AG- 3 (HK G3 or HK 91 if I recall correctly) vs L 85 bullpup
My 2 cents :
The AG-3 (7,62 nato) was I my opnion the ultimae battle rifle .Rugged,reliable,accurate and pretty versatile.
Tried the L85 for a week or so - and was impressed by a number of things -firstly the range on it ,that was supposedly the AGs main advantage.Scoped for sniping I would say a pure AG yes.But in an assault rifle role ,the optics on that rifle combined with the iron sights gave it a pretty decent range .I remember the guys in the regiment I was at said that they easily engaged out to 400 + meters .The same distance we said was practical for our guys- although we did try out to 600.(No optics) .But the difference is mostly in caliber between the 2 - Most our training was at 200 meters though .
Also it was lighter and the weight differance on the mags was a staggering experience as it was the first non issue Norwegian rifle I trained with .Rate of fire was better too - the recoil really was pleasant compared to trying to do consecutive AG shots in rapid fire at the same targets.
A double tap from the AG will definently down you though - but a double tap from the 5,56 will leave you slightly less dead - but dead nonetheless.So why go heavier ?
making the swap I asked myself - which too take if the SHTF ?Both had strong points . Being mech inf I didnt care about the weight as much ,even though the AG is heavy .I had gotten used to carrying it .
Bottom line - bullpup is handy and has as good range with the optics as a M16s in my HUMBLE opinion , not really having had any training with it (ARs) .
But with iron sights - I guess there would be a difference ,although I hardly ever used the iron - it was just so mouch more cool with the optics on the L85 , that the AG wasnt issued with then .
Didnt like the bull pup mag positioning or the controls on the L85 though .
Yes - I believe the optics like Aimpoint or Leupold CQ 1-3 x 24 would make it AS effective as an M16 /AR15 platform with the same optics.
|