/brg/ BATTLE RIFLE General

File: 713511581286ca87c5b966bce6eec95f[1].jpg (39KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 500x500px

>>32527147
Last Thread
>>>32519958
>>>32519958
>>>32519958
if you really want it

>does HCARfag's sister got any nudes?

File: 1483034142448[1].jpg (2MB, 2066x3099px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2066x3099px

>>32527172
Scrumptious. I don't worry about what I'd do to her, the shorter list is what I wouldn't.

>>32527199
Dubs get for insemination!

I'd creampie her cooze like it's gonna be made illegal.

inb4 anyone says coonan is worth a fuck

>>32527337
That's a lot of salt friend

File: ReconTactical308Web.jpg (546KB, 1980x1320px) Image search: [Google]

546KB, 1980x1320px

so i ordered this about an hour ago. I've been going back and forth with all the brands and options for a while now. i think i made the right decision. and now we wait… shouldn't take too long though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMvoDjGre2Y

>>32527990
Not an argument.

>>32528132
Any real complaints aside from the single batch of l1a1 reciever or your husbando gunplumber pontificating?

Anyone tried a .30-06 Vepr? How do they compare to the 54r Vepr?

File: G3.jpg (28KB, 758x177px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 758x177px

Guys i'm simply not getting what the idea is with the HCAR can someone explain it to me? It just seems that there is nothing it does better than already existing guns.

>>32528322
>oh man the BAR was badass
>what if we made a modern version and tactiqueered it up
>FUND IT

>>32528335

>The bar is a great battle rifle but shit lmg
>What can we do to fix it's issues
>make it lighter, give it a larger magazine
>this is somehow bad
>yet updating G3s and fals is ok

Outside of PTR, FAL and AR-10, what are some good DMRs?

>>32528387
It's a 12lb. rifle that costs as much as a car.

>>32528387
>>32528335
Bar was ok in 30s after that Bar is shit.

>>32528401
Vepr
M1A if you have the patience of a saint
That's about it other than bolt actions and scoped Garands and SVTs.

>>32528322
There is alot of hotter 30-06 that you used to not be able to shoot out of many, if any, repeaters. At least those available to a regular westerner.

.308 has just about fucking peaked without radical shifts in gun and weapon design.

.30-06 is a better round on the high-end and can still come cheap as mil-surp from all over the world.

HCAR is (only) "modern" semi that can shoot all 30-06 no issue with a tactical build concept including tacticalfanboy necessity large magazines (20 and 30).

The HCAR does in fact do many things better, by alot, than other rifles out there.

BUT it still could be alot better, using the 1919 as a base, or just shortening the internals like the M1919 colt monitor is an obvious first step, but HCAR uses fullsize guts like the original.

At least it can use WWII mags, right?

File: 1430274152707.jpg (38KB, 637x476px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 637x476px

>FAL is unreliable shit that's why the Jews made the Galil
>FAL is super reliable that's why the Rhodesians prefer it to the G3
>G3 is super reliable that's why modern African militaries use it instead of the FAL
>G3 can bw accurized to hell and back look at thd PSG-1
>FAL is a good DMR out of the box, the Irish use it to great effect
>G3s are very picky about their ammo
>G3s eat anythig, even Slav steelshit
>FALs are very picky about their ammo
>FALs eat anythig, even Slav steelshit
Do I just need to buy both and make my own assessments?
Also is the M14 a serious battle rifle of yesteryear or is that 'Murican fanboyism?

>>32528521
>Also is the M14 a serious battle rifle of yesteryear or is that 'Murican fanboyism?
The M14 can maintain battle rifle accuracy (~2MOA) very well and does well in that front. It's a bitch and a half keeping it accurized to ~1MOA and you're better off with an AR-10 or a bolt gun on that front.

File: untitled.jpg (491KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

491KB, 1024x768px

How much should I pay for an Imbel kit w/ all matching serial numbers and "like new" bore?

Also, DSA 30rnd mags are g2g rite?

>>32528417

BAR is good in general.

Just because a 1911 isn't a good sniper doesn't mean it's not a great pistol.

they tried to shoehorn the thing into a role it wasn't designed for

>>32528387
BAR is a shit battle rifle; M1918 was 16lb unloaded and M1918A2 was 19lb unloaded if memory serves. That's the weight of LMGs, not battle rifles, and 'automatic rifle' isn't a legitimate term used nowadays. Also, yes, the M1918A2 is a shit LMG, but it IS an LMG. The M1918 has the advantage of being RELATIVELY light for an LMG, but otherwise is shit.

>20-rnd capacity when most LMGs are 30-rnd or more
>Non-changeable barrel for when it overheats
>Shit-tier sights of M1918A2, not sure about M1918
>Shit-tier bipod for M1918A2

As for your suggestions to make it a battle rifle...

>Make it lighter
Yes, this is VERY MUCH needed to even CONSIDER it as a battle rifle. At LEAST bring it down to 11lb unloaded, but that'll be roughly 5lb to remove... good luck.
>Larger magazine
For a battle rifle? Not really; 20 rounds is plenty. You'll be using it on semi-auto 99.9% of the time. The .1% is for "Is it really as bad as they say?..." one burst later "... yup it's just as bad as they say." Then flip it back to semi-auto and leave it there.
>somehow bad
Get the M1918 down to about 11lb unloaded, and yeah, it'd still be pretty bad. There are lighter battle rifles out there.

>>32528417
This. M1918 was awesome in the 1910s, decent in the 1920s (unless faced with stuff like vZ.26 or whatever it's called that lead to the BREN, also I consider the DP28 better), but more and more great LMGs came out in the 30s-40s, meanwhile the MG34/42 dominated the GPMG field rendering the M1919 shit-tier.

As for HCAR or whatever it's called... why? Interesting novelty item, but there are better semi-auto rifles out there. Need a semi-auto .30-06 that's mag-fed? True, there's not a big market, but you're better off just going with .308. In that case, just get an M1A or something like that. .308 can do whatever .30-06 can, just like .303 can do whatever .308 can.

>>32528682
To be the honest the HCAR is a real kick in the ass from that company. Several years before they came out with that FDE shit brick they kept dropping hints they were building a special lightweight BAR. Everyone assumed they were going to build a replica of the Colt Monitor Machine Rifle and then they dropped this tacticool shit show in everyone's lap.

I would have much rather had a similar weight Monitor, or perhaps they could have really surprised everyone and combined two variants and made a 'Jungle Monitor' with a 15" barrel, a shortened gas system and a fixed Cutts Compensator and had a 11.5lb BAR.

>>32528810
An 11.5lb BAR would have been something worth writing home about. Still better designs out there, but would have been very interesting and very useful.

>>32528521
The G3 and FAL are both good battle rifles and you won't go wrong with either.
You can't go right with the M14 unless you're buying it just to look pretty.

>>32529234
Why do you dislike the M14?

oh god i want an HCAR so bad

File: download.jpg (6KB, 166x85px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 166x85px

>/brg/ is always bullshit/bitching about that one guy with an HCAR
Does anyone here actually own a battle rifle?

>>32529372
not him, but they are a bit finicky in my experience compared to thePoorTR and the FAL.

>>32529372
Because it's based on the M1 Garand.
Sure, the M1 was a great rifle for the time, but the M14 suffers from being one of the most ridiculously open rifle designs ever. It's so easy to make a M14 malf with dirt it's not even funny.
Also I hate the idea of having to babby a rifle to keep it accurate.

File: IMG_1503.jpg (517KB, 1284x1284px) Image search: [Google]

517KB, 1284x1284px

>>32529465
And the FA(i)L is more finicky than the P(imp)TR

File: 1474294395473.png (290KB, 498x341px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 498x341px

>>32529496
not in my limited experience, but my experience just that, limited

File: 20170102_201920.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

>>32528554

How is the finish? With a decent finish, I'd say a complete parts kit should go for just around $550, maybe a little south of $500 if the finish is spotty or very worn or if surface rust is present.

Most of the ones I see online these days sell for less than $600 at the most, so use that as your price ceiling.

Also keep in mind that 'all matching' when it comes to IMBELs isnt all that relevant, since so few parts were actually serialized by the factory. Its just the lower and bolt carrier iirc (might be wrong, probably am).

why didn't those retards start with a Colt Monitor and modernize from there?
>HCAR weight: 11.75 pounds on 16" barrel
>Monitor weight: 13.2 pounds on 18" barrel

wow, they sure did improve it a lot

File: LMT002-1.jpg (256KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 1024x768px

>>32528485
>radical shift
Just neck it down to 6.5mm and move the shoulder back a little.

