The Original CZ Forum
CZ LONG ARMS => VZ-58 semi auto rifle => Topic started by: bm303 on July 13, 2016, 09:22:21 PM
-
Hi everyone,
I am pretty obsessed with Commie guns, and Czech guns in particular. Always was fascinated with them for some reason. So I am looking to get my first rifle and I am leaning toward a VZ-58, even though I know almost nothing about them. That or something like the Arsenal SGL-31 AK-74.
Visually I really like the look of this VZ58:
(http://i.imgur.com/EQXG6OM.png)
My only use will be range fun.
Would the VZ be a good choice for a first rifle? It would be kind of cool to have such a unique gun. I've never seen anyone with one at the range. They almost all have AR's and a few AK's.... but no VZ58's in sight.
-
If you have a wife or girlfriend that you want to get involved (which is always a plus on a shared budget) than the softer shooting AK74 may be a better first rifle.
If you go with AK74 make sure you take a look at Vepr74. OTOH the weight of a Vepr may not be best for your wife though.
One thing for sure, you better get a move on. Hildebeast is on the way.
-
I don't think the AK74 is really that much softer shooting than the VZ58... It's a longer recoil impulse, but with that heavy bcg, I wouldn't call it lighter recoiling. VZ58 is a little snappier...
The VZ58 has often been compared to the M1 carbine in handling, weight, efficiency, and use, but it's a much more robust cartridge.
For one rifle, I like 7.62x39 as a general purpose caliber. It's capable on deer and hogs, and suitable for home defense as well...
Now 5.56 is definitely lighter recoiling, but it's a less well-rounded caliber overall for medium sized game but is better suited to addressing varmint issues. Another benefit of 5.56 is that is flatter shooting at longer ranges, but it is also less effective and more suited to wind drift... Generally new shooters have a hard time with bullet drop, while advanced shooters have a harder time with wind drift -- bullet drop is consistent, wind speeds and drift never are.
Generally, 7.62x39 is cheaper to shoot than 5.56, but 7.62x39's low cost is dependent on cheap russian imports -- cheap b/c their raw material costs are so incredibly low due to all of the old soviet stockpiles and lower standard of living... Apples to apples for American-produced ammo in brass cases, 5.56/.223 will, or should, be 20%-30% cheaper than 7.62x39 since it uses less raw materials.
Both calibers are options in VZ58.
However or perhaps moreover, ncgoober makes a good point. Any weapon you buy, I'd suggest getting a dozen or two standard capacity mags to go with (anti-gunner's high capacity). The 7.62x39's VZ58s mags are platform-specific, while the 7.62x39's version are standard AR mags.
On the AR mag front, I would not want to stockpile polymer mags for ban as they do warp over time, especially if loaded. One exception would be the Lancers with steel feed lips. Speaking of steel, the c products stainless steel mags are much more durable than the USGI aluminum ones. SGAmmo has the stainless mags in stock right now, or did last I checked, for what everyone else is selling aluminum for. Steel would be my preference for longterm mag reserves...
Further on ncgoober's point, it wouldn't hurt to take a look at ARs either. There are some really good deals right now still, and even if you can just afford bare receivers at $100 per high quality one (personally, I prefer Aero) they could be a great investment. I doubt that AR parts will ever fully dry up, and since they assemble like tinker toys, it's an easy gun to diy repair/modify. The VZ58 requires a skilled gunsmith with the correct press, lathes, and other such tooling, and perhaps most importantly -- actual skills... Food for thought if you're young, want a gun to shoot a lot, etc. Also if potentially getting into carbine classes, a lot of them are AR-based, though the VZ58 is close enough in function to run as well.
Bottom line, I think the VZ58 is an excellent first rifle. But given current events, and if budget allows, I would encourage you to cast a slightly wider net if possible too and think towards the future as it relates to mags and "guns" (i.e., gov't defined bare receivers) as well...
-
Do note there are a lot of comparison and such threads here on VZ58 vs ARs, AKs, etc, that have much more info and many folks perspectives as well.
-
Unpopular opinion alert:
If you live in the USA, buy a high quality AR15 or some variant thereof. No 922r concerns and...the AR has much more to offer in terms of aftermarket accessories, high quality mag availability and reliability. Reliability? Yes. This isn't 1970. The modern AR is more reliable than the AKM or the VZ58 in harsh conditions. That little ejection port cover works wonders in harsh conditions. I have tried the mud test, the sand test and the dirt test with my personal AK and AR -- the AR wins every time. I will admit I was really surprised as all the blah blah blah would lead anyone to believe the opposite to be true. People can talk about how great the commie rifles are all they want right until they have to back it up with proof. The AR wins.
-
No.
It's the same old DI POS firing the same anemic 5.56 round, and even worse now in the shortened M4 version (think of not being able to knock down skinnies in Mogadishu). They might work better with a round with enough oomph to blow past the inherent fouling of the action, say in .308 or maybe 6.5 Grendel, but...no.
http://www.cleveland.com/world/index.ssf/2009/10/in_2008_afghan_firefight_us_we.html
Personally, for a general purpose self-defense / survival rifle, I'd rather carry a drop dead reliable rifle chambered in a round that can penetrate both sides of a car and kill the bad guy on the other side...like 7.62x39...in a good (imported) AK or CSA Vz58.
-
Unpopular opinion alert:
If you live in the USA, buy a high quality AR15 or some variant thereof. No 922r concerns and...the AR has much more to offer in terms of aftermarket accessories, high quality mag availability and reliability. Reliability? Yes. This isn't 1970. The modern AR is more reliable than the AKM or the VZ58 in harsh conditions. That little ejection port cover works wonders in harsh conditions. I have tried the mud test, the sand test and the dirt test with my personal AK and AR -- the AR wins every time. I will admit I was really surprised as all the blah blah blah would lead anyone to believe the opposite to be true. People can talk about how great the commie rifles are all they want right until they have to back it up with proof. The AR wins.
AK and VZ are more open which leads sand in faster but once jammed can be cleaned out in seconds with water. Once the AR has had enough sand, it needs to be thoroughly cleaned before it will work again.
I would take a $1k AK or VZ over an AR any day, but I prefer the simplicity and the x39 caliber.
No one bats an eye when you bring an AR to the range here. Bring an AK or VZ and you get many lookers and questions. One point to note is that the AR is at an extreme low for price but AKs and VZs are steadily increasing in price (many quality ak variants could be had a year ago for $500 or less, now it is hard to find one at $650 or less)
-
The AK market is getting to the point of nonsensically high prices. Much of that is likely due to executive order nonsense. My AK is now something around 4 times more expensive than when I bought it in the 90s.
Back to the AR for a moment. The 5.56 is not anemic with the right ammo. 75gr Hornady Tap is much more effective than the military ammo and you can certainly hand load some very effective rounds which do not laser beam right through soft targets. While I have an M4 profile AR, it is not my go to AR -- my personal favorite is patterned after the Mk 12 (18" 1:7" twist barrel, free float, rifle length gas system).
If I want something with more serious power, I pull the SR-762 out of my safe. However, lugging around multiple mags full of 175gr ammo gets old pretty quickly.
More open/less open and cleaning. I have tried the idea that you can make an AK run after it is gunked up with mud by just dumping water in it. How much water are you talking about because taking off the cover and dumping a full bucket of clean water into it didn't do the trick. At least not well enough to where it would fire more than 2-3 rounds at a time without having an issue. And who carries a 2.5 gallon bucket with them everywhere in the field?
There is another rifle which could likely be more reliable than the AR, AK, etc if the design were slightly updated. That is the South Korean K2. A lower that takes M16 mags but has an AK style gas piston system that mates with the bolt carrier. If it only had a dust cover.... Under any semi-normal conditions mine has never failed to fire but I have never tried dumping mud into it. It isn't as easy to replace as an AR or AK and spare parts are somewhat expensive.
-
The AK market is getting to the point of nonsensically high prices. Much of that is likely due to executive order nonsense. My AK is now something around 4 times more expensive than when I bought it in the 90s.
Back to the AR for a moment. The 5.56 is not anemic with the right ammo. 75gr Hornady Tap is much more effective than the military ammo and you can certainly hand load some very effective rounds which do not laser beam right through soft targets. While I have an M4 profile AR, it is not my go to AR -- my personal favorite is patterned after the Mk 12 (18" 1:7" twist barrel, free float, rifle length gas system).
If I want something with more serious power, I pull the SR-762 out of my safe. However, lugging around multiple mags full of 175gr ammo gets old pretty quickly.
More open/less open and cleaning. I have tried the idea that you can make an AK run after it is gunked up with mud by just dumping water in it. How much water are you talking about because taking off the cover and dumping a full bucket of clean water into it didn't do the trick. At least not well enough to where it would fire more than 2-3 rounds at a time without having an issue. And who carries a 2.5 gallon bucket with them everywhere in the field?
There is another rifle which could likely be more reliable than the AR, AK, etc if the design were slightly updated. That is the South Korean K2. A lower that takes M16 mags but has an AK style gas piston system that mates with the bolt carrier. If it only had a dust cover.... Under any semi-normal conditions mine has never failed to fire but I have never tried dumping mud into it. It isn't as easy to replace as an AR or AK and spare parts are somewhat expensive.
On cleaning, check out Rob Ski and the AK operator Union. He sometimes cleans them by dumping the rifle into a creek
-
Even with heavy loads, .223/5.56 is marginal with mid sized game like whitetail deer or coyotes... Personally, I think you need to be up into the 80+ gr range to even consider humane use for deer. And for that heavy of loads, you're either hand loading into an AR or using a bolt action rifle. So if I don't trust it to reliably and swiftly kill a deer, I question why consider it adequate for similarly sized humans...
Each caliber has tradeoffs. .223/5.56 penetrates less through drywall at cqb distances than 7.62x39, or even pistol caliber bullets. However, that same minimal penetration directly correlates to reduced penetration in flesh and through the barriers bad guys typically hide behind... And 7.62x39 performs best out of carbine length barrels, while .223/5.56 performs best out of rifle length. So take that into consideration if wanting a rifle or carbine as well...
The OP can definitely do his own research on caliber. Fortunately, both calibers in question are available in the VZ58. Personally, I think the VZ58 is best in the 7.62x39 iteration.
Again, the primary benefit of ARs as I see it as all they really require for assembly are parts and appropriate wrenches. Even AKs are more difficult to build in my opinion. Even if the OP doesn't want to build, having receivers on hand for future builds is prudent in my opinion.
The AR/5.56 is definitely more capable than 22lr; however, if I could have/afford just two semi-rifles, I would personally recommend that the OP get a 7.62x39 and a 22lr, 10/22 preferably though if not minding tubes the marlin 60s are a good option too... Drawback of 22lr vs 5.56 is less reliable (rimfire issues) and less capable cartridge, while the main benefit of 22lr is the much lower cost.
But on the cost front, having guns, legally defined -- in this case stripped receivers, and mags for future builds is definitely prudent.
Having ammo/mag commonality/standardization can also be a good thing.
Dollar for dollar at today's, I think the OP would be ahead w/ a VZ58 over an AK. The Yugo-made Yugos would probably be about the only ones I'd consider worth it over a VZ58 at current prices... Especially considering the Romys and Yugos are about the same prices these days.
I get the appeal of accurized longer barreled 5.56 ARs, but I find myself questioning why not just go w/ a .308 instead. The only big pluses I can't discount w/ 5.56 are the ammo commonality and lower per round cost... Performance and weightwise, I still think the .308 comes out ahead if wanting to have optimal performance beyond 300-400 yards. DI ARs by nature of their design are very easy to accurize, and for lower round count precision type weapons, I also don't see major drawbacks on the DI system in that role -- for high volume fire carbine and such use, I do like the appeal of piston ARs. Adams arms uppers can be had for $500 or so, and is one of the most common piston AR systems in the country -- but, there is no piston parts standardization vs w/ DI weapons.
One further thing to think about -- I find I'm willing to use and abuse weapons I don't care about much more likely than those I do. So here, a truck gun that could get stolen makes me much more likely to pick an AR over a VZ58. As a ranch rifle for varmints and stuff (as well as more suitable caliber), again the AR or 10/22 over the VZ58, etc. Just something to think about -- are you the type that gets new work shoes/boots and clothes, but still wear the old and destroyed stuff to keep the replacements nice? When you get a new truck do you baby it for years, or after the first scratch/ding, willing to put it to heavy work, etc? Food for thought on what you're buying to collect/treasure and what you're buying to use and abuse. Specifically for me, I will grab an AR for a work gun in 5.56, even though I believe my Galils to be superior in every way but weight. SHTF in 5.56 especially if restricted to iron sights, yes I'm grabbing a Galil.
-
Don't worry about what "everybody else" has
If you have a preference for something it is a no-brainer : Get one !
( you will eventually have one of each anyway)
Vz58 is an excellent firs rifle. It will spoil you.
..and regardless of brand, it is hard to go wrong.
Funny how quickly the thread became a discussion on calibers instead
Stick to what works best
Vz was meant for 7.62x39
AR was meant for 5.56x45 (223)
AK was also meant for 7.62x39 but along came an "improvement" in form of 5.45x39
each has advantages and disadvantages. It is a game of trade-offs : by getting an ar in 7.62x39 or a vz in 223 you are introducing additional trade offs and potential compromises into the mix. Leave that for later after you first gain experience with the basics.
Caliber selection is a different issue from platform selection however sometimes a caliber choice dictates a matching platform and vice-versa until clowns mix it all up because "what everybody else has"
remember to come back and tell us how happy you are with your new VZ58
...also mention what state you're in as it may be advantageous to have certain platform with certain features to comply with restrictions
(can't beat stripper clip loading possibility on the vz)
-
Don't worry about what "everybody else" has
If you have a preference for something it is a no-brainer : Get one !
( you will eventually have one of each anyway)
Vz58 is an excellent firs rifle. It will spoil you.
..and regardless of brand, it is hard to go wrong.
Funny how quickly the thread became a discussion on calibers instead
Stick to what works best
Vz was meant for 7.62x39
AR was meant for 5.56x45 (223)
AK was also meant for 7.62x39 but along came an "improvement" in form of 5.45x39
each has advantages and disadvantages. It is a game of trade-offs : by getting an ar in 7.62x39 or a vz in 223 you are introducing additional trade offs and potential compromises into the mix. Leave that for later after you first gain experience with the basics.
Caliber selection is a different issue from platform selection however sometimes a caliber choice dictates a matching platform and vice-versa until clowns mix it all up because "what everybody else has"
remember to come back and tell us how happy you are with your new VZ58
Franz is correct about caliber changes and for why you can look into why so many newly developed "multi-caliber" weapon systems continue to have reliability/performance issues.
Also agree that the caliber discussion is probably more confusing to a first time rifle buyer than the weapon itself...
But, the AR was designed around .308, and was adopted by military in 5.56 and due to or perhaps despite military standarization, we've only relatively recently reached a point in the AR world where w/ SOPMOD bolt kits, buffer and spring combos, and perhaps most importantly improved magazines in 5.56 that the 5.56 rifles and carbines are MORE reliable than .308 ARs...
-
Gotta feel for our troops bravely fielding that turkey of an M4 into battle...thanks to the procurement gravy train our troops have been saddled with a basic infantry rifle second to all for the last 50 years. What a disgrace:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/19/armys-quits-tests-after-competing-rifle-outperform/
Yep, 5.56 is great -- as long as the bad guys are hiding behind sheet rock or plywood -- if they're behind brick or cinderblocks, you should have brought an AK or a .308:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lprGoEpDXJQ
Whoever posted this to you tube didn't dwell too much on 7.62x39. Too embarrassing for 5.56 chambered weapons, I suppose.
-
As a replacement to the M1 carbine for non-infantry troops, the 5.56 m4/16 is a solid improvement -- in most instances a more effective round especially if just exclusively fmj, and the AR is pretty well sealed from elements and dirt with mag in, muzzle condom on, and dust cover closed so with limited use and infrequent cleanings, whether stored on rack or carried for security/perimeter patrols, it should work when needed. That's probably a lot about why the US Air Force was the first to adopt...
As a general purpose military front line infantry carbine/rifle I find 5.56 lacking... Logistically, however I don't see the need for a full-sized .308 rifle in most types of combat... Double weight of .308 rounds vs 5.56 just doesn't make sense when one looks at how bullets are expended in combat zones.
Militarily, most small arms fire is intended for suppression and fixing the enemy, so odds of a given bullet actually hitting an enemy soldier is low.
This marine document on the depuy fighting positions, has a stat of 12 kills per 100 rounds fired for defenders shooting from positions of cover, pretty much a best-case combat scenario: http://www.2ndbn5thmar.com/fight/whythedepuyfightinghole.pdf
In Afghanistan, the GAO estimates US troops fire 250,000 rounds for every enemy insurgent killed -- that's about $75 grand in ammo costs (by commercial bulk retail pricing) BEFORE you account for the abhorrent costs of shipping anything to and within that country: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/us-forced-to-import-bullets-from-israel-as-troops-use-250000-for-every-rebel-killed-28580666.html
Back to the original point, while yes the .308 is more powerful, within 250-300 yards the 7.62x39 can do pretty much everything .308 can do and often better, with perhaps a small exception of .308's greater penetration against steels solely due to higher velocity. .308's energy inside of 250-300 yards generally is too much power and results in much longer penetration necks in gelatin with similar issues to the m855 ammo with through and through pencil holes with little energy deposited in the enemy -- yes .308 is a 30 caliber hole in this instance vs a 22 caliber pencil holes for 5.56, but insofar as pencil holes'/permanent cavity there shouldn't be much difference between a 9mm round and a .308 going through and through, the temporary stretch cavity is where differences come in.
While in the weeds, the main point here is that if anticipating a substantial amount of engagements beyond 300m, .308 shines. If anticipating most to all engagements within 300m, then 7.62x39 shines. Most folks who deem the .308 caliber/rifles to be paramount for combat have an argument that essentially distills down to that they'll pick off their foes at 500 yards (or other extreme range) -- which doesn't really account for the fact that no human will willing be a sitting duck so will seek cover/concealment, the likely limited marksmanship of most of these types including the challenges related to ranging and limited exposure of enemy once they know they are in the crosshairs that won't allow multiple shots at same target at same place (it won't be a static range), etc...
Back to the military, m4s are primarily used for combat at distances where supporting/combined arms cannot be used -- whether unit rifle grenades and mortars, supporting artillery, or air, troops typically can and are taught to engage enemy at range with these assets and small arms merely use to suppress and pin down the enemy to be killed by methods other than small arms...
And even in the small arms realm, individually portable squad automatic weapons are considered the primary tool for enemy engagement... But with most US infantry now being vehicle-borne troops, .30 and .50 cal vehicle mounted machine guns and grenade launchers typically are used in place of or preferable to M4s for engagements at all distances...
When you're talking about danger-close grenade range combat, the M4 and 5.56 round does perform sufficiently in most cases...
Also worth noting that modern small caliber high velocity rounds with shorter effective ranges have been outgunned by old bolt action rifles in service calibers in Afghanistan, primarily a matter of range, but worth noting...
http://cominganarchy.com/2010/05/21/it-took-us-nine-years-to-figure-this-out/
http://archive.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2010/05/21/us_rifles_not_suited_to_warfare_in_afghan_hills/
Ultimate point here is to have at least a high-level understanding as to all the ways and reasons compromises are being considered. For the military it's seldom about the "best" but rather about logistics, procurement, and pacifying the bureaucratic officer corps and all the varying stakeholders that have different priorities than optimal terminal performance, weapon reliability, etc...
All considered is why that while 7.62x39 weighs ~45% more than 5.56, it's potential to be more effective, require only one shot to put an enemy out of action vs a couple shots with 5.56, better in short barrels, cases chamber/extract more reliably, etc, just aren't a primary concern...
*stealing ammo weights from here: http://forum.saiga-12.com/index.php?/topic/65272-how-does-weight-compare-between-steel-case-762x39-and-brass-223/
200 rounds of steel-cased 7.62x39 122 grain weighs 7.22 lbs. (1000 rounds = 36.15 lbs)
200 rounds of brass-cased .223 55 grain weighs 5.02 lbs. (1000 rounds = 25.13 lbs)
200 rounds of 2 3/4 12 ga 00 bk weighs 19.18 lbs. (1000 rounds = 95.90 lbs)
200 rounds of 7.62x51 146 grain weighs 10.86 lbs. (1000 rounds = 54.30 lbs)
The figures for the 7.62x51 was supplied to me by someone else so I can't guarantee it's accuracy but it seems right to me. The other calibers I personally weighed so they are accurate. The difference between the 7.62x39 and .223 is about 2 lbs. The figures kind of screw up the idea of carrying around thousands of rounds on foot.
