Part 2. The Best Survival Carbine (AR Style Rifle)

www.olive-drab.com

Part 2: (History) In order to better understand the capabilities of the modern AR style rifle and how it can be an invaluable tool in the right situations, it’s important to understand its origins and history (both good and bad).


This article is Part 2 in a series of posts.  Read Part 1: (A Little Background)

Knowing these facts can help you make a more informed decision as you purchase or build your ultimate survival carbine.  The history of the carbine in our society and the part its played in military applications has a very long and sordid past.  During Vietnam the military switched from the tried and true M14 platform to the M16 platform.  There were a lot of complaints from the soldiers on the ground using the new weapons (often with good reason), many of these were related to reliability and functionality of the direct gas impingement system and the terminal ballistics from the new smaller 5.56×45 NATO cartridge the M16 used; as opposed to the larger and more formidable 7.62×51 NATO cartridge that was fired from the very reliable M14 rifle.

Some of the positive aspects of the M16 were the lighter configuration, ergonomics and expanded magazine capacity.  The most modern variation of the U.S. combat rifle is the M4 carbine.  It was adopted by the U.S. Army in the mid 1990’s and replaced the M16.  Both the M16 and M4 carbine use the same 5.56 mm NATO round with similar design and functionality.  The M4 carbine is available in a number of M4variations depending on the specific military or law enforcement applications it is used for.  One of the interesting notes is that the M16 and the M4 carbine have about 85% of the same parts compatibility.

Some of the nice features of the M4 carbine are that it is lighter, more compact and has a number of attachment options which allows for greater flexibility in use.  In comparison with the AK-47 (Avtomat Kalashnikova 1947 -Soviet-Made 7.62×39 mm Assault Rifle) the modern M4 carbine has a reputation for being more accurate and at greater range.  The civilian version of the U.S. military M16 / M4 carbine is usually referred to as an AR15 or simply AR and in most variations is almost identical.  Other than being semi-automatic, if it is constructed according to MIL-SPEC, it’s almost completely interchangeable with the military M16 / M4 carbine select fire variations.

An interesting fact is that ArmaLite sold the rights and designs of the AR10 and AR15 to Colt in 1959, from which Colt started designing the M16 assault rifle and later the M4 carbine.  This is where we got the name AR (from ArmaLite).

From Wikipedia:

“The AR-15 is based on the 7.62mm AR-10, designed by Eugene Stoner of the Fairchild ArmaLite corporation.”

Some attractive features of the AR style rifle is that: with a simple barrel and receiver switch,SEAL using the MK12 Sniper Rifle Firing 5.56mm round this rifle can fire numerous different calibers and sizes of ammunition.  It is almost completely customizable.  This rifle can be a personal defense firearm at less than 30 inches long or a sniper rifle (MK12) over 50 inches (read “Lone Survivor” for a good book about a SEAL team using the MK12 sniper rifle in Afghanistan; also see Video of Blackwater Snipers in Iraq using MK12). The standard magazine is 30 rounds, but aftermarket 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 60, 90, and 100 round magazines and drums are also available.

The boutique options of the modern AR carbine such as those listed above make it a very attractive survival rifle.  With companies offering upper receiver/barrel options capable of accepting and accurately sending a number of different caliber rounds downrange, the flexibility is unsurpassed by other platforms.  Also, the compatibility of parts between the AR15 / M16 / M4 carbine type systems and their availability mean that they will probably be able to be maintained (one can acquire replacement parts as needed) without much trouble in the future (unless there are new legal obstacles put in place).

There has also recently been a re-emergence of the Springfield Armory M1A / M14 battle rifle, typically with a shorter barrel, synthetic/lighter stock and with modular configuration options (i.e. MK14 and SOCOM 16) that allow it to accept many modern accessories (scopes, laser sights, weapon mounted lights,  etc).  This platform enjoys a legacy as a durable and reliable weapon, has excellent performance in both arctic and desert conditions and fires a round that is about twice the weight and size of the typical 5.56 AR15 / M4 carbine system.  If I had an M1A battle rifle variant as my primary weapon system early on in my career as a gunslinger, I would probably be more partial to it, however it emerged as an option for me late in the game.  I found it slightly heavier and a bit more cumbersome and ergonomically challenging to carry and manipulate than my M4 carbine and MK12 sniper rifle so I decided to stick with what was familiar and comfortable.  It’s personal preference.  The M1A may be a good alternative to those folks who don’t like the AR style rifle platform for various reasons.  Although it didn’t work for me and what I wanted in my primary weapon system, it may be the best survival weapon choice for others.