>>32529578
$550 is going price for a south american vintage kit. The more desireable kits start at $700, hand around FALfiles and youll see over a thousand.

File: IMG_0035.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>32529514
It has been in my limited experience

File: IMG_0852.jpg (169KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 640x1136px

>>32528150
Buy imbel and know it'll work

File: 20170102_202604.jpg (1MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x1836px

>>32529605
Aside from the obscene weight, I don't think that IMBEL kits are on a lower level than their European counterparts desu. My IMBEL cranks out groups just under 2 MOA fairly consistenly with German surplus ammo, plus it has a very nice chrome lined barrel and chamber (fucking DSA still doesn't have those) just like many of its European counterparts.

I will, however, concede that a lot of other kits have much higher cool factor(Canadian, G1, Izzy, etc). The massive variety of kit FALs are what make them so damn cool.

>>32529578
>How is the finish?
The finish is worn, especially around the end of the barrel (but not completely gone), and no rust anywhere.

>'all matching' when it comes to IMBELs isnt all that relevant
So then basically the whole front end could be from a different gun, and only the lower and bolt assembly are matched?

Thanks. You are a gentleman and a scholar, sir.

>>32528113
Wilson Combat is a joke. You're dumb. You could get more mileage by flushing your money down a toilet.

>>32529923
do you think theres still time to cancel my order? its only been a few hours.

>>32529758
>Lower level
Supply and demand. Less supply and more demand for European models.

>>32529848
Lower and bolts arent necessarily match either.

File: download.jpg (126KB, 618x721px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 618x721px

https://youtu.be/y55vrf_9keY
>it is illegal to manufacture .308 AP bullets because it is a "pistol" round
Fucking why?

>>32530442
Because the NFA is a violation of the constitution and it's your job to get rid of it, faggot.

>>32530461
>Im actually okay with most of the NFA

File: 1135376[1].jpg (36KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 640x360px

>>32529605
>just neck it down to 6.5mm and move the shoulder back a little
You don't understand.

There isn't going to be any way the military is ever going to fund the refitting and re-everythinging costs of switiching to a new caliber, even if it covered both GPMGs and PDWs, unless it sees an increase in capacity and reliability well beyond what is now acceptable and not to mention
>all while being cheaper
>6.5 anything ain't never ever gone b adopted
Basically, we got the calibers we got until we're shooting laser beams or lightning, or laser-beam-riding lighting at eachother or ayyyyyss.

>>32530469
I'm glad you're ok with being a felon and having your dog shot because you dared to keep a barreled receiver with a barrel shorter than 16 inches in your home.

>>32530486
You might be surprised
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/08/31/modern-intermediate-calibers-021-us-army-marksmanship-units-264-usa/

>>32530521
Call me when the mil-surp hits the market.

File: IMG_20161027_161913692.jpg (3MB, 4160x2340px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4160x2340px

>>32530500
It's just a few bucks and a wait

>>32530555
And an unconstitutional registry.
Also the reason .308 can be classified as "pistol" ammunition, and the reason the ATF was able to ban 7n6 from import.

>>32530576
Im fine with the restrictions and access to those as it stands. Might like to repeal hughes, but im really that wanting full retard stuff.

>>32530619
But how can you be fine with it while complaining about ap .308 being illegal? It's the reason why you can't have ap .308. If SBRs weren't a thing, nobody would be able to sell a .308 "pistol."

>>32530640
Im not complaining thet AP ammo is illegal. Im cool with that too. Fine with 7n6 being verboten too.

>>32530664
How are you not a hypocrite?

>>32530677
stop biting his bait

>>32530677
I dont care that I cant buy AP ammo
I dont care that I need a stamp to buy NFA items

I dont see how im being hypocritical

>>32530664
So you'd also be fine with the ban of all cheap surplus 7.62 nato and 5.56, right?

>>32530707
What if a caliber you like was veto'd for the same reason as 7n6 was?

>>32530728
Sure.
I reload

>>32530733
The caliber wasnt banned, the projectile was.

File: 20170103_222104.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

>>32529848

Just make sure that the barrel is one of the original pre-ban imports, my dude. Chrome to the dome.

>>32530740
What if reloading was made illegal because you can potentially make armor piercing ammunition?
Where do you think they'll come after they've banned the import of all surplus ammo?

>>32530751
I think your hat needs a couple more layers of foil.

Reloading has a sporting purpose.

File: RFB.jpg (202KB, 1280x852px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 1280x852px

>>32530740
SHALL
NOT
BE
INFRINGED

Go the fuck away.

What do you cats think of the RFB as a battle raifu? I honestly have no idea what BR I want to get, and this thread is full of people complaining about FALs and PTRs.

How are DSA FALs?

>>32530768
So does suppressors. As did all of the ebil guns banned from import by daddy Bush and 7n6.

>>32530778
FAL vs HK91 is literally AK vs AR autism scaled up. Buy what you think is cooler desu.

File: IMG_1005.jpg (453KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

453KB, 1080x1920px

>>32530778
RFB isnt a battle rifle and fal is shit get a ptr

>>32530778
Your whats wrong with this country. Because I dont agree with you 100%, im the fucking enemy.

>>32530793
And you can totally buy suppressors, just throw a few bucks to the ATF smudge your fingerprints on a piece of paper and send it to them.

>>32530812
>Wanting to UNCONSTITUTIONALLY restrict RIGHTS

Yeah, that's what makes you my enemy, and the enemy of everyone on /k/, and liberty in general.

File: 2017-01-02 08.39.19.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>32530745
post more bb

>>32530812
But you just implied nothing with a sporting practice should be restricted. Regardless of whether or not you can get suppressors, them being on the NFA is still a form of restriction, especially against the poorfags that can't justify/afford that extra 200 shekels.

>>32530830
>the enemy of everyone on /k/
Hi there. I'm a one on /k/. Vetoed. He's not my enemy, just a cuck.

How well do PTRs suppress? Just from looking at the action I'd think quite well but I'm not a gun scientist. Obviously .308 isn't a quiet round but I'd like it to be a tad quieter.

>>32530932
They suppress pretty well. Just make sure to get a #17 locking piece. It'll compensate for the increased gas pressure.

File: download.jpg (42KB, 380x380px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 380x380px

>>32530882
>not bullying plebs
>not a cuck
choose one

Is this a battle rifle?

http://dpms-gii.com/full.html

>>32531355
ill allow it

>>32530830
I draw the line a little further in than you.
Go ahead and rage though

File: image.jpg (45KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 640x480px

Optimum magnification for a battle rifle?

>>32530850
can you post some profiles of the rifle pls, also 16.5?

>>32532457
I really want to say 3-9, I really do, but god damn if my PTR isn't the sloppiest shooting piece of shit on earth
>Eokek couldn't even hold zero on it
Does shooting off a traditional G3 bipod just fuck everything up for that rifle design or something?

>>32528441
Thanks

>>32532518
I heard the FAL bipod fucks accuracy. The barrel is too thin. Even using a sling while shooting can cause your groups to spread. I don't know about PTR's.

I suppose it has to do with max effective range for a point target and the clarity of the glass. Clear glass at a lower magnification could work just as well or better. I think 600 meters is realistic, so do you need 9x to identify a target at that range?

Is the Galil ACE in 7.62 NATO any good, or is it overpriced and too similar to guns that are already cheaper on the market?

File: 20170102_154215.jpg (955KB, 2560x1536px) Image search: [Google]

955KB, 2560x1536px

>>32529452
I have two.
>>32529482
>ingress of dirt
How often do you roll around in mud holes?
>having to baby it to keep it accurate
Only if you do serious match shooting. They maintain practical combat accuracy, in fact even better than most BRs with no real effort.
>>32528538
This guy is more on point in that regard.
>>32529465
Depends. My el-cheap-o Fed.Ord. eats Tulammo and Wolf all day. Gonna find out if my SAI can digest the same with as few hiccups.
That and self-regulating gas system allows you to run a variety of ammunition on the fly. There are aftermarket adjustable gas plugs but they aren't really useful since the standard setup will run just about any 7.62 or .308 without hassle. No you won't bend the op rod either, it's a short stroke system.
>>32532904
Very expensive and very heavy. The old school ones are cooler, but still heavy and even more expensive. I'd take a Zastava M77 or VEPR over an ACE any day.

Guys, I'm fairly new to battle rifles, only having shot FAL a few times and reading a bit, and I am confused.

