Musings on the Budget AR15 - Page 2
Register

Welcome to the Prepper Forum / Survivalist Forum.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Musings on the Budget AR15

This is a discussion on Musings on the Budget AR15 within the Rifles, SKS, AR, AK, Long Guns forums, part of the HandGuns, Pistols and Revolvers, Long Rifles, Shotguns, SKS, AK, AR category; Originally Posted by Smitty901 If They would have had the manufacturing ability The AR10 would have hands down been chosen and there would be no ...

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 39
Like Tree38Likes

Thread: Musings on the Budget AR15

  1. #11
    The Good Cop


    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    S.E. Georgia / N.E. Florida
    Posts
    12,434
    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty901 View Post
    If They would have had the manufacturing ability The AR10 would have hands down been chosen and there would be no M14. They knew when the selected it it was wrong. That is why it was the shortest issue weapon ever. The AR10 out did it in every way.
    They knew that . Research the history. The m14 was many problems 1 big one is it was not very accurate unless a lot of work was done to it . The AR10 is nothing but and enlarged AR15 .
    I have an m1 Garand it is cool but not anywhere near an AR10.
    The evaluation and competition to become the service rifle replacing the M1 in the mid-1950's was between Springfield's T44E4 (which became the M14) and the FN FAL.
    Armalite decided to join the competition late, and in 1956 hurriedly submitted two hand built AR10's, calling them "production" pieces.
    The composite steel/aluminum barrels burst under torture testing, and although Springfield Armory had originally given the AR10 a good review, the Army needed a modern magazine fed infantry rifle right away, and could not wait for "5 years or more to take it through tests to adoption".

    So, the AR10 was never considered as a replacement for the M1, that was between what was later designated the M-14 and the FN FAL.
    Armalite was not deterred and made a number of examples to be sold to foreign governments, but even these had durability and reliability problems.

    For the full story, go here https://military.wikia.org/wiki/AR-10

    The Armalite design, while innovative, had many problems. More than 50 years of R&D on the M16/AR15 platform has made it better.
    Mad Trapper likes this.
    "There is nothing so exhilarating as to be shot at without result." Winston Churchill
    "Leave the artillerymen alone, they are an obstinate lot." Napoleon
    Member: VFW, American Legion, Vietnam Veterans of America, Society of the 5th Infantry Division, Sons of the American Revolution.

  2. #12
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Columbia, Tennessee
    Posts
    5,218
    I am convinced that the AR 15 surpassed the AKM in terms of reliability, durability, versatility, weight and accuracy years ago. AKs are inherently problematic. Bad heat treats, corrosion , short sight radius, mushrooming, cheek and trigger slap, mag wobble, crappy optics mounts and a host of other nonsense. I have one and love it! for cheap fun. My ARs will always get the nod for serious work. I thought my Roller delay guns would be as good as my ARs. Nope. Heavy as hell and dirty as shit. Still love them all.
    Smitty901 and RedLion like this.
    "There is a destiny that shapes our ends, Rough, hew them as we will."

  3. #13
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Way North East
    Posts
    6,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty901 View Post
    If They would have had the manufacturing ability The AR10 would have hands down been chosen and there would be no M14. They knew when the selected it it was wrong. That is why it was the shortest issue weapon ever. The AR10 out did it in every way.
    They knew that . Research the history. The m14 was many problems 1 big one is it was not very accurate unless a lot of work was done to it . The AR10 is nothing but and enlarged AR15 .
    I have an m1 Garand it is cool but not anywhere near an AR10.
    M14 was still in action into 201X?

    Ever shot one? It has THE BEST open sights. Shoot opens at 500 yds?

    I got to shoot a Nelson build one, all/20 of the magazine in one ragged hole at 100 yrds. Cheap UMC 150gr ball ammo too.
    RedLion likes this.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PrepperForums.net
    Advertisements
     

  5. #14
    The Good Cop


    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    S.E. Georgia / N.E. Florida
    Posts
    12,434
    And yes, the adoption of the M-14 over the FAL was entirely political. The FAL, while superior, was foreign made and the old Generals in charge of the military demaned an American made rifle.
    So, if the AR-10 had been a better rifle from the beginning, being American, it just may have become the service rifle.
    "There is nothing so exhilarating as to be shot at without result." Winston Churchill
    "Leave the artillerymen alone, they are an obstinate lot." Napoleon
    Member: VFW, American Legion, Vietnam Veterans of America, Society of the 5th Infantry Division, Sons of the American Revolution.

  6. #15
    The Good Cop


    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    S.E. Georgia / N.E. Florida
    Posts
    12,434
    Quote Originally Posted by Mad Trapper View Post
    M14 was still in action into 201X?