As I mentioned before, I am partial to the AR platform, I have been conditioned to like it.  I lived with it, slept with it, spent nearly every moment with it within arms reach for months at a time.  I like the weight and the balance in my hands. I know what types of problems it is partial to having and how to avoid a majority of them based on maintenance, proper usage and configuration.

Recently, several manufacturers seeking to create a more reliable M4 carbine have revamped its legacy direct gas impingement system into a gas piston operated alternative.

In addition to the U.S., there are around 35 countries that have also purchased and are currently using the Colt M4 carbine system, in some capacity, in their military and / or law enforcement ranks.  There is quite a bit of information out there on the history, controversy, and future direction of the modern U.S. carbine rifle. Individuals interested in reading more about modern developments on the M4 carbine rifle should read the following link(s):

The USA’s M4 Carbine Controversy
M4 Carbine Good Enough for US Army (Counterpoint)

Marine Corps Rifleman’s Creed
This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine…..

Visit Our New Survival Gear Store – Forge Survival Supply

Continue Reading:  Part 3: (Direct Gas Impingement (DI/DGI) vs. Gas Piston Operated)

photos from:
www.olive-drab.com
www.militaryphotos.net
www.thefirearmblog.com
www.americanspecialops.com

{ 38 comments… read them below or add one }

Sean November 11, 2010 at 7:59 pm

I'm a tactical newbie, but have some basic objections about this as a "Survival" weapon.

1) hunting: 5.56mm/.223 is too big for a rabbit and too small for a deer
2) home defense: I hear it's great for not over penetrating, but so would a $300 shotgun with buckshot
3) property defense: assuming it's legally appropriate/necessary – if I had acres of property and a need to engage beyond 300 yards, is a 5.56 NATO round from a carbine the best choice? Grandpa's .30-06 would travel further and make a bigger hole upon arrival.
4) price: For the price of a decent AR, you could get guns to fit roles 1-3 above.

To a military or other large organization there are many logistical advantages to the platform. It is ideal for many modern missions. Equipping an infantry has little in common with defending your ranch.

I love this website. Please keep it up.

Reply

bigbob25060 November 16, 2010 at 1:24 am

I agree, every upbeat thing I've seen about the Stoner cloners always say they are reliable as long as you keep them clean.
Shame on me if I don't keep my weapon clean but durned if I like that restriction.

Reply

Kevin November 19, 2010 at 5:33 pm

1) Hunting: 5.56/.223 is good for killing medium sized game and can kill larger game. Get a .22lr conversion bolt for small game. SHOT PLACEMENT

2) Home defense: 5.56/.223 is an excellent self defense cartridge that has devastating effects. SHOT PLACEMENT

3) Property Defense: 5.56/.223 can and will be effective out 500+ yards, assuming you can see your target from there. SHOT PLACEMENT

4) Price: The price of a decent AR can be anywhere from 700-1000 dollars.

Sure you could get 3 different guns for the price of an AR but we're talking the BEST survival carbine. You think you can lug around 3 different guns, all your gear, extra ammo for each gun and extra magazines for each gun? Why not just get one gun that can do it all?

AR-15 in my opinion is the best survival rifle you can buy. Get a .22lr conversion bolt (very lightweight) a .22lr magazine for the ar and a brick of .22lr rounds and your set for 2-4 legged creatures of any size. SHOT PLACEMENT

Reply

Docboy November 30, 2010 at 11:16 pm

Shot placement. Yes, I agree that the cartridge matters way less then the person. "It's not the gun that kills you, it's the man holding the gun that does that." However, we must be reasonable when it comes to which cartridge we choose. While you can hammer with a wrench, that's not the best idea I've heard. Right tool for the right job.

