All-purpose Assault Rifle

[navajo]

all around

I keep an AR-10 carbine behind my front door.
Long distance is covered with a M1A, NM.
I have owned 7 M1As and none of them ever malfunctioned. Not one. Ever.
Never had a malfunction with a M-14 either and the 14 was subjected to all kinds of dirt, sand (basic at Ft. Polk), mud, water, you name it.

 

[Rifleman 173]

Robinson XCR in 7.62 X 39 carbine. It handles like an M-4 but it shoots the BIGGER, more efficient bullet...

 

[H2O MAN]

Rifleman 173 Robinson XCR in 7.62 X 39 carbine.

Are these available with fixed/collapsible stocks?

Never mind, I found my answer and THIS

 

[rob_s]

The AR/M16 isn't awful, but it's dated and far better designs are available.

Like what?

 

[H2O MAN]

+1

What better designs are currently available?

 

[NonConformist]

Short og a G36 or HK416 etc I am wondering as well!

 

[goon]

FWIW - if you're trying to strip any rifle in "the heat of the moment", you're probably going to get killed.

I'd buy a FAL carbine in your position.

 

[H2O MAN]

I FAiL to see the logic in that suggestion

 

[Realbigo]

I've got to throw in my two cents here. In my 8 years in the Corps, I had one ftf out of countless thousands of rounds fired through my issued M16a2's in both training and combat. That includes in the jungle, and in the desert. Granted, after growing up hearing the never ending number of complaints about it from all of my fathers cronies, I kept my rifle as clean as I could at all times. I always have thought that the 5.56 is an underpowered round, and should have never replaced the 7.62.And if I had a choice, I'd rather carry one of the new piston driven uppers, than the standard gas system, but if I ever have to carry a rifle again, if they hand me an M16 of any sort, I'll do myt best to keep it clean and keep her shooting straight.

 

[Westley]

The XCR so far seems the best suggestion with the exception of the Socom 16. A Saiga also could be an interesting decision, and the ability to turn it into a semi-automatic shotgun is tempting. Socom 16's are just a little too expensive and I feel like I would be a bit more comfortable firing a weapon like the XCR. I also like the idea of the XCR because the ability to change bullet size is pretty ingenius, and I'm interested in how effective a round like 6.8 is. But the Socom 16 keeps saying buy me. How accurate is the Socom 16 at 300-400 yards?

 

[Westley]

Is there anywhere I can learn more about the 6.8? Does it have the punching power a 7.62 has, - ie would it take down big game, go through the same sort of materials? You can't even really fire an AR-15 bullet through a car window accurately but if you drop a couple 7.62 bullets they'll wreck an engine block. What is the 6.8 capable of?

 

[Rifleman 173]

Here you go. I should also tell you that the XCR is available to shoot the 6.8 SPC, 7.62 X 39 and the .223/5.56 cartridges. According to Robinson Arms, they are also hoping to have a version that shoots the 6.5 Grendel cartridges and guess what???

All the barrels are interchangeable for the XCR carbines. Buy one now in 7.62 X 39 and in a few months you can buy a different caliber barrel assembly and change it out yourself!!! Do some research on the XCR and hit YouTube for the changing of the barrels to see what I mean.

 

[Z-Michigan]

What better designs are currently available?

According to the Army's own tests, the HK416, FN SCAR-L, and XM8 (which is similar to an HK G36) are all greatly superior in reliability. The HK416 was fielded with an Army unit for two years before being pulled for political reasons. The SCAR-L will soon be available (or maybe is now) to SOCOM units, but not others.

There are many sources for this Army test data, but I recommend the Jim Schatz presentation available at:
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008Intl/

(see pages 101-102). That presentation also details everything else wrong with the M16/M4 weapons.

The M16/M4 continues in service because top brass won't admit it's time for a change, and politicians are happy with who the procurement contracts are going to.

Beyond those, I think the AR-180 (original), the XCR, and the AK-100+ series of AK's would all be better in reliability and give up little or nothing in other areas. (Nothing for the XCR, except I'm not aware of it yet being combat tested.)

 

[Westley]

Alright, I read all about 6.8- now my question is if anyone has had experience with the 6.8 and who makes the best 6.8 rounds.

 

[navajo]

still in use

M-16 and M-4 are probably still in use because RSM has stock in Colt and FN.
Haaaaavud whiz kids are never wrong.

 

[Rampant_Colt]

USMC for the win!

