Post Armageddon- firearm choice

[bwsmg]

Originally Posted by Inkognito
The Israeli's set out to find a rifle that would be reliable in the desert under harsh conditions after the 6 day war in 1967.

Old data that doesn’t apply to the modern AR. The AR platform has the longest service record with the greatest Military in the history of the World. A Military that has the funds to replace it anytime they deem necessary.

Originally Posted by Inkognito
The big incentive is that the U.S. provides the Israelis with military aid dollars. Dollars that must be spent on U.S. made weapons systems.

U.S. has provided military aid since 1948. Israel has a long history of using all types of Nato related Nation’s weapons: FN-Fal, Mag58, and etc. Israel has had a design improvement program of Nato firepower for years: FN-Fal bolt sand cuts, FN-Fal HB edition, and the A10 Thunderbolt bent wing tips just to name a few.

If your statement is true why didn’t U.S. equipment replace across the Israeli Military scale for the last 25yrs? For example: Merkava Mk3 Tank, British, French Jet Fighters and my favorite free Colt M16/9mm to replace the Uzi.

Originally Posted by Inkognito
since the end of the Cold War and the subsequent shrinkage in military budgets, most have cancelled those programs. Great Britian used the L1A1 for 20 years after the US changed over to the smaller 5.56mm cartridge which is something like what Britian wanted to do to begin with.

There have been more small arms development in the last 20yrs compared to the last 40. Kriss, FN SCAR, Sig556, Mexico, Britain, China, HK alone has 5 credits of new designs. Russian designs have changed from direct piston drive to adjustable gas plug and button systems: AK101, AK103, Saiga12s and etc. The original prototype of the L1A1 was based on the 5.56mm.

FNC, SIG, Galil, Valmet, AK, etc doesn’t compare to the AR long range reliable accuracy performance. I’m not claiming the Galil is bad and should be hated, but the AR is the only lite weight rifle that’s punching paper holes for those weekend warriors beyond 600yds. Our returning U.S. "Combat" Troops are buying ARs based on their experienced successes and not because of ignorance. Personally I prefer the reliable accuracy up to 800m of the AR for Post Armageddon.

 

[Tom5390]

^^^
I thought the US military scrounged up every old M14 based weapon they could find cause for longer ranges cause the AR/M16 based guns just ain't cutting it. I bet there isn't a single old M14 left in the wrapper in US arsenals...they have all been sent to Irag and Afgan. Now if the AR is the only thing punching holes out to 600 yards why would it be that they are blowing the dust off these old Vietnam relics when you could just swap out some AR's uppers to .308?...hmmm?

I'm planning an getting an AR soon myself, but not cause I think it's far superior to anything else, I mean it's ok all but I don't think it's like the best by any means. I'm getting an AR for the same reason I bought a Ruger 10/22...it's so customizable. And just like the 10/22 I can make it the way I want it without a bunch of tools and skills. But if it weren't for all the after market accessories I'd pass on either and I think this would be true for a lot of AR and 10/22 owners.

 

[Inkognito]

I guess I'll respond to this but it is getting a bit trite, and I realize that is my fault for expressing an unpopular opinion in the first place. I just can't keep quiet when the AR is being set up as some kind of firearm diety. Where to begin...I guess to say that the US military does not have to consider budget when deciding to continue to field the M16 vs. a completely new system just seems naive to me. I don't even know how many ground soldiers we have or how many M16s we have in service, but I would venture to guess at least 500,000 weapons? I also don't know what they pay for them, but I assume they are getting a pretty good price for the qty. they are buying, lets say $300 a piece? I think that would be a conservative figure. So conservatively speaking $150 Million dollars just in the replacement weapons alone. That would buy about 40 M1 Abrams tanks or more than pay for the armor plates in all of our Humvess (remember the controversy over that budgetary consideration?), that is no small budgetary consideration. Not to mention the additional cost of logistics, training, spart parts, testing costs, etc. involved in changing weapons systems.

I remember back in the 90's the US looked hard at the HK G11 but the cold war had just ended so it made no sense to spend money on upgrading. And I agree that there has been a lot of small arms development in the past decade. Probably more than we've seen since the 60s-70s. But how many militaries have adopted a brand new system on a large scale? I remember also reading about Finland and the Sako M95. They were all set to upgrade to that fine rifle replacing their aging Valmets, but as the Cold War ended they had budget cuts and decided to spend the money on some new Griffen fighter jets instead. I don't know if they ever did adopt the M95 in mass numbers.

