Poll - Favorite Battle Rifle

[chico20854]

OK, it seems I've been remiss in the polls... folks like Battle Rifles more than Assault Rifles.

So here's a poll for your favorite full-caliber semi-automatic rifle. I'd say detachable magazine, but I want to include the M-1 Garand for those hard-core history buffs out there, if any...

And keep in mind that with our user group, there are a lot more folks that used the L1A1/FAL (Australians and Brits) and M-14/M1A (Americans) than the G-3 (Norwegians), so that may skew the results...

[pmulcahy11b]

That was a hard one. I've actually had some range time with an M-1 Garand and it was fun, but I wouldn't have to fight with a powerful cartridge in a general-purpose rifle. The AR-10 has good ergonomics, and the FAL is an excellent rifle, but they're both too light for automatic fire.

[Legbreaker]

Having only used the L1A1, SKS and SKK, my vote is for the L1A1 SLR.
A good, solid weapon which if taken care of and fitted with the marksman's leaf battle sights (smaller peep hole in reat than the standard issue) extremely accurate (it's not bad with the standard leaf either as long as the shooter can handle the larger sight picture).

I've also used the heavier barrelled automatic version which I found to be a reasonable support weapon if firing short bursts from the bipod. It does have a high rate of fire and only 30 round mags though, which are nowhere near enough for a sustained fight (even if a decent supply of mags is available).

I'd have been more than happy to take one home to use as a hunting rifle.

[jester]

The M14 is there. That is enough. The FAL/L1A1 is nice and a very good platform, but it doesn't have the accuracy that the M14 platform has and that in my view places it well over the top.

It is not just about volume of fire or the power of the cartridge, but it is ACCURATE FIRE which is key. And that allows you to use the benefit of the weapon. That also is one of the reasons I tend to go with the 16 over the AK, accuracy and range, as for reliability, just clean your weapon and it will work, simple.

PS: I do own an L1A1, the Canadian variant and it is very accurate but there is no arraingmenet for windage so a mam sized target is hard to get past 300m.

[Legbreaker]

I do own an L1A1, the Canadian variant and it is very accurate but there is no arraingmenet for windage so a mam sized target is hard to get past 300m.
Even 16 years after I last laid hands on an L1A1 I can say with absolute CERTAINTY there most definately IS windage adjustment contained within the rear leaf sight mounting.
You'll note two screws, on on each side. By loosening one half a turn and tightening the other half a turn you adjust the sight. I can't remember how far half a turn puts the point of impact at what range though.

If yor weapon does not have these two screws, you don't have an authentic weapon (at least not the right rear sight).

Even as a machinegunner, I was still able to score in the top 5% of may infantry battalion using the L1A1 and standard battle sights. You just need to know how to zero it properly and follow through on your shots.
The army states it's range to be effective to 300 metres and harrassing to 600 metres - in good hands it's accurate well over those battlefield ranges.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

PS: I do own an L1A1, the Canadian variant and it is very accurate but there is no arraingmenet for windage so a mam sized target is hard to get past 300m.

That would be the C1 rifle and not the L1A1. The Canadians used a different rear sight to the British and Australia SLRs although I can't imagine they would not include windage adjustment and I think it is exactly the same as found on the British and Australian rifles and indeed the entire FN FAL/SLR range. From the images I've seen of the M14 it has a drum you can dial for windage making life very easy, the L1A1 philosophy is that you shouldn't be doing those changes on the battlefield.

I can tell you without any fear of contradiction that the Australian issue L1A1 most definitely has an arrangement for windage, two screws on either side of the rear body upon which the rear sight block sits. You adjust both of them to shift the entire block left or right, once set for the person using that rifle, you aren't supposed to adjust it again. The idea being that a rifleman should know his rifle & abilities well enough to shoot off if he needs to take windage into account - if you really need to adjust for windage by changing the sight itself, by the time you finish mucking about with altering the sight to shoot at someone, they're already gone.

[Targan]

Even as a machinegunner, I was still able to score in the top 5% of may infantry battalion using the L1A1 and standard battle sights. You just need to know how to zero it properly and follow through on your shots.
The army states it's range to be effective to 300 metres and harrassing to 600 metres - in good hands it's accurate well over those battlefield ranges.

True. After I had zeroed my SLR I scored 100% against man sized targets on the 600m pop-up range on my very first range practice in the Army Reserve. I was lucky, it turned out I was a natural at land navigation and shooting. I certainly wasn't the perfect soldier in other areas though.

[jester]

You call it a drum it is called the "windage knob" or "elevation knob."

And you gents say that one should muck with adjustments in windage. But, if you wish to be accurate, to engage an enemy at range, you will have to study the wind, adjust for range in order to engage. It takes less than a couple of seconds to adjust your windage.

Using battle sights sure they should be generaly locked, And this does work for short ranges 300m or less. But, when you want to engage on man sized targets out to 500 and 600m and beyond well then it is critical and you will want fine adjustment.

And that gents is the thing, you want to be able to use the inherent accuracy of your weapon to its fullest. I dare say that for most, the potential for accuracy of the weapon is greater than the ability of the shooter. And for the 7.62 Nato cartridge, to limit to just 300m for a man sized target is under utilizing it.

As for the L1 vs M14, which weapon is easier to adjust windage if you had to?

As for adjusting the point of aim, that is called Kentucky Windage, which is far from accurate, and as state, not bad for 300m and less, you can even hit a man sized target at that range much of the time.

But, also, consider this, the ability to engage an enemy before they get close enough to engage, that will force them to to do a coolness check, since most would be very very upset at having to suffer accurate fire beyond your ability to return fire, so they just have to suffer and advance and take the casualties. When it comes to such, well, I'd like to be on the side handing out the damage at a range beyond the ability of my enemy.

I mean come on guys, we used to be able to nail a man sized target at 500m with the 16, it only has a bullet drop of about 6 feet at that distance. With anything in the 7.62 you have less drop, less affect by wind, damn, with practice 800m would be easy enough, before the shooter starts to fail <I can hardly see that far these days>

Next time I go to where my rifle is stored <Illegal to have in this state> I will check it out and see about those screws and make some adjustments.

[Ramjam]

L1A1 every time.

Yes it may only be semi-auto but at least you know it's going to hurt someone if they get hit by it.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

You call it a drum it is called the "windage knob" or "elevation knob."
Drum was the best description I could come up with at the time.

