Best Post-War Battle Rifle

[Zniperguy114]

After WWII, America, the USSR and many European countries were looking for a new, modern rifle for service. I've picked four famous post-war developments: the M-14, FN FAL/SLR, HK G3, and the infamous Russian AK-47 as choices for debate. Now this is not about how good of a weapon all around the rifle is, but how good of a RIFLE it is. (Instead of how good it is all around in killing the enemy, how good it does that like a proper rifle should.)

 

[riacrato]

I don't quite get what you mean by "rifle vs. weapon" to be honest.

As far as bench shooting goes you might be happier with an M-14. As far as weapon for war goes, that would be G3 for me.

 

[Matt308]

I pick AK any day of the week for your average meatball untrained 'soldier'. It is indestructable, accurate enough and needing virtually zero maintenance.

 

[Pong]

Definitely the AK.

 

[timshatz]

Isn't the G3 in the same family as the FN/SLR?

Voted for the G3 but am a huge fan of the SLR, even over the M14. Last in the pack is the AK. As noted, great for the untrained solider and very low handling requirements. Even made it on the flag of an African Nation (I think it's Nambia). Definitely huge impact on the world, greater than any of the other weapons.

But, all that being said, I'm going with the SLR or G3. Better, more accurate weapons.

 

[marshall]

Last in the pack is the AK. As noted, great for the untrained solider and very low handling requirements. Even made it on the flag of an African Nation (I think it's Nambia).

It's not Namibia but Mozambique.

 

[Colin1]

The AK-47
The SLR was a good weapon but not a great weapon. In the hands of an savvy infantry platoon it could get through the side wall of the AFVs of the day. Firing pin had an annoying tendency to freeze in the Arctic. Gas regulator settings could get fussy from weapon to weapon.
Generally good characteristics were its non-subtle nature, it was a bit of a blunderbuss; hiding behind cars (including the engine bay), walls etc from it generally did you no good. Totally inappropriate for the streets of Northern Ireland.
I'd take one any day over the SA-80; I was hugely relieved that as they were on their way in, I was on my way out.

The AK-47 doesn't seem to have the word 'stoppage' in its vocabulary.

Tim
the FN/SLR was product of Fabrique Nationale as I recall, the G3 was part of the Heckler-Koch family.

 

[pbfoot]

The AK-47
The SLR was a good weapon but not a great weapon. In the hands of an savvy infantry platoon it could get through the side wall of the AFVs of the day. Firing pin had an annoying tendency to freeze in the Arctic. Gas regulator settings could get fussy from weapon to weapon.
Generally good characteristics were its non-subtle nature, it was a bit of a blunderbuss; hiding behind cars (including the engine bay), walls etc from it generally did you no good. Totally inappropriate for the streets of Northern Ireland.
I'd take one any day over the SA-80; I was hugely relieved that as they were on their way in, I was on my way out.

The AK-47 doesn't seem to have the word 'stoppage' in its vocabulary.

Tim
the FN/SLR was product of Fabrique Nationale as I recall, the G3 was part of the Heckler-Koch family.

never had the FN freeze on me even once when it hit -35C. maybe poor maintainence?

 

[timshatz]

Tim
the FN/SLR was product of Fabrique Nationale as I recall, the G3 was part of the Heckler-Koch family.

Colin. Was aware they were from different manufacturers but thought they shared the same action. The Cetme from Spain was the patern both families of weapons came from. Could be wrong on that.

Marshall, my bad. Probably could've googled it and figured it out but....

 

[Colin1]

never had the FN freeze on me even once when it hit -35C. maybe poor maintenance?

We didn't use the FN version of the weapon
ours did not have the automatic fire function; no idea whether that counts for anything. I don't think many British soldiers (myself included) would thank you for questioning our diligence with weapon maintenance; there were one or two bad apples but the majority of us knew why we were there.

 

[Colin1]

Colin. Was aware they were from different manufacturers but thought they shared the same action. The Cetme from Spain was the pattern both families of weapons came from. Could be wrong on that

Doubt it
probably me

 

[pbfoot]

We didn't use the FN version of the weapon
ours did not have the automatic fire function; no idea whether that counts for anything. I don't think many British soldiers (myself included) would thank you for questioning our diligence with weapon maintenance; there were one or two bad apples but the majority of us knew why we were there.

