Discussion in 'Firearms' started by 3M-TA3, Aug 9, 2017.
It looks like to me if we ever get a chance to get one of these it will be the AR 15
I think a similar set of tests with sand would be interesting. I was very surprised at the results.
Right now they are the most inexpensive I have seen them while manufacturers clear out their inventories. There are some very nice AR-15's for less than $500, and many of the better ones at just a couple of hundred more.
Ouch. Several times over. It really hurt to watch all that.
I have seen different results depending on the media being tested, so to me, this, while entertaining, isn't really a definitive test! Still, several stand out as more reliable when foweled, and this hasn't changed over the years, and that is what I base my choices on!
I have tortured my top three favs, and they all held up during the full spectrum of foweling better then expected. The M1 Garand series did the best, followed by a virtual tie between the M1A and the FN/FAL, except for one very important exception, frozen!!!! The FAL cleared itself completely with a single round, where the M1 series had to be man handled a little to free them up. The AT type rifles had to be beat on to clear them, and that can cause damage! One of the biggest surprise was the SIG 550 series, that little banger passed every single emaginable test with out a single hickup!!! I only wish the ergo were better and the gas system was easy to regulate!
The definitive test for a battle rifle...is the projectile's terminal effects on flesh, bone and viscera. Other media only come into play to the extent that they get between the firer and the firer's meat sack target. Knowing how much of what medium will defeat which class of hostile incoming projectiles, is a very handy thing for defenders to know.
My uncle has talked about how the Garand, and sometimes even the Browning .30's would freeze up in Korea. He told me that whenever possible he and his buddies would sleep with their rifle under their coats against their chest. Said while it took a couple of seconds longer to get the rifle into action they knew it would fire. He told me that when pulling watch they made sure the rifle was wiped down and dry as possible. When it was snowing they would try and cover at least the action with anything at hand, ponchos, cardboard from C rat boxes what ever they had to try and keep the action a bit dryer. Same for the .30's. Said it made a lot of difference. Nowadays the lubes we have are no doubt better, but nothing replaces keeping the weapon clean as often as you can.
THere's reports like that going back into the Mountain Man days...and I've heard theories that that cold may be one of the reasons the Asians held onto the bow so long.
Surprised at how many people thought the AR-15 would do the best prior to watching the videos. Personally I expected the AK-47 to live up to its reputation. Thinking about it after the video, most of what I've seen typically has some guy jamming a peanut butter sandwich in the action and shows you well it runs. Then it occured to me that peanut butter is effectively a grease and white bread has almost no substance. Also, that a battlefield isn't usually covered in PB&J's...
The humble long bow was a more lethal weapon, producing a greater volume of projectiles than the early fire arms. What early firearms gave soldiers, were the hideously frightening effects of fire, noise, smoke, and injuries that couldn't be effectively protected against by the armour of the day. All of which made combat firing at close quarters a severe test of the morale for both sides. The side whose morale broke first, usually lost.
Part of the issue of Garands, and small arms weapons of a similar era of manufacture, is that they may have been machined to closer tolerances than say, the SKS / Kalashnikov platforms. Keeping weapons clean, and free of moisture would certainly help. Condensation inside the working parts of a weapon, taken from a warm environment into the freezing cold, is probably not a good thing, unless the weapon is kept sufficiently warm, by say, body heat.
Although there may be differences between the performance of the different platforms, the significant difference is going to be the ballistic performance of the cartridge / projectile. 30:06 in my estimation is the most effective, with 7.62Nato second ....the tail enders can suit themselves.
if I had to smear peanut butter on my rifle...I'd go for the smooth over the crunchy
It's all about the proper tool for the job. If I'm defending my home I'm not as worried about carrying a bunch of weight, so I'll take either of the 30 cal choices above, but in an AR platform, so the 7.62 NATO. If I for some reason need to take the fight to you while humping other equipment I'll take the extra rounds I can carry. If I want to reach out and touch you, I'm looking at something completely different. You might be surprised that out to a bit over 1,000 yards I'd pick the 6.5x55 pushing a 140 grain VLD over any of the above.
My comment was in relation to the mud test, not to applications generally. The list in the questionnaire was to estimate relative performance penetrating mud....
With regards to MBR battlefield preferences...if one could have their 'druthers'....much would depend upon the mission; though it is unlikely that one will be toting a MBR golf bag around the PAW / TEOTAWKI wasteland, to select from when taking out MZBs ; For many in the USA, (other than some cast members of Doomsday Preppers perhaps), there will probably be a single tool on hand when needed, with possibly a sidearm as a backup, to cover a wide range of contingencies.
Darn...I guess I'll get rid of the golf caddy then...
I did think the Garand would have done better than it did...live and learn!
In that case I'd pick the AR followed by the AK - the one that actually fires will tend to have the best ballistics.
I think, back in the day they were called gun bearers, Bwana..."Nkhomo....pass me the Purdey with the #9 birdy shot....I see some damned find fine looking quail ahead...."
You may wish to consider the tactical wheel barrow option, accessorised with the barkless attack .
I'd probably agree: even though the AR projectile is lighter, it does have a higher velocity pushing it, and the slightly narrower projectile diameter offers less cross sectional surface for friction with the mud to slow it down. Mud deserves the best!
Just for fun, I ran a failure drill with my Dad and Brother last night using every thing we have around here. the One that I hadn't even thought of was my 03 Springer, knock out the bigger chunks, give a good shake, and she runs and runs and runs! For suppressive fire, not the best tool, but if your with in 1700 meters, your number will be up!
I showed every one the videos, and we all laughed, the mud being an absolute worse case situ where you would absolutely have no choice but shoot, instead of taking a few minutes behind cover to clean it enough to function! Dad did his Garand, and with a good shaking and blowing out around the bolt before trying to fire, it ran as it should, same with the M-1A. I also know why my FAL never fails, because it has a first gen smooth bolt that fits nice and tight, and the top cover ejection port acts like a scraper!!! My Brother has a first gen Tavor, and that sucker runs flawlessly even when gunked up good, so I think with a bit of thinking before just picking up a muf caked weapon and trying to get it to fire will result in a much better outcome, because nothing is worse in the heat and stress of a fight for your life then a hard bent weapon, which is now a very expensive club!
A fun test were the 1911's we all carry, never once did one fail in any respect, and when you think about it, they have such tight clearances, it would be pretty hard for any thing to get inside to muck them up. Mine was the only one to have any issues, and that was with the trigger bow getting some gunk in the race from inside the mag well, so off came the grips and a thin piece of lexan now resides between the frame and grips! All in All, if you take a little time to care for your weapons, even when things go really far sideways, they can and should run as expected each and every time!!!
Where weapon platform architecture / manufacture may shine or fail, is in ease of weapon maintenance, reliability, ease of operation, and ability to survive abuse and austere operating conditions....having the best ammunition calibre / load doesn't mean much if the weapon is doesn't fire reliably, or critical components are prone to failure.
Running such drills, Ura-Kai is well worth doing...if only to to test ones limits with the weapon system, as much as the weapon system itself.
Separate names with a comma.