The AR is almost perfect when it comes to ergonomics, and it has proven its place on the battlefield. But less I restate the wheel and go over stopping power etcwhich we have all heard, let's look at it from a slightly different angle.
It was designed to support the fully automatic system, and the cartridge was built around that (most people found the 7.62×51 and the 30-06 to be too stout to control on full auto).
Since we are generally not allowed to own full-auto weapons, why own a weapon designed around that system?

Also note, I am fond of the saying "Right tool for the right job." Which is better, a saw or hammer? Depends on if you want to cut something up or pound nails into an object. Which is better, AR or M1A/FAL/HK91? Depends on the situation. Having been trained on CQB I know I would NEVER choose to lug around a 22" barreled M1a in an indoor shootout. Having been trained in marksmanship I know I would ever choose an AR to make a 500 meter headshot. Both weapons can be pushed to either limit, but they both have their home field.
In a survival situation, what is 'right' depends. It depends on you, depends on your location, depends on your preference. Please note however that in a Survival situation your best hope of survival is to keep the fight out as far away from yourself as you can. (such an action requires a cartridge larger than the 5.56/223) If an engagement is occurring inside your home then you have already half lost (that's my philosophy, anyway) So I will go with the M1A, tried and true, accurate, simple, powerful. And if they get too close to use that then I pull out my backup tool, the one that goes on my hip and shoots a .40, until such a time as I can bring my rifle to bear again.

Peace through superior firepower

Reply

Minarchist_1776 November 20, 2010 at 9:01 pm

Oh no! AR "survival" carbines. [Hurridly genuflects at the altar to the mighty triumvirate of the HK-91 : Springfield Armory M1-A : FN/FAL and then lights a votive candle at the shrine to the M1-Garand. Deliver us from poodle poppers oh mighty weapons systems beloved of real riflemen. :-) ]

The biggest problems are the cartridge the AR is chambered for and the AR's lousy reputation as far as reliability is concerned. You might be able to get around both of those issues by going to one of the gas piston variant ARs and switching the caliber to something like 6.5mm Grendel or 6.8mm Remington SPC, but then you'd have something that was nonstandard. I prefer to stick with things that have been proven to work, as opposed to things that have been proven to be marginal, or things that look like they might be a good idea but haven't been tried that much.

Reply

CaptBart December 15, 2010 at 9:46 am

Gotta admit I like your attitude. Light a candle for me and I'll do the same for you. The AR platform in .308 is a different animal than on in 5.56 and is a different discussion. I'm an old guy at 61 but I still prefer the M14 to the AR. If you just GOT TO HAVE an (all true riflemen forgive the heresy) "assault" rifle get an AK or a Ruger Mini-30 in a 30 caliber. If you want a little history, get the M1 Carbine in .30 (more limited ammo sources thought). The AR is the choice of many and it will do many jobs but don't delude yourself that you have a battle rifle or an effective big game rifle because you don't.

Reply

Russ November 25, 2010 at 7:08 pm

I have harvested many deer (the largest a 225 pound Ohio whitetail) and rabbits, squirrels and turkeys without destroying the meat with my M4 clone with an aimpoint. It takes some skill to not destroy the meat on squirrels, turkeys and rabbits, but it will take down a deer with trophy bonded bear claw ammo at 62 grains.

Reply

OutLander777 November 14, 2010 at 8:25 pm

Now this is why its great to have people post opposing thoughts. It gives others that have never used or handled these systems a chance to hear from professionals that have used and continue to use these systems in real life and for extended times and conditions. How a weapon system preforms in or at a range does not compare to use in the real world. Fore warned is fore armed when your at the gun store and the sales guy starts his pitch.

All the extras that you can add to a weapons platform/system just help to weight you down causing you to have a weapons system that is harder to use, care for and maintain. Also when you become to dependent on all of those nice little goodies and they start to break or become useless you'll be back to iron sights. Remember windage and elevation, windage and elevation.
So i would suggest before you buy and mount all of the neat heavy items to make you a more proficient shooter. Learn to shoot with your iron sights, you might just be amazed what you can hit with practice.