From a civilian, for self defense within 100 yards (unless your part of the country has frequent gunfights, should cover all legally justifiable self-defense scenarios -- at least before the zombies come), 5.56 is an adequate performer especially with premium non-fmj ammo. It also generally produces less recoil, is lighter, is a more compact round, and in the VZ58 uses AR mags, which are almost as awesome as glock mags. O0
But again, 7.62x39 is better for hunting, barrier penetration, and as a combat small arm at carbine (~300 yard or less range), especially if you don't have mgs, supporting arms, etc, like the military does...
Define your needs and make a choice -- any gun is better than no gun. There's no wrong answer, just differing opinions -- but those whose opinions' differ may decide your opinion/decision is wrong... haha
-
AR:
https://youtu.be/YAneTFiz5WU
AK:
https://youtu.be/DX73uXs3xGU
Vz58:
https://youtu.be/f3kComQz40o
The first two basically match up with the results from my informal AR and AK mud testing I did for my own amusement.
-
AR:
https://youtu.be/YAneTFiz5WU
AK:
https://youtu.be/DX73uXs3xGU
Vz58:
https://youtu.be/f3kComQz40o
The first two basically match up with the results from my informal AR and AK mud testing I did for my own amusement.
I can't imagine any situation where I would be forced to wade a swamp with my gun under the mud. I can see a situation for a sand tornado test where folks live in a desert climate. Realistically in my area more realistic tests would be dunked in snow, soaked in rain, and fired without cleaning
-
AR:
https://youtu.be/YAneTFiz5WU
AK:
https://youtu.be/DX73uXs3xGU
Vz58:
https://youtu.be/f3kComQz40o
The first two basically match up with the results from my informal AR and AK mud testing I did for my own amusement.
I can't imagine any situation where I would be forced to wade a swamp with my gun under the mud. I can see a situation for a sand tornado test where folks live in a desert climate. Realistically in my area more realistic tests would be dunked in snow, soaked in rain, and fired without cleaning
That has always been my general opinion of many of the radical torture tests you see for firearms. The original ones for the Glock always cracked me up...it can be frozen in a block of ice and then hammered out and it will work....it can be dropped out of a helicopter from 200 feet, bounce off the concrete and work! Umm. So what? If I am with the gun, I am dead in either case.
That being said, it is bleep shocking to see the AR15 actually work after that. It is contrary to its Internet reputation.
-
AR:
https://youtu.be/YAneTFiz5WU
AK:
https://youtu.be/DX73uXs3xGU
Vz58:
https://youtu.be/f3kComQz40o
The first two basically match up with the results from my informal AR and AK mud testing I did for my own amusement.
I can't imagine any situation where I would be forced to wade a swamp with my gun under the mud. I can see a situation for a sand tornado test where folks live in a desert climate. Realistically in my area more realistic tests would be dunked in snow, soaked in rain, and fired without cleaning
That has always been my general opinion of many of the radical torture tests you see for firearms. The original ones for the Glock always cracked me up...it can be frozen in a block of ice and then hammered out and it will work....it can be dropped out of a helicopter from 200 feet, bounce off the concrete and work! Umm. So what? If I am with the gun, I am dead in either case.
That being said, it is bleep shocking to see the AR15 actually work after that. It is contrary to its Internet reputation.
Well, whatever you do, NEVER, EVER let your DI AR15 get wet and try to use it (I mean water only covers 3/4 of the world's surface, so what could happen?). It will blow up, literally:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGwkHktkTxU
AK? No problem:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzwdCCNwn4M
Of course, even the most inexperienced shooter could probably guess that it's not standard procedure to pour dirt / sand / mud directly into the internals of your firearm before you try to shoot it.
The main problem with the AR15 DI system (aside from water) it that it !@##s where it eats: powder fouling and extreme heat is blown directly into the action every time it is fired, requiring constant maintenance to keep it running, even in the best of conditions.
A civilian in a SHTF scenario may not have time to constantly clean his weapon and doesn't have a 10,000 mile supply chain, fortified bases to go to to clean his weapon or the ability to call in air strikes when he gets into trouble, so a good AK or Vz are a better choice as a semi-auto self-defense / survival gun, especially with the hard-hitting 7.62x39 round as opposed to .223 / 5.56 which has trouble penetrating common urban barriers,
-
I think we're getting entirely off topic now... This is first time rifle buyer who by now is surely entirely confused... Apologies OP for feeding this fire.
The mud test has already been covered here: http://www.czfirearms.us/index.php?topic=76441.0
Bottom line, that's a level of neglect and abuse rarely seen...
MeatAxe, all .223 weapons have an issue w/ water remaining in barrels unless seal is broken due to surface tension, etc... 30 caliber weapons don't have that issue; though the DI buffer tube even on 308s can hold water if seal isn't broken by pulling charging handle, etc... Secondly, DI ARs because they cycle gas that compresses, when water is in the system it causes much more force to be applied to the bolt carrier since water compresses less than gas...
Lastly, worth noting that standard AR receiver extensions don't have enough drainage holes (well just one on rear of buffer tube) to allow proper function of buffer either when rapidly firing from submerged, so with a tremendous amount of pressure to front and rear of bcg, the bcg goes sideways which kills the upper like in the vidoe.
On my AR builds, I use the POF buffer extension (last couple I ordered have an ugly white POF logo on the side by receiver however...) that is $10 or so more expensive than standard milspec extensions (POF is milspec aluminum and anodizing while many AR buffer tubes are not... Main reasons are the tube 1) locks with the buffer retainer pin to prevent rotation, 2) eliminates much of the possibility for carrier tilt since buffer tube fully supports the carrier rear, 3) the extra drainage holes aren't a bad thing either, and 4) quality of manufacture is top notch which means better stock fit too...
Bottom line, DI guns are dangerous to fire when submerged, but just like the InRange mud test, that's not the end all be all of a firearm.
-
I think we're getting entirely off topic now... This is first time rifle buyer who by now is surely entirely confused... Apologies OP for feeding this fire.
The mud test has already been covered here: http://www.czfirearms.us/index.php?topic=76441.0
Bottom line, that's a level of neglect and abuse rarely seen...
MeatAxe, all .223 weapons have an issue w/ water remaining in barrels unless seal is broken due to surface tension, etc... 30 caliber weapons don't have that issue; though the DI buffer tube even on 308s can hold water if seal isn't broken by pulling charging handle, etc... Secondly, DI ARs because they cycle gas that compresses, when water is in the system it causes much more force to be applied to the bolt carrier since water compresses less than gas...
Lastly, worth noting that standard AR receiver extensions don't have enough drainage holes (well just one on rear of buffer tube) to allow proper function of buffer either when rapidly firing from submerged, so with a tremendous amount of pressure to front and rear of bcg, the bcg goes sideways which kills the upper like in the vidoe.
On my AR builds, I use the POF buffer extension (last couple I ordered have an ugly white POF logo on the side by receiver however...) that is $10 or so more expensive than standard milspec extensions (POF is milspec aluminum and anodizing while many AR buffer tubes are not... Main reasons are the tube 1) locks with the buffer retainer pin to prevent rotation, 2) eliminates much of the possibility for carrier tilt since buffer tube fully supports the carrier rear, 3) the extra drainage holes aren't a bad thing either, and 4) quality of manufacture is top notch which means better stock fit too...
Bottom line, DI guns are dangerous to fire when submerged, but just like the InRange mud test, that's not the end all be all of a firearm.
Well, the HK .223 didn't blow up in / underwater, so it's not the caliber. The issue is that the AR15 direct impingement is fraught with a lot of problems (excessive heat, powder / carbon fouling, demands constant maintenance, etc. etc. to name a few -- and blows up if you happen to drop in the water and then have to fire it to save your life -- e.g. in the rice paddies of Viet Nam).
If you want a drop dead reliable semi-auto rifle, piston guns are better than DI, preferably in a serious caliber. The AR15 and 5.56 caliber were picked by the bean counters at DOD (Whiz Kid Robt. McNamara of Viet Nam War strategy fame) because Gen. Curtis LaMay was impressed with the space-aged look of the AR15 and at how it blew up watermelons when demonstrated at a picnic. LeMay may have been a genius at strategic aerial bombing, but he had no business having any influence in picking an infantry rifle.
And GIs have been stuck with that poodle-shooter turkey going on 60 years. Arguably the worst combat rifle & cartridge (for its time) in US military history has been deployed for the longest time. Incredible.
-
As a replacement to the M1 carbine for non-infantry troops, the 5.56 m4/16 is a solid improvement -- in most instances a more effective round especially if just exclusively fmj, and the AR is pretty well sealed from elements and dirt with mag in, muzzle condom on, and dust cover closed so with limited use and infrequent cleanings, whether stored on rack or carried for security/perimeter patrols, it should work when needed. That's probably a lot about why the US Air Force was the first to adopt...
As a general purpose military front line infantry carbine/rifle I find 5.56 lacking... Logistically, however I don't see the need for a full-sized .308 rifle in most types of combat... Double weight of .308 rounds vs 5.56 just doesn't make sense when one looks at how bullets are expended in combat zones.
Militarily, most small arms fire is intended for suppression and fixing the enemy, so odds of a given bullet actually hitting an enemy soldier is low.
This marine document on the depuy fighting positions, has a stat of 12 kills per 100 rounds fired for defenders shooting from positions of cover, pretty much a best-case combat scenario: http://www.2ndbn5thmar.com/fight/whythedepuyfightinghole.pdf
In Afghanistan, the GAO estimates US troops fire 250,000 rounds for every enemy insurgent killed -- that's about $75 grand in ammo costs (by commercial bulk retail pricing) BEFORE you account for the abhorrent costs of shipping anything to and within that country: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/us-forced-to-import-bullets-from-israel-as-troops-use-250000-for-every-rebel-killed-28580666.html
Back to the original point, while yes the .308 is more powerful, within 250-300 yards the 7.62x39 can do pretty much everything .308 can do and often better, with perhaps a small exception of .308's greater penetration against steels solely due to higher velocity. .308's energy inside of 250-300 yards generally is too much power and results in much longer penetration necks in gelatin with similar issues to the m855 ammo with through and through pencil holes with little energy deposited in the enemy -- yes .308 is a 30 caliber hole in this instance vs a 22 caliber pencil holes for 5.56, but insofar as pencil holes'/permanent cavity there shouldn't be much difference between a 9mm round and a .308 going through and through, the temporary stretch cavity is where differences come in.
While in the weeds, the main point here is that if anticipating a substantial amount of engagements beyond 300m, .308 shines. If anticipating most to all engagements within 300m, then 7.62x39 shines. Most folks who deem the .308 caliber/rifles to be paramount for combat have an argument that essentially distills down to that they'll pick off their foes at 500 yards (or other extreme range) -- which doesn't really account for the fact that no human will willing be a sitting duck so will seek cover/concealment, the likely limited marksmanship of most of these types including the challenges related to ranging and limited exposure of enemy once they know they are in the crosshairs that won't allow multiple shots at same target at same place (it won't be a static range), etc...
Back to the military, m4s are primarily used for combat at distances where supporting/combined arms cannot be used -- whether unit rifle grenades and mortars, supporting artillery, or air, troops typically can and are taught to engage enemy at range with these assets and small arms merely use to suppress and pin down the enemy to be killed by methods other than small arms...
And even in the small arms realm, individually portable squad automatic weapons are considered the primary tool for enemy engagement... But with most US infantry now being vehicle-borne troops, .30 and .50 cal vehicle mounted machine guns and grenade launchers typically are used in place of or preferable to M4s for engagements at all distances...
When you're talking about danger-close grenade range combat, the M4 and 5.56 round does perform sufficiently in most cases...
Also worth noting that modern small caliber high velocity rounds with shorter effective ranges have been outgunned by old bolt action rifles in service calibers in Afghanistan, primarily a matter of range, but worth noting...
http://cominganarchy.com/2010/05/21/it-took-us-nine-years-to-figure-this-out/
http://archive.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2010/05/21/us_rifles_not_suited_to_warfare_in_afghan_hills/
Ultimate point here is to have at least a high-level understanding as to all the ways and reasons compromises are being considered. For the military it's seldom about the "best" but rather about logistics, procurement, and pacifying the bureaucratic officer corps and all the varying stakeholders that have different priorities than optimal terminal performance, weapon reliability, etc...
All considered is why that while 7.62x39 weighs ~45% more than 5.56, it's potential to be more effective, require only one shot to put an enemy out of action vs a couple shots with 5.56, better in short barrels, cases chamber/extract more reliably, etc, just aren't a primary concern...
*stealing ammo weights from here: http://forum.saiga-12.com/index.php?/topic/65272-how-does-weight-compare-between-steel-case-762x39-and-brass-223/
200 rounds of steel-cased 7.62x39 122 grain weighs 7.22 lbs. (1000 rounds = 36.15 lbs)
200 rounds of brass-cased .223 55 grain weighs 5.02 lbs. (1000 rounds = 25.13 lbs)
200 rounds of 2 3/4 12 ga 00 bk weighs 19.18 lbs. (1000 rounds = 95.90 lbs)
200 rounds of 7.62x51 146 grain weighs 10.86 lbs. (1000 rounds = 54.30 lbs)
The figures for the 7.62x51 was supplied to me by someone else so I can't guarantee it's accuracy but it seems right to me. The other calibers I personally weighed so they are accurate. The difference between the 7.62x39 and .223 is about 2 lbs. The figures kind of screw up the idea of carrying around thousands of rounds on foot.
From a civilian, for self defense within 100 yards (unless your part of the country has frequent gunfights, should cover all legally justifiable self-defense scenarios -- at least before the zombies come), 5.56 is an adequate performer especially with premium non-fmj ammo. It also generally produces less recoil, is lighter, is a more compact round, and in the VZ58 uses AR mags, which are almost as awesome as glock mags. O0
But again, 7.62x39 is better for hunting, barrier penetration, and as a combat small arm at carbine (~300 yard or less range), especially if you don't have mgs, supporting arms, etc, like the military does...
Define your needs and make a choice -- any gun is better than no gun. There's no wrong answer, just differing opinions -- but those whose opinions' differ may decide your opinion/decision is wrong... haha
US Ordnance was actually on the right track in the early 1920s (almost a hundred years ago now) when they came close to adopting the .276 Pedersen round, a flat-shooting, intermediate powered cartridge, which was the first chambering of the M1 Garand. Funny thing, the .276 Pedersen had almost identical ballistics to the 6.5 Grendel and the 6.8 SPC, which are recognized as the long-overdue replacement for the anemic 5.56. Of course, the 6.5 Grendel is basically a necked-down 7.62x39 round but tapered to fit an AR platform (regrettably).
Unfortunately, the bean counters won and the US stuck with the .30'06 (along with the anemic .30 Carbine for support troops) through the Korean War.
Then when NATO came about, the US forced everyone to adopt the 7.62x51 (near identical to the .30'06 ballistically) even though the .280 British cartridge was proposed (ballistically near identical to the .276 Pedersen, the 6.5 Grendel and the 6.8 SPC -- you get the picture).
It seems the US Ordnance never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity as far as picking out an infantry rifle / cartridge.
-
Hi everyone,
I am pretty obsessed with Commie guns, and Czech guns in particular. Always was fascinated with them for some reason. So I am looking to get my first rifle and I am leaning toward a VZ-58, even though I know almost nothing about them. That or something like the Arsenal SGL-31 AK-74.
Visually I really like the look of this VZ58:
(http://i.imgur.com/EQXG6OM.png)
My only use will be range fun.
Would the VZ be a good choice for a first rifle? It would be kind of cool to have such a unique gun. I've never seen anyone with one at the range. They almost all have AR's and a few AK's.... but no VZ58's in sight.
I think you would be well-served with either a good drop dead reliable imported AK or a CSA Vz58 chambered in the hard-hitting and relatively inexpensive 7.62x39. Arsenals are great, especially the milled SAM7 rifles. I would steer clear of 5.45 because 99% of it comes from Russia, which could be subject to an ammo ban (as Saigas are now).
The AK has the advantage over the Vz in parts, accessories and magazine availability (50,000,000 vs. @ 1 million produced world wide), but a Vz is a nice shooting weapon.
Also, for range fun, you'll spend more time (and less money) shooting an AK or a Vz and less time having to constantly maintain your rifle as you would with an AR. Not fun. I'd rather shoot than clean any day. Plus, 5.56 is more expensive than 7.62x39.
Then again, if you have to use it for a self-defense SHTF rifle (notwithstanding if you feel compelled to drop dirt/sand/mud inside the action), you can be sure that a good AK will go bang when you pull the trigger and need to knock something down (ARs, not so much without a lot of attention to maintenance).
-
AR:
https://youtu.be/YAneTFiz5WU
AK:
https://youtu.be/DX73uXs3xGU
Vz58:
https://youtu.be/f3kComQz40o
The first two basically match up with the results from my informal AR and AK mud testing I did for my own amusement.
I can't imagine any situation where I would be forced to wade a swamp with my gun under the mud. I can see a situation for a sand tornado test where folks live in a desert climate. Realistically in my area more realistic tests would be dunked in snow, soaked in rain, and fired without cleaning
That has always been my general opinion of many of the radical torture tests you see for firearms. The original ones for the Glock always cracked me up...it can be frozen in a block of ice and then hammered out and it will work....it can be dropped out of a helicopter from 200 feet, bounce off the concrete and work! Umm. So what? If I am with the gun, I am dead in either case.
That being said, it is bleep shocking to see the AR15 actually work after that. It is contrary to its Internet reputation.
Well, whatever you do, NEVER, EVER let your DI AR15 get wet and try to use it (I mean water only covers 3/4 of the world's surface, so what could happen?). It will blow up, literally:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGwkHktkTxU
AK? No problem:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzwdCCNwn4M
Of course, even the most inexperienced shooter could probably guess that it's not standard procedure to pour dirt / sand / mud directly into the internals of your firearm before you try to shoot it.
The main problem with the AR15 DI system (aside from water) it that it !@##s where it eats: powder fouling and extreme heat is blown directly into the action every time it is fired, requiring constant maintenance to keep it running, even in the best of conditions.
A civilian in a SHTF scenario may not have time to constantly clean his weapon and doesn't have a 10,000 mile supply chain, fortified bases to go to to clean his weapon or the ability to call in air strikes when he gets into trouble, so a good AK or Vz are a better choice as a semi-auto self-defense / survival gun, especially with the hard-hitting 7.62x39 round as opposed to .223 / 5.56 which has trouble penetrating common urban barriers,
Lol. Have you not paid attention to the design on the SR762? Or the SR556?
AR's blow up or will lot run in water? That is complete nonsense. Mine has been soaking wet on a number of occasions and it shoots without any problems. Do you think the SEALs use Mk12s and Mk18s because they don't work in wet environments? No. I am fairly sure they dunk them in the ocean just like all of their other guns and those are both AR designs.
Speaking of the Mk18 mod 2....It is also used by the U.S. Coast Guard's Tactical Law Enforcement Teams, Maritime Safety and Security Teams, and Maritime Security Response Team and the United States Navy's Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Operators. It is also used by Marine Force Recon's CQB operators, and is in most cases the standard weapons of choice for said operators. Do you think those guys do not get them wet?? Surely the US Navy and US Coast Guard are never around water.
ARs don't penetrate urban barriers? Have you shot an AR loaded with M855 SS109 in this lifetime??
ARs won't run dirty? More nonsense. See the mud test above. Without crazy conditions like those I have gone months without cleaning my AR and it runs without any hangups whatsoever. If finished in Black T or RF85, they even run without lube (as in completely dry).
-
Holy cow, you guys! The OP asked a simple question. My simple answer is 'yes!' In my experience, new shooters do well with the VZ-58/2008. I also second RSR's suggestion to get a 10/22, regardless. They're cheap, reliable, easy to customize and they shoot a round that costs 1/4-1/2 the price of steel 7.62x39. .22lr is a great caliber for new shooters to learn on and experienced shooters to practice with or just plain have fun with.
-
Lol. Have you not paid attention to the design on the SR762? Or the SR556?
