topic locked

Topic: Top Fighting Rifles

Page 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9
posts 1–20 of 176 newer >
?
832 posts

Much like my list of Top Hunting Rifles, this list is my top picks for battle and assault rifles. Rifles that Civilians in a Free American State can purchase. Lots of questions about two rifles that didn't make this list... the FN SCAR and the Bushmaster ACR... reason being, they are not actually on the market yet regardless of however many articles you read about them. Once they are available, and I get my hands on one... maybe my list will change. Don't piss and moan and get all emo about it... you can't actually buy them yet and that's the criteria I'm going on here. The most important thing... you can buy these. This list is not fantasy. You could, if you had the means, buy one of each or more. So lets get to it:

1.

Springfield M1A. This is a civilian legal, semi auto copy of the classic M-14 rifle as used by the US military. Chambered in .308, this rifle has multiple applications. From hunting to home defense, this rifle can do it. I prefer the standard version with the wood stock. It looks great. The way a fighting rifle should look. While the M1A is more problematic for mounting optics, the upshot is that it has the best iron sights ever invented. This weapon is of course the direct descendant of the M1 Garand, which Patton claimed was the best battle rifle every invented. That was simply because Patton died before he got to shoot the M-14. I think it's easy to say that Patton would have been all over this rifle.
2.

SIG 556. We can't easily acquire the SIG 552... the numbers in the states are quite few and since they are select fire, more difficult to obtain. Well, SIG took their classic fighting rifle, changed the receiver to lighter weight aluminum, and changed the mag well to take US GI M-16 type mags. And of course, made is semi auto only. What we get is a rifle that is leaps and bounds more robust and reliable than the AR-15. Accuracy is acceptable. Above average and when using heavier bullets, very accurate. Another advantage the SIG has, is stability. While shooting quickly, the rifle stays on target. Double taps are fast and the second hits is very close to the first. I also think this is one of the best looking EBR's out there. (Evil Black Rifle)
3.

HK 91. The accuracy is above average, the reliability is solid and the caliber is .308. These factors go a long way to make the HK 91 a top choice for anyone looking for a serious fighting gun. The roller action makes this gun unique. HK takes the design from the Spanish CETME rifle, which you can get for a lot less. There are several companies that make HK 91 clones and some are better than others. If you want one of these, shop around carefully and do not just buy the cheapest one you find. One of the reasons I like this one is the iron sights. I like the dial on the rear and the easy to see front sight post. This makes hitting your target easy.
4.

The M1 Garand. This is the Daddy of Battle Rifles. Chambered in full house .30-06 it can take down most anything, from an elk to the Third Reich. It has a ballistic advantage over the .308, that .308 shooters will argue about. They will say that you can load the .308 up to what the '06 can do and really hot rod it. Same is true for the '06 and you can load it up to levels the .308 can't touch. This makes the Garand the most powerful battle rifle on this list. The only downside to it is the 8 round clip and the loud “sproing” announcement that you've just run dry. The upside is that the Garand can be reloaded very fast. Another downside is this is where we get the term “M1 Thumb” from. If you don't know what that is, you will find out if you spend time with it. You generally will find out what it is, once, and never experience it again.
5.

MSAR STG-556. This is an improved clone of the Steyr AUG rifle made famous by the Austrian military and the movie Die Hard. The AUG was ahead of its time. The bullpup action makes the rifle easy to handle and maneuver. Slower to reload, sure, but I'll take that trade off since it has 42 round mags, integral optics, and a vertical fore grip for added stability. Microtech took the AUG design and cleaned it up... giving us a Flat Top option and a bolt hold open. They also made the gun a bargain compared to an original AUG. Cheaper and actually better... brilliant. Accuracy is fantastic.
6.

FNH FS2000. This is another bullpup rifle, but this one is unlike anything else on the planet. It uses AR type magazines, which is great, but what makes it most unusual is that it ejects spent cases forward. This bullpup actually improves over all other bullpups in that it is truly ambidextrous and can be used left or right handed. Mount any optic you want on the flat top version. The version that comes with its own optic... that optical gunsight sucks quite a bit. Get the flat top and put an EOTech gunsight on it. You will spend some serious cash on this package, but you will have something truly remarkable.
7.