While browsing the last thread, I saw SKS' there. Do you guys consider those a battle rifle? I thought the definition is a semi/selective fire rifle shooting full-power rifle cartridges. How come the SKS' was there? Is that more to do with, say, use of the rifle, rather than strictly adhering to the full power only? Also, where's the line between a battle rifle and DMR - the original use? Say, SVD be a battlerifle, but also a DMR? I am confuse.

>>32529578
You play?

>>32533458
A DMR is a rifle used by a designated marksman.
Just a like a Sniper Rifle is a rifle that's used by a sniper.
SKS is not a BR although could be used in a similar way I suppose. I'd say that 7.62x39 is on the higher end of the intermediate cartridges.
And and SVD is a BR but only a DMR if used by a DM

>>32531355
What the fuck is this TEFLON coated barrels malarkey?

>>32533477
Thanks for the explanation, famalam. Still seems like it's bit vague. Anyhow, have a nice day.

>>32533485
dpms makes really accurate AR-10s
some of my cousins have them, great rifles for the cost
I'd rather have the scar tho

>>32533564
>what are teflon coated barrels though, they sound like a joke

>>32533585
idk, prob some stupid marketing shit right?

>>32533553
Designated marksman rifles use full size cartridges to overcome the range limitations of assault rifles. Everyone wanted to switch away from battle rifles after WWII, because most engagements are medium range and a smaller cartridge allows a Soldier to carry more ammo. It mostly has to do with those two things: engagement distance and combat load.

File: allison-stokke-pole-vaulter.jpg (917KB, 2500x3750px) Image search: [Google]

917KB, 2500x3750px

>>32532597
Depends on how rigid your handguard is. To identify at 600, do you want to see that someone is there, what camo pattern they are wearing, or who it is?

>>32533564
>DPMS
>Really accurate
I needed a laugh this morning. Some of them can be, they also turn out 2.5moa rifles.

>>32533715
There are intermediate cartridge DMRs too anon.

>>32528485
The VEPR 30-06 is a semiauto that can shoot all 30-06. Only downside is they haven't developed extended magazine.

>>32533996
That and its slavshit

>>32532518
>Eokek couldn't even hold zero in it
Well no shit. EOTechs can't hold zero on anything.

File: IMG_5170.jpg (25KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 480x360px

30-06 goodness

File: IMG_5171.jpg (78KB, 1170x500px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 1170x500px

Noreen!

>>32527199
That gun is freaking huge.

File: TRX_Petra-SiD_7512.jpg (138KB, 2348x1665px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 2348x1665px

>>32534137
>Right side charging handle
>That handguard
>Weak ass fuddy aught six
Pass

>>32534124
Isn't .308 supposed to be superior to .30-06?

>>32534405
no. it's supposed to be more efficient. it used higher pressure to duplicate 30-06 performance in a smaller case, but now days you can also just load 30-06 to the same pressure, and get more performance. some people argue that .308 can be more accurate, but that's a bunch of bologna.

>>32534440
Longer actions will be less rigid, all else being equal.

>>32530521
Call me when big army doesn't waste truckloads of money shooting bullets it's never gonna use. The number of test barrels ordered from the last 50 years alone would pr buy an aircraft carrier.

>>32534506
true but that doesn't preclude a standard length action from being sufficiently rigid. you're just trading a couple ounces more steel, for higher performance. some .308 shooters still use a standard length actions, so they can load heavy 200 grain bullets out farther.

>>32534519
Like 10 years ago.
All the ammo, from all the manufacturers were going to asia. Not all, but it even things like fgmm and BH was in short supply

>>32533458
An SKS is technically a carbine. Though that's kind of strange to quantify in the modern context. It phased out the M44 as a lightweight alternative to the SVT-40 that was supposed to but never fully phased out the M91/30. In that sense the SKS is kind of like the com-bloc equivalent of the M1 Carbine.

Shortly afterwards the AK series came along and replaced both weapon systems, same way the M14 and M16 replaced the M1 Garand and Carbine.

File: 1442465431147.jpg (177KB, 750x572px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 750x572px

>>32534596

File: 20161230_181021.jpg (2MB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2560x1440px

>no mas

>>32527172
>>32527147
If I were to have the money to burn on an HCAR I would want it in black, FDE is just fugly

>>32534904
Cerakote is an option

>>32533474

I have a Miraphone, it'd be a sin if I didn't.

I spend a lot of time playing through the etude books I still have from High School, now that I'm not in any ensembles.

>>32534405
Here's how I understand the story of .30-06 and .308...

M1903 was adopted in 1903, with .30-03 which used round-nosed bullets. 3 years later, they changed it to more modern 'spitzer' (pointed) bullets and dubbed it .30-06.

The .30-06 used during WWI was quite potent, as you'd expect from a 7.62x63 cartridge. In the 1920s/30s, the US was making serious efforts to adopt a self-loading/semi-auto rifle. The M1 Rifle was meant to use a much smaller cartridge than .30-06, and use a 10-rnd en bloc clip. One fucking guy, basically the head honcho of the Military, Mac-something, stepped in at the last minute and said "NOPE! Stop this bullshit! We've got .30-06 stockpiles up the wazzoo, so we're sticking to fucking .30-06, end of story!" Thus, the M1 Rifle was scaled up to .30-06, lessening the capacity in the process to 8 rounds, and .30-06 also had to be slightly under-loaded due to the bend required in the op-rod. Thus, .30-06 was made into M2 form, which was still relatively potent, but was a step behind .30-06's true full potential.

.308 Winchester is a civilian cartridge, and is essentially a .30-06 but shortened by 1.2cm (roughly half in inch) to do away with all the wasted space. M80 Ball 7.62 Nato is almost identical to M2 Ball .30-06, so all that time having M2 Ball since the mid-30s, there has been basically half an inch of empty and excessive brass on the casing.

Well, the US wanted to replace their good ol' M1 Rifle, and in the process wanted to make their ammo more efficient. Shorter casing mean slightly smaller mags which can save weight, which means slightly smaller receivers which can save weight, which means the overall-length can be shorter or you can have a slightly longer barrel which can either save weight and/or improve accuracy, and shorter casings can eject more easily than longer ones. Seeing this nifty little .308, they chose that.

Full strength .30-06 will outperform .308, but you need EXTREME distance before you'd notice.

>>32534596
When the AK came about, it was basically initially meant to be used as an SMG for short-range action and primarily to be used in full auto. I don't buy the whole "That's why the first notch is auto and second notch is semi-auto" bullshit; unless the select fire lever is REALLY fucking tight, it's easy to sweep it straight down to semi-auto, and then if need be, make the manual 'click' up to full-auto. You can see it demonstrated in the Military Arms Channel.

Anyways, apparently they liked both the AK-47 and the SKS-45, so adopted both, intending the AK-47 to be used basically like an SMG up close, and the SKS-45 was meant to be used as a sort of 2nd line rifle. What would the equivalent of this be for the US? Perhaps how the Thompsons might have been encouraged to close with the enemy while the M1 Rifles were to try and give them covering fire/accurate fire from a distance? Just a thought. But to my knowledge the USSR did intend the AK-47 to be used up close like an SMG and SKS-45 to be used for more accurate fire.

Then the AKM came, which was lighter than both, cheaper than both, almost just as accurate as an SKS, and so the SKS was phased out. In fact, I think the SKS left production in 1956 or so meanwhile the AKM didn't come about until 1959 or so, meaning they seen the heavier AK-47 design being overall more valuable than the lighter SKS-45 design, in spite of its SLIGHT improvement in velocity/accuracy.

>>32535141
Your in the wrong thread with that literally weak ass shit.
Try >>32532781

Moving down to Texas from New York with my Girlfriend at the end of the semester. I own a nugget now but wanted to get an FAL when I get down to Texas. Is there anything I should no or explore beforehand?

>>32533932
LSWs are not DMRs.

Is it true that full auto will beat the piss out of the FAL to the point that it shouldn't be used? Because I'm building one off a parts kit (only way to get a FAL in my country), and it may or may not have the auto sear and trigger pack. :^)

>>32535262
LSW is belt fed
DMR is generally a scoped and accurized rifle used by, get this, a designated marksman. The concept is caliber agnostic, though in military practice it's often of the same type of rifle that the rest of the deployed element is using. They generally will be using match ammo too.

File: CqlNBsEVUAADkMW.jpg (97KB, 1125x875px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1125x875px

>>32535295
Extensive use of full auto will cause reciever cracking. It's why the type 2 reciever was made. Type 3 can also deal with full retard fire.