Using battle sights sure they should be generaly locked, And this does work for short ranges 300m or less. But, when you want to engage on man sized targets out to 500 and 600m and beyond well then it is critical and you will want fine adjustment.
For our training, out to 400 metres was the job of the rifleman, out to 800 metres was the job of the machinegunner and although Section Fire could be conducted out to 600m, it wasn't reliant on individual accuracy, more the volume of fire.

And that gents is the thing, you want to be able to use the inherent accuracy of your weapon to its fullest. I dare say that for most, the potential for accuracy of the weapon is greater than the ability of the shooter. And for the 7.62 Nato cartridge, to limit to just 300m for a man sized target is under utilizing it.
Certainly and I am not trying to dispute what you said, just illustrating the philosphy behind our emplyment of the weapon. As I mentioned above, targets beyond 400m were the province of the machinegun, the decision to employ the 7.62mm rifle out to 400m was not about the limits of the rifle and its round but about the limits of the shooter.

As for the L1 vs M14, which weapon is easier to adjust windage if you had to?
Without a doubt the M14 is easier, the windage knob is far easier to access and doesn't require any tools as far as I can tell.

As for adjusting the point of aim, that is called Kentucky Windage, which is far from accurate, and as state, not bad for 300m and less, you can even hit a man sized target at that range much of the time.
Again, my comment about the role of the rifleman and the role of the machinegunner apply here

But, also, consider this, the ability to engage an enemy before they get close enough to engage, that will force them to to do a coolness check, since most would be very very upset at having to suffer accurate fire beyond your ability to return fire, so they just have to suffer and advance and take the casualties. When it comes to such, well, I'd like to be on the side handing out the damage at a range beyond the ability of my enemy.
You're preaching to the choir, I totally agree with you here and I'm sure a few other fans of the 7.62x51mm do as well. It's just a pity that the politicians and the army high command don't see it that way.

Next time I go to where my rifle is stored <Illegal to have in this state> I will check it out and see about those screws and make some adjustments.
If you can find it, download the British Army L1A1 users manual, it should go into some detail about adjusting the sights
Did I mention that I'm supremely jealous that you own that rifle? I'd love to own an L1A1 or a C1A1 but it's never going to happen in Australia - the world's centre of fear and paranoid fantasy when it comes to guns.

[Targan]

Did I mention that I'm supremely jealous that you own that rifle? I'd love to own an L1A1 or a C1A1 but it's never going to happen in Australia - the world's centre of fear and paranoid fantasy when it comes to guns.

Me too. I know how to strip, clean and shoot the SLR. So sad that we Aussies can't (legally) own such things.

[Legbreaker]

SLR, M60, M16, F88 all blindfolded at breakneck speed, over a decade and a half later.
I suppose that's why they make you practise, and practise, and practise....

[jester]

Yes, somethings gents become reflext we did them so many times in our youths. Ah the memories. And honestly, I could dial in a mortar faster and better still drunk from the evening <late morning> before than I could stone sober. Instinct and reflecx.


Ansd as for the doctrine.

You gents have the machinegun as the base of your element like most of Europe don't you? Where the riflemen support the machinegun. Whereas, for us in the US, it is oposite, the machinegun supports the riflemen. A different doctrine. And those who are playing American characters you had better adopt that mind set :p to play your characters right ;)

Also, per rifle doctrine, the Marines are the only US service who still train for long range shooting, everyone else it only goes out to 300m whereas the MC still shoots out to 500m, another organizational difference in doctrine which does shape how we see things.

Just things to consider.


As for the C1, yeah, well the last time I saw it was in 01, however, I may be moving the "bad guns" to a location out of state a bit closer, hey, they allow anything in Arizona, so I may send them there.

[pmulcahy11b]

Yes, somethings gents become reflext we did them so many times in our youths. Ah the memories. And honestly, I could dial in a mortar faster and better still drunk from the evening <late morning> before than I could stone sober. Instinct and reflecx.

I've known a lot of guys who could do that. Now I could shoot better in MOPP gear than without it -- who else can claim that?;)

Oh, and BTW, have you seen the mess that happens when someone who's badly hung over throws up in his mask before he manages to get it off?

[Rainbow Six]

L1A1 for me every time.

[jester]

I've known a lot of guys who could do that. Now I could shoot better in MOPP gear than without it -- who else can claim that?;)

Oh, and BTW, have you seen the mess that happens when someone who's badly hung over throws up in his mask before he manages to get it off?



Add to it, while stuck in the same confined space such as helo, tracked vehicle or aircraft interior. ICK!!!! And at times it becomes a puke fest.

[Dog 6]

M-14 FTW

[fightingflamingo]

chico know's why I feel the way I do, now if only he'd buy one... :)

[pmulcahy11b]

Add to it, while stuck in the same confined space such as helo, tracked vehicle or aircraft interior. ICK!!!! And at times it becomes a puke fest.

And now you know why when I was a designated driver, my hard and fast rule was that we don't take my car!

[chico20854]

chico know's why I feel the way I do, now if only he'd buy one... :)

Hey, my Garand is beautiful... like new

http://s695.photobucket.com/albums/vv314/Charlie59_photos/Service%20Special/ (not mine, but from the same batch...)

[pmulcahy11b]

Hey, my Garand is beautiful... like new

http://s695.photobucket.com/albums/vv314/Charlie59_photos/Service%20Special/ (not mine, but from the same batch...)

Oh, those pics are better than porn!

[Raellus]

Wish I had a Garand...:(

I picked the G-3. I've never fired any of the guns on the list but I chose it because it looks shorter and handier than the FN FAL (and, as opposed to the SLR version, is full auto capable) and it has a pistol grip. Some of the tricked out versions used by German and Norwegian commandos look pretty flippin' sweet too.

[Legbreaker]

As a point of interest, the L1A1 SLR can be easily converted to fire automatically by several methods. Two that I know of involve a match stick inserted inside or simply removing the safety catch. Of course it's not exactly a great idea as the barrel is a bit light to cope and you loose the ability for single shots (not to mention a working safety!)

A third option is judicious application of a file to the safety which both removes the exterior "lug" from the safety which prevents it rotating around to the Auto setting (the L1A1 is marked with an auto setting even though it's not actually able to fire that way), and a little work on the same peice internally.

[Cpl. Kalkwarf]

AR-10, as it is very familiar to the M16 which the USMC sought to train me on. And I own one. Very nice weapon.

[leonpoi]

Wish I had a Garand...:(

I picked the G-3. I've never fired any of the guns on the list but I chose it because it looks shorter and handier than the FN FAL (and, as opposed to the SLR version, is full auto capable) and it has a pistol grip. Some of the tricked out versions used by German and Norwegian commandos look pretty flippin' sweet too.

I second that!

[Tegyrius]

FN 49. Beautiful.

Does need bigger and detachable magazines, though.

- C.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

FN 49. Beautiful.

Does need bigger and detachable magazines, though.

- C.

That's why they made the FAL :p
But I agree, the FN-49 is a nice, classic rifle, just a shame they made it with a fixed magazine or it may have lasted as long as some of its contemporaries (I suppose it could be argued that it lived on in the FAL in way the Garand lived on in the Italian BM59)

[pmulcahy11b]

As a point of interest, the L1A1 SLR can be easily converted to fire automatically by several methods. Two that I know of involve a match stick inserted inside or simply removing the safety catch. Of course it's not exactly a great idea as the barrel is a bit light to cope and you loose the ability for single shots (not to mention a working safety!)

A third option is judicious application of a file to the safety which both removes the exterior "lug" from the safety which prevents it rotating around to the Auto setting (the L1A1 is marked with an auto setting even though it's not actually able to fire that way), and a little work on the same peice internally.

Along this line, what do you think the possibility that that drop-in auto sear kits (such as those that used to be for sale for the AR-15 back in the mid-1960s) would make a comeback? Would governments start making them again to give out to their militias?

[Targan]

Along this line, what do you think the possibility that that drop-in auto sear kits (such as those that used to be for sale for the AR-15 back in the mid-1960s) would make a comeback? Would governments start making them again to give out to their militias?

In other parts of the world, absolutely. I doubt they would here in Australia though. I can't imagine the Australian military thinking it would be a good idea to provide militias with full-auto converted SLRs. I think they would feel much more comfortable training militias to use SLRs in the same way that the Australian Army has always used them (semi auto).

[Legbreaker]

The lighter barrel the L1A1 is equipped with probably wouldn't stand up to automatic fire for all that long. At a guess, maybe it would last through one decent contact before becoming effectively useless.

However, replacing the barrel with a heavier one while retaining the other parts is conceivable - but it would require at least a trained armourer and the correct tools.

Without a bipod though I can't really see the point. You'd also need to find a decent supply of the larger (and seriously rare) 30 round mags - the standard 20s are gone in a flash (same with the 30 true be told).

As a side note, the Infantry museum at Singleton, NSW has an L1A1 and an M16 converted to bullpup. Both weapons are capable of fire even though the "conversion" appears to be little more than application of a hacksaw, and adding a bit of fencing wire and assorted bits and peices that happened to be laying about the workshop....

[Legbreaker]

Thanks to StainlessSteelCynic this is one of the weapons I remember seeing at Singleton. http://www.nvtech.com.au/index-pastProjects.html

[Targan]

Thanks to StainlessSteelCynic this is one of the weapons I remember seeing at Singleton. http://www.nvtech.com.au/index-pastProjects.html

Never seen those photos before now. Awesome. Love it. What a pity it wasn't adopted by the Australian Army.

[Brother in Arms]

Why do you do this to me guys!!

Can I pick All of the Above? I love em all for different reasons...As far as my own personal owenership goes I own both an M1 and an M14 type rifle as well as a South african FAL parts kit that I can never seem to get around to building :(

I have always favored the power range and accuracy of battle rifles. Cut my teeth shooting the M1 and M14 on the high power shooting range. My first rifle though was a Chinese type 56 SKS not exactly a battle rifle in that it fires an intermediate cartridge but more so in form than other rifles in 7.62x39mm. (I also own several Mosin nagant rifles and a 1903A3 springfield wich is deadly accurate.) Edited that being said I have made some of the best shots with an M1 rifle I think I shoot it slighlty better than I do the M14.

I think the FAL, SLR and M14 are some of the best of there breed. The FAL and G3A3 platforms are certainly more common the world over but given my loyalty I have to put one up for the M14. But I wouldnt feel under armed with any of the choices in the poll. The US Army is adopting a new AR-10 rifle designated M110 to replace the M21 and M24 rifles.

[pmulcahy11b]

Thanks to StainlessSteelCynic this is one of the weapons I remember seeing at Singleton. http://www.nvtech.com.au/index-pastProjects.html

That bullpup M-16 is just so ugly...yet oddly-attractive...

[Legbreaker]

The base weapon is actually an L1A1 SLR but they're scrounged parts from an M16 to form the stock.

[pmulcahy11b]

The base weapon is actually an L1A1 SLR but they're scrounged parts from an M16 to form the stock.

Well, L-1A1-based would be different -- she's ugly, but always puts out!

[chico20854]

she's ugly, but always puts out!

I see a comment forming here...

[micromachine]

Despite the drawbacks of the M-1 Garand (weight, limited ammo, the "ping"), I would take it in a heartbeat, particularly if based in North America. .30-06 packs the one round knockdown, is accurate, and would make an excellent hand to hand weapon (particularly with the bayonet attached) when the ammunition is exhausted.

[Legbreaker]

It's partly the lack of weight and size that makes me lean away from assault rifles and towards the heavier battle rifles (although primarily the greater punch of a 7.62).
Assault rifles such as the M16 (especially) and Steyr AUG just aren't suited for bayonet work - their ability to accept a blade seems more like an afterthought.

[Targan]

It's partly the lack of weight and size that makes me lean away from assault rifles and towards the heavier battle rifles (although primarily the greater punch of a 7.62).
Assault rifles such as the M16 (especially) and Steyr AUG just aren't suited for bayonet work - their ability to accept a blade seems more like an afterthought.

Hell yeah. And being on the receiving end of a butt stroke-smash combination from an enraged soldier swinging an SLR would be devastating too. That weapon is externally damn near unbreakable.

