The O.G. battle rifle. Fear the old man who knows how to shoot it
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Wanting a battle rifle
- Thread starter Jmccracken1214
- Start date
The O.G. battle rifle. Fear the old man who knows how to shoot it
The country who invented it also had their ass kicked by it a couple times lol
I’m not interested so much in the governments opinion on a rifle or round, as much as it’s proven record.
Hard to argue with the work the 762x39 as put in.
Not something I’d want to shoot golf balls with at 300yrds, or something I’d run in a 3gun, but for toppling tyrants and repelling invaders, that shit puts in work.
Last I checked, Spetsnaz and FSB Alfa still have the option to go for the 7.62x39 if they desire, plus Kalashnikov still makes their newest rifles for it so the Russians must still expect to get some mileage from the cartridge they moved on from.
LMT MWS. "I highly recommend it if you have the means. Its so choice." Ferris Bueller
The “battle rifle” concept is epitomized by the Garand, the FAL, the m1a, and the AR10. If you are stepping down to an intermediate cartridge (7.62x39, 5.56x45, 5.45x39, etc) you are no longer looking at a “battle rifle.”
I am late to the party. Looking for a rifle that is different than the AR style rifles, I say look at Robinson Arms XCR M and get a 7.62x51 or 6.5 Creedmoor. Looking to save money on ammo look at the XCR L series in 7.62x39. BTW if you want a M-Lock competition handguard you need to call them. It's not on their website, but they do offer it. PSAK 47 are decent and they have a Romanian build right now that is $899.00. I have one:
Skip the HP's, they fragment and separate.
The Speer Gold Dot (referred hereafter as SGD) Rifle bullets are protected softpoints (recessed into the jacket tip), and bonded. Base separation is extremely rare. Accuracy is up there with some match bullets, and the cost factor is smaller. They have a rebated base, which gives some of the attributes of a boat tail but not the added length, so there's less protrusion into the case, conserving powder capacity. The meplat is actually a small flat, further reducing overall length. This brings the ogive forward, while allowing mag length feeding to get that ogive closer to the rifling.
Reviews strongly suggest excellent accuracy as well as significant terminal performance. My 308 load for the .30/168 bullet is 43.5gr of IMR-4064, which is essentially identical to my 168gr FGMM Clone load. For 30-06, I use 46.5gr of IMR-4064. The 30-06 groups slightly tighter than 168gr FGMM at 200yd, and has an aggregate POI shift of less than 3 inches.
I have reworked most of my rifle loads to employ these bullets. I use .264 90gr TNT, and 120SGD for the 6.5 Grendel and 260 Rem, as well as the 140 for the 260. I use the 168SGD for 308 and 30-06. I use the 62 and 75gr for the .223/5.56.
Unlike match bullets, which have the accuracy, these also have significant and consistent terminal performance. Speer Lawman Ammunition is loaded with these bullets, and a variant is also used in the Federal Fusion load, both of which have proven performance reputations.
I like being on target, but I also like the bullet to do impressive things on arrival. I arrived at this choice after using the Fusion ammunition, and wanted to duplicate that load. This bullet may allow for something even better.
These do; IMHO
Greg
My only true battle Rifle is an M1 Garand.
My modern equivalent is a significantly customized 20" PSA PA-10 308. It is scoped with the (now discontinued) Bushnell AR Drop Zone BDC 308 scope. Made in Korea, it gets zeroed at 100yd, then additional reticle aiming points corresponding to 200, 300, 400, and 500yd are configured to be ontarget for the Federal 168 FGMM load. The lower vertical crosshair junction between the thin and thick portion can also be used for a 600yd aiming point. In testing, I was able to achieve relaxed hits going from 100 to 200, then to 300yd in well under a minute.
Battle rifle? Nope, but possibly something better, IMHO.
The Speer Gold Dot (referred hereafter as SGD) Rifle bullets are protected softpoints (recessed into the jacket tip), and bonded. Base separation is extremely rare. Accuracy is up there with some match bullets, and the cost factor is smaller. They have a rebated base, which gives some of the attributes of a boat tail but not the added length, so there's less protrusion into the case, conserving powder capacity. The meplat is actually a small flat, further reducing overall length. This brings the ogive forward, while allowing mag length feeding to get that ogive closer to the rifling.
Reviews strongly suggest excellent accuracy as well as significant terminal performance. My 308 load for the .30/168 bullet is 43.5gr of IMR-4064, which is essentially identical to my 168gr FGMM Clone load. For 30-06, I use 46.5gr of IMR-4064. The 30-06 groups slightly tighter than 168gr FGMM at 200yd, and has an aggregate POI shift of less than 3 inches.
I have reworked most of my rifle loads to employ these bullets. I use .264 90gr TNT, and 120SGD for the 6.5 Grendel and 260 Rem, as well as the 140 for the 260. I use the 168SGD for 308 and 30-06. I use the 62 and 75gr for the .223/5.56.