Reply

zschell November 14, 2010 at 8:18 pm

Wow. What a heated debate. I made this comment in the .45 vs 9mm debate months ago. Whille I have a 12g for serious up close and personal issues with large game or other humans, I have a Glock 19 and a Kel Tec sub 2000 for other SHTF issues. The Kel Tec takes glock mags, so I save on weight and space. Plus, with 9mm I can hunt small game and kill bad guys if necessary. In a strictly survival situation, I would like to have the least amount of weight for the most overall punch that I can carry. Don't get me wrong. I would love to have a Kel Tec su16c for its long range accuracy. I think .308 is great for long range accuracy and one shot one kill. I know this forum is based on gear. When my family and myself are on the line, I want to be able to do the most with the least amount that I can carry, and trust my skills to take up the slack. Feel free to give me constructive criticism or flak, but where I stand right now, I am confident that I have less than 25 lbs. worth of stuff to carry with a shotgun, a carbine, and a handgun, and 500 rds.for each, and when I have two kids and a wife to worry about, that's a big deal.

Reply

mr_smashy November 13, 2010 at 1:25 pm

I have a copy of the document that outlines the testing for the changes made from the M16A1 to the M16A2, and I can tell you there was some real flaws and some real changes made to address them (and they were tested vigorously to ensure the M16A2 was a good improvement). You can google all day about people who are bad at using the AR pattern rifle system; they aren't trained, use crap rifles, don't understand maintenance. The AR pattern is a system, and like any system there is always a weak link, for most shooters it's the shooter. The rifle needs to be cleaned and lubed once a day, and that's with heavy use in a poor environment. Not knowing how to clean and lube it properly is usually the problem.

You can also google all day about FAL issues (bad mags, parts kit guns) M1A issues (non-USGI parts, SA INC assembly and QC, SOCOM gas system, mags). Those weapons systems have room for failure as well. I'm very familiar with the M14, and there is no good optic mounting solution. The ARMS mount is probably the best, but that is if you're working with USGI M14 receivers. Once you start working with SA INC M1A receivers, your optics mounting solutions are even worse, and thanks to that IMBEL receiver you can damage it and have to work with a scout setup of some kind. Sadlak makes a good one, but they make it clear that they're made to USGI spec and M1As don't follow that spec.

The AR platform is extremely ergonomic, modular, and has an amazing amount of accessories available to help accomplish your given mission. Finding a good optics mount is not a problem. Finding good mags is not a problem (mags are expendable). Once you have a weapon system squared away (rifle, ammo, accessories, TTPs, shooter), you will have the same end result with either rifle/caliber. The difference is cost, weight, and speed.

I would also like to add that the focus on one shot, one kill is noted. This is an issue with basic rifle marksmanship, not caliber. During the first Fallujah engagement, in April 2004, when the Provisional Gov't requested Marine ceasefire for negotiations that the insurgents were requesting. The first thing the insurgents requested was that the Marines withdrawl the "hundreds of snipers" imbedded in the city. What they didn't know was that although there were around 1,000 Marines operating in the city, only 25-30 snipers were in the city at any given time. What a study later showed was that it was infantry Marines making kills at over 800 yrds and headshots at 500.

Reply

bigbob25060 November 16, 2010 at 1:30 am

You said it yourself, "it NEEDS to be cleaned and lubed once a day"

Reply

g October 10, 2012 at 7:23 am

Your obviously an idiot and are a wannabe warrior. I have used an m4 in real world combat situations and never had an issue. Get a life posser.

Reply

Scott811 November 15, 2010 at 3:29 pm

It's great to have all the input from folks on the pro's and con's of different weapon systems, limitations and opinions. I have no doubt that, much like a conversation on religion and politics there is merit to all viewpoints however what you choose at the end of the day has to be what feels right for you. It has to be the weapon you will pick up and feel comfortable with, have confidence in, understand how to manipulate, understand the limitations and maintenance of the system. The shooter determines the best platform for them. If someone goes out and buys a weapon, never trains on it, never takes it to the limits and understands how it and they will perform with it in moments of stress, they will not utilize it properly when the time comes and it will be useless regardless of whether it's an AR, M1A, AK-47 or other platform. If you know how to use grandpa's .30-06 and feel uncomfortable with anything else… then I daresay that you should keep that thing close by and at the ready…. work on your reloads though!