>>32535295
Only if you have the gas all the way open. Most .308s are pretty uncontrollable in full auto.

>>32535262
>>32535325
I was thinking light support weapon as in a SAW, you were thinking as in the bong LSW Enfield?

>>32528322
Snipers from Vietnam reported the 30-06 was alot better on the high end, distance shooting applications when the switch to .308 M70's and M40's happened. Less drop and such.

That said I highly fucking doubt a battle rifle based on the fucking BAR of all things could take advantage of that long range performance, so you would need some heavy ass bullets to justify it over .308, esp considering 30-06 AP bullets can be used in .308 cases, which negates the barrier penetration myth the HCAR throws around.
I would like OOW to release a light BAR with the HCAR's lightened reciever design

>>32535349
Ah, pity. Guess I'll just have to stick to semi.
>>32535351
Yeah, I would expect so, just curious.

>>32535250
Be prepared to have a shiteating grin after shooting the FAL but other than that not a lot.

>>32528521
Rhodies were a professional volunteer fighting force, Israel was a hack army full of conscripts who's only saving grace is they were much better trained and organized than their counterparts.

The FAL eats anything after you realize it has a adjustable gas system, G3's basically eat everything.

The M14 is as serious as it has to be. The sight picture is frigging outstanding, and at least the new chassis systems - EBR 2.0, Troy, etc are getting lighter and stronger.
It's still not a bad choice if you don't give a shit about weight and cost but I find it hard pressed when an out of the box PTR91 GI with a scope and some boxed match loads performs just as well as a tricked out 15lb EBR

>>32535483
>EBR is 15lbs
That's.....
Wow

>>32528682
I still consider it a crying shame the US didn't adopt the Lewis. The USMC had 30-06 Lewis Guns but politics got in the way and they were confiscated prior to entry into WW1.
The Lewis and BAR compliment each others inadequacies and the Lewis would have been a fantastic platoon level LMG with some tweaks and a larger drum - Leaving the BAR for squads.
The air cooled M1919 infantry version - the M1919A4 - didn't start getting produced until the 30's and plenty of infantry platoons early WW2 had to deal with the M1917 water cooled, or didn't at all and pushed M1917 MMG's to company level when the Lewis could have filled that niche

>>32535295
You still need an upper thats cut correctly to use those parts ya big dummy

>>32529923
>>32529970

Cancel it now.

I don't think Wilson is a joke per se, but they are extremely fucking overrated and have never, ever had mil contracts besides a few SF guys buying their pistols personally for mission use in the 90's.

I would be extremely wary of anything not-1911 coming out of the 1911 world of overpriced garbage and I'm dead fucking serious about that. Kimber can't make a non-1911 or bolt gun to save their lives, Colt sucks at anything not an AR or 1911, I could go on

3 grand buys you a LMT 308MWS, currently in service with the British Military, and narrowly lost in the US CSASS trials (HK attaboy contract) to the G28.

Or you know a SCAR-H, jesus christ buy the SCAR-H

>>32529970
>>32529923

You'll never catch me dead buying anything from Wilson Combat besides their 1911 mags, and CMC and 10-8 are just as good.

So fucking overpriced you may as well ignore it

>>32530778
Unless you can find a RFB really damned cheap, sub 700 bucks, avoid.

It's fine for what it is, but it isn't a completed product compared to a Battle Rifle with military service. Take for example the Torx/allen/etc screws all over the goddamned thing

>>32530932
Need a #17 locking piece. I think the FAL has the clear edge in suppression thanks to the adjustable gas system, which is why I hold FAL carbines (PARA Fal's) in higher regard than shorter G3's

SKS is best battle rifle

>>32531355
Still has that .308 tax that AR-10's all seem to have, you can save 400 bucks building an AR-10 of slightly better quality

File: 100_0178.jpg (3MB, 3456x4608px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3456x4608px

>>32535806
>Not owning both a MWS and a SCAR
Ishygddt

>>32532457
1-6x variables are the sweet spot, but a 1-8x is fine too.
As for fixed mag keep it just over 4x

>>32535852
Thanks, anon, willco.


So for my first battle raifu, is 2MOA acceptable? Is it acceptable at a 2,000 dollarydildo price point?

Are DSA FALs any good?

Do I say fuck it and save for a SCAR? Do I say fuck it and build an AR10?

Is it even worth it to try building a budget AR10 or does that completely defeat the point?

>>32535908
SCARs are back to just south of $3k again.
$2k gets you a good budget to build a .308 AR, upper end of mid grade prebuilt.
Gets you whatever FAL you want

2moa from a new FAL is probably about right. From the SCAR expect moa give or take, AR should do moa or under.

What are your thoughts on glass?

>>32532518
>>32532597

G3's wide bipod handguard is free floated, but I'm sure enough pressure on a bipod will negate that - it's just narrowly floated.
Shoot off a rest and compare.

FAL bipods will 100% cause your groups to shift upwards, spread may or may not be affected

>>32535699
2.0 is lighter, it ditched some of the bulk and has M4 furniture compatibility, IMO it will still be a heavy beast if you don't pair it with a Scout Squad or a 16"

>>32535955
Thanks, /k/omrade.

Not sure if I'd want to go with a VCOG or ACOG, and I don't know enough about optics to think of anything but Memeicon.

So an AR10 would be the best bang per buck, then?

>>32535885
I'm jelly af

>>32535075
According to Wikipedia, you have the order of events slightly wrong. Winchester saw the development of what would become 7.62 NATO and came to market with the .308 before it was offically adopted by NATO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62%C3%9751mm_NATO

>>32536011
If you want a bang for the buck build, get an aero m5 reciever set, a ballistic advantage barrel, etc etc. You could probably get in around the thousand mark, though $1300 would give you more options, .308 ACOGs start at like $1000, been thinking of cheaping out and getting one for my mws.

>>32536058
The MWS was an October panic buy
Not sure what I'm going to do with it

>>32536136
get a matched upper/lower like bro said
aero shit dont mix well with others. im having to fie my upper (m5) to fit a good lower.

im at the 1400 mark and scored some real deals so im happy with it

>>32530768
A gun doesn't need a sporting purpose to be owned by civilians.

Like, I get where you're coming from and used to think that way myself, but shit like the NFA and Brady bill and AWB are actually unconstitutional, and banning ammo imports of specific calibers and designs in those calibers is just awful.

Just because you reload doesn't mean that you're safe from those problems either. powder supplies have been pretty dry over the last 8 years, and don't even get me started on finding small rifle primers. Your statement is basically that because your hobby doesn't include spam cans of 7n6 it means that no one's should. >>32530812
I don't think he's saying you're the enemy, I think he's saying that your vision of gun laws and rights is extremely selfish and is what's going to get it banned like it has been in other countries. I'm a pretty firm believer that we will see another Assault Weapons Ban following the Trump administration, and it's not going to be the fault of the anti-gunners, it'll be the fault of the moderates who compromised on the issue rather than taking it seriously.

File: image.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

Just got all this for 35 shipped. Anyone here have experience fixing up old mags?

>>32534596
>>32535141
Well, thank you for all that, alas, I was not asking for history, more for the terminology about the whole carbine/DMR/BR thing. Guess my confusion came from reading somewhere that SKS' is kind of an entry-level BR, least used to be in the US.

So, to put it in nice lil' digestable thing. SKS's not BR, because of the intermediate cartridge, but the (planned?) use of it coincides with true BRs?

Also, what's your opinion on autonuggets? Friend of mine once told me they are a bitch to clean and maintain, alas, I am a sucker for com-block long arms, and they are the cheapest semi-auto full-power rifle still here.

selling boipucci for inch fal. where to buy

>>32536742
>Razr Keyboard
>Rusted and dented to fuck mags

Do you make nothing but bad decisions?

File: range rifles.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>32536806
Keyboard is actually pretty good, mouse would be good too if it didn't have software issues

Mags were like 8 dollars a piece and function. Do you not like equipment with history?

File: 1483469891629.png (43KB, 657x560px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 657x560px

>>32536839
>>32536742

Just Polish the mags with a dremmel lightly, or use a brillow pad to remove rust. Then treat with some Casey Birchwood anti rust shit.

Check inside of mags for rust, and the springs.

maybe treat the aluminum or spray them with something after treating to add a protective finish on them.

Dents and shit, dunno man.

They function, maybe make sure you have anti-tilt followers also. (you can test and also see by color of USGI mags.)

File: 1483549372826.jpg (24KB, 477x350px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 477x350px

>>32536806

Aside from the dents, I think old mags look cool.

