Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    NWFL
    Posts
    13,375
    Quote Originally Posted by M1A's r Best View Post
    You may not consider the .223 a "battle rifle cartridge" but these days it's what I take with me on road trips.

    I started with an M1A back in 1978/79 and it was "my" rifle for years. Range, fun, hunting, road trips/vacation.

    Then I got a really raggedy looking Greek return M1 from the CMP that made that match barreled M1A look like a cheap .22 shooting cheap .22 ammo and the M1A stayed home and the M1 traveled with me.

    Then I bought my Coupe and the M1/case wouldn't fit in the trunk for the summer time trips and I got the SIG 556R.

    When my wife decided she was going to get her concealed carry permit and get more active in carrying/shooting I built a nice AR15 for her and eventually switched over to that myself so we'd have the same magazines/ammo. Started carrying a 9MM on road trips/vacation, too, for the same reason.

    I recently (well, a year or so back) bought a GII in .308 and that's been a sweet rifle so far, but I don't take it on road trips.

    Around here (central VA) 100 yds. is about the limit for how far you can see due to the houses, trees, buildings, etc. I don't need an 800 yd. cartridge/rifle. It's even tough to find a place on the interstate without hills/curves that would stretch it that far.

    My youngest son recently go interested in the 6.5 Grendel. He's planning on building an AR15 in that caliber. Uses all the standard AR15 parts but the bolt/barrel/magazines and has more punch/range than the 5.56X45. Match ammo is about a dollar a round. Plinking ammo (Russian steel case) is about the same as brass cased surplus type 5.56X45, or $270 per thousand.

    I look at it this way. At home, the GII is available and plenty of ammo as well. If I have an issue with it, I've got other rifles. On the road/vacation if I had an issue I see .223 ammo being more available and having two rifles in the same caliber means issues with one leaves more ammo/magazines for the other one.

    I don't shoot any exotic ammo in any of them. It's all FMJ. I will never forget the look on the face of my wife's uncle that cold rainy winter night after church. We were out in the parking lot waiting on a bus to get out of the ditch in front of the church. Out of the blue he looked at me and asked, "Was the M1 .30-06?" I told him it was. He said, "I thought it was, but I wasn't sure. I only remember two things about the M1. It was heavy and it killed good. It killed real good." Then the look went away, he was back in the parking lot and we were talking about the bus and the cold rain. He passed away a couple years ago. A Korean War veteran, family man, coal miner, leader in his church. Probably triggered by the weather/dark that night to bring up memories from 50 years earlier.
    A discussion of battle rifles and their loads versus assault guns and their cartridges is a different subject and was not the intention of the OP. And true the 6.5 grendel load may be in a different class, but then that is another thread. I recently purchased a 6.5 G Alexander upper myself.
    Assault guns like the StG44 were developed for in part for uses in tight spaces and as I said the OP was just for favorite battle rifle cartridged and not what types of guns were best. For vehicles I am thinking of an AR pistol type, but again that was not the topic here.
    One who hammers his gun into a plow plows for those who do not....Unknown
    ...at the end of the day its not about anything else but YOU AND YOURS..... Gabe Suarez
    ....WANT not NEED is what America is all about. ..... Gabe Suarez
    Its not about how fast you can load, but about how well you can shoot ..... Someone being saved by a speed load is not something that has happened with any regularity. Gabe Suarez

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    117
    From a logistical and practical use standpoint, 7.62 NATO remains the winner.

    One has to consider increased weight and bulk of rifles, ammo and mags.

    Effective engagement ranges and practical uses need to be balanced against the terrain and obstacles present in the AO.

    I have two Saiga GSRs and an R700 20" set up to take detachable mags but, due to practical considerations - I consider them special application rifles. If I know I will need their added range, penetration and precision, I'll grab one.

    Otherwise, for general purpose use, my AKs are the tested and proven tools that I use. I am getting back into ARs slowly and deliberately so, they will eventually fill this role for me and mine.