[Legbreaker]

Try that with an M16 and you'll end up with nothing but shattered plastic disintergrating in your hands.
Of course a butt stroke with an M60 is even nastier. ;)

[pmulcahy11b]

Try that with an M16 and you'll end up with nothing but shattered plastic disintergrating in your hands.
Of course a butt stroke with an M60 is even nastier. ;)

When I went to basic, they let us use real M-16A1s on the bayonet assault course since the training battalion was slated to re-equip with M-16A2s. Hilarity ensued... I got off lucky, I only shattered my handguards. We had snapped-off stocks, bent barrels, cracked pistol grips, and lot, lots, of shattered and missing handguards. We had to do a special range walk to pick up all the pieces.

But we completed the course!

Edit: screwed that up. The 4th ITB was getting newer M-16A1s as the regular units were getting the M-16A2s. I hate when I screw up a good story!

[pmulcahy11b]

I see a comment forming here...

Oh c'mon, we all knew those girls in high school and college. I never took them up on it, though. It's in a way embarrassing, but I was 21 before I lost my virginity. It's much better when you actually love the person you are doing it with.

[pmulcahy11b]

Try that with an M16 and you'll end up with nothing but shattered plastic disintergrating in your hands.
Of course a butt stroke with an M60 is even nastier. ;)

And then you rake their face with your bipod (if it's retracted).

[Legbreaker]

Actually, I was thinking the foresight would put a decent hole in somebodies face...
The spare barrel would do some serious damage when swung too - just be sure it hasn't just been swapped out and is still smoking hot!

[Brother in Arms]

Micromachine
The M1 is a really good choice!
its "deficiencys" really arent....like Limited capacity, 8 rounds of .30-06 will keep you from wasting ammunition.....and if you need more rounds you can always load another clip in the rifle. Clips can be loaded into the rifle extremely quickly! faster than a magazine can be changed.

Wieght isnt bad either...the rifle makes an excellent hand to hand weapon and it amazingly sturdy...carrying it around is tough but id rather carry a heavy rifle all day and have some range and killing power. I have competead with the M1 using iron sites at 1000 yards and hit man sized targets...so it definitly has long range effect.

A potential useful bit of info you can carry M1 clips in M14 or M16 pouches (with the loops cut out) 6 clips will fit in each pouch. You can also carry M1 clips in the oldschool M-79, M203 vest one clip in each grenade pouch it will hold 25 clips!

I think the M1 Rocks....my only concern would be if I lost all my clips. You might not always have time to pick them up. They you only load the rifle one round at a time....which is still suprisingly fast.

[Anton_Lysenko]

Privyet!

I have to go with the SVT-40, "Stalin's Garand." 7.62x54, 10 round box mag...and it looks as sharp as hell. The only accessories are a scope, a bayonet, and a sling. :)

Me with mine at a public "demo" (ie, dog and pony show) in Waxahatchie, TX:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4012/4384695763_2ef814a464_o.jpg

Call me old-fashioned. ;)

[Brother in Arms]

SVT-40 a true Frontovik!

Another good battle rifle always wanted one for my collection seems like every time I almost aquire one something gets in the way. I have almost bought about 4 of these rifles. Not to mention the cut down Carbine version of these rifles is extremely appealing

actaully had a twilight game set in russia and one of the players aquired a SVT-40 PU from a great Patriotic war diarama in a musuem. It was later used with deadly effect.

Gotta Love 7.62x54R leave it to russia to develope a round nearly the same ballisticaly to 7.62x51 only 80 years before we did! There is reason that this round is being used today even though it was invented in the 1880'

Love the SVT though they are sadly harder to get these days.

[waiting4something]

Privyet!

I have to go with the SVT-40, "Stalin's Garand." 7.62x54, 10 round box mag...and it looks as sharp as hell. The only accessories are a scope, a bayonet, and a sling. :)

Me with mine at a public "demo" (ie, dog and pony show) in Waxahatchie, TX:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4012/4384695763_2ef814a464_o.jpg

Call me old-fashioned. ;)

Damn, that's awesome. I have only seen those in books. I can't even remember seeing those in any movies. Stalin's Garand.

[TiggerCCW UK]

SLR for me, although I also have a great deal of affection for the old Mk4 .303.

[jester]

Come on guys, get outside the box, SMLE and SLR blah blah blah! Both good systems but its like having vanilla icecream all the time. Get out of your rut! Find, study and enjoy the whole color spectrum of the rainbow as far as rifles go!

[Targan]

Come on guys, get outside the box, SMLE and SLR blah blah blah! Both good systems but its like having vanilla icecream all the time. Get out of your rut! Find, study and enjoy the whole color spectrum of the rainbow as far as rifles go!

Umm... but I do only eat vanilla icecream. Its my favourite and I don't really like other flavours. I do take your point though. Its just that the icecream analogy doesn't apply to me very well.

[jester]

Umm... but I do only eat vanilla icecream. Its my favourite and I don't really like other flavours. I do take your point though. Its just that the icecream analogy doesn't apply to me very well.

Smarty pants! You know very well what I am meaning!

[headquarters]

Or AG-3 as we call it -AutomatGevær-3 .

It is a sturdy,accurate and reliable piece of gun .Heavyer than carbines,only 20 round mag etc etc .

But still - us Norgies have had it since the late 60s and used from the Polar Circle to the Bekaa Valley.

We now use the HK 416 which is like an M4 with a piston system - only better than an M4 - ;)

I havent quite decided yet which one I favour -but the AG-3 is definently a good battle rifle.

I see many have the SLR as primo arma. I cant argue with that choice either -proven and re-proven .

I think many tend to choose whatever they are most familiar with though.Stick with what you know in a way .

As for use in game terms , the battle rifle is very useful if you have good STR and AG .If not , the recoil builds up to fast for efficient use imho.

Still in game terms - if you get them with the 7,62x51 you get them good. The 5.56 you might get them straight off - but maybe not .

[pmulcahy11b]

if you get them with the 7,62x51 you get them good. The 5.56 you might get them straight off - but maybe not .

I'll agree as someone who's shot people with an M16 -- shot placement is absolutely vital. But then again, 7.62mm NATO is too powerful for use in a main force assault rifle.

[LAW0306]

Very Wierd Poll..Most here have not been to combat or have carried all these weapons in or to Combat. So we are going off what we have read or heard ...This is not good. I have attended Foreign Weapons Instructors course and Have handled all the above weapons in Static Live fire and In BE's. I had a preferance for the G3 with the FAL a close second. I own a M-1 and a M-14 and shoot them often. If I was in Combat where I had to have a Battle rifle I would choose the FAL..Its not better then the G3 but there are more out there to use and I would feel I would be well armed with a reliable weapon that had the power to stop any two or four legged creatures.....

