| Author | Message | ||
     Johnnymceldoo |
I cant believe this mini vs. AR platform stuff is still going on. Blake, if the AR platform is an 1125R then the mini14 is a buell blast with leather tassles hanging from the bars. Seriously guys theres no debate to be had. | ||
| Pdxs3t |
Really, A Mini-14 is a Buell Blast. That is fu#king funny! The AR paltorm is good, but please already. Its funny, I've heard it for 25 years how a Mini-14 is such crap, when I have yet to experience an AR that is like built, out shoot me on the range. The masses have spoken, the AR is the only thing to buy when it comes to .223/5.56mm semi-auto rifles. Me, I'll stick with my tassle wrapped Mini-14, and go away. Just don't come to my house looking for something you don't own, Or I'll throw my tassles at you! | ||
| Nukeblue |
If shtf fan i gotta say i'm reaching for the m1-a. you can't deny the 308! the boy gets the carbine & the wife the shotgun  | ||
| Pdxs3t |
Amen to that! It has the reach, it has the knock down and..its just uber cool! | ||
| Aesquire |
It's not like that. The Mini-14 is a redo on a pre-World war 2 design. It has acceptable accuracy for it's purpose, which is hitting a coyote sized target at under 200 yards, after being neglected behind the seat of a pickup for months and years.... Or standing watch year in and out on a prison wall..... or used in combat in the real world, in jungle or desert... It just works. The AR-15 series is a post WW2 design intended from the beginning to use aircraft alloys and manufacturing techniques. It's design and construction differ from the Mini as much as the Mini differs from a Brown Bess. ( time is funny that way. progress accelerates, or stagnates. Rocket ships are little improved from 1975. A typical smart phone is so far ahead of a 1975 mainframe computer it's hilarious. The PC I'm typing this on can kick the snot out of a NSA Cray of the early 90's.... ) Both the Mini and the AR-15 can be accurate and reliable. It's an apples and oranges comparison. They are both good. It's stupid to argue about it. There are a few piston AR's worth looking at. It's such a "new" design that reliability is not yet determined... but I can say that a poorly engineered piston conversion is crap, and the best is fine. On the good end...Look for the piston spring to not ever bind, ( designed so it never fully collapses ) the carrier tilt problem to be zero and the accuracy to be within spitting distance of a "old" match grade direct gas AR. On the bad end, the piston will crack, the springs will break and the bad design will destroy your rifle. Dead. Broken. ( carrier tilt can/will destroy the lower receiver, buffer, etc. ) Ruger and LWRC seem to have it right. Others? waste of money. This list will change. Don't forget this is a Kludge on a proven design. It's not a horrible idea to try and make an AR more AK-like, but it's not really a needful thing. Yes, you should clean an AR. More than a Garrand? Probably. Yes you should lube any gun properly, and more important, with the right lube for the environment. I run an AR pretty wet in the North East in the rain and snow. In the Sandbox, that would be foolish as it would have grit and that talcum like dust jamming it all up. In Iraq, I'd run light lube on a few points and mostly dry. I'm also a big BoreSnake fan. Keep one with the gun... use it at the end of a shooting session. ( but I also own a proper length carbon fiber rod. Plastic coated rods suck, as the plastic flakes off, and metal rods work, but can scratch up the bore if crud gets caught in the joints... ) A Garrand design gun also gets treated with Hoppes Number 9, and Sweets 7.62 copper solvent... the AR gets hosed out with Breakfree CLP. Different alloys, ( and stock materials ) Different lubes. You don't run Mobile1 in your Primary, do you? | ||
| Pdxs3t |
Now that was very well put!  | ||
| Fb1 |
Guns and motorcycles: I like them ALL. Nutnfancy put a Ruger Mini-14 through its paces against the "big boys" and came away favorably impressed. Emphasis mine:
http://youtu.be/8Fk84KLiaa4 http://youtu.be/PKPgJ_ec3Fs | ||
| Pdxs3t |
He's done several vids on the Mini...he even owns a few AR's too... | ||
| Blake |
Excellent vid for us newbs to black rifles... Excellent channel too. | ||
| Pdxs3t |
I'd still take one of these! Galil...One of the best Battle Rifles ever made. Only draw back, the price tag.  | ||
| Ninefortheroad |
"Excellent vid for us newbs to black rifles..." Life is too short, why not own both? and a mini30? and an SKS because of the relative low price every firearms enthusiast should have one. I just might get another one... C+R holders can get one for $320 http://www.wideners.com/itemdetail.cfm?item_id=100 000439&dir=700|701|1029 or here for $250 http://www.classicfirearms.com/c-r-eligible/chicom sks | ||