    I'm in the market for and AR in 7.62 NATO but, I honestly feel that a quality bolt gun in 7.62 NATO and a quality AR in 5.56 provide 95% of the capability that most of us realistically need.
    From his weapons on the open road no man should step one pace away; you don't know for certain when you're out on the road when you might have need of your spear. Havamal 38

    NRA Certified Instructor, Glock Certified Armorer, Gunsmith, Veteran.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Washington Co. Arkansas
    Posts
    3,632
    Quote Originally Posted by paknheat View Post
    I believe that Springfield Armory is releasing the M1A in 6.5 CM.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
    Yes they are already out. I've seen and held one not a cartridge and rifle platform combo I'm personally interested in though.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Southeast Florida
    Posts
    1,657
    As always, first define the mission.

    For real world engagements where you want more than a 5.56 AR-15, 7.62 AR-10 type is the obvious winner for the same reasons as the AR-15.

    Beyond that, there's nothing wrong with having fun with other options, and alternatives may be completely sufficient for an individual as you narrow the mission parameters, but I don't see the universal argument for anything else.

    That being said, my Holy Grail is still the Desert Tech MDR in 7.62 for all rifle duties inside 800ish yards. More compact and maneuverable than any non-SBR AR even with a suppressor, minimal weight penalties to go with the bigger round, and you only give up 5 rounds in mag capacity.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,547
    .308/7.62x51

    It does the trick just fine, has excellent ballistic characteristics within the general envelope of combat, and can reach out quite a bit farther than 400 or 500yds too.

    Not to mention all the platforms one has to choose from.

    Also, I know an M4 isn't a "battle rifle", but 5.56 just just fine within its own envelope as well. If you don't plan on shooting farther than 250-300yds, it also kills well. But, I think a 7.62 is better all around. If I had to choose only one rifle, it would be a 7.62/.308
    Isaiah 54:17

    Deus dea traballo, dixo o enterrador.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    NWFL
    Posts
    13,375
    Quote Originally Posted by H60DoorGunner View Post
    .308/7.62x51

    It does the trick just fine, has excellent ballistic characteristics within the general envelope of combat, and can reach out quite a bit farther than 400 or 500yds too.

    Not to mention all the platforms one has to choose from.

    Also, I know an M4 isn't a "battle rifle", but 5.56 just just fine within its own envelope as well. If you don't plan on shooting farther than 250-300yds, it also kills well. But, I think a 7.62 is better all around. If I had to choose only one rifle, it would be a 7.62/.308
    The modern battle rifle cartridge dates back to the time of the first smokeless powders. The US in 1903 was still on the first generation of the battle rifle cartridge with 30-03 in response to the German redesign of the 8x57 to use spritzer bullets that are pointed, lighter, and with higher velocity there was the USA modernization with the 30-06. The 7.62 Nato with modern powders duplicates this. The battle rifle cartridge does a better job of turning cover into concealment. At longer ranges the battle cartridge is likely to produce a more severe wound. In recent years the US has added to the 5.56 a hardened penetrator to add penetration and made the bullets heavier giving them more terminal effect at extended ranges. If I have to engage vehicles I want more than a 5.56. At least a 7.62x39 with steel core ammo or better yet a 7.62 NATO.
    Last edited by barnetmill; 06-01-2018 at 05:24 PM. Reason: typos
    One who hammers his gun into a plow plows for those who do not....Unknown
    ...at the end of the day its not about anything else but YOU AND YOURS..... Gabe Suarez
    ....WANT not NEED is what America is all about. ..... Gabe Suarez
    Its not about how fast you can load, but about how well you can shoot ..... Someone being saved by a speed load is not something that has happened with any regularity. Gabe Suarez

  7. #27
    308 and 7.62X39, for a SCAR 17, using two lowers and caliber change parts/barrel. FN and AK mags. That way you can use enemy/ubiquitos ammo and mags, or lean on your own GPMG ammo. Just one problem, $5 000.

    There is no finer GTW small arm system, and it uses these calibers to cover the bases.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •