Need a ultra cool gun to add to my collection!!!

[tarosean]

Since this is posted to the rifle section...

This would make a nice companion to your S&W

http://www.gunblast.com/BigHorn-SpikeDriver.htm

 

[tarosean]

I did check out the NightHawks as well as the Ed Brown, Fusion, STI and Wilson Combat was the only one that could command me to drop $3,000.

Care to elaborate as to why?

 

[peacemaker45]

Not to ruffle any feathers here, but could a few of you guys chime in and tell me what it is that makes you think that the M1's are so cool? Don't get me wrong, I think that they are cool, but it seems as if consensus has it that it is way cooler than I think it is. A few years ago, I was seriously looking at M1's and once I handled it.... I just didn't get it.
I understand it is a very accurate rifle and it has a cool sight system and saw combat time. Can anyone chime in here and explain to me a bit what personally makes them so cool. I looked at the SoCom and thought it appealed to me a bit more.

And there you have the problem with asking other people to tell you what you should buy. I can't tell you why you should love the M1A.

Why a military rifle? Why not a nice custom hunting rifle? Why not a precision rifle? Why not some other flavor of cool? In amongst all the recent furor, it's occurred to me that what the armed citizen really ought to be is a rifleman. Put another way, the essential centerpiece of any collection ought to be a quality fighting rifle. All the rest is luxury. So get a fighting rifle. It's your civic duty.


As to why the M1A, out of all the fighting rifles out there, I can only tell you why one is next on my list. It begins with an appreciation for the M1 Garand. It was called the "finest battle implement ever devised," by no less than George Patton. It was the rifle that won World War II. More than that, in capable hands, it's an extremely effective weapon, apart from the historical attachments.

However, when you come to use one, several issues begin to appear. Garands are big guns, kind of long and heavy. The en bloc system's something of a nuisance. No easy top ups, limited capacity, and a good way to mangle your thumb. Then there is the fact that they don't care for modern ammunition, you have to down load the legendary ought six to .308 levels.

The M1A, on the other hand, uses the .308 to start with. Because of that, it's also shorter and lighter. It even eats its shorter and lighter rounds from a box mag. By my lights, that makes it the finest battle implement ever devised, perfected.

That's why I like it better than the Garand. I also like it better than the AR, firstly, because of its range and power. Now I know, understand, and appreciate all the reasons the Army went to an intermediate cartridge. I'm not really arguing the battle rifle's superiority for general issue. I think that carbines are quite appropriate for most recruits. However, for my own use, I'd rather have the battle rifle. I'm not an average recruit, but instead take my shooting seriously. In those circumstances, I think that I'd see more advantages from the power and range, than disadvantages from the recoil, size, and bulk.

Ok, you say, but what about the AR-10? Well two things. First is service history. The M1A/M14 has a lot of it. That's a product development process that just doesn't get equalled in the civilian world. It's pretty much been figured out. The AR-10 hasn't had it. In fact, the AR-10 hasn't really even been standardized. Everyone makes their own version of a big AR. This negates one of the huge pluses that the little AR has, namely, it's vast aftermarket support. Second, is that ARs, big or little, just leave me cold. I know how wonderful they can be, but they don't connect with anything emotional in me that makes me want one.

A final point, which might perhaps have better been my first, is that the one essential thing a rifleman needs is skill. The finest battle implement ever devised, even perfected, is of no value if its owner doesn't know how to use it. Other peoples' psychologies may differ from mine, but I find that competition is the keenest spur to the development of skill. And an M1A is a ticket to both High Power Service Rifle matches, and Heavy Metal division in 3 Gun matches.

 

[bracer]

Cooper, Kimber, Anschultz, AYA, blued steel and fine wood. Must cost over $3000 to be any good.

 

[HexHead]

Seriously, is there anything more "ultra cool" than a Weatherby, in a Weatherby Magnum caliber?

 

[allaroundhunter]

How about an STI 2011/SVI Infinity?.... About as cool as you will get in the 1911 (ish) world and not widely known outside of the competitive shooting circuit. If you think that you have to spend $3,000 to get a 'cool gun' then you will be sorely missing out on some amazing pistols... But, if you need to spend that chunk if change then you can customize any of their 2011s and be there easily.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Seriously, is there anything more "ultra cool" than a Weatherby, in a Weatherby Magnum caliber?

May be your grail, but sales trends indicate that an extreme majority feel otherwise.

The Mk V is a nice rifle, but with a starting price double or more your average Remington, Winchester, Browning, etc., they don't appeal to your typical sportsman who intends to actually use his rifle in the field. And I concur. I am bothered enough by a wanger in the stock of a $700 BDL, let alone if it happened to a $2,200 Weatherby.

 

[CraigC]

...with a starting price double or more your average Remington, Winchester, Browning, etc., they don't appeal to your typical sportsman who intends to actually use his rifle in the field.

I would wager that the "typical sportsman" really doesn't care what kind of rifle he goes afield with and doesn't even shoot it until the week before the season opens.