AK-47. Chambered in 7.62x39mm, the AK packs a lot of punch. They are reliable, simple, tough, and easy to use. They get a bad rap for being less accurate, but really that is not quite the case. On some better examples, the AK can be just as accurate (in practical terms) as an AR. One of the reasons of the bad rap is the AK's rudimentary iron sights. They work, but they take some time to get used to. Also the cartridge has a lot of arch to it compared to the 5.56mm... these two factors make guys used to the AR think the AK sucks and is inaccurate. The other downside is that it is difficult to mount a decent optical gunsight to the AK. There are solutions out there, but few sources. However, once you get your AK set up the way you want it... you will have spent far less than on a typical AR. What you get in return however is a weapon that hits harder and is more reliable than your AR. Last downside is of course, the lack of Ergonomics. If you want to know what Ergonomic means, show them the AK and they will get it because of the obvious lack of ergonomics...
8.

FN FAL. This rifle has a long and proud history outside of the USA. While eastern countries picked up the AK-47, the US took the M-14 and Germany took the G3... and just about everyone else took the FAL. It's a big battle rifle to be sure. It's heavy weight gives it some disadvantage, but this is made up by having one hell of a rugged and easy to use action. Accuracy is good, but not quite there with the G4 or M-14... close, but it is 3rd place here. It's also cheaper than the other ones thanks to the fact that there are so many examples out there. I prefer the British version called the L1A1. It has a couple improvements that I like such as cuts in the bolt that move dirt and grit out of the way of the action... and the folding cocking handle that keeps it out of your way. The .308 cartridges are fed from tough, cheap, and plenty 20 round magazines. Lots of aftermarket for the FAL... Lots of love for it. It breaks open like a shotgun without pulling any pins, bolt carrier comes right out, so cleaning takes about 2 minutes if you take your time. Gotta love that.
9.

AR-15. I know I wrote the book on hating the AR, but it has some distinct advantages. The familiarity since its been our service rifles for longer than any other battle rifle in history save for the Brown Bess. There is a whole industry making parts and accessories for the AR. You can dress it up into so many different configurations that this rifle is like a militant set of legos. It is wonderfully ergonomic, comfortable, and easy to use. Hitting with it is very easy and the rifles tend to be extremely accurate. What more could you want? Well, you could want few small parts, easier to clean, quicker to clean, and less sensitivity to a lack of cleaning. Every AR fan always says “they work if you keep them clean”. Sure. But the AR gets dirty fast and is the least reliable weapon tested by the US Military in dusty environments. (The M-4 is just one variant of the same platform. Swap uppers and you go from an M-16A2 to an M-4.... they are all the same to me)
10.

Saiga .308. This is a big .308 AK type rifle. FBMG has 20 round mags for it which puts it on par with other top .308 battle rifles. It also does so at a fraction of the cost. Reliability is there, accuracy is good, and you can get a conversion to a pistol grip and folding stock by Tromix (or FMBG?) or a replacement stock with a fixed pistol grip from Choate. This really is a great rifle for the money. You can certainly do a lot worse. Now, if you want to go all out and get the Tromix conversion with the folding stock, get some rails on it for mounting all your AR type goodies... man, you can build one hell of a serious weapon system out of the Saiga... and you would still be less than a base M1A1.

__________________
?
69 posts

Got to disagree with you on your #1 pick George.

The M14 is a fat, unwieldy length of steel and wood in the same general shape as a bolt gun, but at twice the weight. It is a better marksman's rifle, but it is not a better battle rifle than the FAL or the G3.

I've owned an M305 - the Norinco version of the M14 - and handled a few Springfield M1a1's. I also started shooting an FAL under government supervision when I was 12 years old. I earned my marksman's qualification with it.

The gun I am accustomed to is the C1A1 - "Canada one, Amendment one" FN FAL.

Without question this would be my #1 choice of combat rifle.

You could take apart a car or a small house with that rifle, given enough time and ammunition.

Why is it better than an M14/M1a1?

3 standard stock sizes, for one.

Pistol grip.

Adjustable gas aperture.

Better sights.

And most of all:

It looks way cooler.

?
832 posts

M-14 vs FAL
M-14: 11.5 pounds. FAL: 9.8 pounds. Winner: FAL.
M-14: 22 inches barrel. FAL: 21 inches. Winner. M-14.
M-14: 700-750 RPM. FAL: 650 RPM. Winner M-14.
Simplicity is a matter of familiarity, but I'll give this to the FAL.
The adjustable gas system is moot, that might be handy on the FAL, but not needed on the M-14.
Better sights? That's a strong matter of opinion. I like the M-14's sights much better.
So really, it's sixes here... a manner of opinion or taste. To me, the M-14 has a better flavor to me.