[LAW0306]

The arguement on the 5.56...go stand in the street and let me shot you in the chest and then I will ask you if it is a under-strenght round...ok thats right you would not be able to talk you would be dead.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Very Wierd Poll..Most here have not been to combat or have carried all these weapons in or to Combat.

The poll is titled What is your favorite battle rifle for your PC? It's for the game, not real life

[kato13]

The poll is titled What is your favorite battle rifle for your PC? It's for the game, not real life

But the thread is titled "Favorite battle rifle". I have made the mistake of answering the title (rather than the poll) more than once.

[LAW0306]

once again another attack by a guy who cant read. Good job buddy. way to make your point.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

once again another attack by a guy who cant read. Good job buddy. way to make your point.

I was simply stating the title of the poll because I believed it was important to note that while the thread itself said "What is your favourite battle rifle?", the poll itself was titled as "favourite battle rifle for your PC?".
The only person here making attacks is you

[headquarters]

all of us posting here step back and take a second to reflect on why we do so ?


I for my part enjoy reading and posting here .

I have a worry that quarrels and negativity could ruin our whole set up .

[Targan]

We have a number of strong personalities on this forum. This can be both a blessing and a curse. Not pointing any fingers but lets try to keep the tone here respectful eh fellas? We each have something unique to bring to this forum. I don't hold any members here in contempt. Be cool my brothers, be cool.

[HorseSoldier]

For a general purpose battle rifle, the FAL is head and shoulders above any of the other "main battle rifles" out there -- ergonomic brilliance being the place where it just beats the everloving snot out of the M14 and G3 all day long. It's combat accurate, though definitely not a good starting point for building a DMR.

Add to that, for a T2K world, the ability for the user to adjust the gas system easily to allow for hotter or weaker, cleaner or filthier ammo from various sources and you've got the absolute winner.

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j132/jboschma/081707_14371.jpg

[waiting4something]

For a general purpose battle rifle, the FAL is head and shoulders above any of the other "main battle rifles" out there -- ergonomic brilliance being the place where it just beats the everloving snot out of the M14 and G3 all day long. It's combat accurate, though definitely not a good starting point for building a DMR.

Add to that, for a T2K world, the ability for the user to adjust the gas system easily to allow for hotter or weaker, cleaner or filthier ammo from various sources and you've got the absolute winner.

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j132/jboschma/081707_14371.jpg

Nice STG-58.:cool: I agree with you it has better ergonomics then the G3 and M14. And I agree that the accuracy of Fals isn't on pair with either rifle either. The hole on the rear sight is just to big I think. Non the less a cool rifle.

[Targan]

Nice STG-58.:cool: I agree with you it has better ergonomics then the G3 and M14. And I agree that the accuracy of Fals isn't on pair with either rifle either. The hole on the rear sight is just to big I think. Non the less a cool rifle.

Once I'd zeroed my rifle I never missed a shot with the SLR (FAL) on the 600m pop-up range. Its accuracy is just fine IMO.

[headquarters]

Once I'd zeroed my rifle I never missed a shot with the SLR (FAL) on the 600m pop-up range. Its accuracy is just fine IMO.

I cant let you SLR toting Anglophones have the last word !

;)

The G3 has decent ergonomics and acceptable accuracy (IMHumbleO ) . Moreover it is robust and easy to use .I wont say much for its trigger ,but some tweaking is possible to make it smoother .

I cant agree totally that the SLR is better . So I think we have to agree to disagree about snot extraction etc

:)

[waiting4something]

Once I'd zeroed my rifle I never missed a shot with the SLR (FAL) on the 600m pop-up range. Its accuracy is just fine IMO.

Well that is some amazing shooting. I couldn't do that even with a M1A or AR-10 and they have better sights.

[waiting4something]

I cant let you SLR toting Anglophones have the last word !

;)

The G3 has decent ergonomics and acceptable accuracy (IMHumbleO ) . Moreover it is robust and easy to use .I wont say much for its trigger ,but some tweaking is possible to make it smoother .

I cant agree totally that the SLR is better . So I think we have to agree to disagree about snot extraction etc

:)

The few things I don't dig about the G3 type weapons is like you said the trigger sucks. The other thing that blows is it doesn't have a last round bolt hold open like the FAL'S, AR-10'S and M1A's. Where the cocking handle is located is also a arms reach away unless its chopped down to a MP-5 sized weapon, like the HK 51's and 53's. It's a sexy gun I'll give it that though as long as it has the wide forends, not the slim tropical ones.

[B.T.]

Hi folks.

I think, Headquarter is right, when he points out, most people take, what they are familiar with. That's why I choose the G3. Two drawbacks (IMHO): It's not very balanced, when you have to carry it with one hand. The FAL is better, because of the carrying-handle. And the G3 lacks a bipod.
But as far as I'm informed, not all of the FALs have a bipod either, right?

We did not shoot at 600 m as normal infantry, but I had no trouble with the 400 m range, what was the longest range for us conscripts to shoot at.

If I had the chance to take the G3/SG1, I'd do that. It has a bipod, but it was never the standard-issue-rifle.

Well, and for gaming purposes: It's no difference (In V2 and V2.2), if you choose FAL or G3 - the stats are the same.

[HorseSoldier]

You're correct, some nations fitted the integral bipod (as on the StG-58 I posted a picture of earlier in the thread) and others did not. Without checking to make sure, I'm suspecting that most nations using the FAL did not fit the integral bipod, as least on versions intended for rifle use (unlike some of the Israeli and Canadian versions which were light support weapons). From personal experience on the StG-58, the bipod isn't super useful for semi automatic shooting in the prone, but it does make putting effective bursts on target very easy. During familiarization/general screwing around on the range we'd regularly make multiple hits on steel chest plates out to about 200 meters with 3-5 round bursts. Definitely not a substitute for a machine gun, but much better than trying to do the same thing with a full auto 7.62x51 rifle standing off hand.