    Ever shot one? It has THE BEST open sights. Shoot opens at 500 yds?

    I got to shoot a Nelson build one, all/20 of the magazine in one ragged hole at 100 yrds. Cheap UMC 150gr ball ammo too.
    My Army Basic Combat Infantry Training weapon was the M-14. My issue rifle in a stateside Field Artillery unit was an M-14.
    I was given two weeks training with an M-16 before shipping out, and once in Vietnam I was issued an M-16A1, made by Colt.

    Today, I am the proud owner of a Springfield Armory M1A wood stocked Standard Model almost identical to my old M-14's, the only difference being semi auto only.
    She is a 1993 model, and most of the parts are USGI.

    I have absolutely zero interest in owning an AR of any description, unless it is a real, selective fire, M-16A1 made by Colt. And I can not afford the $20,000 to $30,000 that would take.
    "There is nothing so exhilarating as to be shot at without result." Winston Churchill
    "Leave the artillerymen alone, they are an obstinate lot." Napoleon
    Member: VFW, American Legion, Vietnam Veterans of America, Society of the 5th Infantry Division, Sons of the American Revolution.

  7. #16
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by rice paddy daddy View Post
    That just may be that unless they are machine gunners they have never used anything but 5.56 in combat.
    Granted, the 5.56 NATO will get the job done but it’s foolish to have to shoot someone more than once.
    The 80 year old US Rifle Caliber 30 M1 , commonly known as a Garand is better in every category except magazine capacity.
    And yes that is my opinion
    The Garand weighs significantly more, is more difficult to load and certainly is not more accurate. A soldier can also carry a significant amount more ammo more conveniently available in 20 & 30 round magazines. The AR15/AR10 can be had in multiple calibers and in some case, just a swap out of the uppers changes the caliber. If the Garand was superior it would still be in use. The 30-06 round is a great round and is very common in use for hunting.

  8. #17
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Way North East
    Posts
    6,179
    Quote Originally Posted by rice paddy daddy View Post
    And yes, the adoption of the M-14 over the FAL was entirely political. The FAL, while superior, was foreign made and the old Generals in charge of the military demaned an American made rifle.
    So, if the AR-10 had been a better rifle from the beginning, being American, it just may have become the service rifle.
    FAL sights sucked.

    I'm gifted with good eyesight. Never in service, but I can shoot better than friends that were expert/marksman, Army/Marines, open sights.

    Not to denigrate service men. I am sure there are those who shoot better than myself.

    I can still see a ice fishing tipup flag, on the other side of the lake > 500 yds, trip.

  9. #18
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Way North East
    Posts
    6,179
    Quote Originally Posted by RedLion View Post
    The Garand weighs significantly more, is more difficult to load and certainly is not more accurate. A soldier can also carry a significant amount more ammo more conveniently available in 20 & 30 round magazines. The AR15/AR10 can be had in multiple calibers and in some case, just a swap out of the uppers changes the caliber. If the Garand was superior it would still be in use. The 30-06 round is a great round and is very common in use for hunting.
    M14 don't weigh much more ~10 lbs loaded.

    Ever shot one? Or a match one?

    Yea they can make ARs cheaper and shoot as good.

    I like a good mini 14 better than an AR.
    Last edited by Mad Trapper; 12-09-2019 at 04:50 PM.

  10. #19
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Mad Trapper View Post
    M14 don't weigh much more ~10 lbs loaded.

    Ever shot one? Or a match one?

    Yea they can make ARs cheaper and shoot as good.

    I like a good mini 14 better than an AR.
    I was commenting to the Garand versus the AR platform. Yes I have shot both the M14 and Garand. Both are fine rifles without a doubt. Never said that either were not good rifles. This is a thread that started giving praise to affordable AR15's for the affordability, much improved quality, and durability. Most importantly the AR15 has brought many, many people, including women into the shooting community, thus expanding our cause (pro-2nd) more than any other rifle.

  11. #20
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Way North East
    Posts
    6,179
    Quote Originally Posted by RedLion View Post
    I was commenting to the Garand versus the AR platform. Yes I have shot both the M14 and Garand. Both are fine rifles without a doubt. Never said that either were not good rifles. This is a thread that started giving praise to affordable AR15's for the affordability, much improved quality, and durability. Most importantly the AR15 has brought many, many people, including women into the shooting community, thus expanding our cause (pro-2nd) more than any other rifle.
    Well you could add the AK and SKS, commie guns Instead of denigradging two fine US service rifles.

    Durabilty? Ask RPD about AR vs AK.

    Any serviceman bitch about a Garand/M14 jamming?
    Last edited by Mad Trapper; 12-09-2019 at 05:28 PM.
    rice paddy daddy likes this.

 

 
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

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