Our version was also not auto , we did have a squad based version which had a bipod heavier barrel and was fully auto. I know your rfle wasn't as good in the colder climates for the operator as it was tough to use with mittens as the trigiger guard was stationary.

 

[Matt308]

Isn't the G3 in the same family as the FN/SLR?

G3 is a roller locking design. SLR is gas piston/tilting breechlock.

 

[tomo pauk]

AK all the way, though with any of the ones a decent shooter would have the edge in distances over 300m, vs. the AK-47.
But then, many people are not decent shooters

G3 FN-FAL are not related.

 

[mikewint]

isn't this the "one size fits all" debate? under what conditions? Where? When? Depending on the mission we generally made sure that there was at least one m-14 for its ability to penetrate cover, most carried the CAR-15 though on occasion a 12gauge was the best choice. AK's were the best "under the conditions". farmers buried them in the ground covered in sand and dung for a year and they fired while the m-16 would jam it you looked too hard at it. but the AK was only used on covert missions and the whole team carried because of its distinctive sound.
personally i used an uzi that i bought a in a bar from an old Sargent going "back to the world"

 

[Zniperguy114]

isn't this the "one size fits all" debate? under what conditions? Where? When? Depending on the mission we generally made sure that there was at least one m-14 for its ability to penetrate cover, most carried the CAR-15 though on occasion a 12gauge was the best choice. AK's were the best "under the conditions". farmers buried them in the ground covered in sand and dung for a year and they fired while the m-16 would jam it you looked too hard at it. but the AK was only used on covert missions and the whole team carried because of its distinctive sound.
personally i used an uzi that i bought a in a bar from an old Sargent going "back to the world"

to answer your "under what conditions" question, i say any and all conditions.

riacrato, what i mean by rile vs. weapon is that does it have good RIFLE triats vs. just any good weapon traits it has(i.e. smg traits and/or PDW traits)

Personally, the weapon I'd go to war with is the G3. Originally designed in bunkers in berlin in 1945, the g3 was to replace the StG 44 in service as the StG 45. Only 30 StG 45s were ever built, but the design was still there and after the war was sold to CETME. After Germany was rejected the rights to manufacture the FAL/SLR, Germany fell back to use the design and the G3 was born. The G3 used a roller-locking delayed-blowback system that used rollers to delayed the bolt until gas pressure levels inside the chamber were at a safe leve, making the rifle be just as accuate and reliable as it is powerful. So, if I had to go to war today, I'd go into battle with the G3 on my back.

Source:
Small Arms From The Civil War To Present Day by Martin J. Dougherty, Author. Copyright 2005 Barnes Noble, Inc.

 

[gjs238]

Comparing apples oranges here.
M-14, FNFAL/SLR G3 are main battle rifles.
AK-47/AKM are assault rifles, as is M-16, StG 44, etc.

 

[tomo pauk]

'Main battle rifle'??
Now, that's something new.

 

[Zniperguy114]

Comparing apples oranges here.
M-14, FNFAL/SLR G3 are main battle rifles.
AK-47/AKM are assault rifles, as is M-16, StG 44, etc.

I see were you are coming from, but think of it this way: the AK-47 and AKM (and relitives with the same 7.62mm by 39mm round) are the only assault rifles with a 7.62mm calibre or higher. And before you say "Wait a minute, the StG 44 used a 7.92mm by 33mm round and that was the first assault rifle." I would like to point out the the 7.92mm by 33mm known better as the 7.92mm Kurz, is only .3mm of a difference from the .30 calibre carbine round used in the M1 carbine. The .30 calibre round was 7.62mm by 33mm and is clearly close both in dimensions and in how they worked on the battle field. The StG was a weaker than stardard rifles of the day but kept accuracy and range of the rifles. This made it possible to have an accurate long range weapon with full auto abilites. The StG was a weaker, light calibre weapon because the round it used was so SHORT not WIDE like with most other cases in naming the difference between an assault rifle or battle rifle. So, in other words, I think the AK series can be either or, and for that matter considered an oversized SMG because of its traits.

 

[Colin1]

Comparing apples oranges here.
M-14, FNFAL/SLR G3 are main battle rifles.
AK-47/AKM are assault rifles, as is M-16, StG 44, etc.

Assault rifle and 'main battle rifle'? What's the difference?
If you turn up for a gig with the wrong weapon, what happens?