[Rockwolf66]

I personally picked the M-14 series of Rifles. I have friends who own H&K G3A3, FN FAL and M14E2 rifles. Those friends shoot said rifles at least once a month and a couple of them compete with said rifles in full Auto competitions. Now said rifles can hit targets in FA out to 100 yards when fired in short bursts. The basic cartridge, magazine capacity, and size being the same or roughtly the same. What gives the M14 my vote is the effectivness of the sights. The FN-FAL is very nice with optics but the iron sights are not my cup of tea. The G3 on the other hand has standard sights limited to 400m.

Plus there is personal preferance going on here.

[jester]

Rock, I have to agree. The 14 platform has more things you can to do accurize it. And inherently it has better potential out of the box as well. The advantage is the Garand style sights that allow you to adjust for windage and elevation technicaly while the weapon is still shouldered. Then, toss in some NM sights, trigger group and barrel and well the platform just get better. I own a L1A1 and a M1A1 and well, the L1 is good, a very good battle rifle. But, it just can't do the same precision at a distance my M1A1 can do. At close range the L1 is accurate but the fine adjustments for longer range is nothing compared to the M1A1.

[bobcat]

in order.
G3 (ootb can serve any decent sniper)
M14 (the 8 round ding with a box mag)
FAL (democracies right arm)
M1 garand (the 8 round ding.)

[dragoon500ly]

Have shot the M-14 while in the service...an absolute sweetheart of a weapon, very easy to use, ergonomic and surisingly far more accurate than a M-16 on single shot. When kicked over to full auto, he had better have been hitting the barbells at the gem, the recoil would throw you all over the range.

Since getting out, I have purchased an M-1 Garand...and next to my wife and kids, this is the love of my life (at least until the military starts selling off M-14s to civilians). A sweet, sweet rifle.

[HorseSoldier]

Since getting out, I have purchased an M-1 Garand...and next to my wife and kids, this is the love of my life (at least until the military starts selling off M-14s to civilians). A sweet, sweet rifle.

Never going to happen, barring a complete rewrite of US gun laws -- even though most M14s weren't issued with full auto capability enabled, the receivers are still set up for it, and so BATFE takes the "once a machine gun, always a machine gun" view on the matter.

If you can find an older M1A (back when Springfield Armory was basically just assembling USGI M14 parts on their receivers), or get one from a higher end manufacturer than SA today, you can get something that is about as close to the real thing as will ever be available on the commercial market, though. (Well, I'm told there are some transferable Class III M14s out there, but I think I've heard upwards of $15K price tags if you can even find one . . .)

[dragoon500ly]

Never going to happen, barring a complete rewrite of US gun laws -- even though most M14s weren't issued with full auto capability enabled, the receivers are still set up for it, and so BATFE takes the "once a machine gun, always a machine gun" view on the matter.

If you can find an older M1A (back when Springfield Armory was basically just assembling USGI M14 parts on their receivers), or get one from a higher end manufacturer than SA today, you can get something that is about as close to the real thing as will ever be available on the commercial market, though. (Well, I'm told there are some transferable Class III M14s out there, but I think I've heard upwards of $15K price tags if you can even find one . . .)

I know that the likelyhood of M-14s being sold to civilians is somewhere in between "never going to happen" and "when pigs fly"...but it is a sweet rifle and I have a lot of fond memories.

But the M-1 is the next best thing, and in spite of the armchair wiz-bangs talking out of their fourth point of contact about the amount of noise that the clip makes...after over three years of shooting it, I'm happy!

[Matt Wiser]

I'll take the G-3. In Europe, you're likely to find G-3s or FALs, but I'll go with the G-3. There's a greater likelihood of picking one up off a corpse than an M-14. (2nd choice) Given that's probably how replacement weapons and ammo are found, beggars can't be choosers.

[dragoon500ly]

All too true...but I'm willing to bet that a lot of GIs will be toting AKs!

[Legbreaker]

I've got to admit that the AK with it's curved mag certainly looks very cool and it's likely to get picked up for this factor if nothing else.
As far as a practical and accurate weapon, there's plenty of better options out there IMHO.

[HorseSoldier]

The gunner on my first Bradley crew had (as a PFC or so) carried one he picked up on day one of the ground war in the '91 go-round. Chain of command eventually told him to get rid of it, on or about the last day of the ground war.

These days I can't imagine anyone with quality, current-state-of-the-art weapons training reaching for an AK because, as suggested, it's just not a very good gunfighting weapon, but in the Twilight War it'd probably happen even before necessity enters the equation. Big Army didn't get serious about gunfighting until . . . well, okay, they're still not very serious about it, but they started trying to get better only within the last five years or so.

[Legbreaker]

That'd be the US military then. Us in the rest of the world have looked upon marksmanship in a positive light for a very long time. ;)

[HorseSoldier]

Not marksmanship. Gunfighting. Related but very distinct fields of study.

[dragoon500ly]

I've got to admit that the AK with it's curved mag certainly looks very cool and it's likely to get picked up for this factor if nothing else.
As far as a practical and accurate weapon, there's plenty of better options out there IMHO.

It have the accuracy of a Brown Bess, it can get hot enough to burn your hand under sustained fire, say what you will, drop it in sand or mud, take it from the tropics to the artic and back, lose parts and have some 3rd World blacksmith beat out a replacement part, but the AK has one thing going for it...its works under any and all conditions. Something that can't be said for a lot of high tech wonders that the West/NATO issues to its troops.

[Cpl. Kalkwarf]

You know, the more I think about it. Im going to go with an SVD as a combo Battle Rifle and DMR. Its kinda limited with the 10 rd mag though. But still its one heck of a rifle, and its sexy to boot.

[Legbreaker]

I can't imagine nobody has produced an extended capacity mag for the SVD....

[Tegyrius]

I can't imagine nobody has produced an extended capacity mag for the SVD....

I've seen some homemade 20-rounders for the "AK-54" (Romanian PSL with AK furniture), but they seem to be two 10-round bodies welded together. Wouldn't want to bet my life on one.

- C.

[95th Rifleman]

The SLR is a great Battle rifle. It has a good, heavy round and is proven in combat to be a deadly weapon in trained hands.

The Falklands proved something else about the SLR/FAL, it's a blody pile of heavy crap in the hands of half-trained conscripts and is useless as a fully automatic weapon (which is why the British/Commonwealth SLR was semi only).

The M14 is lighter, easier to control and arguably a better piece of kit for militias and units with little training, it's almost idiot-proof. The M14 is also a good latform for further conversion and tinkering, which makes it such a great DMR thst is still in use today.