The dents would have stopped me though, only for aesthetics.

Plus I am not a commie cuck low capacity fucker.

I own 1 low cap mag, and never use it. I only own it because it looks cool being flush with my mag well.

>>32528335
Fuck it, I want to see it happen to all the really old school weapons. How about the M1928? We can finally see it in that rifle configuration that never happened.

File: Hikcok45.png (2MB, 1152x1130px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1152x1130px

>>32536896

He can also use Ballistol to treat the mags, my fellow Glock enthusiasts.

>>32536116
Huh, didn't know that. It's all in a pretty short timespan though.

>>32536952
... I still find it hard to believe that that image isn't photoshopped. That couple between them must be like 5'4 and 5'6 or something.

>>32528485
>There is alot of hotter 30-06 that you used to not be able to shoot out of many, if any, repeaters.

That's because the older semi-autos were calibrated to run on WWII-era M2 Ball, aka the standard ammo for the Garand. If you handload, work up a batch of 30-06 to perform like the old M2 ball recipe (pushing a 147-150 grain projectile at 2650fps) and suddenly those guns will run all day without a hiccup, won't kick hard at all and give great accuracy.

When magnum rifles came onto the scene, the focus of loading went to a case's "maximum potential" to try and compete. And there's another barrel harmonic accuracy node for rifles that can run at higher pressures than the Garand can, so that's what they load modern 30-06 to. If you're shooting the new stuff in a bolt gun, it'll take the extra pressure with no problems, give you greater downfield range and just as much accuracy as before. But put it into a Garand or an old semi-auto and it'll shake itself apart in short order, as you know.

>.308 has just about fucking peaked without radical shifts in gun and weapon design.
That's because it wasn't designed as a magnum round. Rather, think of it as the old 30-06 M2 Ball loading with the case shrunk down to fit the powder charge size better. It's not exactly that, but it's close enough that real-world performance is comparable between the two.

>.30-06 is a better round on the high-end and can still come cheap as mil-surp from all over the world.
Yep. And when you need it, accept no substitutes.
But most people just don't. For what most people do with their guns, even 308 is overkill. That's why smaller things like 223 and 243 have gained so much popularity. It's the power they need in a package that doesn't beat them up.

>>32529970
I'd cancel it and go with a JP LRP07 or a Les Baer if you have that much money to spend, and want one that's actually worth it.

>>32536594
Iirc the ban is not on 5.45 but on 7n6 ammo

>>32537042
If you need a step up from .308, '06 doesn't really get you much more.

>>32535739
Apparently mine is.
>>32535349
How much would you say qualifies as "extensive"? Will it hurt it too bad to dump a mag once in a while in F/A?

File: 1482990006264.jpg (35KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 960x640px

Is an ar10 a good first battle rifle?

I already have an ak47 and a nagant. I have kind of a fetish for reliability and easy maintenance.

>>32537282
>nagant
>reliable

>>32537282
no
lr308 barrels are most, if not all, cut for 308win chamber. very likely to run into issues with surplus 7.62NATO brass being tight

get a ptr gi, a box of cheap mags and all the steel cased ammo you can afford

File: 1479761312124.jpg (513KB, 1344x1640px) Image search: [Google]

513KB, 1344x1640px

>>32536952
>>32537005

>>32537481
>>32536952
Ice Giants!

>>32535806
>>32535825
>>32537085
if /k/ is against it that tells me all i need to know

SHES A KEEPER

I've already got /k/ approved rifles now I'm getting a boutique gun.

>>32536158
You in Texas? I'll trade son

>>32537327
Got anything remotely authoritative to reference there?

>>32538242
how about looking into it yourself youngster

I need help /brg/

first most let me say I live in a b@ state so I cant buy fal/g3 etc but I can buy stripped lowers. So it seems that a ar10 is the only option for me, Ive read up on them a bit and decided to go DPMS pattern as its the most common. Has anyone on /brg/ built a 308 ar and if so, offer some suggestions on where to get parts and look up compatibility?

>>32538744
Have you tried the M1A? It's California legal.

>>32538728
Salty way of saying no.

>>32538744
Buy your recievers in a set, and check with the manufacturer for compatibility, like this
http://www.megaarms.com/maten/compatibility/

>>32538796
you can get bitchy if you ask for personal experience and dont like it, but that doesn't change anything

ill hold you hand long enough to look at the faxon site itself, hell even dpms says not to use S.african surplus. now shut the fuck up while grown folks are talking

>>32538915
>Quotes from shitty DPMS
Literally nothing of value

File: 1465310959929.jpg (82KB, 719x624px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 719x624px

>>32538932
>kids not liking when theyre told

File: IMG_0037.jpg (95KB, 750x993px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 750x993px

>>32537282
Get a scar

>>32537042
Pretty sure M2 Ball .30-06 was 150gr going 2800 ft/s from the 24" barrel of an M1 or M1903. Not 2650 ft/s. Light Ball 7.62x54r was 147gr at 2850 ft/s from the 29" barrel of an M91/30. s.S. Patrone 1934 8mm Mauser was the hottest standard-issue cartridge of WWII to my knowledge, and was 198gr at 2500 ft/s from a 24" barrel as I recall. Mk.VII Ball .303 British used by Great Britain/Commonwealth throughout both World Wars was 174gr at 2440 ft/s from a 25" barrel. This is all from memory because I'm autistic or some shit, so double-check if you think any of it is amiss, but I'm quite certain it's all accurate.

>>32537481
That's fucking hysterical, but yeah, it's fairly easy to see that that's a littlegirl with Ian's goatee shopped onto her. Still, if you were to get an image of JUST her face... it'd probably trick a lot of people. At least in the thumbnail. I had no idea that Ian was so babyfaced! VERY curious now what he looks like without the goatee!

>>32538963
Again, DPMS is literally a non source.
The the bottom of the barrel, and from what you said they only mention one type of ammo. Why would you run shit ammo through whats apparently a match chamber anyway?

>>32529372
its an old as fuck concept, designed for stripper clips, poorly bedded in a wooden stock with little support.

its heavy, not particularily accurate or good ergonomics.

its one of the most sexy guns on the other hand

>>32540030
keep pushing them goalposts son

File: 200-2.gif (4MB, 262x200px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 262x200px

>>32540064
Goalpost has been that quoting from the DPMS website is essentially worthless in the AR10 world. Its a shit rifle.

Its still there.

Keep memeing friend

>>32539913
You're right, my bad. It was 2800fps.
I must have gotten 2650 from people using shorter barrels.

Real numbers are here for the interested:
http://www.m1-garand-rifle.com/m1-garand-assembly/ammo.php

>>32540095
you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground buddy

File: Chile-Volcano.jpg (1MB, 2592x1652px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2592x1652px

>>32540820
And you dont know DPMS from quality

>>32542066

Not the guy you replied to, but I thought tha AR10s were one of DPMS's few decent products? Like, I always heard that the LR308 or whatever was actually a pretty good gun (correct me if I'm wrong) that was worth the money.

>>32542139
For DPMS their .308 line is decidedly better than the .223 line. But trying to use DPMS, who knows that they have a finicky chamber as a pertinent example for the entirety of all 308 ARs is inane.

Has DPMS made some decent rifles, yes. But by and large its pure hobby grade

>>32528682
>Shit-tier sights of M1918A2, not sure about M1918

The original M1918 has M1917 Enfield stype of sights, which are considered much better than the M1903A1 style of rear sights.
You forgot that the original has semi and fullauto modes, whereas the A2 has two full auto modes (slow and fast), which made the gun more mechanically complex (ergo, there's more that can fail).
The A2 was adopted more than a decade after JM Browning passed away.

>>32539562
only place around here with a SCAR has a "L" model and thats it :(

>>32534440
You forget that modern bullets are tapered, which makes them more efficient.

File: 168rbbt1[1].jpg (33KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 640x480px

>>32542882

>>32535861
The adjustments don't go down far enough, so it's still too much gas for a suppressor than it needs to be. There is someone on the files that will mod your gas plug for no charge though, so that's really cool. I think he fills in one of the holes with solder and drills a small diameter hole in it.

>>32536011
Check out Razor Gen II. 3-gun it's a popular scope from what I understand. It beats other glass twice the price, on 1x its amazing eye box/eye relief it's as fast as a red dot, on 6x its awesome resolution it's good to 1,000m, and the same price as an ACOG. I got money for a new optic, I would buy it.