I don't know for sure why the Israelis origially rejected the free rifles only to change their minds and decide to take advantage of it later. Maybe that offer was not always on the table? I don't know. I always thought in the back of my head that the cost of weapons systems has just grown more and more making it more of a burden for them to continue paying for their own rifles when they could get free ones. I out right reject the notion that Israel tested the M16 and found it to be more reliable than the Galil. That is a fairy tale if ever I head one. It might be that weight became more of a consideration and with more urban warfare they found that they did not need a rifle to be as reliable as when they were fighting large battles in open desert.

"FNC, SIG, Galil, Valmet, AK, etc doesn’t compare to the AR long range reliable accuracy performance." This statement I outright reject, especially when speaking of the SIG. I don't know so much about the 556, but I would take a 550 over any other semi-auto for accuracy or dependability. And if our armed forces really had money to just blow on the best rifle out there, we would have adopted that beautiful piece of work 20 years ago. I would put the FNC right behind it on accuracy.

But I do tire of recounting ancient facts and using sound logic to make the age old case that the AR is not what everyone claims it to be (God's gift to mankind). I honestly don't know why it is so difficult to honestly look at the pros and cons of that particular weapon. I am very open to the down sides of the Galil, it is heavy, and it is not as accurate as an AR. I accept the weight and I have found that mine is about as accurate as the average 5.56mm semi-auto service rifle, but the Galil would be a poor choice as a paper puncher for competition. It would not be able to compete with a SIG or an AR for accuracy. If people would just stop ignoring the flaws of the AR and making crazy statements regarding its performance under harsh conditions, I would not feel honor bound to decry it at every opportunity. But, I guess it gives me something to do when I bored on a Sunday night But I'm out now, I've beat this dead horse long enough.

 

[bwsmg]

Originally Posted by Tom5390
I thought the US military scrounged up every old M14 based weapon they could find cause for longer ranges cause the AR/M16 based guns just ain't cutting it. I bet there isn't a single old M14 left in the wrapper in US arsenals...they have all been sent to Irag and Afgan. Now if the AR is the only thing punching holes out to 600 yards why would it be that they are blowing the dust off these old Vietnam relics when you could just swap out some AR's uppers to .308?...hmmm?

M16 is 90% of most U.S. squads. M14, M40, M240, M249, Barrett 50 BMG, and etc make up the other 10%. I never posted the AR is the only thing punching holes out 600yds. I said: (the AR is the only lite weight rifle that’s punching paper holes for those weekend warriors beyond 600yds)

However the Knight SR25 Mk2 and the Armalite AR10 (T) are replacing the M14 for the U.S. and Canada. I’m currently shooting Armalite AR10 (T) Super SASS and my M14s, FN-Fal, HK91, with my friend’s Galil 308, AK 308 NM, and Dragunov haven’t produced the same results.

Originally Posted by Inkognito
"FNC, SIG, Galil, Valmet, AK, etc doesn’t compare to the AR long range reliable accuracy performance." This statement I outright reject, especially when speaking of the SIG. I don't know so much about the 556, but I would take a 550 over any other semi-auto for accuracy or dependability. And if our armed forces really had money to just blow on the best rifle out there, we would have adopted that beautiful piece of work 20 years ago. I would put the FNC right behind it on accuracy.

It’s the age old debate of free floating barrel direct gas system vs. the piston weight and movement interference with the barrel’s harmonics. Sorry I’m not buying into the economics, politics, 1967 negative rep, and so on. I don’t believe the Galil or the AK cost more to build.

When AK designs and the FNC start giving the ARs at Camp Perry a run for the money, I’ll be the first to change my mind. They all want to win, if there were a rifle with the ability they would be using it and not even give a damn where it was from.

AK designs weapons are fine firearms but I don’t want to wait for a threat to approach any closer than first sight to have confidence to take the shot.

Post Armageddon situation will require for every shot to count. With that in mind I believe we have similar beliefs but with different taste in firearms.

 

[Blazin]

I also don't know what they pay for them, but I assume they are getting a pretty good price for the qty. they are buying, lets say $300 a piece? I think that would be a conservative figure.

Very conservative, looks like it's closer to $600: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m16.htm

 

[Mr Folgers]

I remember back in the 90's the US looked hard at the HK G11 but the cold war had just ended so it made no sense to spend money on upgrading.

I still have yet to understand the purpose of the G11. Caseless ammunition is a leap i suppose, but i find the overall operation and usefulness of it to be rather poorly constructed. There was also something about it not having any recoil until the 3rd shot(burst), but from what i've seen, that isn't true. Someone fill me in on what's so special about the damn thing.