| Buellinachinashop |
Anybody see the 6.8 or .300 Blackout conversion kits for the ACR?  | ||
| Nukeblue |
interesting read from israeli special forces from another forum... galil vs ar M16 Vs. AK47/Galil One of the most common debates in weapons forums on the web is the M16 Vs. AK47 issue - which one is the better assault rifle. As probably the only western army in the world that have used both an AK47 variant (IMI Galil) and the M16 on a large scale, the IDF is often mentioned as a real life example. The pro M16 guys claim that the IDF usage of the M16 is a clear evidence of the weapon's quality, while the pro AK47 guys claim that the IDF switched from IMI Galil to the M16 only since it received them free of charge from the U.S. The truth is that the M16 is by far the more superior weapon. It's lighter, more accurate, more versatile, and with proper maintenance it is very reliable. Indeed, it might be less sand proof then the Galil/AK47 series. However, all you need is to clean it once a day and it will work properly. Since modern armies clean their smallarms on a daily even during combat deployment this is a non-issue. In fact, most of the myth regarding the M16 unreliability date back to the Vietnam War when the M16 was first issued. The 5.56 ammunition given then to the troops used a low quality sticky powder that caused massive buildup of dirt in the M16 mechanism and eventually to jamming problems. When the ammunition was changed, the misfire problems disappeared as well. The IMI Galil is heavy, not accurate and you can't place any optics on it without special adapters. Many people also don't like the Galil/AK safety mechanism but that's more a personnel preference issue. The M16 design, however, is very user friendly and allow numerous modifications to be made such as mounting various uppers. The large number of M16 variants used by the IDF for dozens and dozens of years of continuous combat deployment is a clear evidence of that. Thus, the reason for the IDF usage of the M16 over the Galil isn't the cost. It's the pure quality of the M16 over the Galil. Most of IDF troops dislike the Galil and will prefer a CAR15/M4 over it. Those who are using the cost factor are simply unfamiliar with the IDF assault rifles history. Short review - up until the mid 1970's the IDF standard issue assault rifle was the FN FAL. At that time most of the Israeli elite units were using the AK47, which was considered to be much better then the FAL. During the Israeli-Arab Yom Kippur War in 1973 the U.S. made a massive airlift to Israel containing large sums of brand new M16A1 and CAR15. However, shortly after the war the IDF had adopted the IMI Galil as its new standard issue assault rifle so most of the M16 remained in storage. The Galil wasn't a big success to say the least. Most of the IDF elite units weren't impressed with the new weapon and remained with the AK47, which also had a deniability capability in covert deep insertions operations. In the late 1970's few SF units tried out the CAR15 and were tremendously impressed. A decade later, by the late 1980's, almost all elite units were already armed with CAR15 which was gradually replacing the IMI Galil SAR and the AK47. Note that this was years and years before the IDF officially adopted the M16 in the early 1990's. The IDF SF units that adopted the CAR15 didn't had any cost issue at mind. They could have used either the M16 or the Galil. It made no matter budget wise, since both weapons were already available in masses. The decision was purely quality based and no one told the units which weapon to use. More clearly - in some IDF elite units the Galil was simply never used and they always preferred the CAR15 over it. Following the influence of the SF units, in the early 1990's the IDF had officially adopted the M16 family as its new standard issue assault rifle for all infantry oriented units, including both SF and conventional units. Today, the IMI Galil is only used by the Artillery Corps, Armor Crops, stationary elements in the Anti Aircraft Corps and rear line units. Lets again review the situation in the early 1990's. The IDF had large sums of Galil variants it procured over the years, and it also had large sums of M16 it received in the 1973 war as well as in U.S. Army surpluses shipments over the years. Both weapons were available in masses and there wasn't any current or near future need to procure either weapon. The IDF also had thousands of AK47 that were captured over the years. So the IDF could use the AK47 free of charge over M16 or Galil. Eventually, the