File: 1413647784279.png (346KB, 499x358px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 499x358px

>The HCAR is a thing
>Modernized FG-42s aren't

>>32527147
what is the best QD suppressor mount?

File: IMG_1502.jpg (270KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 1080x1080px

>>32542673
Internet my friend, I got mine BNIB for $2650 off GB right before Orlando shooting

>>32544661
There are too many factors, really, but look at Dead Air's key mount.

>>32529372
the price/rails ratio is too low

File: Capture.png (29KB, 843x316px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 843x316px

Where do I get 30 round FAL mags?

Looking for a new rifle for a lefty. Not concerned with ejection (learned my lesson about snowflakes). Im concerned about operation. Ive been told some of the more popular choices are not suited to lefty use. I want something to shoot now and then put glass on later for distance shooting. Price isn't a concern, im just looking for solid options and opinions.

File: 2017-01-05 10.04.48.jpg (2MB, 2449x3265px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2449x3265px

>>32527199
Nope but I will drump from her recent hunt.

File: 2017-01-05 10.05.32.jpg (283KB, 960x1280px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 960x1280px

>>32527199
>>32545522

File: 2017-01-05 10.03.13.jpg (3MB, 2449x3265px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2449x3265px

>>32545528
>>32545522
>>32527172
>>32527199

>>32545522
>>32545528
>>32545538
admit it, you fuck your sister.

Whats the cheapest FAL?

File: 2017-01-05 10.24.53.jpg (901KB, 2121x3771px) Image search: [Google]

901KB, 2121x3771px

>>32545557
I'll let her answer that.

>>32545498
.308AR and SCAR 17 are the most lefty-friendly options. AR will be the best BR for distance shooting.

>>32545609
So yes or no?

>>32545569
A used DSA Voyager.

>>32545609
ill fuck her

>>32545609
tits pls

File: SaggyBoobsLOL.png (489KB, 459x500px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 459x500px

>>32545674
K

>>32545721
TITS NAO

File: 1482247671990.jpg (1MB, 1800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1800x1200px

>>32544027
Its glass is about as nice as its price point. Which is good, its also heavy as fuck. ACOGs are noticeably cheaper. 6x magnification, too a thousand? whew lad.

>>32544982
Get http://www.e-sarcoinc.com/bren-l1a1-308-nato-30rd-magazine.aspx and modify. http://www.falfiles.com/forums/printthread.php?s=2fd6060c0563bba0aa15c505c5789007&threadid=22011

Or you find some old shitty rhodie 30s, or new made, absolute shit korean mags from DSA.

>>32545569
Problematic (that is the joke) CAI l1a1

>>32545611
This

>>32544027
>As fast as a red dot

If true that's fucking amazing.

I wish it was possible to rent optics or something at ranges. Thanks for the tip, anon, I'll definitely check it out.

>>32545609
Does your sister have a penis?
So if the RFB is able to get 1MOA bench, why is not a battle rifle?

File: 366C8559-9ADF-4B71-A612-E7516A90FA49_zpsri7ypztj.jpg (327KB, 800x1071px) Image search: [Google]

327KB, 800x1071px

>>32545801
Start going to three gun matches. Meet people with everything, Looking through a scope isnt a big ask for most people.

File: image.jpg (45KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 640x480px

>>32545730
>Its glass is about as nice as its price point.
Not from what I've heard. It's not the best but it's on par with optics that are twice the price.
>heavy as fuck.
Like half a pound heavier, so not really.
>ACOGs are noticeably cheaper
I can get a Razor Gen II right now for $1,288, so again not really.
>[to] a thousand? [wew] lad.
Resolution is an important factor, but that is what I heard.

>>32545801
Pic related. The eye box is amazing.

>>32545801
Not that I know of??? At least not since the last time I assisted with a diaper change which was almost 19 years ago.

File: 12525643_804299561671_7167781809245964506_o.jpg (333KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 2048x1152px

>>32545828
Its not. For example the Kahless k16i, some of the best glass in the game is like 50% more than the vortex, and has decidedly better glass. Are there scopes out there at the $2800 MAP that the vortex has better glass than? probably.

Half a pound heavier is 50% additional weight from the competition. Thats WAY to heavy.

ACOG (TA11C), new for $1050

There is a lot of things important to long range shooting. A 1-6 at 1000 is asking a lot. If you want a long range optic, try the AMG by vortex.

>>32545730
Thanks

>>32545822
Nice gat.

>>32545881
It's pretty obvious your trying to justify overspending on an ACOG. It's cool though, I'm sure you'll appreciate the bomb-proof feature next time you roll over an IED or whatever you do in the suburbs.

>>32545822
so funky. i like it.

>>32545923
I actually dont own an ACOG, only trijicon I do own is an RMR.

Even within the vortex lineup, the AMG, like twice the price, has better glass.

>>32528441
>patience of a saint

why does the m1a require patience?

>>32545609
Yo that's a big head for a girl, and a masculine digit ratio.

Post penis or masculine intersex clit.

>>32546523
see
>>32527199

File: 1469414856883.webm (1MB, 720x404px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 720x404px

>>32546574
Don't feed it. It never terns out well. He's just a manlet thats never seen a woman who had to drag her own animals out of the brush before.

>>32546477
It has a temperamental action that's not conducive to accuracy

>>32546640
The wifes cousin can field butcher a deer to bagged up quarters in minutes. She goes hunting with the whole butchering kit in like a carpenters belt pouch. Seeing her work is dazzling.

>>32546673
Yep

>>32537302
How is it not?
>inb4
>only ammo is by Prvi Partizan and runs really dirty
>Trigger pull is designed to be used only by bears
>Dirt/sand/dust buildup can somewhat prevent the gas lock from closing fully (but thats only if you cake the shit on)

File: depiction of a female Japanese animation character.jpg (105KB, 457x461px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 457x461px

Hello, /k/brg/, I require your assistance. Please recommend a firearm.
I require a semiautomatic rifle capable of striking a human being sized target with significant force - for the sake clarity let us say the force required to consistently kill a human being - at 750 meters. This rifle must be able to consistently complete its operation cycle in temperatures ranging from 42 to -38 degrees Celsius. This rifle must be able to accept a sound suppressor without limiting functionality. This rifle must be able to complete its operation cycle with a sound suppressor and subsonic ammunition with the lowest possible loss of functionality. Further functionality criteria and use case information may be provided as necessary upon request.
Thank you for your assistance, /k/brg/.

File: 2016-09-26 15.24.42.jpg (2MB, 2121x3771px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2121x3771px

>>32547165
Subsonic hitting with lethal force at 750 meters is almost impossible. But I will put my rifle on the table and say you can do everything but the subsonic part.

File: VKS_Engineering_technologies_international_forum_-_2012.jpg (332KB, 1920x1237px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 1920x1237px

Good fucking luck m8
That subsonic criteria is going to make things near impossible.
This will do it, but is bolt action, has a max range of 600 meters, and you'll never get one.

>>32547259
>>32547282
Clarification: Subsonic ammunition must be able to properly complete the rifle's operation cycle. While ballistic functionality loss of the bullet is inevitable, mechanical functionality loss of the rifle must be avoided.
Apologies for the miscommunication.

>>32547342
Look into the Falkor Petra.

>>32547386
This rifle appears to meet my specification, however, I am having significant difficulty finding information regarding the subsonic performance of the .300 Winchester Magnum cartridge. Will this cartridge provide the ideal compromise between supersonic performance and subsonic performance? Could you provide an estimate to its effective subsonic range?
Please forgive my numerous inquiries - I apologize profusely for any inconvenience caused by my unfamiliarity with the topic and greatly appreciate your assistance in this matter.

File: 2016-08-11 12.51.36.jpg (906KB, 2981x1676px) Image search: [Google]

906KB, 2981x1676px

>>32547342
Uh... no clue if H.C.A.R. can cycle them, I will have to make some and try. Not sure why it couldn't.

>>32547165
If you want something that can cycle subsonic, managing a suppressor isn't going to be an issue, your going to need a highly adjustable gas system.

AR is going to be your easiest bet. Might be possible with the SCAR or FAL with modifications.

750m, your going to need to be getting at least moa, this is going to likely knock the FAL out.

SCAR is likely to perform better in the cold than the AR, but I have seen no testing of that, especially at low temperature.

Your biggest concern is going to be that temperature spread. Your going to need dope charts for a like every 5°c for every load. Some powders are more temp stable than others.

Easy answer - AR
Real answer - reconsider your objectives, there isn't really a one rifle to rule them all.