 

[Che]

"But I'm out now, I've beat this dead horse long enough."

The horse was not beat to death, it was shot by an AR15 (just follin with ya)


Yes. To each their own and no one is wrong.

 

[carcass]

Post-Armageddon, it'll be all swords, maces and trebuchets. WTF are you going to get ammo? Bet you'll wish you had joined the SCA then, huh?

 

[piratesover40]

No matter what SHTF senereo you can come up with evey Govt, in the world has plans for it and they will survive if no one else dose. Well except most your banana republics. So that being said they'll know way ahead of us and any registered guns will be picked up. So whatever SHTF gun is your choice I suggest you either hide them well and have a lot of very good fake bills of sale. Or your start replacing all your reg. guns with..............Well you know.

 

[cuate]

Opinions are great and varied. In an invasion of my home or property by evil doers whom I'll refer to as zombies without referring to race, politics, or religion, I would grab whatever was in reach with sufficient ammo. It could be an M4, a Galil, an AK47, or a Mini 30....just whatever was the first in sight and hand. Maybe even the old 18 1/2 inch barreled Model 1897 Winchester 12 Guage from the Cowboy action shooting days.....

 

[Zombi]

To answere the original question: A Ruger SR556 with Eotech, have a GenIII night vision weapons mounting system in tow, ten Pmags filled with XM193 and a Sig 226 on the side. Nuff said...:handgun

 

[Nwcid]

^^^
why would it be that they are blowing the dust off these old Vietnam relics when you could just swap out some AR's uppers to .308?...hmmm?

Maybe because there is no way to put a .308 upper on an AR-15 lower :thinking

 

[Che]

So that being said they'll know way ahead of us and any registered guns will be picked up.

I would image in a post Armageddon situation, there would no longer be any centralized government, or one that would have much control over the population. If there was, that could be either good or bad. In the best situation, perhaps the country can survive in an orderly manner. But it is bad, I would have to imagine that law enforcement and military personnel would be more concerned with their own families and situation rather than remaining "on the job". But, assuming a government would exists with intent to do as you said (confiscate "registered" guns), I'm not exactly sure who will be doing this, because at this point many on the government side are gun owners themselves (and may align themselves with the "registered" gun owners more than the idiots who command them). All I can assure you is there better be a lot of body bags for both sides.

 

[Jagdraben]

Old data that doesn’t apply to the modern AR. The AR platform has the longest service record with the greatest Military in the history of the World. A Military that has the funds to replace it anytime they deem necessary.

The funds? Yes. The will and the ability? No.

Anyone remember how long it took to adopt the M9? Adopted in 1985, but it did not make it out to the troops in significant numbers until the early 90s. And the M1911A1 was clearly obsolete at that time.

The original prototype of the L1A1 was based on the 5.56mm.

Er, no. The original L1A1 was the FAL. Which was originally designed in 7.92x33mm Kurz.

FNC, SIG, Galil, Valmet, AK, etc doesn’t compare to the AR long range reliable accuracy performance.

So that's why nations dealing with extreme weather conditions don't make their own ARs?

Let's be honest, every neutral nation in the Western hemisphere relies on an AK of some variety: The Fins on the AK-derived Valmet and Sako RK-series. The Swiss on the AK-derived SG550-series. And the Swedes on the AK-derived FNC.

Our returning U.S. "Combat" Troops are buying ARs based on their experienced successes and not because of ignorance.

Both correct and not. US grunts are like grunts everywhere else: They are not gun people, they are just doing their job and the AR-series is the weapon that is given to them. Some of them are, yes, buying AR-pattern weapons when they return home because they are familiar with it. Some because they were impressed by it. And some are buying other guns because they weren't.

^^^
Now if the AR is the only thing punching holes out to 600 yards why would it be that they are blowing the dust off these old Vietnam relics when you could just swap out some AR's uppers to .308?...hmmm?

Why? Because you cannot swap out AR uppers to .308. Simple as that.

The M14 was taken out of retirement because it is what we had on hand. And almost as soon as it made it to the troops, we started developing and subsequently adopting new weapons. Like the Knights M110 SASS and the FN-H SCAR and our British allies have adopted the LMT LM308MWS.

As far as the OP is concerned, I'll use whatever is on hand. By the time my choice becomes a bad one due to lack of parts or lack of ammunition, there will be plenty of guns and ammo laying around or I'll be dead.