Reply

bigbob25060 November 16, 2010 at 1:40 am

I wasn't gonna mention the AK group of guns since this forum is about the AR platform. But since it has been brought up I'll throw in my two cents. They AK type weapons in 7.62 X 39 are the most reliable weapons in the world. If they get gummed up with dirt and crud bang the butt on the ground (after unloading) to knock the big chunks out then if necessary urinate on the action to get it back in shooting order

Reply

bigbob25060 November 15, 2010 at 11:05 pm

Though I don't own one I have had occasion to shoot the Mossberg 500. It is a good reliable weapon. I do have 4 shotguns of different manufacture. One thing I've learned about all survival guns is that mine are the best. They are the best because they are mine and are all I can afford. I'm sure a lot of us are in the same boat.
Thanx for reading this (assuming you did)

Reply

Forge_Survival November 16, 2010 at 9:36 am

I will chime in one more time in this debate to follow on to Mr. Smashy's comments: Like I said before, to each his own .308 / 5.56 / .22LR / 12 Gauge – all good choices – I like the 5.56mm Carbine, weight/recoil/ergonomics/ability to carry ammo, etc. To follow on to one of Mr. Smashy's comments – one of my good buddies in Iraq was a Company Commander (not in Fallujah) he was somewhere else – anyway, they got intel of a possible ambush on a Marine vehicle check point. They reinforced the checkpoint in the middle of the night – the ambush kicked off the next day by insurgents. After the ambush was driven off, he had to go through a formal investigation because there was an accusation that his Marines executed insurgents with head shots. After ballistics and eye witness accounts of the investigation, it was confirmed that Marine Grunts using the ACOG scopes were able to record head shots with the 5.56/ACOG system 100 to 300 yards out and further. I didn't get this second hand, I got this from the guy who went through the investigation.

Reply

Minarchist_1776 November 23, 2010 at 1:33 pm

Not to be overly contrarian, but head shots are just about the only way you're going to drop somebody with one round of .223 :-)

On a more serious note, the major consideration is what you're actually expecting the weapon to do in terms of the targets you think you're going to be engaging. It is my opinion that if you're in an area where hunting large game/dealing with serious predators is going to be an issue, you're going to need something with a lot more punch than a .223. That's why I've got an HK-91 clone in .308.

I will note that at one time my rifle for serious use was a bolt action .30-06. My preferred ammo IIRC was a 168 grain Winchester Ballistic Silvertip. It retained as much energy at 500 yards as a .223 had the the muzzle with three times the throw weight. However, while bolt action rifles have a lot going for them if you're looking at the hunting end of things, they don't handle the "20 bad guys at 20 yards" sort of scenarios that well. Hence the shift to the battle rifle clone.

Reply

mr_smashy November 16, 2010 at 10:24 am

I did, but I also qualified my statement, which you did not quote.

The US Rifle, Caliber 30, M1 (Garand) also NEEDS to be cleaned and lubed once a day or MORE OFTEN, with heavy use or a poor environment. That is straight from FM 23-5.

Reply

bigbob25060 November 16, 2010 at 11:59 pm

I hate like hell to bother you with this but do you know how to contact the people running this whole web sight. When I try to go to “contact us” it gives me one e-mail address that is bogus. I need help navegating around this darned place,I'm old and it is showing. Hope you can help me.Bob—

Reply

chris December 10, 2010 at 11:47 am

This is for all the naysayers of the ar type platform.
http://www.bravocompanymfg.com/v/vspfiles/assets/images/filthy14_oct10.pdf
Now after reading this article, explain to me how this weapon isn’t reliable.

Reply

CaptBart December 15, 2010 at 9:51 am

I've heard of .22LR taking deer as well. Doesn't make it a deer rifle. Your skill and choice of ammo are what makes that possible. Not sure how wide spread the availability of your special ammo is which is one of the big arguments for the 5.56 round nor am I sure how hard it is to get the power supply for your aimpoint when TSHTF but that you can take deer with a weapon that can kill a man doesn't surprise me. Your skill just doesn't make the rifle a 'deer' rifle. That label belongs to a weapon that will routinely deliver a clean kill with a variety of factory loadings at regular hunting distances.

