The Best Assault Rifle.

Which One the


  • Total voters
    48

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Actually tests have shown the deflection of small arms bullets are rather significant with brush as small as 1/4in diameter. And the deflection is much greater than 1/2in at 75 meters. I'll try and dig up the test scenarios, but I recall that .30cal class (.308, .30-06, etc) cartidges exhibited deflection of the magnitude of a foot or two on target 75m behind brush. I'm having to extrapolate, because the scenario was not 75m, but rather 5yd, 10yd and 25yds behind light brush obstruction. Bullets were noted to keyhole in all cases.

And get over it. Jeez. I'm a teddy bear compared to Les.
 
Back to the thread - I agree with Emac and K9, give me an FN FAL / SLR any day. You can shoot through walls with them. Very useful, even if your chances of actually hitting anyone aren't that high, you'll still scare the **** out of them. I never had trouble with stoppages, and could hit out to about 400 yards with my own rifle, no probs. As for bushes, a 7.62 will deviate less than a 5.56, and the rest is academic. How much each one deviates is unimportant - the fact is that with a 7.62 you have a greater chance of hitting him and doing him serios unpleasantness, and that's all there is. And the M-16 I tried was a piece of junk.
 
ndicki said:
give me an FN FAL / SLR any day
And Ill take an AK-47, preferably the lighter AKM, for any sort of combat mission other than close in work....

And I wouldnt go so far as to say the M-16 was junk, but the M4A1 SOPMOD is a far superior weapons system...
SOPMOD_2-2005.jpg
 
I have to agree with Les, give me an AK. I do like the M-4 though as you have shown. I like all the cool **** you can do with it and they were pretty accurate and fun to shoot. Never had a problem with an M-4.
 
Doesn't look that much like it, does it? Anyway, all these fancy sights do is get in the way when you're snap shooting, by increasing your target acquisition time. I'd sooner have a basic, bog-stock iron sight like on the SLR.
 
It's got lots of bits to lose or break, I'll give it that.
Special Operations Operatives dont lose anything, we find things hehe...

There are lots of Missions that are were and are going to be fought in the cover of darkness guys... Iron sights in the dark???
32161.gif
32159.gif


Anyways, I did like the fit of the SLR, but crawl through the mud with one and then compare it to an AK.... I could break my AK down in under a minute... Cant say that of the SLR...
 
Special Operations Operatives dont lose anything, we find things hehe...

There are lots of Missions that are were and are going to be fought in the cover of darkness guys... Iron sights in the dark???
32161.gif
32159.gif


Anyways, I did like the fit of the SLR, but crawl through the mud with one and then compare it to an AK.... I could break my AK down in under a minute... Cant say that of the SLR...

Ofcourse we did not use iron sights at night. We used NVGs and laser sights at night. From the aircraft I chose not to use a laser though. It was useless to me. I just used NVGs and walked my tracers in.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back