AR's blow up or will lot run in water? That is complete nonsense.Mine has been soaking wet on a number of occasions and it shoots without any problems. Do you think the SEALs use Mk12s and Mk18s because they don't work in wet environments? No. I am fairly sure they dunk them in the ocean just like all of their other guns and those are both AR designs.
Speaking of the Mk18 mod 2....It is also used by the U.S. Coast Guard's Tactical Law Enforcement Teams, Maritime Safety and Security Teams, and Maritime Security Response Team and the United States Navy's Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Operators. It is also used by Marine Force Recon's CQB operators, and is in most cases the standard weapons of choice for said operators. Do you think those guys do not get them wet?? Surely the US Navy and US Coast Guard are never around water.
ARs don't penetrate urban barriers? Have you shot an AR loaded with M855 SS109 in this lifetime??
ARs won't run dirty? More nonsense. See the mud test above. Without crazy conditions like those I have gone months without cleaning my AR and it runs without any hangups whatsoever. If finished in Black T or RF85, they even run without lube (as in completely dry.)
(http://new4.fjcdn.com/comments/Sheprobablydid+_07944e4a5017bce9614cc5769131e721.jpg)
-
(http://new4.fjcdn.com/comments/Sheprobablydid+_07944e4a5017bce9614cc5769131e721.jpg)
Not sure that scrub brush attachment is milspec...
I agree with the 10/22 suggestion. If you want a really inexpensive option, Savage also has a semi-auto .22LR that is truly dirt cheap - it can often be found for around $110 but it doesn't have the aftermarket support of the 10/22. The Savage bolt action Mark II FV-SR .22 is another great starter rifle - especially if you want to jump on a precision bolt action rifle in the future. However, the bolt action option opens the door for another type of firearms addiction. You will end up taking up at least one side of a gun safe with them sooner or later.
-
At least we know he's not 'running it dirty'!
-
Well, the HK .223 didn't blow up in / underwater, so it's not the caliber. The issue is that the AR15 direct impingement is fraught with a lot of problems (excessive heat, powder / carbon fouling, demands constant maintenance, etc. etc. to name a few -- and blows up if you happen to drop in the water and then have to fire it to save your life -- e.g. in the rice paddies of Viet Nam).
If you want a drop dead reliable semi-auto rifle, piston guns are better than DI, preferably in a serious caliber. The AR15 and 5.56 caliber were picked by the bean counters at DOD (Whiz Kid Robt. McNamara of Viet Nam War strategy fame) because Gen. Curtis LaMay was impressed with the space-aged look of the AR15 and at how it blew up watermelons when demonstrated at a picnic. LeMay may have been a genius at strategic aerial bombing, but he had no business having any influence in picking an infantry rifle.
And GIs have been stuck with that poodle-shooter turkey going on 60 years. Arguably the worst combat rifle & cartridge (for its time) in US military history has been deployed for the longest time. Incredible.
HKs have a very heavy barrel profile which is what was required to achieve similar accuracy to DI guns due to the piston system's effect on barrel harmonics -- that 10" barrel HK weighs about the same a 16" A2 profile DI gun.
Again, the reasons for the fracturing of the upper receiver were noted -- drainage holes in buffer tube and how the DI system works (liquids don't be have like gasses, so when liquid in the gas system, there's issues).
The point about .223 rifles is that the barrel can burst when any obstruction, including water is in the bore. With round loaded in chamber and surface tension of water in .22 cal barrel, the water effectively holds itself in barrel unless seal is broken on chamber end -- much like holding finger over one end of a straw.
You're also incorrect on LeMay forcing it onto infantry. He wanted it for Air Force base security -- to replace the M1/M2 carbine whose ammo was relatively ineffective in FMJ/ball verison vs 5.56 AND had serious reliability issues in full auto mode (including magazines), leading most to be used in semi auto only.
Congress and the Pentagon shut down the Air Force buy, and ultimately Pentagon and the President forced the weapon onto the resistant Army and Marines. You can read more here: http://www.gundigest.com/article/the-ar-16m16-the-rifle-that-was-never-supposed-to-be
The last is entirely your opinion and you're welcome to it, but let's at least keep the facts straight.
-
US Ordnance was actually on the right track in the early 1920s (almost a hundred years ago now) when they came close to adopting the .276 Pedersen round, a flat-shooting, intermediate powered cartridge, which was the first chambering of the M1 Garand. Funny thing, the .276 Pedersen had almost identical ballistics to the 6.5 Grendel and the 6.8 SPC, which are recognized as the long-overdue replacement for the anemic 5.56. Of course, the 6.5 Grendel is basically a necked-down 7.62x39 round but tapered to fit an AR platform (regrettably).
Unfortunately, the bean counters won and the US stuck with the .30'06 (along with the anemic .30 Carbine for support troops) through the Korean War.
Then when NATO came about, the US forced everyone to adopt the 7.62x51 (near identical to the .30'06 ballistically) even though the .280 British cartridge was proposed (ballistically near identical to the .276 Pedersen, the 6.5 Grendel and the 6.8 SPC -- you get the picture).
It seems the US Ordnance never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity as far as picking out an infantry rifle / cartridge.
I agree that .276 P would have been a superior choice to .30-06 for the M1 Garand. However, .276 P is effectively a flatter shooting, higher velocity .308 -- and it actually has a longer overall cartridge length as well. So it's still a full caliber high velocity battle rifle cartridge... Primary benefits of .276 P or .280 B vs .308 are higher velocity, flatter shooting, and reduced recoil... Primary drawbacks of these higher velocity, necked down rounds is reduced barrel life due to increase throat erosion, which is of concern in a MG role...
http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2011/12/for-those-who-think-that-the-280-british-and-the-276-pedersen-were-pipsqueak-cartridges-in-compariso.html
Personally, I find the 5.56 FN Minimi/M249 SAW to be a greater aberration than the M4 in modern military use... A true intermediate SAW capable of barrier penetration but lighter than .308 would be a great asset to troops, the M240 .308 MGs are considered medium machine guns... And to my knowledge the Mk48 in .308 that weighs 2 lbs more than M249 (both FN Mini variants) is only available to socom -- ammo weigh-wise even with the lighter weapon, the problem still exists.
So, I'm more a fan of true intermediate calibers for the modern battlefield if you want one weapon capable of engaging both near and far -- the 7.62x45 Czech that the VZ58's predecessor, the Vz52 was designed for, is one of several options including 6x48 UIAC, .270/.280 british (which you mention as main competitor to .308 for NATO adoption), etc. The VZ58, early prototypes, was also originally designed for the 7.62x45 Czech cartridge.
In regard to US Ordinance, weapon development has always been a problem. The expiration of the Clinton AWB and adoption of ARs and accessories in large quantities by US civilians has played a tremendous role in allowing private companies to develop off the rack solutions to issues plaguing our military's primary small arm. No doubt a tremendous soldier's number of lives have been saved by the US consumer demanding the best...
-
Not sure that scrub brush attachment is milspec...
Throughout the 80s, 90s, and even into the early 2000s/GWOT, it wasn't uncommon for America's finest, including Special Operations soldiers, to attach accessories to their M16s/4s with duct tape, unfortunately. First sopmod kit came about mid-90s I believe. Note my preceding comment on the expiration of the Clinton AWB.
Regardless of milspec, high speed tape is always authentic...
Lol. Have you not paid attention to the design on the SR762? Or the SR556?
AR's blow up or will lot run in water? That is complete nonsense. Mine has been soaking wet on a number of occasions and it shoots without any problems. Do you think the SEALs use Mk12s and Mk18s because they don't work in wet environments? No. I am fairly sure they dunk them in the ocean just like all of their other guns and those are both AR designs.
Speaking of the Mk18 mod 2....It is also used by the U.S. Coast Guard's Tactical Law Enforcement Teams, Maritime Safety and Security Teams, and Maritime Security Response Team and the United States Navy's Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Operators. It is also used by Marine Force Recon's CQB operators, and is in most cases the standard weapons of choice for said operators. Do you think those guys do not get them wet?? Surely the US Navy and US Coast Guard are never around water.
ARs don't penetrate urban barriers? Have you shot an AR loaded with M855 SS109 in this lifetime??
ARs won't run dirty? More nonsense. See the mud test above. Without crazy conditions like those I have gone months without cleaning my AR and it runs without any hangups whatsoever. If finished in Black T or RF85, they even run without lube (as in completely dry).
DI ARs can explode the upper receiver if water is in the gas system.
Any AR with standard buffer tube extension w/ one hole on rear face cannot properly if under water.
Any .22 cal gun w/ bullet in chamber can have a water seal in the barrel which can result in barrel bursting.
You are correct that piston ARs have less problems with water in action, but that system comes with weight and accuracy penalties vs DI.
Note my earlier comments re: water in the system to MeatAxe's comments as well.
One round of 5.56 will not penetrate as well as one round of 7.62x39 against most intermediate barriers, that's a fact.
No weapon should be intentionally abused like not cleaning or running without lube. It's like running your car engine with no oil or the cheapest oil. Just b/c you can doesn't mean you should. And no dry films and special coatings do not provide same level of protection to metal on metal wear as they would with the addition of lube.
As with most things, there's tradeoffs. Understand them and decide accordingly. Don't reject them b/c you don't like the facts.
-
Not cleaning the AR was a matter of seeing when it would stop working. They are certainly not plagued by many of the problems which some like to claim with regards to reliability issues without constant maintenance. Once I satisfied my curiosity, it was well scrubbed, parts inspected and then reassembled. No signs of harm.
Of course, not all ARs are the same. Carbine length or shorter ARs can be a little fussy under really poor conditions but mid-length and rifle length are much less so in my experience with them. Even with the carbine length AR, problems are rare. I suspect that many AR reliability horror stories arise from people who assemble their own (incorrectly) or are buying bottom of the barrel brands. From what I have seen few even consider disassembling them, cleaning, tweaking and smoothing as necessary and then re-lubing and reassembling before their first trip to the range.
The same is true with AKMs - if you buy a poorly assembled junker model you will have problems sooner or later. If you build one yourself and do a halfassed job, you will have problems. A lot of gun problems arise from poorly made guns but just as many seem to be from the trigger finger back as well.
Good piston systems in ARs are not all that heavy. An original config AKM is about 6.8lbs. The Ruger SR556 is about 7.94lbs but a good part of that is due to barrel profile and those huge Troy rails that come on them from the factory. You can shave them down to AK weight with a little effort. The SR762 takes more effort as it is about 8.6lbs out of the box - not bad for a semi-auto .308 (compare with the H&K G3 or the FAL which are both over 9 pounds). I haven't shot an SR556 enough to really say how accurate they are but the SR762 is not suffering from any piston-related loss in accuracy. That is likely because the bullet exits the barrel before the piston system has an affect on barrel harmonics. With Black Hills 168gr match, my SR762 easily puts 5 rounds in under 1" at 100 yards. If there is a drawback, it is the price tag: $1700 plus tax. Another $1000 on optics and mount. Replacement for the factory flash suppressor (not a fan of that part): $100. Sling: $40. It ends up being a decent chunk of cash but worth it.
-
To maintain accuracy on piston guns, a stiffer heavy profile barrel is required. That is more weight.
To operate piston guns, that requires a piston system -- pistons by nature are heavier than than the very light hollow tube of DI guns. That is more weight.
Yes, with tunable piston, you might be able to run a lighter buffer than with some of the DI guns; however, especially with heavy barrels, more weight on the stock end to counterbalance is a plus to weapon performance. This is potentially less weight but also potentially a detriment to handling.
Colt 6720 lightweight DI AR spec weight is 6.2 lbs.
Colt 6920 (effectively a 16" barreled M4 equivalent with the backwards A2 profile barrel -- heavy profile at front rather than handguards) spec weight is 6.95 lbs.
From your #s, that's over 1.5 lbs (+~25%) for the lightweight and +1lbs, ~+15% for the 6920...
Your SR762 is 16" barrel.
16" FAL runs lighter at 8.35 lbs: http://www.dsarms.com/p-14230-fal-sa58-carbine-rifle-1625-premium-bipod-cut-barrel.aspx
16" DI AR10 runs lighter too at 8.4 lbs: https://armalite.com/shop/ar-10-tactical-16/
If I wanted a piston gun, I would prefer a weapon designed around that operating system... While many of the piston AR kinks have been worked through, it's still not perfected for a piston operating system.
Further, I wouldn't buy a black rifle from Ruger whose namesake helped to bring about the assault weapons ban, sees no need for anyone to have mags with more than 15 rounds, and doesn't believe that collapsible or folding stocks should be on civilian weapons, among other positions...
YMMV.
-
The weight of the FAL depends on your exact configuration but I have never found one lighter than claimed. Heavier than claimed? Yes. Have you ever tried to by anything for a FAL? It requires calculus. Is it inch or metric? Will it fit this particular manufacturer's gun or was the designer's ass too warm in the chair when he was knocking out the specs?? Also, they are optics killers. The FAL's bolt impulse destroys scopes like a shark on a feeding frenzy and mount options are less than wonderful (same with the G3 and any eastern bloc design in 7.62x54mm).
Ruger. I was not at all happy with their decision to support the AWB back in the mid-90s. However, that was two decades ago and they are not the same company. They have a new CEO and he seems to pay a hell of a lot of attention to their customer base. Their customer service is top notch and they back up their products. Obviously, you are entitled to hold a decision from 20 years ago against them if you choose but they are certainly not the only company in the industry to make a bad call under heavy political pressure by any means.
As for the SR762, a decent part of the weight is the handguard. You can shave the weight down easily. You can make it lighter than any FAL (plastic handguard) with very little effort. I actually like the FAL but they are a chunk to lug around and there are few options to make them lighter. The same is true of the G3. They are just beefy rifles and unless you have access to a lathe and mill they are not going to get much lighter.
I failed to mention an additional expense to the SR-762...the trigger. They have gotten much better but holy hell did the original triggers suck. Any other inherent accuracy was ruined by the trigger on many of them as they were heavy and had more grit than a full sheet of 30 grit open cut sand paper. As such: trigger: $245 (on sale).
-
(http://new4.fjcdn.com/comments/Sheprobablydid+_07944e4a5017bce9614cc5769131e721.jpg)
Not sure that scrub brush attachment is milspec...
I agree with the 10/22 suggestion. If you want a really inexpensive option, Savage also has a semi-auto .22LR that is truly dirt cheap - it can often be found for around $110 but it doesn't have the aftermarket support of the 10/22. The Savage bolt action Mark II FV-SR .22 is another great starter rifle - especially if you want to jump on a precision bolt action rifle in the future. However, the bolt action option opens the door for another type of firearms addiction. You will end up taking up at least one side of a gun safe with them sooner or later.
I can't wait for the video of you shooting your AR filled with water in the bathtub! Prove me wrong!!! LOL
-
(http://new4.fjcdn.com/comments/Sheprobablydid+_07944e4a5017bce9614cc5769131e721.jpg)
Not sure that scrub brush attachment is milspec...
I agree with the 10/22 suggestion. If you want a really inexpensive option, Savage also has a semi-auto .22LR that is truly dirt cheap - it can often be found for around $110 but it doesn't have the aftermarket support of the 10/22. The Savage bolt action Mark II FV-SR .22 is another great starter rifle - especially if you want to jump on a precision bolt action rifle in the future. However, the bolt action option opens the door for another type of firearms addiction. You will end up taking up at least one side of a gun safe with them sooner or later.
I can't wait for the video of you shooting your AR filled with water in the bathtub! Prove me wrong!!! LOL
Easy enough - I just had to reply to your fanboy nonsense the first time. Take off your ninja suit and exit the mall.
Side note: soap would entirely relieve the surface tension in a 5.56 barrel - that is one of the reasons soap works in the first place. As such, no problems in the bath.
-
Well, the HK .223 didn't blow up in / underwater, so it's not the caliber. The issue is that the AR15 direct impingement is fraught with a lot of problems (excessive heat, powder / carbon fouling, demands constant maintenance, etc. etc. to name a few -- and blows up if you happen to drop in the water and then have to fire it to save your life -- e.g. in the rice paddies of Viet Nam).
If you want a drop dead reliable semi-auto rifle, piston guns are better than DI, preferably in a serious caliber. The AR15 and 5.56 caliber were picked by the bean counters at DOD (Whiz Kid Robt. McNamara of Viet Nam War strategy fame) because Gen. Curtis LaMay was impressed with the space-aged look of the AR15 and at how it blew up watermelons when demonstrated at a picnic. LeMay may have been a genius at strategic aerial bombing, but he had no business having any influence in picking an infantry rifle.
And GIs have been stuck with that poodle-shooter turkey going on 60 years. Arguably the worst combat rifle & cartridge (for its time) in US military history has been deployed for the longest time. Incredible.
HKs have a very heavy barrel profile which is what was required to achieve similar accuracy to DI guns due to the piston system's effect on barrel harmonics -- that 10" barrel HK weighs about the same a 16" A2 profile DI gun.
Again, the reasons for the fracturing of the upper receiver were noted -- drainage holes in buffer tube and how the DI system works (liquids don't be have like gasses, so when liquid in the gas system, there's issues).
The point about .223 rifles is that the barrel can burst when any obstruction, including water is in the bore. With round loaded in chamber and surface tension of water in .22 cal barrel, the water effectively holds itself in barrel unless seal is broken on chamber end -- much like holding finger over one end of a straw.
You're also incorrect on LeMay forcing it onto infantry. He wanted it for Air Force base security -- to replace the M1/M2 carbine whose ammo was relatively ineffective in FMJ/ball verison vs 5.56 AND had serious reliability issues in full auto mode (including magazines), leading most to be used in semi auto only.
Congress and the Pentagon shut down the Air Force buy, and ultimately Pentagon and the President forced the weapon onto the resistant Army and Marines. You can read more here: http://www.gundigest.com/article/the-ar-16m16-the-rifle-that-was-never-supposed-to-be
The last is entirely your opinion and you're welcome to it, but let's at least keep the facts straight.
LeMay obviously had McNamara's ear when he rushed the M16 into production for Viet Nam with disastrous results. The Whiz Kid took the advice from an "Expert" and came up with a "better idea" about what makes a superior infantry rifle. Like the article says, the M16 killed a lot of GIs when it jammed / seized up in combat. Since then, it's been one band-aid after another to try to fix it's numerous short-comings. It has to be the only rifle in history fitted with a device (the forward assist) specifically designed to try to deal with the many anticipated jams when the rifle decides to crap out at the worst possible moment.
The AR still today has the same basic flaws with the DI system and the anemic 5.56 round. The work around is all the design bandaids, barrel/rifling and bullet changes and constant maintenance and even then it's not enough.
Like I alluded to in an earlier post, when the M4 started getting it's butt kicked by other (piston) rifles in head to head competition, the US military stopped the trials. Apparently, a jam every 400 rounds is an "acceptable" failure rate for the M4. That's a disgrace and a great disservice to our troops.
-
(http://new4.fjcdn.com/comments/Sheprobablydid+_07944e4a5017bce9614cc5769131e721.jpg)
Not sure that scrub brush attachment is milspec...
I agree with the 10/22 suggestion. If you want a really inexpensive option, Savage also has a semi-auto .22LR that is truly dirt cheap - it can often be found for around $110 but it doesn't have the aftermarket support of the 10/22. The Savage bolt action Mark II FV-SR .22 is another great starter rifle - especially if you want to jump on a precision bolt action rifle in the future. However, the bolt action option opens the door for another type of firearms addiction. You will end up taking up at least one side of a gun safe with them sooner or later.
I can't wait for the video of you shooting your AR filled with water in the bathtub! Prove me wrong!!! LOL
Easy enough - I just had to reply to your fanboy nonsense the first time. Take off your ninja suit and exit the mall.
Side note: soap would entirely relieve the surface tension in a 5.56 barrel - that is one of the reasons soap works in the first place. As such, no problems in the bath.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0YIJQ1jgEI
I'm sure it will be a colorful!
-
US Ordnance was actually on the right track in the early 1920s (almost a hundred years ago now) when they came close to adopting the .276 Pedersen round, a flat-shooting, intermediate powered cartridge, which was the first chambering of the M1 Garand. Funny thing, the .276 Pedersen had almost identical ballistics to the 6.5 Grendel and the 6.8 SPC, which are recognized as the long-overdue replacement for the anemic 5.56. Of course, the 6.5 Grendel is basically a necked-down 7.62x39 round but tapered to fit an AR platform (regrettably).