__________________
?
69 posts

Yep that's one we'll have to agree to disagree on. I'll admit a strong bias to the FAL based on my exposure to it, for sure.

?
161 posts

Hard to pick between two such solid designs, but I lean a little toward the M14. Feels like it's more stable while firing.

__________________
Keep your laws to yourself.
?
26 posts

M-14 vs FALM-14: 11.5 pounds.
FAL: 9.8 pounds. Winner: FAL.
M-14: 22 inches barrel. FAL: 21 inches. Winner. M-14.
M-14: 700-750 RPM. FAL: 650 RPM. Winner M-14.
Simplicity is a matter of familiarity, but I'll give this to the FAL. The adjustable gas system is moot, that might be handy on the FAL, but not needed on the M-14.Better sights? That's a strong matter of opinion. I like the M-14's sights much better.So really, it's sixes here... a manner of opinion or taste. To me, the M-14 has a better flavor to me.



1 inch on the barrel isn't that big of a deal. The slower rounds per minute on full auto is also moot...full auto .308, especially with the M14's style of stock, just isn't as controllable...

The adj. gas system on the FAL  means that it can adapt to dirt and crude easier.

The FAL is/was extremely widely used by many Western countries...the M14 saw service with not nearly as many, and the M16 replaced it in general issue not very long at all after it's introduction...both are great rifles, however. The M14 has strong cool factor of being Garand's baby cause he worked on the prototype...I'll take either one any day, but would pick up a DSA FAL first...

FNH FS2000.



Wait, what is it that I hear about it's problems and parts breakage?

The jury is still out for the MSAR, FS2000, and SIG 556 for me...

The FAL, M14, AK, and AR are good picks for sure. If you are looking to get a rifle before Obama, pick one of those 4. The M14 is going to be the most expensive, the FAL can be found from 800 if you are lucky to 1200 for a DSA STG58 and up, and the AK can be had for $400 (for a WASR). The AR is going to cost about $800+ for a quality brand (not a DPMS POS, get a Stag, Smith, CMMG, or even better, and LMT, Noveske, Charles Daley, or the like). The AR-15 is no AK, but a good rifle in it's own right.

I took a long, hard look at AK vs AR for a fighting rifle...sorry, the AR won out because of accuracy and parts availablility for me...plus, a higher grade AK would have ended up costing me about the same as the AR15...but I'm hoping to pick up an AK in a few months just to have one...but right now, I'm stocking up on mags, ammo, and spare parts for the AR (plus I've got to get an optic of some type).







?
832 posts

"The adj. gas system on the FAL means that it can adapt to dirt and crude easier."
Thats not what British troops found when they went from SA80 back to L1A1... then back to SA80 because there was no improvement.

FS2000, parts breakage? Maybe on some earlier ones. I sell these things. We sell a lot of them. We've had ZERO issues with any of them. None. Not one has come back for a single thing. AR's? We've had a few issues.
I live out in the middle of nowhere, and we have a lot of Oil Field workers who are making fat dollars with nothing else to do but shoot. They shoot a lot. More in a month than most guys do in a year. More than even that. They buy ammo by the case lot, all the time. The FS2000 has been quite impressive.

__________________
?
93 posts

I love the idea of getting an FS2000, but wonder if it can really be $1000 dollars better than the SIG?

__________________
Some people call the midwest the heartland, I prefer to think of it as the liver. Not too romantic, and easy to ignore until it stops working.
?
832 posts

That's a good question.
The answer is the STG-556.
But if you have the means... the dissposable income like some of the guys around here... they say "WTH, I'll get the FS2000. If it sucks, I'll sell it."

__________________
?
14 posts

I love the idea of getting an FS2000, but wonder if it can really be $1000 dollars better than the SIG?

I have both, but the price seems to have gone up on the FN since I got it. I like both of them a lot and would have a hard time picking between them.

?
93 posts

Yeah, my next "real" planned purchase is a five seven to go with my PS90, and the FS 2000 would make a nice matching companion to both, but I've handled the Sig and like it a lot. I've never seen or priced the STG 556 so I'm really in the dark except that I know it's a clone of the Steyr AUG.

__________________
Some people call the midwest the heartland, I prefer to think of it as the liver. Not too romantic, and easy to ignore until it stops working.
?
93 posts

On another topic, I have an AK. I slapped an Ultimak scope mount, which replaces the upper hand guard and lashes to the barrel with barrel bands, popped a Trijicon Tri-Power on the rail, and got 4" groups at 100 yards from sandbags. not bad for bolting $550 worth of stuff to a $450 gun, and I think that's plenty accurate for what it is.