I've got to throw in my two cents here. In my 8 years in the Corps, I had one ftf out of countless thousands of rounds fired through my issued M16a2's in both training and combat. That includes in the jungle, and in the desert. Granted, after growing up hearing the never ending number of complaints about it from all of my fathers cronies, I kept my rifle as clean as I could at all times. I always have thought that the 5.56 is an underpowered round, and should have never replaced the 7.62.And if I had a choice, I'd rather carry one of the new piston driven uppers, than the standard gas system, but if I ever have to carry a rifle again, if they hand me an M16 of any sort, I'll do myt best to keep it clean and keep her shooting straight

Semper Fi, Realbigo!
Quoted for truth. Hooorah!

 

[goon]

Westley - I've shot things behind windows with .22LR's.
The damage on the target was pretty severe - it basically turned a .22LR into a shotgun loaded with glass. It may not be immediately lethal but I'd bet that your attacker wouldn't be able to see anything for the rest of his life and in one of those nasty scenarios, that probably wouldn't be very long.
I also wouldn't discount the wounding ability of the round itself.

Also, engine blocks are tough. A 7.62 will be more likely to punch through something that will tie your engine up but I still wouldn't count on penetrating the block.
Fortunately, you don't really have to. There are fuel injection systems and radiators and stuff like that on cars and if you take something like that out you won't be driving far.

I still prefer a FAL but that's a personal choice. I wouldn't feel underarmed with a good AR-15 variant.

 

[704338]

I'm hung up on home defense and long range shooting. Personally it sounds like to me you need a pistol and a rifle. You're not going to find any "assault" rifle that's going to meet both criteria in my opinion. Maybe if you insulated your interior and exterior walls of your home with steel.. But then you have that pesky case of ricochet. That leads me to an option of maybe a .22lr AR-15, but of course that would cut down on your big game hunting. Get a decent caliber handgun and a big caliber rifle.

It sounds to me like you just want a gun that looks super bad ass and it puts a big hole in a paper plate. Please remember this, in case of emergency, it doesn't matter how big your gun is or how many scopes and rails you have on it. A majority of the time it will be bulky and hard to maneuver. A pistol or revolver would be fine for home defense, because it's almost always the first shot that matters.

:x

 

[Westley]

I'd rather have a Galil than a FAL, but I'd rather have an XCR than either. I'd love to get the 6.8, but it's WAY more expensive. 7.62 is cheaper than I thought it was.

 

[Westley]

I understand your point about home defense- the pont is if SHTF later down the line- and it could be far too late to get a rifle like this then. I want to do it while it's still possible to get one.

 

[Stinkyshoe]

H2O man.

Sweet rifles at the end of page 2 there. What kind of stock is that on the M1a? Thanks!

Ss

 

[chieftain]

Originally Posted by Realbigo
I've got to throw in my two cents here. In my 8 years in the Corps, I had one ftf out of countless thousands of rounds fired through my issued M16a2's in both training and combat. That includes in the jungle, and in the desert. Granted, after growing up hearing the never ending number of complaints about it from all of my fathers cronies, I kept my rifle as clean as I could at all times. I always have thought that the 5.56 is an underpowered round, and should have never replaced the 7.62.And if I had a choice, I'd rather carry one of the new piston driven uppers, than the standard gas system, but if I ever have to carry a rifle again, if they hand me an M16 of any sort, I'll do myt best to keep it clean and keep her shooting straight

As Rampant Colt states thanks for your truth. As in your experience I to would and have chosen A piston driven rifle. My next 'accessory' for my XCR will be the 7.62x39 combloc conversion kit (available right now). I can change from 5.56 NATO to 7.62x39 in about 2-3 minutes. Loading the magazines will take longer. If I need 7.62 NATO I will stick with my M1A/M14.

Go figure.

Fred

 

[gunseller2]

Ah...no disrespect but a big game rifle that will double as a home defense rifle? I don't know about your house but mine is a little small and the neighbors a bit too close to be shooting at bad guys with a 7.62.

 

[goon]

I'd shoot a Galil, a FAL, an M1A, an AR-15 or two, and an XCR.
Then decide what you're going to spend your money on.

 

[Westley]

That's a lot of hardware to take on a test drive. The ability to change from 7.62 to 5.56 would be excellent for home defense, although I'd much rather have a pistol. Although, in my room I do have a machete, an axe, a meat cleaver, and some weapons of my own design that are indescribable.

Shooting a guy with a pistol gets the job done efficiently. A meat cleaver ensures no one will ever mess with you ever again. (J/k) And you'll find arguments much easier to win against your g/f. Does anyone else find meat cleavers more terrifying than machetes?

I wish I could afford the XCR and a 1911 40.cal or H&K compact usp. Then you're covered indoors as long as the other guy doesn't have a shotgun or sub-machine gun. Which won't happen.