We Brits need some tissues and a quiet moment to ourselves when we see the SLR because the British where (and still are) a relatively small and highly tained military with very high standards of marksmanship. A British soldier could make 600m killshots with an SLR because that is what he was trained to do, day in and day out on the ranges come rain or shine.

Nations with larger militaries can't put that much effort into the average soldier. America is a good example as they are required to spend less time on individual training compared to the British (with the exception of the USMC who have a similar focus on marksmanship).

It comes down to doctrine. The British is geared around the idea of individual, aimed shots to make best use of limited numbers and ammo conservation.

The US army is geared around putting serious lead downrange to make the enemy keep their heads down as US troops advance andpush the enemy out.

In a way the Bits are more defensive in style as their advances tend to be slow and steady affairs in a tried and tested fashion that has won many battles. The Americans are fast and furious and their choice of weaponry matchs this philosophy of rapid advance under heavy and sustained fire.

Heh, this has become something of an essay so I apologise. In short, the SLR and M14 are two different weapons with different tactical doctrines inspiring their development and use.

[James Langham]

While the British in the 20th century (after bad experiences in the Boer Wars) have always prized marksmanship, there are two other reasons that the British prize marksmanship so highly:

1. Northern Ireland had given us an environment when shots had to be carefully placed.

2. Defence cuts never gave us enough ammo!

Preference between weapons is highly dependent on what you are trained on/national pride. SLR is still the best though :-)

[Targan]

We Brits need some tissues and a quiet moment to ourselves when we see the SLR because the British were (and still are) a relatively small and highly trained military with very high standards of marksmanship. A British soldier could make 600m killshots with an SLR because that is what he was trained to do, day in and day out on the ranges come rain or shine.

And we in the antipodean Dominions have proudly inherited these doctrines.

It's funny you've mentioned 600m killshots because on my very first range qualification shoot with an SLR, once I'd zeroed it, I didn't miss a single shot on the 600m pop-up range. I was far from being the perfect infantryman but I'm proud of my marksmanship.

Edit: Oops, just realised I said the same thing about accuracy 24 posts above :o

[Sanjuro]

Weather permitting I'm taking the SMLE to Bisley next week, first time on the 600 yard range of Century. Hope I can live up to that standard (and that's without having to cope with semi-auto...)

[James Langham]

Weather permitting I'm taking the SMLE to Bisley next week, first time on the 600 yard range of Century. Hope I can live up to that standard (and that's without having to cope with semi-auto...)

Just stay out of Magpie Alley!

[kcdusk]

I'm not a firearms owner/user, although i have spent some nights out shooting rabbits and foxes. So while i come from very much a begginer backgroud, I have a thought on all the statements about accuracy that appear in any "best rifle/pistal etc" thread.

Lets say a person/PC who has an ingame/real life shooting skill of 85% accuracy takes any rifle onto a range, sites it in, and for the most part I think that person/pc would make between 83 and 87% of their shots. With the variation from 85% being the accuracy +/- of the rifle. I think the variation would be small.

But with all that said, i dont think much of the above counts "in battle" or "under fire", where the conditions are just so different. No sighting in, firing quickly (if at all), moving targets, cramped shooting postion etc ...

I think our 85% shooter above would see his hits drop dramatically.

All i'm saying is, from my non-shooting background, is that a rifles shooting accuracy on a range is not the most important factor "in battle". I think other qualities would be higher on my list (like how comfortable any rifle/pistal is in terms of weight, length, reliability etc).

[Ronin]

I have to go with the M14/M1A. As it is basically an external magazine fed, M1 Garand. Which (And I agree with) George S Patton described as "the greatest implement of battle ever devised." I'll be damned if he wasn't right.

[bobcat]

I'm not a firearms owner/user, although i have spent some nights out shooting rabbits and foxes. So while i come from very much a begginer backgroud, I have a thought on all the statements about accuracy that appear in any "best rifle/pistal etc" thread.

Lets say a person/PC who has an ingame/real life shooting skill of 85% accuracy takes any rifle onto a range, sites it in, and for the most part I think that person/pc would make between 83 and 87% of their shots. With the variation from 85% being the accuracy +/- of the rifle. I think the variation would be small.

But with all that said, i dont think much of the above counts "in battle" or "under fire", where the conditions are just so different. No sighting in, firing quickly (if at all), moving targets, cramped shooting postion etc ...

I think our 85% shooter above would see his hits drop dramatically.

All i'm saying is, from my non-shooting background, is that a rifles shooting accuracy on a range is not the most important factor "in battle". I think other qualities would be higher on my list (like how comfortable any rifle/pistal is in terms of weight, length, reliability etc).



it depends a bit on the way you marksmans mind works. i know people that can barely qualify on the range, but put a bit of stress on them and they suddenly can't miss.(i still wanna find a way to get this combat ability to translate to more garrison concerns though)

[Rockwolf66]

A friend of mine just got a FN SCAR 17S. I know it's not in the TW2K Timeline but it feels nice in ones hands. Plus it is much more ergonomic and accessory friendly than the M14. Hopefully after the hollidays I can get off graveyard and try it out. Their SCAR 16S was a really nice shooter.

[95th Rifleman]

This one has to come down to nationality. If you are Americanit's the M14, if you are European it's the FAL (and if your British or commonwealth then it's the legendary SLR).

[Panther Al]

Not quite:

I'm a US Vet, and I picked the G3.

[Schone23666]

Hmm, once again old poll. What is it with me and old polls? That's polls, mind you, not strip club poles....er, nevermind, back on topic. :o

But it seems I picked the G-3. Oh well, hey, you can't go wrong with German engineering, right? Don't want to sound like an H&K fanboy, but they do make some pretty decent firearms. That plus, G-3's along with spare parts and the ammunition can be found in various parts of the world and aren't too hard to find. Perhaps not as common as the FN FAL, but they're around.

Then again, in all honesty, perhaps the best answer to "favorite battle rifle" would be, IMHO, whatever is actually AVAILABLE, is reasonably accurate, and above all else, DOES THE JOB.

[CDAT]

I went with the M-14 as it is the only one I have any experience with.