IDF chose the M16, so again cost wasn't really an issue. Further more, even if there was such a cost factor, then the IDF could have simply supply all rear line troops with the cheaper M16 and issue the more expensive Galil to the front line troops. The fact that the exact opposite was done speaks for itself. Moreover, some times the cost is less of an issue. The IDF often buy expensive Israeli weapons since it's forced too by inner-Israeli political pressure. For example, the IMI forced the Israeli Police to buy the Jericho 941 handguns. The IDF managed to escape the pressure in this case and got the much better Sig Sauer 228/226. The Israeli M240 Sufa ("Storm" in Hebrew) jeep is yet another example. The fact that despite the domestic pressure the M16 was chosen over the Galil is yet another evident of its superiority. Let's review the situation today. The IDF no longer receives M16 for free. Instead, Israel receives from the U.S. few billion dollars per year of Foreign Military Support (FMS). However, the catch is that most of this money must be spent in Dollars back in the U.S. Also, for several reasons most of the IDF orders are registered as U.S. Army orders. This allows the IDF to largely enjoy from the quantity discounts the U.S. Army receives on its large orders. The M4 series is indeed cheaper then the Galil or even the new Tavor series. In order to buy gear and weapons using the U.S. FMS the item must be at least 50% made in the U.S. This is why the IMI is currently looking for ways to manufacture the Tavor in the U.S. - so that the IDF could buy the Tavor using FMS. But as usual IMI was too slow and the IDF already procured large sums of the M4 replacing the CAR15. Not to mention that the Bullpup concept of the Tavor is problematic since it doesn't allow simultaneous usage of both shoulders during combat, a major tactical disadvantage, especially in CQB or in urban warfare. Yet, it appears that IDF will eventually buy small sums of the Tavor. To summarize, the IDF chose the M16 over the AK47/Gail because the M16 is the better assault rifle in all parameters that matter. As for reliability, the M16 is reliable enough. As for cost it's a non issue. Buying weapons today is cheap. In fact, for modern armies who buy large sums, most optical sights cost much more then assault rifles per unit. | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
M16 vs. Galil= buy both! I like pie etc. etc. ;D | ||
| Sifo |
Just got back from my local RRA dealer. Was trying to get a wheel and deal together. We couldn't quite get to an agreement. I'm back to a patience pace on making a selection. I'll get a chance to shoot a couple of friends ARs and think about what I really need. Nice deal on the RRA for a grand though. You can still order them through Friday. | ||
| P_squared |
It all comes down to what you want the rifle to do in your personal situation. Hunting rifles are good. Personal defense/CQB rifles are good. It's hard to meet a happy ground between the two. Having said that, there are ways to build a rifle that meets both measures, but you have to understand what the compromises are. My personal opinion & YMMV | ||
| D_adams |
I figured mine will run a little over $870 to build it. Build is a broad term though, it's just 2 pins. $320 for the lower complete, $550+ for an upper with a chrome lined barrel. I don't get why it's so cheap to do it that way. Stripped lowers run $140, a complete kit to assemble it is another $675 or so. To buy the same rifle assembled runs almost $1k. Weird, but hey, I'll put the 2 pins in and call it a build. | ||
| Carbonbigfoot |
A little late to the thread, but recently I've had a stinger out for the Kriss Vector. Got to fondle one @ a gun show last Sunday. Me likey! I'd probably pay the money, and wait the time for the trifecta of: SBR Full Auto (selectable) and Suppressed Be a really neat "back seat of the truck" gun. R | ||
| Pdxs3t |
OMG....really? You AR owners are too much. I'm begining to think you're just pissed because you've way over spent on the rifle for what it is! Buy what you can buy and shoot already! Who really care's what you want, own or get a stiff dick for! All that really counts, is you get out freaking shoot. | ||
| Sifo |
Pdxs3t, Why such animosity toward "AR owners". I'm glad you like your gun. I like most of mine too. I'm beginning to want a different tool for a specific purpose. BFD. I do appreciate the input, but the attitude is getting to be a bit much. | ||
| P_squared |