Reply

CaptBart December 15, 2010 at 9:58 am

If you are not worried about having a gazillion rounds of ammo or the ability to purchase it after TSHTF, you might look into the Moisn-Nagant in 7.62X54R. They are for sale locally for around $150 and were the Soviet Union's WW2 sniper rifle. By reputation, rugged and flat shooters. Ammo would have to be from the former communist block but should be fairly cheap if you're not buying thousands of rounds.

Reply

smantzouranis December 30, 2010 at 12:03 am

Lots of good points brought up here. I would have to say that I do not like the M16 in 223 I just went through basic training this last summer and we were all issued one. Reliabilty sucked to put it nicely. and it is only obvious that they lack the stopping power of the larger caliber weapons. availabilty of ammo yes amount of upgrades many worth it no not in my opinion any way. I would not trust my life to one and in a SHTF situation that is exactly what you have to do you have to have complete trust in your equipment. I would argue that the round is not the biggest issue with this weapon thoughl. I am a firm believer in accuracy is the best policy. I understand that when you are getting shot at that it changes alot of things but just shooting randomly back in that direction seems a poor choice to me try to gain a vantage point then fire when you have a clear shot. but that is just my opinion.

Reply

tomkinton January 17, 2011 at 10:14 am

Hi. On my fouth tour in the sandbox. Concur completely with the weight/accessories argument here. I routinely see soldiers with M4's that include a quad-rail system, IR illuminator, ACOG or CCO, laser, foregrip (bi-pod style) and lately, suppressors. The amount of sharp edges/catchy things is nuts. I am a fan of keeping it simple. A2 or M4 rifles are great, and when you start calling it a 'system' it loses it's original intended utility as a carbine (light, easy to handle).

Having said all that, I think the idea of a lower receiver and interchangeable parts allowing the shooter to change from .22 rimfire to .50BMG is tough to beat.

tomk

Reply

KvG March 2, 2011 at 10:10 pm

Sig Sauer 556 Russian – 7.62×39 – takes standard AK mags – i will pick one up tomorrow. I have the sig 556 (5.56×45) and carry that daily. Sig is suppose to come out with a .308 on the 556 platform and that will be nice.

Reply

rick April 7, 2011 at 10:08 am

im looking for a good rifle in 308. I really like the m1a but its a little pricey any suggestions?

Reply

skycop530 July 29, 2011 at 9:05 pm

I've got a Saiga .308. It's an AK style, but it's a good shooter. Costs about half what an M14 would cost. But, it just doesn't feel like the gun an M14 is. I also want an M14 but the price drove me away too.

Reply

skycop530 July 29, 2011 at 9:03 pm

I'm an armorer and arms instructor. I own an AK in .308, but I teach with and maintain the M16 series weapons. I've seen probably just about every malfunction and stoppage that these rifles can throw at a shooter…short of spontainious combustion. Having said that, I think the modern day "AR" is a good system…as long as they are properly maintained. Ammunition types are also a big factor. The old style M193 Ball is for the early M16/M16A1. M855 Green TIp Ball is for the modern M16A2/M4. The barrel rifling is a different twist ratio. Mix/matching the different types will cause the projectiles to tumble rather than spirral. When I switched from gun toter to armorer, we had some old M16's and GAU's (early M4's). They were full auto, but they were a real pimple on the butt. They weren't easy to zero and just didn't feel like the ones that we use today. The new style rifle will get you into and out of trouble…just make sure you clean it once you're out of harms way. And don't forget to clean the magazine!

Reply

beenthere4real September 12, 2011 at 1:08 am

For those of you who prefer the 5.56 or .223 but not the AR platform the Ruger mini14 is an excelent choice as a survival carbine I have one in my arsenal and it has never failed me. I recently purchased a Sig556 and am very pleased with it for accuracy and reliability it is an amazing weapon, cost is high but a real big selling point was it uses standard AR mags!