Along this line, what do you think the possibility that that drop-in auto sear kits (such as those that used to be for sale for the AR-15 back in the mid-1960s) would make a comeback? Would governments start making them again to give out to their militias?
I would say some place between none and zero, I know it is the cool thing with the games (both rpg/table top and video type) to have full auto, but in real life it would be almost useless on most of these. Short of using it as a replacement for the LMG/SAW, most people would not be able to hit anything with it on full auto.

It have the accuracy of a Brown Bess, it can get hot enough to burn your hand under sustained fire, say what you will, drop it in sand or mud, take it from the tropics to the artic and back, lose parts and have some 3rd World blacksmith beat out a replacement part, but the AK has one thing going for it...its works under any and all conditions. Something that can't be said for a lot of high tech wonders that the West/NATO issues to its troops.
I hear things like this all the time from fans of the AK, but my first hand experience with them in Iraq, does not back up most of this. Yes it will get hot enough to burn you, it can do it within one magazine on semi-auto if fired quickly enough (not a selling point to me), most of the ones that I got to deal with the accuracy went from OK (for the best of them) to shooting patterns out of a bench rest. We also had several that had to be chopped up as they would nor work due to lack of maintenance, we had more of the AK's go down due to lack of maintenance than AR's. So my experience with them is they are not something I would trust my life to, unlike the AR.

[.45cultist]

I went with the M-14 as it is the only one I have any experience with.


I would say some place between none and zero, I know it is the cool thing with the games (both rpg/table top and video type) to have full auto, but in real life it would be almost useless on most of these. Short of using it as a replacement for the LMG/SAW, most people would not be able to hit anything with it on full auto.


I hear things like this all the time from fans of the AK, but my first hand experience with them in Iraq, does not back up most of this. Yes it will get hot enough to burn you, it can do it within one magazine on semi-auto if fired quickly enough (not a selling point to me), most of the ones that I got to deal with the accuracy went from OK (for the best of them) to shooting patterns out of a bench rest. We also had several that had to be chopped up as they would nor work due to lack of maintenance, we had more of the AK's go down due to lack of maintenance than AR's. So my experience with them is they are not something I would trust my life to, unlike the AR.

After action reports indicated poor repair of Ak's as a major factor in the poor performance of various insurgence actions. Yes its rugged but it needs PM too. Od Soviet policy was to loan out older weapons when new stuff was issued, so one wants to take care of it. An M14 with a synthetic stock and a scope is a handy thing to have. I went with an AR10 variant since 60% of the parts are AR15/M16.

[LT. Ox]

Hmmm went through Basic with the 14 went through AIT as well.
Then go to Nam and get a 16......... er wtf?
buy browning auto five and get permission to carry. Happy again.
My SWAT team started out with a L1A1 as heavy support weapon carried by the 6'5" 245 lbs middle linebacker of our team.
Me ... shortened mini 14 and restocked as I was the happy Scout.
I do love that garand action ( have one) and have the 30 carbine and m1a1 scoped as well.
It is a very good and dependable design as seen by the use as a sniper weapon now.
I will say I think you members of HER Britanic forces are just biased :D
PS I can not spell and am taking pain meds so there.

[.45cultist]

Hmmm went through Basic with the 14 went through AIT as well.
Then go to Nam and get a 16......... er wtf?
buy browning auto five and get permission to carry. Happy again.
My SWAT team started out with a L1A1 as heavy support weapon carried by the 6'5" 245 lbs middle linebacker of our team.
Me ... shortened mini 14 and restocked as I was the happy Scout.
I do love that garand action ( have one) and have the 30 carbine and m1a1 scoped as well.
It is a very good and dependable design as seen by the use as a sniper weapon now.
I will say I think you members of HER Britanic forces are just biased :D
PS I can not spell and am taking pain meds so there.

I once was looking online and a British possession had a defense force with Mini14's. Don't know which island.

[LT. Ox]

When we put the team together the Boss ( Sheriff) did not have military background and did not like military "types". but he sure wanted a trained group to respond to and reduce any problems.
Ergo, no money support, as in you guys get it together , equip and I will 'let" you have paid time to train...maybe.
the others were into and had the ar 15 I I did and do not like that action or configuration of that weapon, sooooo
I bought the mini 14. I did not trust the head space from the factory and had it checked it was not within what I considered specs and I wanted a bit shorter weapon so I had an inch taken off the chamber and an inch taken off the muzzle re-chambered and re-crowned,
restocked with a top of the line folder and man what a weapon, oh yeah it had the four power Buris(sic) scope.
Our location put us between Denver and Salt lake airports and at the time skyjacking was a threat, our airport could land the big stuff sooo We received our training and some grant money from the Feds and were the fast response to our airport for any such emergence until the FBI could get on scene.
Great training and super experience.
Oh yeah and a whole bunch of pretty good war stores.;)

[.45cultist]

I do like the AR platform, but Ruger has supposedly fixed the barrel harmonics of the Mini 14 and tightened the average groups. New rifles don't need the little gizmo from Firearms News(old Shotgun
News). I think new rifles have 1-9 twist barrels as well. but for Real world price, I can build a nice AR-15 and have a lot of accessories, or buy a used AR-10. A new Ranch Rifle could be a nice truck rifle otherwise.

[Raellus]

Based on the new responses on the Favorite APC/IFV thread, I thought a bit of thread necromancy might be in order.

[mpipes]

My HK-91 remains probably the most accurate rifle I own. I can shoot 1" groups easily at 100yds, and it has never malfunctioned. It would outshoot the Remington Mdl 742 deer rifle I use to own is what I usually try to hunt deer with if shooting out as far as 300 yds.

I recently bought a new ParaFAL and can hardly wait to see if it can better the HK.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

My HK-91 remains probably the most accurate rifle I own. I can shoot 1" groups easily at 100yds, and it has never malfunctioned. It would outshoot the Remington Mdl 742 deer rifle I use to own is what I usually try to hunt deer with if shooting out as far as 300 yds.

I recently bought a new ParaFAL and can hardly wait to see if it can better the HK.
Stop it! You're making me extremely envious (I would love to own either or preferably, both, of those rifles. Alas, both those rifles are restricted in my country).

[Legbreaker]

Stop it! You're making me extremely envious (I would love to own either or preferably, both, of those rifles. Alas, both those rifles are restricted in my country).

Beyond restricted. Those few people allowed to have anything like that are rarer than unicorns. :mad: