but technically is not and we wonder why the anti's are upset? Your kidding, right? If I remember right the first model of assault rifle, before the M-16 was a very similar rifle called the AR-15! Now I don't know that the AR stood for assault rifle but it wouldn't surprise me if it didn't! Notice anything about the present AR-15 and the prototype military AR-15? We are our own worst enemy! Ya notice that nobody scream's about the Ruger Ranch Rifle, the mod 7400 Rem or the Browning BAR? Come to think of it I don't hear the M-14, the M-2 carbine or even the Colt 1911 being screamed about. Other than the 45, it's all in the looks!
Don Fischer is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 02:43 PM   #89
stagpanther
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 4,267
The original assault rifle.

Attached Images
File Type: jpg 20161029_173624_zpslecfsds4.jpg (111.6 KB, 70 views)
__________________
I screw things up--so you don't have to.
stagpanther is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.08198 seconds with 9 queries