Unlike match bullets, which have the accuracy, these also have significant and consistent terminal performance. Speer Lawman Ammunition is loaded with these bullets, and a variant is also used in the Federal Fusion load, both of which have proven performance reputations.
I like being on target, but I also like the bullet to do impressive things on arrival. I arrived at this choice after using the Fusion ammunition, and wanted to duplicate that load. This bullet may allow for something even better.
These do; IMHO
Greg
My only true battle Rifle is an M1 Garand.
My modern equivalent is a significantly customized 20" PSA PA-10 308. It is scoped with the (now discontinued) Bushnell AR Drop Zone BDC 308 scope. Made in Korea, it gets zeroed at 100yd, then additional reticle aiming points corresponding to 200, 300, 400, and 500yd are configured to be ontarget for the Federal 168 FGMM load. The lower vertical crosshair junction between the thin and thick portion can also be used for a 600yd aiming point. In testing, I was able to achieve relaxed hits going from 100 to 200, then to 300yd in well under a minute.
Battle rifle? Nope, but possibly something better, IMHO.
Last edited:
Your first statement was accurate, that's exactly what the 5.56 rd was designed to do. And the 77 gr TMK load does it better in gel than any other load I have seen to date and it still penetrates 14" or more. The only advantage I can see with the Gold Dot load is that it's a better barrier rd, but if we are comparing pure wounding capability, I haven't seen better performance in gel from anything that I would pick in it's place.
I can't argue with a personal choice.
It looks like you're getting excellent performance with yours; good enough to please you. So I'd suggest you stick with what you have.
Confidence is a key factor in shooting, and I suggest you stick with what makes you most confident.
Best Fortune.
Greg
this is my rifle, there are many like it but this one is mine. 103 year old "Battle Rifle" Winchester 1917 Enfield 30.06, I know it's old but she's a sweetie.........
I've owned the M1a and would still own it had catastrophic medical costs not intervened. Mine shot especially well with glassbedding, but scope mounting was always an issue for me.
I chose it to sell it before the Garand because it was more marketable. Next choice was the house or the Garand.
I sold the house; it was in New York. I moved to Arizona, have a smaller house with much easier upkeep and no steps that my handicapped Wife needs to negotiate. I made the better choice. I carry Constitutional (no permit required in AZ for CCW).
Greg
I chose it to sell it before the Garand because it was more marketable. Next choice was the house or the Garand.
I sold the house; it was in New York. I moved to Arizona, have a smaller house with much easier upkeep and no steps that my handicapped Wife needs to negotiate. I made the better choice. I carry Constitutional (no permit required in AZ for CCW).
Greg
Last edited:
I suppose if we are limiting choices to the traditional definition of a "battle rifle" and picking from production designs, I will take an 18" M1A Scout Squad all day, every day.
Large bore :
- SR25 CC
- Hk MR762A1
- SCAR 17
- M1A1 (hand fitted /tested)
- FAL
- M1 Garand
Small bore:
- 18" quality AR15 /77gr 5.56 for max velocity.
- SR25 CC
- Hk MR762A1
- SCAR 17
- M1A1 (hand fitted /tested)
- FAL
- M1 Garand
Small bore:
- 18" quality AR15 /77gr 5.56 for max velocity.
That gave me a chubby.
I can't fault the same color scheme as my M40A1. '76-'86
...whatever you decide on, take into consideration the parts availability for that eventual breakage that will occur... a broke whatever is just a useless collection of metal, plastic, wood... ;-)
...and for those mentioning the BM59's, that was a real sweet platform, I regret not getting one when they were "plentiful" back in the day...having opted for a HK91....
...and for those mentioning the BM59's, that was a real sweet platform, I regret not getting one when they were "plentiful" back in the day...having opted for a HK91....
Last edited:
what? JHC you don't really believe this do you? I'm as red blooded as Teddy but to say the x39 is stepping down when the AK chambered in x39 is the most produced battle rifle with more kills than any other 'battle rifle' is patently fking retarded.
Because whenever somebody starts blathering on about "battle rifle" invariably they are repeating the same old tired worn out tripe that apparently is popularized by various writers and such, and what they really mean is, I want a 1940s to 1950s tech rifle shooting .308, out of a total choice of I guess 3 or 4 models, so they can feel all superior about shooting some kind of "manly" "battle rifle."
Sometimes you'll get a new convert to the "battle rifle" B.S. and they will agree that a more modern design might possibly be allowed as long as it shoots the .308 round.
Don't bother trying to point out that the rifles that millions of soldiers carry into... battle and have done for decades might actually be. OMG!!! "Battle Rifles?"
AK is an assault rifle.