AR is a very good platform for those who want to experiment with different setups, etc. Jim, (Pdxs3t), I know you're opposed to the AR platform, but in capable & trained hands, it beats any other platform, hands down. Yes, the AR platform has a shorter cleaning schedule, but in the real world, it's paid off. (I've had to rely on an M16A2 in the real world in 3rd world countries. If you can't come to this discussion with similar experiences to trade and work upon, I don't want to hear it.) | ||
| M1combat |
The AK has the wrong silhouette... Our military doesn't use them so if there's a choice in someone's mind of whether or not to pull the trigger in a combat situation (say some country that uses AK's moves in or something like that) then they'll be more likely to pull the trigger on someone with the wrong gun. It's as simple as that for me. Well that and the AR is a better weapon... | ||
| M1combat |
"I'm begining to think you're just pissed because you've way over spent on the rifle for what it is!" Nah... You're just pissed because you didn't spend enough to get a good rifle.  I keed, I keed . I like AK's. Just not as much as AR's. Especially .308 AR's. | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
Even if the mini was the greatest weapon and seal team six would use and carry nothing but the mini, its still an unsightly rifle EXPECIALLY with an AR stock on it and every piece of tapco furniture. It does not look like a comfortable rifle to shoulder and manipulate. The AR platform on the other hand is like a jeep wrangler. There are hundreds of companies out there offering hundreds maybe thousands of different aftermarket parts and configurations. The gun buying frenzy of 08 and 2012 was not fueled by people buying the mini14 and its not an accident. | ||
| Nukeblue |
carbon, so how much is a full auto kriss going for these days? | ||
| Thumper74 |
I don't see the point of any of the AR/AK circle jerks. They're different guns, designed in different countries with different ideas on how the gun guns function. Other than a bad primer/light primer strike I chronicled here, my AK has been perfect. My AR has never had an issue either. Without a rest, I can't tell much of a difference in accuracy. I prefer the AK over the AR simply because of the buffer spring. The noise drives me nuts. | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
Nuke, I think it costs about 5000 unobtanium. Kriss firearms are cool but cost way too much for a pistol with a 16" barrel if you don't SBR stamp it. I'd rather stamp a ps90. | ||
| Mtnmason |
"I'd rather stamp a ps9" True! That magazine setup is righteous and while being more expensive - i'd rather shoot that nasty little 5.7 over 45 ACP all day | ||
| Aesquire |
The noise drives me nuts.  I understand. I often shoot with electronic earmuffs. You can hear the range commands, ( usually a plaintive, clear? Clear? Ok to go check targets? ) and it shuts off the loud noises... But it rests on the stock and conveys the "shoooop....ringgggg" sound by bone conduction right into the brain. It also bone conducts the 2 stage trigger "click" as you slowly squeeze... and for some reason I always think of the movie "Quick and the Dead" with Stone and Hackman. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114214/ ( spoiler alert! ) the clock tower makes exactly the same "click"..... Pretty good movie for a modern western. Love the money shot near the end.. I'm not an AK fan. For a few reasons. It was designed to be used by mech mounted troops and hit the ground 100 yards off, or so. It's the design of the stock. A deliberate choice, and it works well in it's context. I've heard it said if you were going to be dropped off on an unknown planet with no idea of the threats or environment ( besides being habitable ) you'd bring an AK-47. My bitch about the AK is the trigger. the stock trigger is anything but a match item, and on the Semiauto ones available in NY, it slaps the finger back with every shot. I understand that the TAPCO trigger cures that, and it's a tiny thing to complain about... but my SKS has a nigh perfect trigger, ( luck ) and seems just as sturdy, and has the disadvantage that mags are slower to change and harder to carry. Also it was never issued as a select fire weapon. The advantage is it never was issued as a select fire weapon.... But I certainly don't dis AK's. Or Mini's, (-14 or -30 ) and don't feel the need to argue about the superiority of one over the other. Apples and Oranges. You want to bench rest shoot at 300yards? I'd pick a AR. Have a pickup gun handy for wild dogs and coyotes? Mini. Or AK. Or SKS. The classic fireside question is "if you could only have one...." and here's my answer. ( ok, my answer is a 10/22, actually, but this is darn close... ) http://www.ruger.com/products/gunsiteScoutRifle/mo dels.html | ||
| Aesquire |
PS90!!! Stargate SG1. Major Carter. |