But after all is said about the AR vs AK it doesn't matter one iota what weapon you choose if you don't train with it and maintain it properly!

Reply

JunktownJerky December 17, 2011 at 9:34 pm

I've often thought an AR- .22LR with a .22LR revolver would make a very good and practical survival combo. I've been lookin into the AR-22's lately, Sig seems to be the way to go from what I've learned so far, S&W's up there as well, but I don't think any semi auto could ever replace a good old bolt-action as a "go to" rifle.

Reply

Lyonsa80 January 14, 2013 at 5:31 pm

Hey FTW, I've been trying to track down a reasonable AK for 6 months or so to no avail. Any ideas? $400 sounds right up my alley. Thanks.

Reply

El_Gordo February 6, 2014 at 1:05 pm

You can't beat a bolt action for reliability.

You do have to be much more disciplined with fire.

The guys who expect a firefight to involve spraying lots of rounds around, who got that impression from selfie videos coming from iraq might be surprised. If you shoot move and communicate effectively you don't have to send a lot of lead downrange and you hear a lot less shooting that you'd expect from the movies or youtube.

Reply

El_Gordo February 6, 2014 at 1:18 pm

It is the methodology not the weapon.

A lot of people, hell, a lot of units believe in grazing fire to 'keep their heads down'. As a result they will shoot at nothing, or more accurately, in the general vicinity of where they think a bad guy WAS, in hopes that he'll keep his head down while they maneuver or pop up and fall sick with a case of dead.

I never saw it work out as planned. But I've seen a number of people who were visibly reluctant to move, look around a corner, etc, seconds after seeing someone shot with accurate fire after doing that.

On the receiving end, there's three ways you know you're being shot at. Firstly, the sound of gunfire – but it is not a great way because you hear gunfire all the time, and hearing it doesn't mean that it was aimed at you, or that it was aimed at you accurately enough to be more dangerous than your grandpa's driving. Secondly, you know when you are being shot at because someone suddenly falls down and bleeds. Thirdly, (and most common I think) you know it is aimed at you because you hear little whistling noises around you and/or impacts in your immediate vicinity.

However, in my experience, nothing says "Don't stick your head out" like number 2. That's why I don't prefer grazing fire.

5.56 makes bleeding and incapacitating wounds where you probably have time to do a POW search before they die – if they die at all.

.308 says, "Knock, knock. You're dead."

Reply

LesStroudfan January 16, 2011 at 6:48 pm

i agree wholeheartedly with you man. to the best of my knowledge, to buy a good AR rifle you need to dish out over $1,000, if not close to two grand. with that money, i could purchase a good Remington pump shotgun, a decent concealable pistol, and ammo for both. plus, there are cheaper alternatives than an AR type rifle for survival such as a Ruger chambered for .22

Reply

Nick August 24, 2011 at 7:53 pm

The AR platform has a very bad rep because it went into the field before the bugs were worked out. A very, very bad decision on the part of a general who wasn't thinking at all.
Currently it will run very well under most conditions, but it is an automatic weapon, and they will all have hic-cups, including the AK's. Yes, AK's do fail no matter what anyone tells you.
Try looking at the Fail Zero bolt, which requires no lubrication. This is modern technology, and something that greatly enhances the AR system.

Reply

El_Gordo February 6, 2014 at 11:52 am

You are right about how the bad rap for the ARs came to be.

I might add that it took nearly 30 years to work out those bugs, and cost more money than all other individual firearms developments for the US ARMY COMBINED! (No kidding)

For those that joined the AR users with the M4: You've got a reasonably capable, reasonably reliable weapon. It still has lots of small parts and pins that must be removed to clean the bolt, and which are easily lost. It still uses 5.56, which is more of a wounding than killing round at all but close range…unless you have an AR10, which, if it incorporates the forward assist and other improvements generated from M16 thru M4, ought to be pretty good.

Reply

El_Gordo February 6, 2014 at 12:58 pm

"I would also like to add that the focus on one shot, one kill is noted. This is an issue with basic rifle marksmanship, not caliber. "

BS.