AR-15 is an assault rifle
Brief History for those confused. In world war II, the Germans chopped the 8mm mauser in half (not literally) to to give the 7.92 x 33 Kurtz and chambered a full-auto weapon in that caliber. It was designed to be more powerful than a pistol but less powerful that the regular rifle. It was to be compact like a machine pistol. It was called the Sturmgewehr which is literally German for "assault rifle"
After the war everyone else caught onto the concept of an intermediate, full auto compact rifle--except those in charge at the US military, who insisted on staying with a 30 cal "full power" round. Thus the US forced NATO to use 308 over various intermediate proposals.
Then the US came to its senses, adopted the AR-15--said "sorry our bad" but we are in charge so we decide .223 you you all can suck it.
This happened about 1970 (While the M-16 is synonymous with Vietnam, European troups where equiped with .308 rifles to be good neighbros with outher NATO buds), so there are some 'purists' who insist that the AR-15 or AK-47 being an INTERMEDIATE cartridge is not a "man's gun" and thus prefer the full power of a "Battle Rifle"
We rediscovered this in PRS when everyone stopped shooting 308 and dropped down to 6 mil and about 30 grains of powder for anything inside 100 yards.
Basically the original rounds used in military rifles were WAY overpowered for the ranges at which combat took place.
Battle Rifle: Full Power Centerfire in a military caliber such as 30-06, 308, 303 British, 8MM Mauser, 7.62x54R (This term is used to contrast their how power status as a reaction against 'assault rifles')
Assault Rifle: Intermediate Power, AUTOMATIC, rifle. (unless you are a politician)
SO when anyone says a "high powered assault rifle" you know they are full of shit because BY DEFINITION an assault rifle is a intermediate cartridge like 5.56 Nato, 7.62x39, 8mm Kurtz, etc.
Its not a knock to say the AK is not a battle rifle. I'd rather have an AK over an M-14 or FAL. Its an assault rifle. Just like those guys that say 5.56 is too wimpy. This argument has been going round since about 1920 or whenever MacArthur ordered the Garand to be chambered in 30-06 over 276 Pederson. Ammo is heavy, the less crap you have to carry, the better. Or better yet, same crap weight, more rounds!
And thank god for spell check becuase I cannot for the life of me spell the word assault correctly. Many of you think this is splitting hairs, but that's the argument of Battle Rifle vs Assault Rifle.
Last edited:
testify brother...lol
I just had to laugh and respond earlier when I read that. I always try to be respectful but his post was full on retard
Wait, I said the same thing- without the exposition on the origin of the terms- but my post was full retard? Whatever. There is no disputing that the x39 (and other intermediate) cartridges are reduced power as compared to their “rifle cartridge” predecessors. Sure, you can use an “assault rifle” in battle (and assault rifles far outnumber battle rifles on the modern battle field), but the term ‘battle rifle’ as defined by those that define these things excludes intermediate cartridges. The ‘battle rifle’ is obsolete on the modern battle field, but most here (including me) will never see a battle field outside of a video game.
With the above- fuller- exposition in place, I maintain that if the OP is truly looking for a ‘battle rifle,’ he is looking for a semi-auto rifle chambered in a full power rifle cartridge as epitomized by the M1 garand and its descendants, the AR10, and the FAL.
I hope you can see that we are arguing the same side of the coin. But, if your feathers stay ruffled, I’m ok with that too.
Gee guys, I love fun too! I'll help keep this 2 1/2 year old topic going by asking "where can I get me some of that 30 cent .223?" LMAO
...... folks, all this "discussion" over semantics is nothing more than evidence of separation of "generations" 
and the perspectives and "lingo" of the generation the speaker is part of....
...and as Doug Marcaida would say about ALL of the mentioned platforms... "it will kill" ....
folks, all this "discussion" over semantics is nothing more than evidence of separation of "generations" and the perspectives and "lingo" of the generation the speaker is part of.......and as Doug Marcaida would say about ALL of the mentioned platforms... "it will kill
" ....
Last edited:
Yeah, some generations think that words like; infringe, male, female and right have meanings. Others say that you can call anything by any word and it’s “all good.” English is an efficient and information dense language, but only so long as words have meanings. Resist the creeping incrementalism that threatens to turn your modern sporting rifle into a military grade assault weapon of mass destruction.
all good brother!Wait, I said the same thing- without the exposition on the origin of the terms- but my post was full retard? Whatever. There is no disputing that the x39 (and other intermediate) cartridges are reduced power as compared to their “rifle cartridge” predecessors. Sure, you can use an “assault rifle” in battle (and assault rifles far outnumber battle rifles on the modern battle field), but the term ‘battle rifle’ as defined by those that define these things excludes intermediate cartridges. The ‘battle rifle’ is obsolete on the modern battle field, but most here (including me) will never see a battle field outside of a video game.