Unfortunately, the bean counters won and the US stuck with the .30'06 (along with the anemic .30 Carbine for support troops) through the Korean War.
Then when NATO came about, the US forced everyone to adopt the 7.62x51 (near identical to the .30'06 ballistically) even though the .280 British cartridge was proposed (ballistically near identical to the .276 Pedersen, the 6.5 Grendel and the 6.8 SPC -- you get the picture).
It seems the US Ordnance never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity as far as picking out an infantry rifle / cartridge.
I agree that .276 P would have been a superior choice to .30-06 for the M1 Garand. However, .276 P is effectively a flatter shooting, higher velocity .308 -- and it actually has a longer overall cartridge length as well. So it's still a full caliber high velocity battle rifle cartridge... Primary benefits of .276 P or .280 B vs .308 are higher velocity, flatter shooting, and reduced recoil... Primary drawbacks of these higher velocity, necked down rounds is reduced barrel life due to increase throat erosion, which is of concern in a MG role...
http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2011/12/for-those-who-think-that-the-280-british-and-the-276-pedersen-were-pipsqueak-cartridges-in-compariso.html
Personally, I find the 5.56 FN Minimi/M249 SAW to be a greater aberration than the M4 in modern military use... A true intermediate SAW capable of barrier penetration but lighter than .308 would be a great asset to troops, the M240 .308 MGs are considered medium machine guns... And to my knowledge the Mk48 in .308 that weighs 2 lbs more than M249 (both FN Mini variants) is only available to socom -- ammo weigh-wise even with the lighter weapon, the problem still exists.
So, I'm more a fan of true intermediate calibers for the modern battlefield if you want one weapon capable of engaging both near and far -- the 7.62x45 Czech that the VZ58's predecessor, the Vz52 was designed for, is one of several options including 6x48 UIAC, .270/.280 british (which you mention as main competitor to .308 for NATO adoption), etc. The VZ58, early prototypes, was also originally designed for the 7.62x45 Czech cartridge.
In regard to US Ordinance, weapon development has always been a problem. The expiration of the Clinton AWB and adoption of ARs and accessories in large quantities by US civilians has played a tremendous role in allowing private companies to develop off the rack solutions to issues plaguing our military's primary small arm. No doubt a tremendous soldier's number of lives have been saved by the US consumer demanding the best...
Yep, unfortunately short-sighted politics and logistics concerns can impede improved performance on the battlefield in the short term and also cost more in performance, time/effort and money (and lives) in the long term: see the M16 / 5.56 debacle going on 60 years now.
If the .276 Pedersen had been adopted for the Garand and the BAR in WW2, they would have been superior infantry weapons and we probably would never have gone through the trouble of developing the .30 Carbine, 7.62x51 or the 5.56 (M1 Carbine, M14 and the M16). The stockpiles of .30'06 could have been used for the M1919 machine-gun. The .276 Pedersen would also outperform the .30'06 as a long-range bolt-action sniper rifle.
The road not taken...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwntZVIoPpI
-
LeMay obviously had McNamara's ear when he rushed the M16 into production for Viet Nam with disastrous results. The Whiz Kid took the advice from an "Expert" and came up with a "better idea" about what makes a superior infantry rifle. Like the article says, the M16 killed a lot of GIs when it jammed / seized up in combat. Since then, it's been one band-aid after another to try to fix it's numerous short-comings. It has to be the only rifle in history fitted with a device (the forward assist) specifically designed to try to deal with the many anticipated jams when the rifle decides to crap out at the worst possible moment.
The AR still today has the same basic flaws with the DI system and the anemic 5.56 round. The work around is all the design bandaids, barrel/rifling and bullet changes and constant maintenance and even then it's not enough.
Like I alluded to in an earlier post, when the M4 started getting it's butt kicked by other (piston) rifles in head to head competition, the US military stopped the trials. Apparently, a jam every 400 rounds is an "acceptable" failure rate for the M4. That's a disgrace and a great disservice to our troops.
Who knows what private discussions were had. AFAIK, the General was concerned about his service and I think it's unfair to assign blame to him when so many more powerful people were responsible for military-wide adoption...
The DI system, though not ideal for extreme neglect or infrequent cleanings in field conditions, is adequate for most uses. For instance, the standard combat load for US GIs is 210 rounds.
Under sustained high rates of fire or engagements where 1000 rounds are going through the weapon, yes DIs are less than ideal. But as noted, the carbine is typically considered a secondary weapon to other forms of firepower...
In total agreement that the launch of the AR15 in VN was a boondoggle. I also agree that the 5.56 round is not ideal for shooting into cover, including dense jungle, where bullets are more likely to deflect off course than penetrate through... Further, the DI M16 also really wasn't ideal in rifle configuration (20" barrel versions w/ fixed stocks) nor was it well suited for the high rates of fire, mad minute/cover shooting/etc reactions to conflict where at least a few mags were dumped on full auto with that light profile barrel, minimal chrome in the action vs what Colt/Armalite recommended, improper cleaning instructions, and reusing mags that were designed to be disposable...
A perhaps good part about DI guns under severe use is typically the gas tube will burst before the barrel under severe heat, rending the weapon single shot but functional (at that point the barrel is likely on its last legs due to losing temper) but still serviceable.
The CZ805 bren had a 2 shot burst setting (auto resets unlike rachet system M16 burst) on it -- with the issues w/ a 5.56 round, I think that makes a tremendous amount of sense, and that's before you look at increased hit probabilities as it relates to both sight acquisition timing, time lead down range, and shooter aiming/estimation errors...
So I'm with you on 5.56.
However, I am totally on board of this read about 6.8spc not being tremendously different from 70+ gr 5.56 loadings: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/04/04/not-so-special-a-critical-view-of-the-6-8mm-spc/
I do think you need to up power beyond 6.8 spc and 7.62x39 before you reach an ideal do everything intermediate round.
And I generally agree for the need of the military to adopt new small arms (and surplus -- not destroy per usual -- their current inventory of weapon and mags). Why? B/c the primary cause of failure for the M4 carbine, Beretta M9 pistols, and most small arms is all the wear and tear and defective mags, etc, that the military continues to keep in circulation/use. Any weapon system if starting with fresh builds, mags, and parts would be more reliable than the current military inventory.
Are there better weapon systems than the M4 -- in my opinion yes. But it's based upon my personal needs/assessments. Everyone's perspective on what is important differs. Currently the military is driven by social justice concerns so small arms will have to be able to be used effectively from 5' 110 lb petite females to 225 lb 6'+ linebacker build types in special operations community... Considering that, the M4 continues to be superior in many respects to other offerings. However, the M4 w/ a piston kit (which most in that military trial were) is not typically more reliable than weapons designed around a piston system from the start. But typically they have a notably different manual of arms, are heavier (unless lots of polymer), and many use the same mags (so doesn't fix the bad mags in circulation issue -- remembering that mags are responsible for 4 out of 5+ malfunctions w/ M4s in the field)...
One thing I didn't note earlier and probably should have is that some piston systems like Adams do effectively free float the piston inside of the gas block, which helps with accuracy but doesn't totally resolve. 1/2 to 3/4 MOA requirement -- DI wins. 1 1/2 MOA requirement both DI and piston guns are equally competitive. Most soldiers probably aren't 1/2 MOA shooters, especially with iron sights or 2+ MOA red dots, so take that into consideration too...
-
Yep, unfortunately short-sighted politics and logistics concerns can impede improved performance on the battlefield in the short term and also cost more in performance, time/effort and money (and lives) in the long term: see the M16 / 5.56 debacle going on 60 years now.
If the .276 Pedersen had been adopted for the Garand and the BAR in WW2, they would have been superior infantry weapons and we probably would never have gone through the trouble of developing the .30 Carbine, 7.62x51 or the 5.56 (M1 Carbine, M14 and the M16). The stockpiles of .30'06 could have been used for the M1919 machine-gun. The .276 Pedersen would also outperform the .30'06 as a long-range bolt-action sniper rifle.
The road not taken...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwntZVIoPpI
.276 P is a .308 equivalent. But still an overall projectile and cartridge weight that would still be less than desirable. The overall cartridge length too is more than is desirable. If the .276 P concept was refined further, then I think you may have a point. But in the .276P only version of history, I still see .30 carbine being adopted (it was developed to replace pistols/sidearms not the Garand) and some iteration of the SCHV round being adopted in some sense too. Remember prior to the M16, the military spent a lot of time and effort trying to develop flechette rounds and weapons to be the primary military small arm... And if you look at a lot of the caseless ammo development, it too in concept is largely small caliber high velocity rounds (often in hyper-fire type weapons) with rounds that have far more in common with high velocity pistol calibers like 5.7x28 or 4.6x30 than the more powerful 5.56...
-
The adoption of military weapons always seems to be an odd and somewhat confused process. Look at the history of the P14 in Britain and how American factories which were set up to build that rifle ended up changing out the chambering to .30-06 to produce 1917 Enfields for World War I. That was out of immediate need for rifle production but it is still odd how it played out.
Side note: anyone know where to get a decent price on a 1917 Enfield stock which has not been cut down? The few I have seen in even semi-decent condition as of late run $350 or more for the stock with none of the metal hardware.
-
Yep, unfortunately short-sighted politics and logistics concerns can impede improved performance on the battlefield in the short term and also cost more in performance, time/effort and money (and lives) in the long term: see the M16 / 5.56 debacle going on 60 years now.
If the .276 Pedersen had been adopted for the Garand and the BAR in WW2, they would have been superior infantry weapons and we probably would never have gone through the trouble of developing the .30 Carbine, 7.62x51 or the 5.56 (M1 Carbine, M14 and the M16). The stockpiles of .30'06 could have been used for the M1919 machine-gun. The .276 Pedersen would also outperform the .30'06 as a long-range bolt-action sniper rifle.
The road not taken...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwntZVIoPpI
.276 P is a .308 equivalent. But still an overall projectile and cartridge weight that would still be less than desirable. The overall cartridge length too is more than is desirable. If the .276 P concept was refined further, then I think you may have a point. But in the .276P only version of history, I still see .30 carbine being adopted (it was developed to replace pistols/sidearms not the Garand) and some iteration of the SCHV round being adopted in some sense too. Remember prior to the M16, the military spent a lot of time and effort trying to develop flechette rounds and weapons to be the primary military small arm... And if you look at a lot of the caseless ammo development, it too in concept is largely small caliber high velocity rounds (often in hyper-fire type weapons) with rounds that have far more in common with high velocity pistol calibers like 5.7x28 or 4.6x30 than the more powerful 5.56...
It seems that a 6.5 to 7mm projectile is the magic formula for combining flat shooting, range, penetration, stopping power and low recoil. If they had adopted the .276 Pedersen,US Ordnance might possibly have used their heads and come up with a .276 "Short" for an assault rifle application (similar concept to the Germans' 7.92 Kurtz for the StGs) -- but probably not, knowing how US Ordnance operates!
It's all moot anyway, they're still trying to put bandaids on 5.56 with a change in rifling and 77gr. bullets, and still with DI.
Unfortunately, the Russians seem to be getting serious about transitioning to 6.5 Grendel or a similar 6.5x39 that would feed through existing 7.62x39 mags (that's using their heads, unlike US Ordnance). If that were to happen, the obsolete and anemic 5.56 would be seriously out gunned on the battlefield, especially if the Russian field body armor that would defeat the 5.56.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/11/13/6-5-grendel-cip-certified-russia/
-
One thing to note, and probably should have earlier... So typically in weapon overhaul programs, the gov't typically defines the specs, and then the lowest bidder (or woman/minority-owned business that was close to lowest bid or all three per preferences/points of the federal gov't contracting process) is the one that ends up doing the work... So the weapons overhaul programs that get bid out to the private sector are often something like Century monkeys, or worse, building our military's small arms.
Or the alternative has been to rely on unit armorers to do upgrades/maintenance where there is also a lot of a disincentives in the military bureacracy that prevent them from doing the job correctly and completely...
So ideally, the goal would be to replace entire inventory of weapons and mags in entirety and then the same factory building contracts also have a provision in the contract that they do all armorer-level maintenance, overhauls, etc, on that inventory and testing/outbound processes being the same as if they were building brand new weapons.
With the Russians, my understanding is that their system does more closely approximate this one.
I agree that somewhere between 6.5-7.5 is pretty ideal for an intermediate caliber. The challenges in design come w/ terminal effectiveness, increased throat erosion with necked down cartridges, and velocity as it relates to both of the previous factors -- and then the tradeoffs between all 3.
The rifling on 5.56 rifles has been 1:7 since 1982 w/ the M16A2 and was necessitated by replacing the M196 tracer w/ the longer L110. The L110 more closely followed trajectory of SS109 rounds (L110 being Belgian designed and SS109 being the Belgian's M855 -- main difference is slighter thicker jackets on most European ammo to comply w/ Hague than you see w/ US or Israeli, my favorite 5.56 military loadings, equivalents) and had about double the effective range of the earlier tracer, so was more suitable for use in SAW, etc, weapons... (I have also seen that rather than tracers, the reason for 1:7 was US Marines requirement that SS109 penetrate a steel helmet at 1300 meters -- 1:9 couldn't accomplish this but 1:7 did... I don't know which is the complete truth, but regardless 1:7 twist is the existing US milspec barrel twist.)
So there's no rifling changes needed to run 77gr -- even military testing showed for the 62gr M855/SS109 that 1:9 was ideal, but the tracer requirement pushed to 1:7. So the 70-80 gr bullets in 5.56 are merely optimizing the projectile w/ the twist rate of the existing barrels -- and 1:8 is probably the superior twist for all but the heaviest in the 70 gr, 80+ gr bullets.
I'm not w/ you on the DI vs Piston game, especially in an AR configuration. Piston ARs have more moving parts and more points for failure, relatively fragile pistons vs AKs or VZs or other piston-specific weapon designs, and more of the operating system is exposed to the elements which can also effect extreme durability... At high rates of fire, yes pistons will stay cooler. Suppressed, pistons stay cleaner with much less blowback in the faces... But as noted earlier, there is an accuracy penalty and a weight/handling penalty -- and in the increasing night operations of modern militaries, most AR piston systems also have larger infrared signatures than do DI guns, both suppressed and unsuppressed...
As far as bandaids, I think continuing to upgrade and revise a weapon system doesn't classify as such, unless anytime you see an opportunity to improve something and choose to fix it you classify then classify such improvement as a "bandaid"...
-
Getting back to the OP after going way off course, there's a reason why AKs are flying off the shelves and AR prices are taking a nose dive: people buying guns nowadays have found out that ARs are a PITA to shoot and maintain and expensive to feed compared to (imported) AKs, especially in 7.62x39. For most people looking for an all around semi-auto rifle -- self defense / hunting / survival / recreation / cost -- the AK (or Vz) is the way to go.
Then there's the AR ammunition / rifling debacle: which twist rates will stabilize which rounds and vice versa? Which rounds will fragment and which won't at a given velocity? Barrier penetration? Ammo cost? Do I have to thoroughly clean my weapon after shooting or can I throw it in the safe and not worry about it ever. 7.62x39 ammo cheap and available everywhere. Aside from 55 gr. (still more expensive than x39) the heavier stuff is way more expensive and hard to find. 99.9% of us aren't carrying full-auto weapons, so the fact that you can carry more 5.56 rounds doesn't matter. With 7.62 x 39, each round you pop off is far more potent.
I've had several ARs, but I just can't bring myself to shoot them much anymore because they're just too big of a PITA to deal with and feed.
With AKs and Vzs, the ammo is cheap, potent, and the gun goes bang when I pull the trigger, again and again and again (with little or no maintenance) -- they're just so much more fun and confidence inspiring (i.e. for when the SHTF) than an AR.
-
What MeatAxe said in his latest post. Forget the AR for now. Cost and reliability are at the top of the list - Go with the AK or VZ. Personally I prefer the VZ. I'm not judging, I'm just saying.....
-
What MeatAxe said in his latest post. Forget the AR for now. Cost and reliability are at the top of the list - Go with the AK or VZ. Personally I prefer the VZ. I'm not judging, I'm just saying.....
Cool, thx guys. I am leaning toward a VZ-58 from Czechpoint when they come in.
Another question about ammo. I am super careful with lead exposure and I only shoot TMJ out of my handgun for this reason. Are there any 'clean' 7.62x39 options?
-
What MeatAxe said in his latest post. Forget the AR for now. Cost and reliability are at the top of the list - Go with the AK or VZ. Personally I prefer the VZ. I'm not judging, I'm just saying.....
Cool, thx guys. I am leaning toward a VZ-58 from Czechpoint when they come in.
Another question about ammo. I am super careful with lead exposure and I only shoot TMJ out of my handgun for this reason. Are there any 'clean' 7.62x39 options?
You just missed a batch that came into Czechpoint last week -- sold out in a couple of days. See if you can get on their email list, as they never last long.
I wouldn't worry much about lead exposure. As a rule, 7.62x39 bullets are bi-metal or copper jacketed, many with a jacketed base, so there's no lead fouling in the bore. There may be minimal lead kicked up shooting soft points or lead based bullets, but as long as your shooting outside or in an indoor range with adequate ventilation, there shouldn't be much problem. Wear nitrile gloves when you do clean your rifle -- and avoid Frog Lube!!!
-
The main thing to avoid lead exposure is to not shoot indoors... Change clothes after shooting and place them promptly in the wash, and wash your hands after shooting before eating... Cleaning solvents, CLPs, etc, that have toxic petroleum and/or chemical-based components/distillates also provide far more health related concerns than lead for the average shooter...
IIRC most russian FMJ ammo has open bases that are inside the case...
Regarding MeatAxes last, the reason ARs are coming down in price is that more are being made by more manufacturers, more competition, and that market was already pretty saturated... Folks stocked up on AR15s since 2008 or so, and are now expanding into other weapon systems like AKs, .308 AR10s, long range precision rigs, a small resurgence in shotgun sports, pistol caliber carbines, etc...
-
I came across this article on the shortcomings of the M4 & 5.56 in Afghanistan:
http://www.defensetech.org/2010/03/01/taking-back-the-infantry-half-kilometer/
The referenced paper by a Major with the US Army war college is a pretty good summary of US military rifle development and doctrine since WWI (and the missteps thereof), particularly with regard to the failures of the M16/M4 and the 5.56 round. Pretty good, informative read:
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA512331&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
It seems that any "advances" in barrier/armor penetration (heavier/steel core bullets) for the 5.56 round negate the stopping power / lethality advantage of the 5.56 manifest by the original 55 gr. M193 lead core bullet, which causes spectacular fragmentation wounds at 2400 fps and above and inspired the Russians to create their own 5.45 "poison dart" round, which wounds by tumbling rather than fragmentation since the Russians can't seem to duplicate the ultra-thin fragmenting copper jackets of the US M193 round. Unfortunately, advances in Soviet body armor, or even steel AK magazine chest rigs can defeat M193 rounds.
If the US Military was smart, they'd go with either the 6.8 SPC, 6.5 Grendel or the 7x45 ARC round discussed in the article and just replace the 5.56 uppers with a piston upper in the new caliber...but, of course, that would make too much sense. ::)
Now that Wolf is making relatively cheap 6.5 Grendel ammo, interest in that caliber is increasing among civilians. You can already get ARs and Veprs chambered in that caliber, and I'd really love to see a 6.5 Grendel Vz58 or Bren 805!
ETA: Whether you're a grunt or a citizen, when the SHTF, you want your rifle to go bang every time you pull the trigger and the bullet to put the bad man down, even if he's behind cover, whether it's MOA or minute of man. The AK seems to fit the bill on that count out to 300 yds. Of course the 6.5 Grendel Vepr would seem to do that out to 1,000 yds and beyond, which is even more better!
-
Yes, that's a good read and makes a lot of valid points.
The main issue w/ Afghanistan as it relates to extended ranges is that troops had far less airpower there due to geographic location (not really convenient for Navy air assets and that the bulk of air assets were sent to Iraq for much of the Afghanistan conflict. And the drones didn't really come into mass adoption/use until the tail end of the Bush years.
Doctrinally, air, artillery, and mortar assets should be primary engagement tools at extended ranges...
The new 5.56 "green" bullet seems to be much better on paper than M855, but haven't seen extensive studies beyond the military's own. And since it's classified as "armor piercing," it's not available for civilian purchase/testing.
