Poll - Favorite Battle Rifle

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by LAW0306

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.

[waiting4something]

Originally Posted by 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.

Nice STG-58. 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]

Originally Posted by waiting4something

Nice STG-58. 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]

Originally Posted by Targan

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]

Originally Posted by Targan

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]

Originally Posted by headquarters

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]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

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]

Originally Posted by 95th Rifleman

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