__________________
Some people call the midwest the heartland, I prefer to think of it as the liver. Not too romantic, and easy to ignore until it stops working.
?
832 posts

I think so too. What you have there is a good, fast, defensive gun that wont fail you in any conditions. That's a good combo. Of course, you might want to order a Vortex Strikefire for the AK, and put that Tripower on something that can do 1 inch groups or better...
Like the STG-556. They are running about the same price as the SIG 556 SWAT... and thats for the version with the optic in the carry handle. The optic sucks. Get the flat top version and crown it with the Tri-Power.

__________________
?
14 posts
Damn, now I want one of those STG's.  Do I really need another bullpup?
?
2 posts

Somehow your discussion of the M1A drifted into the M-14. I'd put the M1A on top because you can also get the Scout (20") or SOCOM (16") versions, depending on your wants/needs. Since George gives points to the M-14 because it's barrel is 1" longer than the FAL, he probably doesn't care about that. The SOCOM is still a heavy s.o.b., but it's quite handy in close quarters!

Remember, George, you named the M1A the best, not the M-14, so rounds per minute should not even be a an issue. The Scout/SOCOM's efficient, integral muzzle brake should not be ignored, whether you're making controlled pairs or just maintaining sight picture after a shot.

?
832 posts

True, Cowboyblob. Good to see ya...
I have a hard time disconnecting the original gun from the Semi Auto Only Civilian version. To me, they are the same gun... they just shoot one at a time.
I do like the SOCOM 16 a good deal. But for some reason, I just like the classic look better on this gun. The SOCOM 16 - I am not fond of the SOCOM II - has a lot going for it that actually give it advantages. Overall length is one for most defensive use. But not for long range battle rifle shooting. The lighter stock adds to the fast handling properties a defensive gun needs... and the front sight houses a nice fat tritium insert for low light blasting. Awesome gun.

But I'd rather have the original. Like the Ford Mustang. These new Mustangs are certainly more refined, faster, more efficient cars. But I'd rather have an original.

__________________
?
32 posts

Have to vote for a good AK. You said top "fighting rifles" not slow controlled fire. (Arsenal SA M7, my pick)

My # 2 pick would be the HK, only downside is the .308 recoil. Little harder to control I would assume as I don't own one.

The Sig 556 would be #1 if it put a .30 cal hole in something. My boss has one topped w/ a leopold 1.5 x 5 in larue mounts. Damn nice package.

M4's undoubtably work as well but I like bigger holes. And, while niether of my AR's have ever jammed. I'm still Not sure I still trust them 100%. Too many bits & pieces.

I'm thinking you should have split this between fighting rifles & Battle rifles.

M14 hands down for a battle rifle...............

?
2 posts

The SOCOM II is hideous.
That tritium insert is next to useless.
Not being a mechanic, I'd rather have a new Mustang. I've got a low-mileage '98. :)

Speaking in defense of the so-called AR-15, there's so much mix-and-match you can do with both halves and their accessories that you could cob together something every bit as wonderful as your SIG and still have the superior ergonomics of the AR (I like my charging handle and safety on the left, thankyouverymuch). If it's a flattop gas-piston M-4gery or bull-barreled, bi-podded tack-driver, is it still an AR-15? How about if it's not in .223? Does the SIG come in 6.5mm Grendel or 6.8 SPC?

Hating the "AR-15" is like declaring you hate dessert. Anything can be dessert.

?
32 posts

Try mounting optics to the SOCOM. Cool rifle as long as you leave the optics off. Heat is a real issue when using a forward mount.

If we are talking a short barreled rifle, the grendel & spc arent doing anything the AK cant in 7.62 X39.

Long range is a different story & a different rifle. Real hard to pick a Spc or grendel over a .308 that works all the time in less than desireable conditions.

Nothing at all wrong w/ an AR or the .223. BUT if someone is shooting at me I'd rather be shooting back w/ a .308. (actually rather be shooting back from inside a tank but I'm reasonably sure the spouse is gonna draw the line there)

?
161 posts

Fighting rifles and battle rifles? WTF?

__________________
Keep your laws to yourself.
Page 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9
posts 1–20 of 176 newer >

This Topic Is Locked To Guest Posts

It's been a while since this topic was active, if you'd like to get it going again, please post as a registered member

join now