Before the ban on 7n6, I would have strongly recommended a 5.45 rifle over 5.56 due to the fact that the bullet is much less velocity dependent so performs better at longer ranges...
6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel strike me as trying to put lipstick on a pig (i.e., trying to fit the 5.56 magwell/weapon system). Regardless of weapon, if the military is going to adopt a new caliber, they should do so in entirety -- see also my concern about mags and other components being unreliable due to age, wear, and tear but nonetheless remaining in circulation.
If you read back on the Bren board, one member has already rebarreled his bren for a 6.5 G.
-
What MeatAxe said in his latest post. Forget the AR for now. Cost and reliability are at the top of the list - Go with the AK or VZ. Personally I prefer the VZ. I'm not judging, I'm just saying.....
AKs are fine for a rifle role, but manual of arms is not ideal for a carbine. Perhaps less of an issue if you're comparing a more refined AK like the Galil ACE or Polish Tantal, but they're exceptions rather than the rule.
And though generally not a problem for AKs, with most with stamped receivers they can dent and render inoperable. Milled receivers may crack, but generally requires much more force -- the main issue w/ major damage is that stamped can generally be hammered back to function whereas milled *might* be able to be repaired with zealous welding.
On my thought process
My first semi-auto military variant rifle was the Galil in 5.56. I wanted a common round, utmost reliability, and something I could afford to shoot a lot of. With a magwell adapter, one can also run AR mags, but that wasn't a priority for me -- I prefer galil mags to ar mags. At the time, .223 steel case, which the Golani I purchased likes, was running around 15 cents a round IIRC -- and I was actually pretty torn between the Galil and a 5.45 AK at the time as to which was the best, especially considering that cost was a factor.
To caliber, 5.56/.223 does best out long barrels, so the 18" galil barrel struck me as an ideal length for a general purpose rifle in a caliber designed for best performance in 22-24" barrels...
Doing the same amount of research, wanting more in the way of effectiveness out of shorter barrels, wanting a carbine, etc, led me to concluding the VZ58 was the ideal carbine for my needs... The steal pricing on the VZ2008s helped to encourage me to take the jump too. And I am glad I did -- for all the reasons, I and others have covered here before. Carbine, I was primarily looking at the VZ, new production M1 carbines, and ARs... But now there are also other interesting carbines on the market -- the CZ805 Bren has me pretty intrigued actually, though all things considered I don't believe it's superior to the VZ58 for my needs, but in some respects the Bren is better.
Again, my personal bests for 5.56 general purpose rifle is the Galil and 7.62x39 carbine is the VZ58. However, neither of these are guns I am personally able, skills or tools, to tear completely apart and rebuild, when generally, I try to take a "don't own things I can't fix" approach to life, even if in running out of time I sometimes pay others to fix them... Newer weapons are much more serviceable in construction...
The AR15, b/c of it's light weight, is very well suited to a carbine role, but shorter barrels limit its effectiveness. However, a 16" barrel is a significant boost in velocity over the 10-14" barrels most commonly found on military issue weapons and discussed by Meataxe. The 16" barrel is common for accurized Recce builds as well (believe, if I have my facts straight, that navy seals/crane wanted the 16" recce vs the Army wanting a 20" DMR, so they compromised w/ an 18" spr weapon)...
An AR15 with a midlength gas system, decent barrel w/ optimized profile (not A2), free floated handguard, good but affordable trigger like Geissele G2S, a milspec bolt carrier w/ a good coating like NP3 (nickel teflon) or NiB, and add an optic, and you have a really good entry for first centerfire rifle when moving up from a 22lr and a cost effective one at that too...
My Mrs was never around firearms until me, and her first semi-auto was a 9mm AR (well, first I got her a Keltec sub2k but she didn't like all the plastic on a gun so it became mine) and is now a lightweight 5.56... She didn't care for the VZ58. So on prompting of wife and having family in the service whose primaries are ARs, I decided that might as well familiarize myself w/ the system. That familiarization led me to stop boycotting it out of principle/opinions similar to what Meataxe is voicing here.
In that journey, I've come to realize while not optimal, the AR isn't as bad as its reputation in some gun circles might suggest, if you're willing to upgrade components and buy quality from the start. Additionally, it does beat both the VZ58 and Galil in the accuracy department by a bit w/ a free floated and quality barrel -- and mounting optics is so incredibly easy vs those two weapons as well.
Lastly, and for many importantly, the AR is a much, much more cost effective system to get into. The Galil and VZ are actually pretty expensive if you price in not only initial weapon but also spare parts, deep mags, upgrade parts, etc. However on tradeoff, I also find the AR incredibly boring.
Anything beyond the range of these weapons, I believe a bolt action to be sufficient for my needs -- though semis are preferred. Military bolt, I really like my Swiss K31 and its surplus GP11 is the cheapest "match" ammo too in .308 equivalent calibers... However, I have been wanting to add some FALs to the collection, but have decided to only do so after adding an accurized .308 AR first... Probably going the RRA route to share same mags as the FALs.
Any need beyond .308 range, I'd be looking to bolt action .300 win mag (since more affordable .338 lapua or .50 bmg -- and I don't need to disable vehicles/penetrate armor which are the primary advantages of those larger and heavier calibers as I understand it vs the win mag). And with these larger calibers, the strength of a bolt action is also reassuring from a safety perspective.
I'm not saying anyone need to agree with me or even reach the same conclusions. Make up your own opinion but please do so on facts.
Probably iterated some of above previously in this thread, but might as well do so here to bring back on topic...
YMMV.
-
RSR - Well said as usual.
-
RSR - you are correct on the SPR - it is an 18" barrel. The Navy's version is the Mk 12 Mod 1. Those are supposed to be phased out for the SCAR 17 with the heavy barrel (if the funding doesn't evaporate). I recently built a Mk. 12 with a few modifications and it has been very solid so far. I dropped the massive PRI top rail and made a few other changes to decrease the weight as an exact clone of the Mk12 would be ~12lbs and that is nonsense for a rifle chambered in 5.56. My piston-driven SR762 is considerably lighter than that.
I have toyed with the idea of building something similar to my SR762 but in 6.5 Creedmoor as that round has been a lot of fun with 140gr Bergers in my Ruger Precision Rifle. Berger's 130gr AR Hybrid OTM Tactical bullet would be very interesting in a SAPR and an SR762 barrel swap would take all of 15 minutes.
MeatAxe - there is no great mystery to AR barrel twist - 1:7 with 75gr TAP or 77gr SMK (MK 262 Mod 1) and done.
-
RSR - you are correct on the SPR - it is an 18" barrel. The Navy's version is the Mk 12 Mod 1. Those are supposed to be phased out for the SCAR 17 with the heavy barrel (if the funding doesn't evaporate). I recently built a Mk. 12 with a few modifications and it has been very solid so far. I dropped the massive PRI top rail and made a few other changes to decrease the weight as an exact clone of the Mk12 would be ~12lbs and that is nonsense for a rifle chambered in 5.56. My piston-driven SR762 is considerably lighter than that.
I have toyed with the idea of building something similar to my SR762 but in 6.5 Creedmoor as that round has been a lot of fun with 140gr Bergers in my Ruger Precision Rifle. Berger's 130gr AR Hybrid OTM Tactical bullet would be very interesting in a SAPR and an SR762 barrel swap would take all of 15 minutes.
MeatAxe - there is no great mystery to AR barrel twist - 1:7 with 75gr TAP or 77gr SMK (MK 262 Mod 1) and done.
So the man from Barfcom is still flogging it? LOL
The Mk262, etc. still has trouble penetrating common intermediate barriers (unlike 7.62x39):
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2006smallarms/gandy.pdf
And the cost of any and all 75 - 77 grain 5.56 ammo is @ $0.75 to $1.50 per round, even at its cheapest, more than 3 times the 23 cents per round for FMJ, SP and HP 7.62x39, so that makes even practicing an expensive proposition.
Not the best choice for a first rifle, if you want to shoot, improve and have something that will save your butt when the SHTF.
Now where's that video of you blowing up your AR in the bathtub?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0YIJQ1jgEI
-
RSR - you are correct on the SPR - it is an 18" barrel. The Navy's version is the Mk 12 Mod 1. Those are supposed to be phased out for the SCAR 17 with the heavy barrel (if the funding doesn't evaporate). I recently built a Mk. 12 with a few modifications and it has been very solid so far. I dropped the massive PRI top rail and made a few other changes to decrease the weight as an exact clone of the Mk12 would be ~12lbs and that is nonsense for a rifle chambered in 5.56. My piston-driven SR762 is considerably lighter than that.
Which is precisely why the SEALs wanted a 16" rifle -- they already had SR25s (sniper variant AR10s in .308) with 20" barrels. So having a 5.56 weapon that was effectively the same weight and same length and same platform but fielding a less capable cartridge/caliber at the intermediate to long range a 18-20" 5.56 AR sniper variants were built for didn't make much sense considering the other tools in their chest...
The recce was intended as a accurized rifle that was capable of precision shots if mission required but was also suitable for close quarters to general use as well -- pushing to 18-20" barrels completely negated the main aims of the recce concept... The Army wanted a 5.56 DMR, no doubt for logistics reasons, and the SPR was the mishmashed result of these two competing objectives... Probably the Army Special Ops guys wanted the same as the SEALs but upper echelon Army brass gets more involved generally in their weapons and such since there's not as clear of a division of skill sets, capabilities, and equipment between regular and special ops vs the Navy...
Not sure if all seal were to get the recce upper as a replacement for the 14.5" long range uppers for everyone or just select? Note the 10" and 14" uppers as standard. Good read and pics on seal weapons regardless: http://www.tactical-life.com/gear/colts-m4a1-556mm-carbine/
(http://files.harrispublications.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2009/02/seal.gif)
I think there's a lot to be said for ARs in the ~16" recce configuration. Colt Canada's special purpose/special forces version of the M4 has a 15-16" barrel and is the version fielded in Canada, the UK and other places in Europe as well (it's probably the main M4 variant competitor to the HK416) and has a unique barrel for increased accuracy and velocity as well, and the recce setup has much of the same performance. For a general purpose semi-auto 5.56 AR15 carbine without military ammo supply chains, etc, accuracy and reliability matters, and 16" 5.56 recce type guns are a really intriguing niche in the world of weapon system compromises...
-
RSR - I have a 16" AR with the carbine length gas system and another with a mid-length gas system. It makes me wonder why they didn't use a mid-length gas system on the recce 16" AR as it would cut down dwell time, reduce pressure and minimize wear and tear on the gas system. I suppose their options were carbine length or rifle length as that would likely be what they would have on hand when they started playing with the idea. Mid-length is more of a civilian market creature but it would avoid some problems.
That is a nice write up at tactical life. It illustrates the advantages of modular design. That is one of my favorite things about the AR. If I want a 16" barrel one minute and a 14.5", 18" or 20" the next minute it is a matter of pushing one pin over, swapping uppers and pushing the pin back in place. 5.56 to .300 takes the same amount of time. Barrel swaps on an upper are almost as easy. Speaking of barrels, 10" barrel with no suppressor? I will pass on that one.
I agree the Mk 12 Mod 1 in its official configuration is somewhat goofy. The 18" barrel isn't too bad but 12 pounds or more is ridiculous for a 5.56 with relatively limited range/power. The same would be true of a 12 pound rifle in 7.62x39, 5.45x39 or .300BO. It is far too easy to get much more power and range in the same size/weight package. That is why I started with the idea of building a Mk12 type rifle but much lighter. 12 pounds? No way. Mine came in at about 9.25 with optics, mount and Harris bipod.
MeatAxe - as per usual, you have no idea what you are talking about.
For starters, I am not from or on barf.com.
The "cost of any and all 75-77 grain" is not "$0.75 to $1.50 even at its cheapest". No access to a Dillon650? You always practice with the same ammo that you use for defense? You are a rare creature.
Just for the fun of it...How long does it take you to swap out uppers on your rifle? Change barrels if you want to convert a rifle from light to heavy, long to short? Change out gas systems? Change caliber? How long does it take to break out that 12 ton press and knock that out? How about mount an optic in a manner that holds zero and doesn't require a chin weld or 10" of eye relief? Lol
Also, you are just flat wrong regarding ARs sitting on the shelves. The number one selling rifle in the USA? The AR15 by far. In fact, four of the top five models are some version of the AR15 and it has been that way for years.
The sudden spike in AKM rifle sales which has driven up prices is the result of who is sitting in the Oval Office or did you miss the importation bans via executive order relating to foreign arms? Ever since that started, the prices have been climbing because people are afraid they will not be able to get them anymore. Ban scare -> increased demand -> increased price but also increased sales. This pattern has repeated itself several times since the mid-80s. You either have a short memory or haven't been in the gun market for 30+ years like some of us.
If I were really concerned about barrier penetration, I would not reach for my AR or my AKM but one of my rifles chambered in .308 or larger....granted, my selection is kinda limited - I only have 20 or so rifles in my gun safe at the moment.
You also seem to have a bizarre fixation with rifles and bathtubs. I find most rifles too bulky for the tub or shower so my bathtub gun is usually more along the lines of a Glock 20. As such, I am not particularly concerned about the bubble bath performance of any long gun. I tend to encounter mud in the field more frequently than soap bubbles. YMMV
-
I believe the Crane Recce was originally supposed to have a rifle length system actually for primary use suppressed.
Yes, midlength would be better.
Colt Canada uses the carbine length as you mention in their 15-16" uppers. The only thing I can figure is that they want a higher rate of fire under full auto than what the midlength would provide. Not fully up on Canada's military rifle situation, but I think standard issue to troops is still a rifle length AR.
IIRC, the recce was developed around the start of the GWOT, so early 2000s. Also, IIRC the first midlength system was developed around 2001 by Armalite, so that may have a lot to do w/ why the original recce went with the rifle over midlength system...
As cheap as it is to build a lower, I don't know why you wouldn't just have separate rifles as a civilian... Military is another matter.
I agree a 10" barrel in 5.56 is misguided, even suppressed. .300 blk is another matter, but a serious kaboom risk w/ wrong ammo in wrong barrel...
The modularity and serviceability by the end user of the AR is a big plus under a severe gov't firearms restrictions scenario...
With your glock in the tub, just make sure you swap out the standard striker spring cups for the maritime version for maximum reliability.
I didn't mention previously, but was looking around and the Sionics assembled uppers are really appealing at their pricepoint as an "only own one" or "first time buyer" general purpose AR. Choice of light or medium profiled barrels, and including a BCG (coated in nickel teflon!) are priced about the same as a BCM upper without one of their bcgs... Midlength systems standard.
For first time buyers, lowers are pretty easy to assemble if you're so inclined, but for uppers -- both safety and function -- it's definitely important to ensure they are assembled correctly from the start...
-
RSR - I have a 16" AR with the carbine length gas system and another with a mid-length gas system. It makes me wonder why they didn't use a mid-length gas system on the recce 16" AR as it would cut down dwell time, reduce pressure and minimize wear and tear on the gas system. I suppose their options were carbine length or rifle length as that would likely be what they would have on hand when they started playing with the idea. Mid-length is more of a civilian market creature but it would avoid some problems.
That is a nice write up at tactical life. It illustrates the advantages of modular design. That is one of my favorite things about the AR. If I want a 16" barrel one minute and a 14.5", 18" or 20" the next minute it is a matter of pushing one pin over, swapping uppers and pushing the pin back in place. 5.56 to .300 takes the same amount of time. Barrel swaps on an upper are almost as easy. Speaking of barrels, 10" barrel with no suppressor? I will pass on that one.
I agree the Mk 12 Mod 1 in its official configuration is somewhat goofy. The 18" barrel isn't too bad but 12 pounds or more is ridiculous for a 5.56 with relatively limited range/power. The same would be true of a 12 pound rifle in 7.62x39, 5.45x39 or .300BO. It is far too easy to get much more power and range in the same size/weight package. That is why I started with the idea of building a Mk12 type rifle but much lighter. 12 pounds? No way. Mine came in at about 9.25 with optics, mount and Harris bipod.
MeatAxe - as per usual, you have no idea what you are talking about.
For starters, I am not from or on barf.com.
The "cost of any and all 75-77 grain" is not "$0.75 to $1.50 even at its cheapest". No access to a Dillon650? You always practice with the same ammo that you use for defense? You are a rare creature.
Just for the fun of it...How long does it take you to swap out uppers on your rifle? Change barrels if you want to convert a rifle from light to heavy, long to short? Change out gas systems? Change caliber? How long does it take to break out that 12 ton press and knock that out? How about mount an optic in a manner that holds zero and doesn't require a chin weld or 10" of eye relief? Lol
Also, you are just flat wrong regarding ARs sitting on the shelves. The number one selling rifle in the USA? The AR15 by far. In fact, four of the top five models are some version of the AR15 and it has been that way for years.
The sudden spike in AKM rifle sales which has driven up prices is the result of who is sitting in the Oval Office or did you miss the importation bans via executive order relating to foreign arms? Ever since that started, the prices have been climbing because people are afraid they will not be able to get them anymore. Ban scare -> increased demand -> increased price but also increased sales. This pattern has repeated itself several times since the mid-80s. You either have a short memory or haven't been in the gun market for 30+ years like some of us.
If I were really concerned about barrier penetration, I would not reach for my AR or my AKM but one of my rifles chambered in .308 or larger....granted, my selection is kinda limited - I only have 20 or so rifles in my gun safe at the moment.
You also seem to have a bizarre fixation with rifles and bathtubs. I find most rifles too bulky for the tub or shower so my bathtub gun is usually more along the lines of a Glock 20. As such, I am not particularly concerned about the bubble bath performance of any long gun. I tend to encounter mud in the field more frequently than soap bubbles. YMMV
:o Gracious Golly Gumdrops -- you have 20 guns in your safe? Amateur!!!
The OP wants a first rifle and you've got him having to reload or pay 75 cents + per round and spend a bunch of time maintaining an AR! I'm sure he'd much rather shoot a lot of ammo and enjoy his rifle than go through all those machinations -- and have a gun that goes bang every time he pulls the trigger and won't blow up if he gets it wet.
I don't swap out uppers -- I just pick up another rifle of whatever caliber and I'm good to go immediately (including .308 & 7.62x54R AKs). Of course 7.62x39 is a great all around caliber, and a great one for a new rifleman, for all the reasons stated above. There are several very effective self defense / hunting Com Bloc FMJs, HPs and SPs that are indeed cheap enough to practice with (@ 23 cents per round) that even group on par with SST or Z-Max, although I may also be expanding to 6.5 Grendel (a derivative of the 7.62x39) in the near future.
I do swap out optics between rifles on occasion. Of course, AKs and Vzs these days have solid side rails and optic mounts that hold zero, so that's not an issue, especially when you co-witness with the iron sights and have close eye-relief (apparently you have not seen those -- a lot has happened in the AK/Vz world over the past 30 years). "Horse" on here sells the amazing RS Regulate scope mounts for the AK, Vz and others.
You need to get out and get up to date with the 7.62x39! 8)
-
MeatAxe, I am beginning to wonder if you have reading comprehension problems. I said I have 20 RIFLES in my safe -- not 20 guns total. Out of those 20 rifles, few are as inexpensive as an AKM, VZ58 or AR15 and several have optics or a chassis which cost more than any of those three rifles. I tend to go for quality over raw quantity as I am not starting my own militia group anytime in the immediate future and I have noticed that rifles are the most effective when fired one at a time as opposed to John Woo mall-ninja style.
Yes - I am aware that there are many forms of cheap, inaccurate and sometimes unreliable forms of steel-cased 7.62x39 ammo on the market. If I were into minute of Buick sized groups or if I didn't own a Dillon 650, I am sure I would enjoy the per round savings. My AKM usually eats it with no problem (other than the charcoal briquettes it often leaves in the bolt, gas system and barrel) but using quality ammo or loading my own with high quality components matched to my particular gun has always yielded much more satisfying results. As such, I'll pass on the steel-cased el cheapo stuff.
Current cost per round. If you rely on ammo cost as a buying point that may certainly end up biting you within the next year. O'bummer has been bad enough but if the next one gets elected (heaven forbid) and lives up to her NRA F-minus rating (I am sure she would), that cheap imported ammo might well vanish. Hopefully that will not happen. She is losing ground at the moment but the US media is doing backflips trying to make it happen. Not long ago, many discovered this could happen very quickly after they purchased an AK or other rifle chambered in 5.45x39mm only to watch the price of the ammo shoot up due to the Oval Office barking at the Bureau of All Things Fun, Etc. until they figured out an excuse to block importation.