With the above- fuller- exposition in place, I maintain that if the OP is truly looking for a ‘battle rifle,’ he is looking for a semi-auto rifle chambered in a full power rifle cartridge as epitomized by the M1 garand and its descendants, the AR10, and the FAL.
I hope you can see that we are arguing the same side of the coin. But, if your feathers stay ruffled, I’m ok with that too.
and kill well......
...and as Doug Marcaida would say about ALL of the mentioned platforms... "it will kill
are you trying to say that a full auto full power cartridge is doable? I hope not because that video evidences the opposite of that
"Full Power" used to be understood to be stuff like .30-06, 8mm Mauser, 303 British, 7.62x54R and other rather larger cartridges.
The .308 that everybody talks about as being "full power" is itself a cut down lower power, smaller sized cartridge...
In it's original configuration when it came out, it was a fair bit of a compromise.
Because 30-06 was just too much for weaker folks to handle. Also slightly bigger and slightly heavier.
Now today with the latest powders and latest bullets and such, .308 can do a lot more.
BUT, imagine if you were to take a .30-06, 8mm Mauser, 303 British, 7.62x54R type case and push it to the max with modern powders and the latest projectiles much like folks do with the .308 now You would essentially have close what the original .300wm was rated for.
Much like what you can do with the 140 year old 6.5x55 which when loaded to the latest modern abilities, makes the 6.5CM look like a nice round for those that don't like manly stuff.
The way I read it is that the 308win of the day was equal in power to the M2 ball ammunition used in the M1 garand (152gr at ~2800 fps). A larger case was not necessary, given the powder advancements made since the adoption of the M2 ball ammo.
My Battle Rifle is the same one that may well have won WWII, the M-1 Garand. This assumes I might have a need for a battle rifle, which is by no means a certainty. IMHO; anything else is a compromise.
When one thinks in terms of a battle rifle, I hope they don't plan on winning the battle by themselves. For handouts to backup peeps, the SKS is a very adequate little battle implement.
But when Com Bloc ammo imports were banned by Mr. Potato head in Chief, I sold my rifles in that chambering.
I also think I like the PSA Gen2/Gen3 PA-10 20".
Greg
When one thinks in terms of a battle rifle, I hope they don't plan on winning the battle by themselves. For handouts to backup peeps, the SKS is a very adequate little battle implement.
But when Com Bloc ammo imports were banned by Mr. Potato head in Chief, I sold my rifles in that chambering.
I also think I like the PSA Gen2/Gen3 PA-10 20".
Greg
Having your average American soldier armed with an M-1 semi auto rifle gave them an advantage against similar German or Japanese soldiers that were often using bolt guns.
this is correct
308 is full power cartridge and more powerful than the 303 so him saying 303 full power and then discounting the 308 immediately puts him on the 'ignore commentary' list. That doesn't include his 30-06 comment. smfh
If I ignore someone, it's seldom for more than a small while. I always assume that each individual has the capacity to learn.
IMHO, the key benefit to employing the 308 is that you can build an AR for it. For the 30-06, this would not be so easy.
Gotta roll with the times.
Greg
IMHO, the key benefit to employing the 308 is that you can build an AR for it. For the 30-06, this would not be so easy.
Gotta roll with the times.
Greg
Mega Maten in 308. Hasn't given me any issues with feeding or extraction, yet. I can put my Ultra7 on the end, has an adjustable gas block, and is quite accurate. Have Magpul MBUS Pro sights to back the scope up.
After it, I would be hard-pressed to decide between my FAL, M1A or MK2-1 Garand in 7.62. All are equally robust and reliable, the M1A is more accurate in sustained fire, the Mk2-1 in slow fire. The FAL, though not as accurate a rifle, is certain to run long after the others.
Grab one to run out the door with? May end up being the Maten in 308 going on my back, but the M4-gery would be in my hands.
After it, I would be hard-pressed to decide between my FAL, M1A or MK2-1 Garand in 7.62. All are equally robust and reliable, the M1A is more accurate in sustained fire, the Mk2-1 in slow fire. The FAL, though not as accurate a rifle, is certain to run long after the others.
Grab one to run out the door with? May end up being the Maten in 308 going on my back, but the M4-gery would be in my hands.
...my most used platform, in 300BLK .... my locale isn't "quiet friendly" so I run supers only in all of my "quiet capable" platforms
.... trying to "downsize" again, figuring having uppers in Wylde and 6ARC to pair it with will adequately cover any SHTF or bugout scenario I hope never to be forced to do....
.... my locale isn't "quiet friendly" so I run supers only in all of my "quiet capable" platforms .... trying to "downsize" again, figuring having uppers in Wylde and 6ARC to pair it with will adequately cover any SHTF or bugout scenario I hope never to be forced to do....
Attachments
Similar threads