>>32543961
Depends on the Fal honestly, some can go from full shut to full open

>>32547551
not the guy you are replying too but apparently using 300WM subsonic is a bit pointless since the max range you'll get with it is 300 meters ( and this is just for an accurate shot, we are not talking about perforation or anything else )

the best for effective "long" range subsonic should be either 308 or 300 savage

>>32544982
Gunbroker. Bren L4, DSA and rhodie 30's, FALO 30's etc

>>32547701
Multiple firearms would greatly reduce mobility and multiple platforms would increase training time. I understand that some effectiveness will be lost but efficiency is also important.
I'm afraid I don't quite understand the following statement -
>Your going to need dope charts for a like every 5°c for every load.
Could you rephrase or elaborate?
Apologies for the miscommunication.

>>32547739
Thank you. .308 Winchester appears to be an acceptable cartridge.

Barring further counsel I am searching for an AR rifle chambered in .308 Winchester. Thank you all for your assistance in this matter.

>>32547864
Gunpowder burns differently at different temperatures. This means a variable muzzle velocity at different temperatures. For short range this isn't going to matter much, at almost range and with 100°c spread, your going to need to know your drops for ranges across a wide spread.

Your also probably going to want a range finder to quickly get the range to target. And different optics for subsonic use.

A .308 AR is going to be the easiest way to get there without a lot of fucking around. Your still going to need to do a lot of work to get the data set you want. Hope you've got a range open at night in winter.

>>32547864
My dude no offense but you don't seem 100% qualified for whatever it is you want to do with that rifle. You talk like a fag and your shit's all retarded.

>>32547969
You wanna go to Starbucks?

>>32547950
Thank you. Would you recommend using differently loaded cartridges for different environmental conditions or adjusting my aim to compensate for the variations in velocity?

>>32547969
I do not understand. While I am not a ballistician nor a marksman I am quite capable of learning to appropriately load cartridges and use a firearm with proficiency.

>>32548038
Stay with the same load, but find a gunpowder that is more temperature tolerant.

A ballistic tip match round for open air shots, a bonded jacket bullet for barriers. You can find some with similar BC for similar external ballistics. At those ranges look at ~175gr bullets

>>32548123
Capital. You've answered all of my questions and then some. I greatly appreciate your assistance and your patience. Thank you very much.

>>32548238
Godspeed autistic/robot anon

File: tumblr_odnesaBXN51sdxszuo1_1280.jpg (182KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 1080x1080px

>>32548238
NP.
Take good notes

File: 1379490120867.gif (427KB, 200x198px) Image search: [Google]

427KB, 200x198px

>>32548267
>yfw we just gave advice to a freshly re-formatted robot assassin
>yfw he assassinates a major political figure in the next few days

File: 1481851670068.jpg (118KB, 554x554px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 554x554px

>>32548319
With those temp ranges its probably not America so I really couldnt care less tbdesu

>>32548349
What if it's Putin

>>32548391
Nothing of value would be lost?

File: 1481304865779.jpg (86KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 640x640px

>>32548391
We pray this entire website is a giant honeypot.

>>32548391
I ask him, "Where is the SVDK he promised me for hacking the election?"

>>32548298
What's the top rifle?

>>32548490
Accuracy international with premier reticle scope and SiCo radius range finder

File: No Humans Though.gif (2MB, 318x197px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 318x197px

>>32548391
Nothing of value lost

>>32527147
W.A.R. reproductions when? It's basically an M1 Carbine in .30-06
>https://www.forgottenweapons.com/w-a-r-the-winchester-automatic-rifle/

>>32549065
Never.
No market

>>32544636
I think SMG Guns made some modernized ones.
They're probably do whatever you want if you pissed enough money at them.

Do the FAL, G3, and M14 stand a chance compared to modern battle rifles like the AR10 and SCAR in any meaningful metric besides AESTHETIC?

>>32549859
The older rifles are completely outclassed by the newer rifles.

If nothing else money and improved engineering has made the difference. Though the US threw effort into making the M14 better, FN tried to make the FAL into what the SCAR is today, and HK doesnt really product updates so much as brand new products.

>>32549859
M14 can be a bad, heavy, finicky AR10 if you POUR money into it. That's about it.

>>32549914
>>32550017
Well that fucking sucks. I wanted to believe.

>>32527147
If you were going to build/buy an AR pattern .308, what would it be?

>>32550209
A boy can dream.
You can pour money into making one 95% of a modern rifle if you want.

File: IMG_20161208_184300731.jpg (2MB, 4159x1649px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4159x1649px

>>32550229
>The only answer

>>32550246
Too rich for me. $2000 is probably the limit. Maybe $2500

>>32550424
for the rifle or the entire setup?
you might want to consider a nice bolt action for much
the DMPS g2s are also pretty good, also around 1200 bucks.

>>32550424
Ddm5v1

>>32549859
Id put a garand up against an AR-10 if its irons

>>32550598
Good irons isn't going to make up for decades of design and materials improvement. Especially since you can put whatever irons you want on an AR10.

>>32550598
Then why does the garand need its own category in competitions?

>>32530768
>Reloading has a sporting purpose.
The Second Amendment doesn't.

>>32550470
Rifle

>>32550501
Not interested

>>32550681
Talk to SCOTUS about that

>>32550700
PWS or SIG then.
Or build your own.

>>32550700
I'd save up another 600 or so and buy a SCAR then
reliable, accurate and good aftermarket

>>32550681
AP ammo is the most retarded shit ever
If I was going to shoot up a school or movie theater the last thing I would take would be AP ammo
these people have no logical sense that want to ban certain stuff because it can penetrate armor, if I wanted to kill a police officer a 223 would shred any Kevlar shit that a cop wears
absolute stupidity.

>>32550209
>>32550017
>>32549859
>M14 sucks meme
Is entirely untrue. It isn't as streamlined or efficient as the other battle rifles, but is plenty accurate and reliable.

>>32550783
accurate? maybe
reliable? if you are at a range shooting at paper yes, if you are in any adverse conditions, hell no

>>32550783
If you want to see someone with a submoa M14 wince, pick up the rifle where the bedding might break

>>32550680
Its that badass

File: 1437086078962.jpg (112KB, 423x750px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 423x750px

>>32550929
Well memed

>>32550852
what if he has an ebr chassis!

check mate atheists
inb4 then he just winces everytime he has to lift it :^)

>>32551137
Lol

>>32527199
Not sure of the girl is small or the gun is just plain big.

File: 1482682964483.png (1MB, 775x960px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 775x960px

>>32551486
Yes

>>32540050
It can take clips, but I dunno if it was designed for them. Personally, I see it as advantageous to be able to reload with either detachable mags or clips; carrying half your ammo in clips and the other half in mags saves quite a bit of weight when compared to just carrying ammo in mags. As for the concept, it's a battle rifle. Select-fire firearm using full sized rifle rounds that has detachable mags.

For the time, it was quite new, even though to world went with assault rifles instead. As for bedding/support, I dunno much about all that. Accuracy? I hear they can manage 2 MOA. As for weight, I don't think it's far off from other battle rifles of the time; FN FAL or HK G3. I don't know the weight of the Sig 510 or whatever it's called off the top of my head, but I dare say it's not far off.

The FN FAL and HK G3 are probably better, but as long as you keep it in semi-auto, I figure it'll be a perfectly fine rifle to use. Sucks about the weight, but hey, it's firing a full sized rifle round after all and was designed in the mid-late 1950s. Not the most 'modern' of rifles out there, but certainly serviceable.

>>32542508
I forgot no such thing; I merely didn't bring up the M1918's semi-auto capabilities. But overall, yeah, the original was far better than the M1918A2, especially if it indeed had M1917 style sights. They shouldn't have dicked with John Moses Browning's design. In the 1930s-40s, its one primary advantage, or possibly its ONLY advantage, was that the M1918 was around 16lb unloaded which is AMAZING for the time. Take away that advantage though, and you've got a big and clunky LMG that has a fixed barrel and only 20-rnd mags while basically all others have a capacity of 30+. At about 19lb unloaded, the M1918A2 is below-average in weight for LMGs at the time, but not by much, and CERTAINLY not enough to make up for the shitty bipod or terribly downgraded sights.

America really did have some of the worst LMGs of the war. The only saving grace that I can think of for widely-issued US MGs is the M2 Browning. Even the Japanese had better LMGs when compared with the M1918A2; better sights, higher capacity, changeable barrel, and can even be mounted with a scope. Well, there's also the bayonet, but that's a pretty silly thing to put on an MG. If it gets to the point that the machine gunner has to engage in bayonet combat, then shit's pretty fucked. Oh, and I think the 6.5 chambered Japanese LMG was also only 2lb or so heavier than the M1918A2. Possibly even less than that. As for 7.7, that might have been around 3lb heavier or so. Also had a pretty fast rate of fire, around 900 RPM if I had to guess.

>>32553297
we also had semi auto rifles
m14 was worst service rifle we've ever issued, and remains the worst battle rifle of it's time
I'd take a g3 over it any day

>>32539913
>198gr at 2500 ft/s
big pill
Why did 8mm replace 7mm anyway?

>>32550681
US vs Miller

>In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense.

>we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument... not... any part of the ordinary military equipment,

Therefore the 2nd Amendment is principally for weapons that are expressly of military or militia utility (machine guns, grenade launchers, assault rifles, mortars, antitank rockets, etc). Weapons that can be used for common defense.

The court case itself was a tragedy because no one showed up to try the Miller side, it was basically just a US attorney speaking unopposed in front of the Supreme Court, since Miller was in hiding or possibly dead and no one was paid to appear on his behalf, so no one mentioned to the Justices that the Marine Corps had 14 inch pump action shotguns in their armory at the time.

But that doesn't alter the wisdom of the judicial thought behind the decision, even if the decision was made on bad info.

>>32550852
USGI fiberglass with aluminum bedding block works pretty good, weighs about 24 oz heavier than USGI wood.

>>32550795
>M14 is unreliable in adverse conditions.
Something must be wrong with mine then. I dragged it through the high deserts of Nevada, Norcal forests, snow, mud, dust, rust and ran about 1,500 rounds before cleaning it. Roughy 500 of which being shitty Tulammo, Wolf and Brown Bear which I would mix with brass cased ball during mag dumps. During the last meet we dug a foxhole and fired it from a sandbag where it got dropped into and sucked up clods of dust/sand and continued to run without a hitch.

Now mind you when I say "accuracy" I do mean combat accuracy. I shoot open sights and I usually settle for being able to hit what I'm aiming at. I'm not sure if that means 1 MOA or 5 since I'm only hearing steel ring in the distance but it has been able to deliver practical combat accuracy consistently. I don't quite know exactly how accurate my rifle is at any given point, but it has been very reliable.

>>32553348
Germany adopted 8mm Mauser in 1888; easy to remember, right? Pretty sure the cartridge they used before that was something over 10mm. It was common to use .40-45 cal bullets in rifles after muzzle loaders were phased out, and I don't think rifle ammo with 8mm bullets or smaller didn't really start to properly come about until the M1886 Lebel rifle. From 1886 until 1888, France had the best rifle and the best ammo in the entire world, hands down. An interesting thing to be able to say. Not often does a nation adopt something that completely outperforms everything else available in just about every way, shape, and form. They were also the first to use spitzer bullets I think, but those weren't adopted until the 1890s I think. US didn't start to use spitzer bullets until 1906. The .30-06 was first .30-03, adopted with the M1903, but was initially loaded with round-nosed bullets. Three years later they changed to spitzer and renamed the round .30-06.

Anyways, you must be thinking of a country other than Germany if you're talking about 8mm rounds replacing 7mm rounds.

>>32553390
You can get very good results with just simple unreinforced fiberglass or even commercial plastic stocks. Getting an M1A to shoot 2-4 MOA is a breeze. I know the snobs say that anything under 1 MOA is a waste of ammunition but that's bullshit because 2-4 MOA is the range that most BRs shoot out of the box unless we're talking SCAR money.

Now cutting an M1A from 2-3 to ~1-1.5 MOA is extremely difficult. There's just too much stuff too spread out to really do it in a practical and cost/weight/reliability sensible way. I think trying to accurize an M1A is a pointless effort. It needs to be shot how it is and enjoyed for what it is.

Yes you can get very impressive results from the G3 and AR-10 platforms. They are better than the M14 in that regard. But there's still room for the M14 to shine as a basic, practical and very enjoyable rifle in it's own right.

>>32553625
it was an 11mm if I remember right
and no, the m1 action is so below modern (FALs and G3s included) rifle reliability it doesn't even compete

File: H&K MR762 LRP.jpg (73KB, 700x345px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 700x345px

>>32528113
>$2.8k
>No forward assist
Even fucking H&K use the forward assist on their guns, what a joke wilson combat is. Should stick to making custom 1911s.

File: 1477878534368.jpg (62KB, 700x690px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 700x690px

>>32553245
How much ammo do plan on "carrying"
Using clips tends to preclude the use of optics

>>32553390
Im going to assume you dont know about marinetex

>>32554020
Forwards assist are over rated.

>>32554539
Well, you know what they say. Better to have it and not need it than to die like a bitch.

File: Cool Starry Bra.jpg (63KB, 500x367px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 500x367px

>>32554677
FAs can cause some issues too, jamming the brass into some debris in the chamber for example. And instead of using the FA, you can manually cycle the action.

>>32553600
Your accuracy accession is understandable.

>>32553625
What a beautiful string of weaponly sentences.

New thread >>32554896

>>32554539
It doesn't matter how old clips are; they work. Clips have been around since the 1880s, to my knowledge. Carrying half ammo in clips and half in mags can save a noticeable amount of weight from your loadout, and it also gives the advantage of being able to 'top off' a mag instead of swapping it out to leave a partial mag in your loadout. Here's an example of the weight that can be saved, using vZ.58 gear:

vZ alloy mag: 1.6lb
3 SKS clips: 1.2lb

>240 rounds
8 mags: 12.8lb
4 mags and 12 clips: 11.2lb
24 clips: 9.6lb

So there's over 1.5lb saved by exchanging 4 mags for the equivalent amount of ammo in clips. Or, in the case of an SKS which can ONLY use clips, you save over 3lb. 1.5lb can go towards carrying an extra mag giving you 5 mags and 12 clips for the same weight as 8 clips alone, or you can add 4 clips which allows you to carry 280 rounds for the same weight as 240 rounds in mags alone. With the SKS, you can carry an added 5 clips for a total of 290 rounds, and it's still a tad lighter than just 8 mags.

For an M14? I recall the 20-rnd mags being 1.5lb loaded, and as for 150gr M80 Ball 7.62 Nato it's around 18 rounds per pound, which is about 1.1lb for 20 loose rounds. Let's call it 1.2lb for 4 5-rnd clips, so we're actually using almost the same numbers as vZ mags/SKS clips, as it turns out, though it's with different numerical values for actual ammo count.

>160 rounds
8 M14 mags: 12lb
4 mags and 16 clips: 10.8lb
32 clips: 9.6lb

Less drastic weight savings, but still, over 1lb is a fair bit of weight to take off of your loadout. Clips are slower than mags when the capacity is higher than 10 rounds, this is true, but you're not going to have do an 'emergency reload' or 'tactical reload' every damn time. If so, if you REALLY need to shoot that much, and that often, then shit's fucked and you're likely to not make it anyways. Using 2 5-rnd clips can take 5 seconds or less with practice.

>>32554897
Oh, shit, didn't know there's a new thread (which turns out to have died while this one hasn't). Well here's a reply from the previous thread (actually this thread) in regards to using clips even though it's quite old tech; you can save a nice bit of weight by using clips AND mags instead of just mags.
>>32555013

and also...

>>32554897
Glad you enjoyed it, I quite like writing, and the amount of firearm history or firearm trivia/factoids I've got memorized is literally pretty retarded. Often times when I was in high school and supposed to be working on something on the computer, I'd instead be researching firearms, ammo, dates of manufacture/adoption, etc. That was around 2005 that I was doing that, and became a gun owner in 2008 to get some hands-on experience. Learned a lot in that time, and still learning.

(Was going to post this in the new BRG thread but it closed, yet this one is still alive for some reason.)

New thread that won't get deleted by mods (hopefully):
>>32555159
>>32555159
>>32555159

File: 1481819908285.png (31KB, 202x682px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 202x682px

>>32555080
Yeah it was all that gay porn in the OP image combined with the thread being WAY too early. Happens sometimes.

>>32555166
Looks like the image cap hasn't been reached.

>>32555164
Why in such a rush to start a new BRG thread? This one still has life in it. Not only that, but it's pretty quiet it would seem. Not really any need for a new one yet. If you want more activity, perhaps contribute more to this one?

>>32555347
It's on page 9 and past bump limit. It's really not that preemptive.

>>32555347
I know what you mean, but we're in autosage mah nig.>>32555461