.75 cents per round? Again, you have a reading comprehension issue. If you review my previous posts, I clearly stated that you do not have to use 75 or 77gr for practice and plinking. There are obviously surplus 55gr and 62gr options and it is easy enough to sight in with your primary ammo and then note differences in POI based on the ammo you are using for practice. If you use surplus/bulk 5.56 you are talking maybe 10-12 cents a round difference. Big whooping deal. The surplus ammo types for the 5.56 are brass case and reloadable. He may not reload now but he might in the future and that brass doesn't turn into a pumpkin at midnight. I had saved up thousands of pieces of 5.56 brass before I ever bothered to start reloading it (during a supply shortage of course)...shocking news: brass that sits in a box for years unused still works. If nothing else, run that brass through a tumbler and sell it on any of the gun auction sites. That will decrease per round total expense. If the budget is that tight, a .22LR for practice is likely the best option for a first rifle.
ARs do not "take a bunch of time to maintain". I am beginning to wonder if you have ever owned one or used one that wasn't purchased with coupons from the bottom of cereal boxes. Blows up when wet? Nonsense. My AR (and the US military's M4s) work fine when wet - I know this because mine has been drenched as well as caked with mud on several occasions and it has always gone "bang" but never "boom". I haven't had a need to shoot it under water as of yet and I seriously doubt that will come up anytime soon since a Glock 20 is my bathtub and hot tub weapon of choice.
I need to get up to date with the 7.62x39? I have 7.62x39 rifles and have had them for the last ~30 years. I have reloaded for them for much of that time as well. Meh. I may even buy another one once the importation ban scare calms down and the AK price bubble pops...
-
Back to the more interesting portion of the program...
RSR - at one point, I was fairly current on Canada's arms but I have lost track of them somewhat. From what I can tell, their rifles and carbines are still very similar to those used in the US with a few tweaks here and there. They do have one which strikes me as fairly interesting - it is the C8CT. They also have the C7CT but it is more like the M12 Mod 1 where the C8CT is a more compact weapon. Despite verifying its existence, I haven't been able to track down the exact specs for it as of yet.
In addition to rifles which are almost clones of the M16A4, the M4A1, the Mk12 and the Mk18, they also have the C8SFW which appears to be almost identical to the British L119A1. At some point, they had a mental misfire and also adopted the C8PDW which is a PDW version as the name implies. It has a 5.7" barrel. I had no idea the Canadians were big fans of insane muzzle flash and going deaf in 5 rounds but the PDW version seems to confirm that is the case.
Of course I have maritime cups on the tub Glock. Don't be silly.
I have looked at Sionics a few times in the past but always accidentally forget about them when building an AR. Wow - their prices on uppers are not bad at all. I would be tempted to try them out but my next AR build will likely be something odd like a 6.5 Creedmoor.
Pic of the C8CT mentioned hereinabove...I am not much on that grip but the rest doesn't look too bad:
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160727/01dcea039472b1e7b3d81f70388807c1.jpg)
-
OP -- as mdi and meataxe both note if you get to the substance of their posts, the 7.62x39 and 5.56/.223 weapons excel in different ways.
Want to sit on a bench at the range and shoot for accuracy -- an AR in 5.56 wins, especially if you opt for a premium barrel and a free float forend.
Want minimal cleaning, then go w/ a piston gun over a DI AR -- your pic on weapon platform. Might have mentioned earlier but some Russian "non-corrosive" stuff has in the past proved to be mildly corrosive, so there is a risk w/ that cost savings.
Want a minute of man carbine for cheap training -- 7.62x39 weapons are sufficient there and typically less prone to malfunctions than ARs, especially if using cheap steel cased russian ammo (if you load 2-3 brass rounds in with steel case 5.56 mags, you can generally avoid issues with steel that way -- brass round and then 9-14 rounds of steel, another brass, etc). Issue with steel is that they don't seal against chamber walls as well, so with straight walled 5.56 powder and other fouling adheres to the case wall eventually leading to extraction issues. Brass expands more, so when expanding, that fouling adheres to the case and effectively cleans your chamber... Running 5 mags of steel and then one of brass, you should anticipate a failure to extract.
Want barrier penetration or a hog rifle or a deer rifle, 7.62x39.
Want a varmint rifle to protect livestock from common predators, 5.56.
Want the least amount of recoil, 5.56.
Want a common us made round, 5.56.
Want good self defense ammo -- both 7.62x39 and 5.56 is available and US made, but starts at 50 cents or so per round, or 2-3x what range ammo runs.
There's more here, but this should deliver the point.
IMO, the VZ58 was 50 years ahead of its time and remains and excellent weapon. It also sits fairly squarely in the middle of the AR vs AK debate (accuracy, reliability, etc) as well as caliber-wise somewhat in the middle of the 5.56 vs .308 debate.
Write your needs down on a piece of paper or spreadsheet. Prioritize those needs. Evaluate each point objectively. And decide accordingly... Many don't like having to be constrained to this process, so we end up buying add'l firearms -- perhaps more than we actually need?.
-
Back to the more interesting portion of the program...
RSR - at one point, I was fairly current on Canada's arms but I have lost track of them somewhat. From what I can tell, their rifles and carbines are still very similar to those used in the US with a few tweaks here and there. They do have one which strikes me as fairly interesting - it is the C8CT. They also have the C7CT but it is more like the M12 Mod 1 where the C8CT is a more compact weapon. Despite verifying its existence, I haven't been able to track down the exact specs for it as of yet.
In addition to rifles which are almost clones of the M16A4, the M4A1, the Mk12 and the Mk18, they also have the C8SFW which appears to be almost identical to the British L119A1. At some point, they had a mental misfire and also adopted the C8PDW which is a PDW version as the name implies. It has a 5.7" barrel. I had no idea the Canadians were big fans of insane muzzle flash and going deaf in 5 rounds but the PDW version seems to confirm that is the case.
Of course I have maritime cups on the tub Glock. Don't be silly.
I have looked at Sionics a few times in the past but always accidentally forget about them when building an AR. Wow - their prices on uppers are not bad at all. I would be tempted to try them out but my next AR build will likely be something odd like a 6.5 Creedmoor.
Pic of the C8CT mentioned hereinabove...I am not much on that grip but the rest doesn't look too bad:
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160727/01dcea039472b1e7b3d81f70388807c1.jpg)
Canada's interesting to me b/c Diemaco starts from a quality-first and seems to not have major concern for cost in that regards... Vs the US, that operates pretty much the exact opposite. Furniture-wise the canadians/diemaco is somewhat behind but their latest w/ the monolithic uppers have been sporting magpul stocks and ergo grips IIRC.
I picked up one of the bcm c8 uppers w/ the simon sleeve a couple years back and have it outfitted sort of like a SFW/L119A1 with free float quad rail, fde furniture, etc, and was actually looking at picking up another and outfitting it more along the line of the carbine w/ fsb tri rail and odg furniture, probably a different grip however...
Just looked at Sionics' website, and they're now selling their uppers without the bcg included. looks like they lowered prices by $50-75 per assembled upper, but are selling the bcg separately now at $170, so an ~$100 price increase from what I recall. Capitalism I suppose.
But still, $250 barrel, $100 upper receiver, $30 for gas tube and and flash hider, $5 or so for assorted pins -- you're paying ~$35 for assembly above cost of bare parts, which is fair, but not getting the same deal as before -- that is, $100+ in freebies when they had them priced at high $400s w/ bcg.
-
In other news regarding magazines a typical US military fashion -- instead of trashing up to decades old mags in circulation:
U.S. Army to Introduce Enhanced M4 Magazine
POSTED BY: MATTHEW COX JULY 25, 2016
The U.S. Army TACOM is introducing a new M4 Enhanced Performance Magazine, according to a TACOM Maintenance Information Message first reported by Soldier Systems.net.
The new magazine will feature a tan body and blue follower and will be engineered to address feeding issues with M855A1 ammunition, according to Soldier Systems.
The M4 EPM has been assigned NSN 1005-01-630-9508 and will be introduced through attrition of the current magazine.
The Army first started to improve M4 magazines in 2008 after reliability tests found that the original follower caused many of the weapon?s feeding malfunctions during the test.
We will be watching for further updates.
http://kitup.military.com/2016/07/u-s-army-to-introduce-enhanced-m4-magazine.html
-
In other news regarding magazines a typical US military fashion -- instead of trashing up to decades old mags in circulation:
U.S. Army to Introduce Enhanced M4 Magazine
POSTED BY: MATTHEW COX JULY 25, 2016
The U.S. Army TACOM is introducing a new M4 Enhanced Performance Magazine, according to a TACOM Maintenance Information Message first reported by Soldier Systems.net.
The new magazine will feature a tan body and blue follower and will be engineered to address feeding issues with M855A1 ammunition, according to Soldier Systems.
The M4 EPM has been assigned NSN 1005-01-630-9508 and will be introduced through attrition of the current magazine.
The Army first started to improve M4 magazines in 2008 after reliability tests found that the original follower caused many of the weapon?s feeding malfunctions during the test.
We will be watching for further updates.
http://kitup.military.com/2016/07/u-s-army-to-introduce-enhanced-m4-magazine.html
Yep, another band aid and another disservice to the US combat soldier. Hopefully, they can get P-mags in the combat zone.
-
Yep, another band aid and another disservice to the US combat soldier. Hopefully, they can get P-mags in the combat zone.
Lancers. ;)
Actually, the GI magazine design while perhaps not optimal can be reliable if they're used within the constraints of their design/service life... Not a bandaid, a necessary and prudent upgrade.
The issue is that not all units/soldiers are provided with enough ammo to test function of all magazines prior to deployment -- and those that do, if they don't crush/destroy bad mags, they'll just get reissued to someone else when exchanging (and mags they receive in exchange may not work properly either -- another soldier's discards). With supply folks not liking lost/damaged mags, it's lose/lose situation for the average soldier, which is why many just purchased their own mags for use in combat, at least until the powers that be banned them from doing so...
Further, the HK 416 gold standard steel mags are expensive at $30 per pop. C products sells stainless mags with their own follower (magpul designed), and the stainless mags are much stronger and more durable than aluminum. Same exact outside dimensions (most polymer mags are not). Difference in weight between an aluminum and stainless mag is only equivalent to about 2 rounds of 5.56 ammo.
Polymer mags are same weight to lighter than aluminum, but run at 2-2.5x the cost of aluminum. C Prods stainless mags run $1-2 more and already come w/ an upgraded follower (SG Ammo has them in quantity at sub $9 vs aluminum you'll see at sub $7, magpul you'll see around $10-12, and lancer at $13-15)...
Point being, stainless are better (function) and also much cheaper (cost) and same size (kit) -- and since stainless don't have corrosion issues typically of concern with steel mags.
At least the outside color is different, which will make identification easier than looking at followers... There are still countless mags in circulation with the old black/gray followers dating back to Vietnam. The green anti-tilts evaluated in the mentioned test were a significant improvement over the black, and these latest generation are a significant improvement over the greens... Typically 75-80%+ of AR malfunctions in reliability tests have been mag related. Top tier mags of any type eliminate the bulk of these malfunctions.
-
Went to range a couple of days ago with a friend who had a high-dollar, super tactical AR15 with all the premium parts. It's a very nice rifle, very accurate, but he did have a jam -- a double feed. It was cleared relatively easily and he continued shooting. My VZ2008 did not have a single failure.
That's pretty much the theme when I go out with my VZ2008 and my friends with their AR's. It doesn't happen every outing, but every third of fourth time an AR in our group goes down for whatever reason. Sometimes the fix is quick, sometimes the AR is out of commission pending access to beefier tools.
I can only imagine the frustration in actual life-and-death situations if AR15's have that kind of failure rate. Sure, change out the mags later, or switch out the rifle later with the armorer, but in that very moment such resources aren't a lot of comfort.
I can see how the debate persists regarding 223/556 vs 7.62x39, but I have no idea of how the debate between the reliability of AR's vs combloc weapons can seriously continue. In my own, limited recreational experience, I've seen a huge difference. I would give a number expressed as however many times more so regarding the reliability of my VZ2008/SKS's vs. AR15's, but if you multiply zero (VZ2008/SKS) by any number (AR15) you still get a zero. Let's just say the difference is tremendous. It doesn't really matter at the range as it's all in good fun, but in the case of a dire scenario, I would gladly give up two or three minutes of angle and suffer a "rainbow" trajectory, yet still know that pulling the trigger will result in an explosion and the propulsion of a projectile.
-
Went to range a couple of days ago with a friend who had a high-dollar, super tactical AR15 with all the premium parts. It's a very nice rifle, very accurate, but he did have a jam -- a double feed. It was cleared relatively easily and he continued shooting. My VZ2008 did not have a single failure.
That's pretty much the theme when I go out with my VZ2008 and my friends with their AR's. It doesn't happen every outing, but every third of fourth time an AR in our group goes down for whatever reason. Sometimes the fix is quick, sometimes the AR is out of commission pending access to beefier tools.
I can only imagine the frustration in actual life-and-death situations if AR15's have that kind of failure rate. Sure, change out the mags later, or switch out the rifle later with the armorer, but in that very moment such resources aren't a lot of comfort.
I can see how the debate persists regarding 223/556 vs 7.62x39, but I have no idea of how the debate between the reliability of AR's vs combloc weapons can seriously continue. In my own, limited recreational experience, I've seen a huge difference. I would give a number expressed as however many times more so regarding the reliability of my VZ2008/SKS's vs. AR15's, but if you multiply zero (VZ2008/SKS) by any number (AR15) you still get a zero. Let's just say the difference is tremendous. It doesn't really matter at the range as it's all in good fun, but in the case of a dire scenario, I would gladly give up two or three minutes of angle and suffer a "rainbow" trajectory, yet still know that pulling the trigger will result in an explosion and the propulsion of a projectile.
This.
And you can throw your AK and Vz in the safe after shooting -- without cleaning it, and go back and repeat trips to the range without worrying about it jamming the next time you shoot it. With an AR, you better clean it after every shooting session, meticulously.
That's why a first rifle should be a good import AK or a Vz instead of an AR15.
I've had several ARs over the past 25 years or so ("quality" manufacturers like Colt, Armalite, Bushmaster, etc.) and every bleep one of them has short-stroked or double fed at one time or another. Bad enough at the range, but potentially fatal if the SHTF.
ARs can be incredibly frustrating -- which is not what you want if you're just getting started. You want something that goes bang when you pull the trigger so that you can shoot and shoot and shoot and work on marksmanship, etc. instead of maintenance and trying to troubleshoot the myriad of problems associated with direct impingement gas systems.
Also, you don't want to break the bank with a $2000+ custom AR with expensive (and still anemic) 5.56 ammo compared to cheap and effective 7.62x39.
I'm not saying all ARs are bad. From what I hear, in semi-auto chambered in more powerful cartridges, say 6.5 Grendel and above, the ammo has enough oomph to operate DI reliably -- from what I hear.
-
OP -- as mdi and meataxe both note if you get to the substance of their posts, the 7.62x39 and 5.56/.223 weapons excel in different ways.
Want to sit on a bench at the range and shoot for accuracy -- an AR in 5.56 wins, especially if you opt for a premium barrel and a free float forend.
Want minimal cleaning, then go w/ a piston gun over a DI AR -- your pic on weapon platform. Might have mentioned earlier but some Russian "non-corrosive" stuff has in the past proved to be mildly corrosive, so there is a risk w/ that cost savings.
Want a minute of man carbine for cheap training -- 7.62x39 weapons are sufficient there and typically less prone to malfunctions than ARs, especially if using cheap steel cased russian ammo (if you load 2-3 brass rounds in with steel case 5.56 mags, you can generally avoid issues with steel that way -- brass round and then 9-14 rounds of steel, another brass, etc). Issue with steel is that they don't seal against chamber walls as well, so with straight walled 5.56 powder and other fouling adheres to the case wall eventually leading to extraction issues. Brass expands more, so when expanding, that fouling adheres to the case and effectively cleans your chamber... Running 5 mags of steel and then one of brass, you should anticipate a failure to extract.
Want barrier penetration or a hog rifle or a deer rifle, 7.62x39.
Want a varmint rifle to protect livestock from common predators, 5.56.
Want the least amount of recoil, 5.56.
Want a common us made round, 5.56.
Want good self defense ammo -- both 7.62x39 and 5.56 is available and US made, but starts at 50 cents or so per round, or 2-3x what range ammo runs.
There's more here, but this should deliver the point.
IMO, the VZ58 was 50 years ahead of its time and remains and excellent weapon. It also sits fairly squarely in the middle of the AR vs AK debate (accuracy, reliability, etc) as well as caliber-wise somewhat in the middle of the 5.56 vs .308 debate.
Write your needs down on a piece of paper or spreadsheet. Prioritize those needs. Evaluate each point objectively. And decide accordingly... Many don't like having to be constrained to this process, so we end up buying add'l firearms -- perhaps more than we actually need?.
I would add that there is a lot of good, effective and cheap imported ammo in 7.62x39. And it's not as inaccurate as some would like you to believe.
Hornady SSTs and Z-Max/V-Max are very good and accurate and we've used them to slap down big hogs with one shot. I hear that Federal Fusion, Corbon DPX and Winchester PDX1 are also very good stoppers and accurate in 7.62x39.
However, there are a lot of good Com Bloc rounds on par with those for a lot less money. You just need to experiment and see which ones your rifle likes and check ballistics gel tests on You Tube for the ones that do the most damage for hunting purposes. Some, like the old Ulyanovsk 8M3 and 8HP "effect" rounds are absolutely devastating. This guy is pretty informative:
https://www.youtube.com/user/mainejunker
With the rifles you get what you pay for: a milled receiver or a stiff 1.5mm RPK type receiver is going to flex a lot less than say a 1.0mm WASR, so they have more accuracy potential, and often thicker, stiffer barrels. I would avoid US made AKs (with the possible exception of DDIs, according to reports) -- IOs and US-made Century Arms are absolute junk and liable to blow up. Stick with a good Com Bloc AK.
Better sights (e.g. good red dot sights) make a world of difference over the basic irons.
If the recoil on a AK or a Vz bothers you, you can get a "straight line" recoil-compensating buffer tube, like the one mfg. by FAB Defense and fit any AR-style butt stock. These work wonders, especially on stamped AKs (don't know that they're necessary on heavier milled AKs but everything helps). They bring the recoil down to the equivalent of a .22 Magnum with no muzzle flip and no sore shoulders. These are apparently used by the Israeli military for the AKs and VZs they operate, so they're no gimmick. If you can find the buffer tube by itself, they only cost @ $60, well worth the money.
http://www.themakogroup.com/stocks-stock-accessories/ak47-and-variants.html?p=1
http://www.themakogroup.com/stocks-stock-accessories/vz58.html
-
8M3 and 8HP effect rounds haven't been available for some time. I like Hornady SST and the Federal Fusion 7.62x39 loads in self/home defense and hunting roles... Tula soft points seem to be more effective than barnaul generally, but I do like that barnaul's are occasionally available with lacquer cases. For clean and humane taking of game, I prefer to spend the extra 30 cents for better performing, and higher quality so more accurate, cartridges.
Re: accuracy, that's why I like golden tiger -- much more consistent than the bear rounds (both powder burn rate and charge volume) and even though theoretically, the GT boat tail bullet only increases accuracy after 200 yards (flat base should be more accurate sub 200 yards) the cartridge overall is reliable and more accurate than most others on the market, especially at its pricepoint. It's lacquered w/ sealed primer and sealed neck -- and has flash retardant in the powder. And is pretty much the same price as the barnaul ammo...
I don't know how much receiver flex affects the inherent accuracy of the AK rifle -- it's the bolt - trunnion - and barrel lockup that matters and none of that is stamped on AKs... Under full auto, rapid fire, etc, yes it makes a difference but under single shot semi-auto I've always questioned that... I do think AKs have more barrel whip and worse harmonics due to operating system system as well as the off balanced recoil impulse...