Modern M4's make a very precise, very small hole. Kills with 5.56 at range are rare because most of the energy of a 5.56 is already expended, causing the bullet to keyhole and strike the target sideways. Any intervening obstacle, leaves, grass, hell, even clothing has been known to suck enough remaining energy out of the keyholing round such that it doesn't even make a bullet wound, only a scratch.

That is the ammo, not the AR. And if you've been in combat think back to how much you liked your M60/M240 gunner and keep in mind that the rest of the platoon was throwing more lead than he was – the difference was the kind of lead thrown.

M4's are a world away from the M16's and M16A2's I started with. But they still use lots of small parts. That's an issue in the field. Anyone who has cleaned one while laying in the brush covered in mud & crud after weeks in the field knows it.

And next time you get out your dental tool to clean the grooves & locking mechanism of the chamber you should ask yourself, "When I am at 7000 ft elevation covered with dust, pine needles & crud, with fingers so cold I can barely move them, how am I going to do that?"

Reply

El_Gordo February 6, 2014 at 12:58 pm

You are wrong about mounts for the M-14. There has been a mount since it was called the 'M21 battalion sniper system'. As for 'good mounts', you have to define good. Until the last 10 years or so it was even harder to get a 'good' AR scope mount. The only option was a rail that bolted into the carrying handle. I still own one, for those who've never seen such a dinosaur.

These things ramp up with popularity. Iraq and Afghanistan are building the popularity of the M1 family. But the guys who were never in the units that still had M14s available, who first worked with the platform after 10 or 15 years with the AR family, they find the transition difficult.

Those of us who got to use both early on don't find the transition so hard.

The right basis of a decision is not the googled drivel you are spouting here. The right basis of decision is understanding what the tradeoffs are.

If you use an M1 platform you are going to lose some (not all) modularity relative to an AR. In return you'll get some reliability improvement and you won't have to deal with so much 'finickiness". For daily cleaning you'll get to deal with 8 big parts, none smaller than a pencil, rather than 13 parts, some the size of 1/2 of a pin (talking about the firing pin retainer pin and the extractor pin) – And yes, we were trained to remove the extractor pin in the '80s and clean the extractor. But to do that you'll have to get used to 'tilting' magazines in rather than slapping them. You'll have to un-train yourself from pushing the forward assist (cause you won't have or need one). And you'll have to get used to not having a pistol grip. And if your AR was a 15 rather than a 10 you'll get a whole lot of lethality and reach-out-and-touch-someone accuracy you never had with the AR.

(Yeah, yeah, I know: The weak link is the shooter. I suggest this, teach 20 people BRM with an AR and count how many get the 300M target. Do the same with another 20 people with M14's or M1s. At 300M the environment is really affecting 5.56.)

If you choose an AR over an M1 you will get a much wider range of accessories. The market is much, much bigger (but you should note that 20 years ago that big market wasn't so big). You'll get some modularity that allows you a wider range of barrels and stocks. If you are a vet, you won't have to retrain SPORTS or loading, or cleaning. And at 150-200 M or less you'll be pretty effective. You'll be able to buy your weapon at 1/2 the cost (unless it is an AR10…which is about the same cost in a basic configuration). But you'll be much less likely to kill what you shoot (unless you get that AR10). And you'll have to deal with some environmental finickiness from the weapon. It doesn't like dirt, sand, water, and a whole lot of other things. And you'll also have a harder time cleaning – especially in the field or in a 'dirty' environment. At the same time your gas-impingement system means you have a relatively greater need to clean it, and clean it thoroughly. And if you have a AR15 variant, and expect to be doing CQB, you won't have to worry nearly as much about over-penetration.

(BTW…unlike targets, people shoot back. When being shot at accurately or in reflexive fire 'well trained' means the shooter remembered – over the screaming of his adrenaline – to use his sight rather than to just point and shoot. ACCURATELY – not like many of the iraqi's or Afghans (and some Americans too!) who usually sprayed wildly while we smiled and waved.)

All of these tradeoffs are TRADEOFFS. They are not indications that one is 'good' and the other is 'bad'. All of them are subject to your use case an your personal preferences.

Reply

Leave a Comment

{ 5 trackbacks }