So I think the overall affect of milled vs stamped is vastly overstated. I have this bookmarked and is the best explanation I've seen: http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?301449-AK-Accuracy-milled-vs-stamped&p=2470826#post2470826
Its always interesting to see what folks think of why the AK design is so fickle with bullet accuracy. Im in the process of testing out my own ideas and they normaly never get mentioned in any forums. If you start out with perfect ammo componants, I feel there are 3 design issues. 1) the 7.63x39 mil spec chamber calls for a 123 grain FMJ to make a .150 free bore jump from the case mouth to the rifling lands. Any of you folks that reload for target accuracy know what that means....flyer city. Secondly, the gas system is over pressurized with a .177 gas port. I have built a gas system that works the action just fine on a .073 diameter port with a slightly longer piston chamber. The AK gas chamber is so short, that it requires a fantasticly large gas port to start the heavy action componants in movement. Please remember the bolt is still not yet unlocked when the bullet is already out of the barrel. So the idea of milled vs stamped has little to do with barrel harmonics where as the fit of the gas tube would have more importance due to the fact it will react directly with the gas block as it get pressurized. Thirdly, I am of the opinion that the tall over the barrel gas block capture of gasses puts a tremendouse amount of downward torque on the foward portion of the barrel. This excessive barrel whip makes it difficult for the bullet to leave the bore at the same exact point of occilation shot after shot. Another way of looking at it is think of the gas piston as a projectile. The gas block will violently recoil foward as it is the base from wich the piston is fired. And the higher over the barrel the piston, the greater the leverage upon the pined bas on the barrel, making the muzzle dip downward with each "recoiling" effect of the gas block chamber. High speed film has long since proven the violent muzzle movement of the AK design. These accuracy short comeings are by design. The AK was designed to be a full auto weapon that would function in the most adverse conditions. 1) the deep chamber throat lowers chamber pressures and reduces the posibility of blowing out primers. 2) the extra large gas port and very short piston cylinder ensures a full bolt cycle -no matter what- the conditions. And the super heavy recoil spring and bolt mass has absolutely no chance of a hang up while contacting the very short "dirty" cylinder walls of the gas block while going into full battery. 3) The tall gas block over the barrel has an advantage of air cooling the system as best as can be expected from the full auto heat build. So there you have it, a semi auto that is a flyer king due to its full auto heritage. I thought it would be neat to tame the specs a bit to see if my evaluation has real world merit. So I designed and built this gas system with a 5 position gas plug that for the most part eliminates the barrel torquing of the original. A full utility patent has been filed with the USPTO a few months ago. Some range testing is still in order but it functions quite well.
Lastly -- milled vs stamped reliability of receivers really only matters if you let your recoil springs go past point of replacement... A bolt carrier, especially one of AK weight, impacting the rear of a milled receiver will cause fractures in the metal that will develop into visible cracks over time.
-
BM303 - did you decide on what you're going to pick?
-
I realize it is still a subject of heated debate but I actually like stamped AKs better than milled if you are talking about long term ruggedness. A hard-use (abused) milled receiver tends to crack where beat up stamped receivers tends to dent or ding. You can hammer out dents and dings. Cracks may be welded but that is a fix left for an equipped shop. A good 1.5mm thick stamped receiver is probably my favorite but those are sometimes hard to find.
I will also admit that I am slightly annoyed with current AK prices. My opinion of what amounts to a reasonable price is likely somewhat biased as I still remember being able to walk into a gun store in the 90s and buying a solid AK for around $325-$350. Those days are long gone but $1500 for an AKM? lol...no.
As for AR reliability, many of them, even the expensive ones, need some tuning. Before any of my ARs go to the range, they get pulled apart and everything is double checked. I am amazed at how often gas tubes and gas blocks are not properly aligned (especially considering it isn't that difficult). I guess some are just slapped together in order to meet demand regardless of price point. I have also found several ARs which have an overly tight fit between the bolt and bolt carrier - enough to where it keeps the bolt from rotating properly. I suppose they plan for them to be broken in with live fire but that is just needless annoyance. Another common problem is a weak extractor spring - an easy $4 fix. A little tuning and tweaking before the first trip to the range can avoid all of that. I don't remember the last time one of my ARs had a stoppage of any kind and certainly not while just playing around at the range. They have a ton of rounds put through them on every outing. Maybe I need to write a thread on how to properly tune ARs...
Splitting the difference between the AR and AK. Another fine example of a rifle which does so almost perfectly is the South Korean K2 (civilian version: Daewoo DR200). I would love to have one of the latest models from South Korea but they are banned from import. I do however have one of the DR200 rifles which were imported by Kimber in the 1990s. That rifle is both accurate and incredibly reliable. With a few slight mods, AR triggers work and allow for much more usable accuracy as the factory triggers are heavy. With a few parts swaps, mine is now 922r compliant and free of its original thumbhole stock. If you like the AK or the AR, you would like this rifle. The scope shown in the pic often comes off as it has very good iron sights. I also occasionally mount a 3x prism scope to it for quicker target acquisition:
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160730/e43af0a9dbd4e61e0d2e9b08023c0b12.png)
-
As for AR reliability, many of them, even the expensive ones, need some tuning. Before any of my ARs go to the range, they get pulled apart and everything is double checked. I am amazed at how often gas tubes and gas blocks are not properly aligned (especially considering it isn't that difficult). I guess some are just slapped together in order to meet demand regardless of price point. I have also found several ARs which have an overly tight fit between the bolt and bolt carrier - enough to where it keeps the bolt from rotating properly. I suppose they plan for them to be broken in with live fire but that is just needless annoyance. Another common problem is a weak extractor spring - an easy $4 fix. A little tuning and tweaking before the first trip to the range can avoid all of that. I don't remember the last time one of my ARs had a stoppage of any kind and certainly not while just playing around at the range. They have a ton of rounds put through them on every outing. Maybe I need to write a thread on how to properly tune ARs...
While I definitely prefer the VZ platform over the AR -- more powerful caliber, higher reliability, etc -- I did gain a newfound respect for the AR platform when I recently bought a Ruger AR556. The AR556 doesn't have the highest reputation in the AR community, but I've found it to be a good and reliable rifle. Still, it, as well as the high-dollar AR's owned by my friends, are overshadowed by my VZ2008/SKS's. It's a matter of taste.
As far as having to tune AR15's, that's a legitimate concern but not at all isolated to AR15's. We all had to "tune" our VZ58/VZ2008's -- tabbed carrier, widen the safety selector notch, upgrade the gas piston, enhanced sights, etc. My SKS's definitely benefited from a trigger job, the first one done by Murray, the second by Kivaari, and the third probably done in 1972, sitting on a log in a swamp while using a nail file, wet sand, and a cup of dirty diesel.
-
While I definitely prefer the VZ platform over the AR -- more powerful caliber, higher reliability, etc -- I did gain a newfound respect for the AR platform when I recently bought a Ruger AR556. The AR556 doesn't have the highest reputation in the AR community, but I've found it to be a good and reliable rifle. Still, it, as well as the high-dollar AR's owned by my friends, are overshadowed by my VZ2008/SKS's. It's a matter of taste.
As far as having to tune AR15's, that's a legitimate concern but not at all isolated to AR15's. We all had to "tune" our VZ58/VZ2008's -- tabbed carrier, widen the safety selector notch, upgrade the gas piston, enhanced sights, etc. My SKS's definitely benefited from a trigger job, the first one done by Murray, the second by Kivaari, and the third probably done in 1972, sitting on a log in a swamp while using a nail file, wet sand, and a cup of dirty diesel.
I agree all ARs need tuned, especially the first outing -- BUT, they are tunable with different strengths of buffer springs, weights, of buffers, etc... VZs currently run as is, for better or worse. AKs do have an xtra power recoil spring from Wolff. Buf few weapon systems are as tunable as ARs.
I have no experience with the Daewoos, so can't comment there...
But for AR cleaning, if just putting a few rounds through with new shooters, I will get my bolt completely coated with oil and grease on tail so that carbon just wipes off. Generally, if only shooting a couple mags, the oil and grease keeps the carbon in suspension and the excess just blows off when the bolt cycles... If you're putting 500-1000 rounds through your gun per day, then yes cleaning is a pain. I have dropped bolts in a supersonic cleaner w/ simple green (my favorite cleaner for the supersonics since ph neutral -- use it for car parts and gun parts), or dunked them into slip 2000s carbon killer too...
-
Why are DR200s cool? A schematic is worth a thousand words:
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160731/358b1196041fccd656f3728a371e81f6.png)
The AR556 is still DI - the SR series is more fun - especially in the 7.62 variety.
-
Weaponsman posted a piece on weapons reliability. Seeing as how this thread diverged, worth reading there: http://weaponsman.com/?p=33752
-
Another "mil-spec" AR bites the dust. Whatever you do, don't buy one of these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfCUjjA2F4U
-
Why are DR200s cool? A schematic is worth a thousand words:
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160731/358b1196041fccd656f3728a371e81f6.png)
The AR556 is still DI - the SR series is more fun - especially in the 7.62 variety.
Good luck finding one and/or spares (the Daewoo). If you do, chances are it's got a 1/12" twist rate that won't stabilize those touted 77 gr. bullets.
-
Why are DR200s cool? A schematic is worth a thousand words:
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160731/358b1196041fccd656f3728a371e81f6.png)
The AR556 is still DI - the SR series is more fun - especially in the 7.62 variety.
Good luck finding one and/or spares (the Daewoo). If you do, chances are it's got a 1/12" twist rate that won't stabilize those touted 77 gr. bullets.
Isn't that hard to find replacement parts for it. If it were, I guess it is lucky for me that I bought a spare barrel that fits it eons ago and it is 1 in 7.3" RH twist. However, the barrel that is currently on it is in great condition and I will not have to worry about swapping them out any time soon.
-
Another "mil-spec" AR bites the dust. Whatever you do, don't buy one of these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfCUjjA2F4U
Mil-spec? It is a Radical Firearms AR in that video. You might as well post up videos of IO AKs biting the dust while you are at it and claim that is as good as AKMs get. God knows every third IO AK video on YouTube is about one of them going tits up so there certainly isn't a shortage of dead "AK" videos available.
-
Another "mil-spec" AR bites the dust. Whatever you do, don't buy one of these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfCUjjA2F4U
Mil-spec? It is a Radical Firearms AR in that video. You might as well post up videos of IO AKs biting the dust while you are at it and claim that is as good as AKMs get. God knows every third IO AK video on YouTube is about one of them going tits up so there certainly isn't a shortage of dead "AK" videos available.
I advised the OP to avoid US-made AK clones, IO and Century in particular.
I had an Armalite that started eating it's own gas rings after 400 rounds...ARs are dependent on too many tiny, fragile parts that don't hold up.
You need to send Rob Ski one of your high-end ARs and see how it holds up to one of his torture tests.
Most AR "manufacturers" are merely "assemblers" of "mil-spec" AR parts put out by a handful of actual manufacturers (e.g. the lower receivers).
-
BM303 - did you decide on what you're going to pick?
I think BM303 quit reading this thread around post #50 but for whatever it's worth, around #46 he said he was waiting for the VZ to get back in stock.
The good news: thus far, no one has suggested OP purchase a Sig ---xi...
-
Ideally stuff like the cam pin, gas rings, firing pin, standard buffer spring, bolt, etc, would last to 5k rounds. But that's about the max I'd personally run them if in a combat zone or serious competition before replacing... So desiring a 5k minimum lifespan -- yes, the rifle fell a little short.
But the cam pin is a $5 part and takes less than 2 minutes to replace. A spare bolt, firing pin, cam pin, and gas rings are all common components many AR owners and soldiers keep in their Magpul or BCM pistol grip in anticipation of potential issues.
I think the issues robski has identified with some of the American made AKs with bad receivers, trunnions, etc, which basically render the full gun unsafe and are also not field repairable are much more significant issues than a broken cam pin. But YMMV.
-
Ideally stuff like the cam pin, gas rings, firing pin, standard buffer spring, bolt, etc, would last to 5k rounds. But that's about the max I'd personally run them if in a combat zone or serious competition before replacing... So desiring a 5k minimum lifespan -- yes, the rifle fell a little short.
But the cam pin is a $5 part and takes less than 2 minutes to replace. A spare bolt, firing pin, cam pin, and gas rings are all common components many AR owners and soldiers keep in their Magpul or BCM pistol grip in anticipation of potential issues.
I think the issues robski has identified with some of the American made AKs with bad receivers, trunnions, etc, which basically render the full gun unsafe and are also not field repairable are much more significant issues than a broken cam pin. But YMMV.
Well those are cheaply made US AKs -- not in the same league with the average Com Bloc AK as far as durability and reliability. Probably has something to do with the fact that labor is so much cheaper in the former Com Bloc than the US -- and that AKs are built, not assembled like ARs.
Not that a competitively priced AK couldn't be built in the US (e.g. DDI) but !@## companies like IO and Century cut corners to maximize profits and stiff their customers. Screw those companies. They produce junk at premium prices.
But if a major part of an AR is "expected" to fail within 5 k rounds, that tells you something, it's not a SHTF survival rifle to pull you through when the world goes to hell in a hand bucket. !@##, there are stamped Type I AKs still in the field almost 70 years old, still going bang when you pull the trigger.
You can't get around the fact that the AR15 "platform" is weak, both in terms of it's engineering and it's choice of cartridge. America deserves better than that. Shame on those who continue to promote the M16/M4/AR15 failures.
-
http://www.akfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=273885
Needs tab and CNC threaded barrel extension ... And Horse's side rail. First variant made in USA. I have had 4, no issues with mine.
-
BM303 - did you decide on what you're going to pick?
I think BM303 quit reading this thread around post #50 but for whatever it's worth, around #46 he said he was waiting for the VZ to get back in stock.
The good news: thus far, no one has suggested OP purchase a Sig ---xi...
Haha, so much of this talk is chinese to me but I am still vaguely following along.
Anyways, I am going to get a VZ-58 when they come back in stock. I have been collecting CZ pistols and the VZ-58 seems like another piece of Czech perfection to add to my collection. I am a bit tight on money after decking out a SP-01, PCR, buying tons of accessories and a safe but I am still gonna get the VZ-58 when I can find one. I definitely want the wood impregnated furniture too.
Thanks for all the help guys. I am lurking but a lot of the discussion here I am not familiar with at all so I don't have much to say. 8)
-
Haha, so much of this talk is chinese to me but I am still vaguely following along.
Anyways, I am going to get a VZ-58 when they come back in stock. I have been collecting CZ pistols and the VZ-58 seems like another piece of Czech perfection to add to my collection. I am a bit tight on money after decking out a SP-01, PCR, buying tons of accessories and a safe but I am still gonna get the VZ-58 when I can find one. I definitely want the wood impregnated furniture too.
Thanks for all the help guys. I am lurking but a lot of the discussion here I am not familiar with at all so I don't have much to say. 8)
lol - we may have gotten slightly carried away for a first rifle thread.
Yes - you can wipe out a bank account with firearms and accessories pretty quickly. I try to set a "reasonable" guns and gear annual budget but it rarely survives beyond mid-May. This year it made it to the third week of July (I cheated by doubling my initial budget amount from last year...and I may have accidentally filed all reloading gear under "home improvements").
If you do not have a .22LR rifle, give some serious thought to getting one. Trigger time on a .22LR rifle is not as inexpensive as it used to be but it is still inexpensive when compared to the cost of decent centerfire rifle ammo. When it comes to the cost of the rifle, they are still very budget friendly as you can get a reasonably reliable and accurate semi auto .22 rifle for under $150.
If you want to develop your rifle skills with larger centerfire calibers and get the most bang for the buck, buy an accurate bolt action at some point. It doesn't have to be a top-tier bench rest rifle but one that is at least capable of 1-1.5 MOA. How is that bang for the buck? Most people tear through ammo with semi-autos (burning through mags is fun) but in doing so they do not pay as much attention to each shot or why it ended up where it did. A bolt action makes you slow down and pay attention to each round and where it hits the target. You can do the same with a semi-auto rifle (especially a SAPR) but you have to exercise a lot more self control in doing so (or load only 3-5 rounds in the mag at a time).
Most people with a semi-auto will fire 5-20 rounds at a target and then disregard ones that didn't land exactly where they wanted them with less thought about what happened. There are more excuses available with most semi-autos ("meh - it's only a 3MOA rifle...") With a bolt action, the same people are usually more concerned about where each round hits and why. Also, with a 1MOA rifle you run out of excuses pretty quickly (fallback excuse if you need it: "bleep scope isn't holding zero! Mount must have loosened up..."). If you want to entirely eliminate excuses get a 1/4-1/2MOA rifle chambered in a caliber that gives you the option to use bullets with ballistic coefficients of .500 or better, mount a $3000 scope to it with lapped, six screw steel rings on a one piece steel scope base that is properly bedded to the action and Loctite everything. Then load it with match grade or better ammo. Any bullet which doesn't land within 1/2" of where you wanted it is your fault. Hence, that is probably the most annoying rifle on the planet.
There is a caveat to buying a higher-end bolt action - they will spoil your trigger finger and mil-spec triggers will feel like complete trash from that point forward. End result: all of your semi-autos will be $175-$300 more expensive because that is how much it costs to make them feel anything close to the trigger on your precision bolt action. Other than the increased cost, that is not a bad thing as a really good trigger will do wonders for the usable accuracy of any rifle. Unless your rifle comes out of the box with a really good trigger, that is the first thing to fix immediately after you verify that everything else is working properly. I upgrade the triggers on my rifles before anything else - before optics or any gadgets. My usual order for rifle upgrades is: trigger; sling (people often forget how important a sling is until they are lugging their rifle around in the field); optics/sights (and mounts for the same); chassis/stock; bipod (if it is that type of rifle); and then everything else in whatever order suits you so long as it does not include a rail mounted toaster oven or the like.
-
BM303 - did you decide on what you're going to pick?
I think BM303 quit reading this thread around post #50 but for whatever it's worth, around #46 he said he was waiting for the VZ to get back in stock.
The good news: thus far, no one has suggested OP purchase a Sig ---xi...
Haha, so much of this talk is chinese to me but I am still vaguely following along.
Anyways, I am going to get a VZ-58 when they come back in stock. I have been collecting CZ pistols and the VZ-58 seems like another piece of Czech perfection to add to my collection. I am a bit tight on money after decking out a SP-01, PCR, buying tons of accessories and a safe but I am still gonna get the VZ-58 when I can find one. I definitely want the wood impregnated furniture too.
Thanks for all the help guys. I am lurking but a lot of the discussion here I am not familiar with at all so I don't have much to say. 8)
Well, a Vz58 is certainly a good choice, if it's in 7.62x39, and certainly better than a lot of other semi-auto rifles. If you get one, get a CSA / Czechpoint rather than the Century Vz2008 or whatever. The CSA rifle costs about twice as much but you won't have to worry about the misfire "gremlin" that Century VZs are prone to, or having to get it fixed and finding someone competent to do the weld job.
However, I would still say that a good import AK (in 7.62x39) would be the best choice.
To recap:
Better trigger
Much better parts, magazine and accessory availability
Most are 1/2 the price of a CSA Vz.
With Hitlery and the Kleptocrats likely coming to power next year, we can count on "assault weapons," magazine and ammo bans coming up, AKs and ARs are probably going to be first on the chopping block for bans. Also, the money you save as opposed to a CSA Vz can be put towards stockpiling magazines and ammo -- 3,000 rounds of good Com Bloc ammo (e.g. Golden Tiger) can be had for @ $700. Buy it cheap and stack it deep, now, before it's too late.
The thing is, being less known/infamous than AKs and ARs, the Vz seems to escape the scrutiny of the gun banners (e.g. in Canada and Commiefornia). Even if AKs are banned, you could probably get a VZ later on, at least for a while.
-
If you do not have a .22LR rifle, give some serious thought to getting one. Trigger time on a .22LR rifle is not as inexpensive as it used to be but it is still inexpensive when compared to the cost of decent centerfire rifle ammo. When it comes to the cost of the rifle, they are still very budget friendly as you can get a reasonably reliable and accurate semi auto .22 rifle for under $150.
If you want to develop your rifle skills with larger centerfire calibers and get the most bang for the buck, buy an accurate bolt action at some point. It doesn't have to be a top-tier bench rest rifle but one that is at least capable of 1-1.5 MOA. How is that bang for the buck? Most people tear through ammo with semi-autos (burning through mags is fun) but in doing so they do not pay as much attention to each shot or why it ended up where it did. A bolt action makes you slow down and pay attention to each round and where it hits the target. You can do the same with a semi-auto rifle (especially a SAPR) but you have to exercise a lot more self control in doing so (or load only 3-5 rounds in the mag at a time).
Bolt actions typically have more felt recoil than semi-autos in same caliber. Aftermarket buttpads can help, but the kick is still there.
I agree on the bolt action however -- and my first 22lr was a bolt action actually, but if you prefer, there are Remington Pump actions, Henry lever actions, someone (H&R?) makes a break action, etc actions, all in 22lr as well. So think single shot, not bolt...
Main benefit of manual load 22lr is that they are definitely safer for new shooters (if they drop the gun, there's not a live round in the chamber among other benefits). (They are also incredibly fun and quiet when suppressed; subsonic ammo and you're at air rifle if not less levels of noise.)
Point here, is that a single shot 22lr is mighty fine training rifle with most of the benefits of a centerfire bolt action rifle, excluding only ballistic capability -- and will likely never be banned, so they're not a top priority for immediate acquisition. There is a chance that single shot weapons with detachable magazines could be banned, but if the powers that be go that far off the reservation we've got way bigger problems at hand...
With any 22lr if you're wanting to really work on fundamentals, I would strongly recommend getting good ammo like cci minimags... Otherwise, there's quite a bit of ballistic variance from cartridge to cartridge, which makes it more difficult to identify things you as the shooter are doing wrong versus variances due to the ammo. Now, in modern combat doctrine, a certain degree of shot dispersion is a good thing -- but that's an entirely separate tangent but useful for understanding some the issues with variance inherent in the Barnaul cartridges (Bears, Wolf, etc, brands -- current Russian 7.62x39 military ammo maker)...
Lastly for a SAPR, semi auto precision rifle, you're really hard pressed to beat a accurized AR (free float a barrel, upgrade to a higher quality precision bolt, and adding a good trigger to any off the rack AR actually make a tremendous difference to accuracy -- with a little extra upgrade your muzzle device, and experiment with buffer weights and springs, -- and then if you are willing to tinker put in a premium barrel) on the accuracy end of the spectrum, unless you have a substantial $ to invest.
Cheap bolt actions vs mid-market ARs with free floated barrels, you're looking at very similar accuracy with similar rates of fire...
-
However, I would still say that a good import AK (in 7.62x39) would be the best choice.
To recap:
Better trigger
Much better parts, magazine and accessory availability
Most are 1/2 the price of a CSA Vz.
With Hitlery and the Kleptocrats likely coming to power next year, we can count on "assault weapons," magazine and ammo bans coming up, AKs and ARs are probably going to be first on the chopping block for bans. Also, the money you save as opposed to a CSA Vz can be put towards stockpiling magazines and ammo -- 3,000 rounds of good Com Bloc ammo (e.g. Golden Tiger) can be had for @ $700. Buy it cheap and stack it deep, now, before it's too late.
The thing is, being less known/infamous than AKs and ARs, the Vz seems to escape the scrutiny of the gun banners (e.g. in Canada and Commiefornia). Even if AKs are banned, you could probably get a VZ later on, at least for a while.
Only AKs worth buying for 1/2 the price, and even then more than that, of a CSA VZ58 are the Zastava Yugo and Cugir WASRs. But in the current market, $700 is entry level here. The Yugos are far superior to WASRs IMO, but lack a chrome-lined barrel if that is important to you.
To note, there are some good to very good condition Chinese SKSes currently available at $400, and I think some of the new unissued Yugo SKSes remain available @ $500. Magazines are integral to these guns leaving you needing cheaper stripper clips rather than magazines, and SKSes are typically more accurate than AKs as well. On a budget, looking for a semi-auto 7.62x39 rifle, SKSes are tough to beat right now.
VZ58s are hands down a better carbine than the SKS could ever be in that role -- and I think the VZ58 to be overall much more versatile a firearm than the SKS while maintaining a sufficient level of accuracy to utilize the potential of the 7.62x39 round at all typical ranges.
As far as utility goes as a general purpose rifle and for an average specimen of each, I don't see either the SKS or AK being definitively better than the other. As a combat long arm on the modern battlefield, the AK is generally superior and always superior if including all variants and irrespective of cost...
If wanting to modernize the SKS with new stock, extended mags, etc, bear in mind you're triggering 922r, which involves a fair bit more cost and considerations and is generally more easily done on other weapon systems -- and really only makes sense for the SKS if you're in a location where you have restrictions limiting you to the SKS or you just really want an optimized SKS for whatever reason...
High end AKs vs SKSes: AKs are generally superior, but 2-3x the cost.
Low end AKs vs SKSes, SKS are generally superior dollar for dollar, as modern day sub $500 AKs are very low quality.
Mid prices on each, see earlier comments.
AK trigger is really only definitively better if you opt for an aftermarket IMO -- yes, the standard TAPCOs are an aftermarket trigger (and a good one relative to OE) and is superior to most OE triggers which are really only found on AK pistol imports where no 922r is required... Polishing OE triggers/fcgs brings them close to tapco levels, but overall manufacturing precision seems to be higher on tapcos if not the material quality...
And that AK trigger comes with the penalty of substantially worse safety, ergos, and weight, among other drawbacks already noted.
Any gun ban will likely be feature based rather than model/list based. I think the gun banners learned their lesson w/ all the loophole issues when they've decided to ban by list in the past... The VZ58 will not be immune under a feature ban.
I do not think that ammo will be successfully banned for any length of time; issue is more one of temporary scarcity due to panic, or restricted supply due to legal requirements, executive orders, or global events. And yes, there could be permanent price increases, greater than inflation or currency market related increases, depending on causes/events driving price increases.
Personally, I'd get a 1-2k rounds on hand for immediate/anticpated training and range time needs for the first year of ownership/use (500-1000 rounds for a weekend carbine course is normal). Nothing's worse than a new gun, but not having any ammo for it to shoot. So having ammo on hand in a given caliber before you buy a gun in that caliber is advisable -- and don't buy ammo at gun ranges unless they require it; prices can sometimes make outrageous gun show pricing look modest! And if they require you to buy ammo there, get your required fix on that first visit and look for a new range.
And then put 2-3x that initial amount of ammo away for a reserve to allow you to continue to train past year 1, time future buys for when prices are low(er), use the ammo to sell/trade for other firearms-related things you might want or need when ammo prices are high, and always have at least some emergency supply.
Basically, whatever you plan to spend on your new rifle, double it so that you have a budget to put that same amount of money into it again for mags, ammo, spare parts, optics, or upgrades to furniture, parts, etc.
And take your initial budget, and triple it if you're looking to receive professional training/coaching. Look to gun clubs in your area, and you'll often find local fellow shooters willing to coach you for no to low cost. The appleseed events look pretty great too, are affordable, and appear to be quite similar to training I was fortunate to receive as a kid through 4-H and Boy Scout Shooting Sports as well as Hunter/Firearm Youth Education put on by the local rural sheriff's office and NRA club/range. Have been wanting to attend an appleseed for a refresher on that style of shooting (and to do it w/ an M1 carbine actually but may settle for a 10/22 M1 carbine clone build)...
I still stand behind stripped AR15 lower receivers (and parts kits, including buffers kits and stocks, to match if your budget allows) being a very prudent investment right now if you can find the $100 or less needed for the purchase. Effectively and legally, each stripped lower is the "firearm" and the primary component of government concern.
At least for present day, I don't see any retroactive gun bans occurring and/or being enforceable at the national level, or any president willing to spend the political capital necessary to pass, implement, and enforce such draconian policies... So anything in your safe by January of next year, should be able to remain in your safe for at least a few more presidential elections... State-level politics are a different matter and with the US supreme court in so much flux especially for 2A cases, state-specific requirements/landscapes could change quickly and drastically, but quite unlikely here in Texas but more so elsewhere.
-
Veprs (still imported from Russia) for $700 new -- can't get much better than that in a stamped AK (RPK receiver, thick chrome lined barrel).
http://www.k-var.com/shop/Vepr-rifles/
Yugos $589 new:
https://www.atlanticfirearms.com/component/virtuemart/shipping-rifles/ak47-yugo-zastava-n-pap-fixed-wood-stock-detail.html?Itemid=0
Hungarian AMD-65s, $539 new:
https://www.classicfirearms.com/amd-65-7-62x39-rifle-with-side-fold-stock-and-black-poly-pistol-grips
Etc. etc. etc. Not to mention a lot of good used Chinese, Saigas, Bulgarians, etc. on the market.
Just get on gun watcher and search.
-
Veprs are good rifles, but a couple hundred dollars more to convert to standard AK looks/configuration...
Your Yugo link is $679 + $30 shipping, which is $709.
Hungarians are cool and I especially like them b/c of the Galil-esque grips; however, they are American made by Century, and not what I'd recommend for a first time rifle owner... Dealing with Century customer service to resolve issues is not fun or something for the novice. If it's all they could afford, and if they had friends with expertise to check them out, then maybe...
Used AKs, I'm personally always wary. A lot of folks treat them like crap, and use them only for rapid fire fun at the range. While perhaps fun, that does a number on the barrel. So if I knew you know the person you were buying from kept it in good care or if you or friend have the expertise to inspect closely for abuse and excessive barrel wear, then yes -- this is a good option. Sight unseen AKs are a potentially major disappointment from my perspective.
-
Back to the original question and philosophy...
I would lean toward a Ruger 10/22 in Poly/Stainless or Mossberg pump shotgun as an "only" long gun. But after that, for a general rifle, the vz.58 still fits most user criteria in regards to accuracy, ammo availability, dependability, and price.
A simple review of the vz2008 variant from a shooters perspective:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5OTyPNw7nk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5OTyPNw7nk)
The "built out vz2008" variant. Still needs tab (push-down-plate) welded to carrier or Zendl spring loaded disconnector:
https://www.slickguns.com/search/apachesolr_search/787450387614?view=list
Search was originally posted here (ibid) by @gwvt: http://www.czfirearms.us/index.php?topic=79187.0
AKMs : I have shot many including full auto, had many in my collection, and have several still that I probably will never sell. Certainly VEPRs, Saiga, Arsenals, Yugos (never had one but respect them), WASRs, are all great but even AK ace builder, Jim Fuller (Rifle Dynamics) suggests considering Chinese AK variants as "the best bang for your buck". I just dug out a post ban Chinese Norinco (MAK90 configuration) I had in storage to swap some US (Ironwood Designs) furniture on. The stock Norinco receiver and FCG (fire control group) is amazing, even compared to Yugo, Arsenal, VEPR, etc. Your essentially getting a military AK build with a chrome lined barrel that was modded to make it legal for import after the original US 1989 ban.
Dont frown hard on Romanian WASRs to hard. Prob the most durable low cost AK variants ever built.
Earlier this year I saw someone walking around a gun show here in Ohio with a MAK90 post ban thumb-hole (crap-hole) stock and it was in almost new condition. Another walker bought it for $500. $500!? I paid $800 for an unfired MAK90, several years ago. So, they still can be found for under $1100 if you look. Add $200 to slightly de-ban (swap out furniture and use US mags for 922R) and you have one of the best quality AKs ever made. As previously mentioned the stock FCG quality and function is darn near amazing, so I would try to work around the FCG for 922R, rather than swap it out with Tapco, ALG Defense, etc. FCG. Drop on an Ultimag scope mount replacement gas tube, Houge hand guard furniture, or TI top cover rail mount for a red dot optic and it's now a true go to gun IMHO. Down sides are no threaded muzzle out of the box (like an SKS), and most other "typical" AKM parts and furniture will not fit on it.
Here is a great interview with Jim Fuller on what to look for when buying an AK. While I suggest you watch the whole thing for some great insights, in this link I skipped to his comment on the MAK90.
https://youtu.be/7nTZJYU9VqA?t=10m57s (https://youtu.be/7nTZJYU9VqA?t=10m57s)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nTZJYU9VqA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nTZJYU9VqA)
You want 7.62x39? If your intended total budget is $350ish and your looking for reliability and decent acuracy? Consider a good condition Chinese SKS with a chromed barrel. Set a round in the muzzle end of the barrel to make sure it doesnt go in to check if it is "shot out".
-
I would lean toward a Ruger 10/22 in Poly/Stainless or Mossberg pump shotgun as an "only" long gun. But after that, for a general rifle, the vz.58 still fits most user criteria in regards to accuracy, ammo availability, dependability, and price.
I agree with everything CP posted, with one exception. The pump shotgun. They're hard to master manipulation under stress (including very necessary tactical reloads with limited capacity), limited capacity, limited effective range, have a mean kick, and while they do have a very versatile ammo selection -- the 12 or 20 ga shotshell (add 16 if you want, but those are the only 3 gauges suitable to general purpose; .410 is not) is extremely heavy, bulky, and inefficient relative to centerfire or even rimfire rifle cartridges...
I can think of 5 scenarios where I'd prefer a shotgun over a 22lr rifle:
-3 or fewer human threats within 25 yards
-Hunting birds in flight
-Hunting or defending from larger than deer-sized game, including hogs, bears, etc, slugs for all and preferably with a rifled shotgun...
-Dealing with a crazed, drugged, or otherwise out of normal consciousness human whom you quite literally have to bleed out, stop CNS function to stop the aggressor -- most humans have a sense of self-preservation where 22lr, including multiple shots, is adequate
-Lastly, the paranormal, including fast zombies and vampires -- the former due to lightning fast speed being like birds in flight and the latter as silver is much easier to load into a shotshell combined with aforementioned (potential) vampire speed... :o
I also cannot state enough the value of having a 22lr pistol for new shooters as well... Starting there helps develop good habits rather than starting with larger caliber, learning bad compensating habits, and then having to unlearn all of those bad habits to become a good shooter...
So 22lr rifle + 22lr pistol is a pretty great foundation combo for anyone's firearm evolution. And I don't think 22lr is nearly as inadequate as some like to state, but it's also not ideal either...
CZ makes some great 22lr rifles too if you want an accurate, classic wood long arm. 22lr pistols, I'm partial to Bersa, but Rugers are good too (though much more difficult to disassemble for regular clean but do digest a wider variety of ammo). Beretta has some good 22lr pistols too but mags are difficult and expensive to obtain and have less capacity than the Bersas.
*EDIT: And a clarification -- WASRs are reliable/go bang in stock configuration, but their build quality varies quite a bit, so probably not a "great" rifle for your average WASR. Not too much different than the Century monkey reputation, except that their rifles work... Rifle dyanmics did have a basic WASR upgrade package for ~$300 that tuned them up considerably (Bolton block and barrel shortening and upgrading furniture were extra $ above $300), but don't see it listed on their website currently. You can read about it here: https://www.shootingillustrated.com/articles/2012/1/31/rifle-dynamics-fine-tunes-the-wasr-10/
They are also the most common AK variant in the states, which is a probably good thing...
-
The Norinco AKs were a lot of fun when they were dirt cheap. The last few of them I have seen on gun auction sites have sold for north of $900 if NIB condition. Makes me happy I bought mine when they were quite a bit under $400. :) It's too bad that Norinco had to allow some of their execs and employees to make some world class idiotic decisions which resulted in them being banned from further importation. That is an interesting story but I digress.
Chinese SKS rifles are solid but you have to make sure you are 922r compliant with any and all upgrades as previously noted. The penalties for 922r violations are harsh to say the least.
Future bans. If they can get them passed, you can be certain that no semi-auto will be immune. The most recent bill which attempted it covered every loophole. It had a specific list of weapons and then an inclusion clause to address additional firearms by specific features which would also be covered. It also had a ban provision for replacement parts and magazine tubes. If that would have passed, any semi-auto that could accept a box mag or other high capacity mag would have been gone. They definitely learned from their mistakes on the Clinton '90s era AW ban.
I agree with RSR regarding .22 pistols and rifles as first guns. Regardless of how many guns you end up owning, the .22 pistols and rifles are always fun to shoot and they have a place in every firearms collection. I like the Ruger 22/45 and the Ruger 10/22. They are great guns out of the box but the aftermarket for them is also just huge. The parts and accessories market for the 10/22 is so massive that it is hard to make decisions sometimes on what to buy. Which of the three dozen stocks fits you the best? Folding, collapsible, target?Which of the dozen trigger kits feels the best? Which barrel profile and length? Blued or stainless? You get the idea - there are about 300,000 different ways to configure a 10/22 and that number seems to go up daily.
Obviously, there are other great .22 rifles. CZ makes one of the best. If you want a trainer for precision shooting get a CZ455. You cannot go wrong with that one.
At one point, if you wanted to add several rifles to your collection for next to nothing there were several great mil-surp options that were great all around rifles. Most were also on the verge of impossible to break and with a little cleanup and tuning, they could be really nice hunting rifles or range guns. However, rifles which were $70-$100 not that long ago are now $300 or more. Unfortunately, import bans and moronic politicians have ruined that option.
-
Even at $300 or more, when you compare many military weapons to their modern new production equivalents at the same pricepoint, you often realize the military weapon in hand would cost several multiples were it made from new today... Is any weapon being given away these days? No. Are there still great values? Absolutely.
-
I remember paying $159 for Chinese AKs and $59 for SKSs back in the day and ammo at @ 6 cents per round (1,000 rd. crate of steel core Norinco for $60).
People were under the false assumption that because the Chinese AKs were so cheap, they were lousy. Nothing could be further from the truth. Although they weren't the best cosmetically, functionally, they are some of the best AKs available.
-
Mosin Nagants at $59 a piece if you bought a case of them. SKS rifles at $90. Makarov pistols for $95. The fact that I didn't buy a boxcar full of each of them at the time makes me want to hit my head against a brick wall repeatedly.
There are still some bargains under $500. I am not much on the Russian or Chinese Mosin Nagants at the $275-$300 price tags many are trying to charge for them but I would definitely take any of the Finnish Mosin variants at under $350. The Swiss K31 rifles can still be found at decent prices now and then and they are supremely accurate as the GP11 milsurp ammo for them is match grade - that combo is hard to beat. The Yugo 24/47 or M48 can still be found for very reasonable prices.
Israeli surplus pistols still show up at bargain prices now and then. I picked up a transitional CZ75 not long ago for a really good price as it needed a little work but it was definitely a deal even after I fixed it and refinished it. That one is now one of my favorite pistols.
Some of the AKM parts kits are a decent deal if you have all of the tools to build an AKM. If you don't have the tools, you will end up spending as much as a high end AK just to build one from a parts kit. The fun of building one is likely worth it.
Best deal I have gotten lately: I was given a sportsterized 1917 Enfield. The barrel has some pitting and the chopped stock will cost $300+ to replace at current prices but any day involving a free Enfield in .30-06 is a good day.
-
Veprs are good rifles, but a couple hundred dollars more to convert to standard AK looks/configuration...
Your Yugo link is $679 + $30 shipping, which is $709.
Hungarians are cool and I especially like them b/c of the Galil-esque grips; however, they are American made by Century, and not what I'd recommend for a first time rifle owner... Dealing with Century customer service to resolve issues is not fun or something for the novice. If it's all they could afford, and if they had friends with expertise to check them out, then maybe...
Used AKs, I'm personally always wary. A lot of folks treat them like crap, and use them only for rapid fire fun at the range. While perhaps fun, that does a number on the barrel. So if I knew you know the person you were buying from kept it in good care or if you or friend have the expertise to inspect closely for abuse and excessive barrel wear, then yes -- this is a good option. Sight unseen AKs are a potentially major disappointment from my perspective.
Just goes to show, with another Clintonista regime looming, the price of Yugo AKs is going up. The price went up almost $100 in a day, so ya snooze, ya lose...
I'm still seeing a lot of Yugo and Draco AK pistols for sale at @ $500 or less, which is a hell of a deal. Great vehicle guns.
I don't think those are Century AMD-65s but probably from TGI on Hungarian receivers with a US barrel (or barrel extension) and trigger group -- a whole lot better than Century's in house effort.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/12/joe-grine/gun-review-amd-65-and-accessories/
As far as the Veprs go, 922r customizing with US parts from the butthole stock to the normal configuration is just part of the fun. And there are a whole lot more parts, etc. available for the AK than for the Vz58, which continues to be sold out.
Time waits for no man...so you better be quick to pounce on one of the few VZs when they become available. At this point, they'll probably sell out in a couple of hours, whenever that is. On the other hand, good AKs are still relatively plentiful...for the moment.