Looking for a high caliber semi auto rifle

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: userfriendly
True, but hunting big game with FMJ bullets in any caliber is not allowed. Guys are buying surplus 7.62x39 FMJ ammo and likely using it on big game illegally, because they can't find SP hunting ammo for their SKS purchase.


While there is no soft point ammunition in 7.62 X 39MM available on the surplus market, because various treaties prevent soft point ammo being used for war, there is a lot of it on the commercial market from companies like Federal, Winchester, and Remington. Also Wolf makes an affordable steel cased soft point in 7.62 X 39MM as well. As does Prvi Partizan. In fact the 7.62 X 39MM makes a very efficient deer cartridge with bullet weights in the 125-147 grain range. It's power and range is equivalent to the .30-30 Winchester round. And that round has killed more deer in North America than any other cartridge.

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted By: billt460


And average sized mule deer is about as difficult to kill as a man. Their cardiovascular system and vital organs are about the same size and weight as a humans. If the .223 was such a wonderful cartridge, then why is it illegal to hunt deer with it in several states? The fact is that it's considered, even in the few states that allow it, to be minimal at best, downright lousy in fact. Which is why it is considered to be a varmint cartridge since it's introduction, not suitable for anything much larger.

I'll grant you the whole, "better to wound in war, rather then kill" mantra. Many will successfully argue that. I will concede the cartridge isn't as bad as the weapon that fires it, (M-16). That gun has had more than it's share of problems in every conflict it's ever been involved in. And again if you doubt that, the information is out there by the ton.
In some places it's illegal to shoot deer with any rifle cartridge. Local game regulations have nothing to do with cartridge performance on game. The .223 has also greatly evolved over the last 50 years.

The information is out there. Unfortunately it isn't being passed around at the gun store counter you sit at. I just can't believe you haven't brought up M16s being made by Mattel. I know a bunch of guys that pulled triggers in Iraq/A-stan. None hate the M4 or 5.56. You can go to forums with thousands of members that were fighting. Again, they tend to like that combo OK. You're stuck on issues from 1965.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: hatt
In some places it's illegal to shoot deer with any rifle cartridge. Local game regulations have nothing to do with cartridge performance on game. The .223 has also greatly evolved over the last 50 years.


So what? All ammunition has. That doesn't make the .223 any more of a deer cartridge now, than it did then. It's not, pure and simple. Laws governing the use of .22 centerfires on large game are in place because these cartridges, along with the bullets they're loaded with, were never designed to be anything more than varmint cartridges. The bullets available are not designed to take anything but varmints with. Then or now. They easily fragment because of their thin jackets, and create destructive wounds that destroy a lot of otherwise usable meat. It's why they are used for varmint and pest control. NOT hunting larger game. And that is the reason they are illegal in many states.

Originally Posted By: hatt
The information is out there. Unfortunately it isn't being passed around at the gun store counter you sit at. I just can't believe you haven't brought up M16s being made by Mattel. I know a bunch of guys that pulled triggers in Iraq/A-stan. None hate the M4 or 5.56. You can go to forums with thousands of members that were fighting. Again, they tend to like that combo OK. You're stuck on issues from 1965.


Stop trying to prove your ignorance. We get it. This rifle has had severe problems in every conflict it's ever been involved in. Including issues galore in Iraq. The fact you "know a bunch of guys" means nothing. The Army knows far more. They are the one's who have published these issues. Not guys "sitting around at gun shops".

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014...as-w/#pagebreak

“The reliability is not there,” Warrant Officer Kramer said of the standard-issue model. “I would prefer to use something else. If I could grab something else, I would.”

"U.S. Special Operations Command in 2001 issued a [censored] private report that said the M4A1 was fundamentally flawed because the gun failed when called on to unleash rapid firing".

"In 2002, an internal report from the Army’s Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey said the M4A1 was prone to overheating and “catastrophic barrel failure,” according to a copy obtained by The Times."

"Retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert Scales, an artillery officer who earned the Silver Star in Vietnam, is a prominent M4 critic. He said its 5.56-caliber bullet is too small and the gas-piston firing system is prone to stoppage. He said better weapons — the German Heckler-Koch G36 and Russian AK-74 (a version of the venerable AK-47) — use superior firing systems."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now, that took me all of 5 minutes to find and post. There is a ton more out there, all from reliable sources. Not from "gun shop counters". Army Major Generals, Warrant Officers, Special Ops. Commanders, and on down the line have all, at one time or another, spoken out on the fact this rifle is nothing but a glorified POS. But you can keep your head in the sand because you love it so. It matters nothing to me. Just stop posting fan boy nonsense as a substitute for verifiable information.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: hatt
The 5.56 was so bad the Russians copied it so they wouldn't have an unfair advantage. Absolutely nothing wrong with the 5.56 as an anti personnel round at typical ranges. The biggest problem was using bullets designed for SAWs and M16s in short barrels. With the new crop of .mil bullets the 5.56 has never been better.


And average sized mule deer is about as difficult to kill as a man. Their cardiovascular system and vital organs are about the same size and weight as a humans. If the .223 was such a wonderful cartridge, then why is it illegal to hunt deer with it in several states? The fact is that it's considered, even in the few states that allow it, to be minimal at best, downright lousy in fact. Which is why it is considered to be a varmint cartridge since it's introduction, not suitable for anything much larger.

I'll grant you the whole, "better to wound in war, rather then kill" mantra. Many will successfully argue that. I will concede the cartridge isn't as bad as the weapon that fires it, (M-16). That gun has had more than it's share of problems in every conflict it's ever been involved in. And again if you doubt that, the information is out there by the ton.


The 5.56 works fine on mule deer sized animals. Punches 18-27" of tissue and expands to 1/2" or so in diameter. If you can't make that work for you, it's the Indian and not the arrow. The fact that it is illegal to hunt deer with it in some states is just as much validation as the fact that several states view AR15's as "too lethal for civilians". I postulate that these laws cancel each other out, lol!

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: hatt
You're stuck on issues from 1965.


Here is more to help you with your "education". "Stuck on issues from 1965". Yeah, right. Wake up.

https://warisboring.com/the-armys-main-r...c76b#.mvbg6bbkx

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: Ws6
It's going to take more than Google to convince me your argument has merit when so many people who have used it in combat come home and buy one to defend their home. You may consider your ar a range toy. Mine is for home defense, hunting, and things of the nature.


Of course it will because your a fan boy of both the cartridge and the platform. And I'm not "arguing". Everything I've said about this platform's problems are well documented fact. The information is out there. Reams of it. All you have to do is read it. You won't. Or else wouldn't believe it if you did. As I said, I like both as well. I most likely own more of them than you do. They're fun to play with. And that's what we do with them, regardless if you care to admit it or not. With that said it doesn't prevent me from realistically looking at both the cartridge and the platform for what they are.... A varmint cartridge in a weapon that has had far more than it's share of problems. Most of which still continue today.

If this nation was not $20 Trillion dollars in debt. And we had both a sitting President, as well as a legislative branch that loved the military, as much as the current administration hates it, we would have been rid of this dog with fleas years ago. But the fact of the matter is both financial, as well as political realities prevent that. So we have limped along with this turd for the last 5+ decades. With the possibilities of getting rid of it becoming more remote with every passing year. All the way trying to make changes to "improve" it. Most of which have not.


I've read it, and I am familiar with it. What you've missed is that a lot of this is political in nature, isolated incidents, units that poorly maintained gear or were using gear that was beat to snot, etc. You can make a case against the M4 if you want, but your case would be built on junk like that Washington Post article. During military testing, the M16 was shown to be more reliable than the M14. Also, in later and more recent testing, it has been shown to be quite impressive, as well. I would direct you to look at New Zealand's procurement choice of the mid-length gas system LMT rifle based on the Stoner system. NZ is fielding a relatively small amount of rifles, and COMPLETELY replacing their infantry arsenal thereof. The LMT product simply out-performed. There is no financial impetus, or "locked in" situation with NZ. Look into it.

I get that you want to find fault with the M4, and it isn't WITHOUT fault. What it is, is the best CQB-medium range tool yet made for the job. Is it THE MOST RELIABLE? Maybe not. Is it THE MOST ACCURATE? Maybe not. But what it IS, is a killer mix of reliability, shoot-ability, handling, etc.

In short, it is the Porsche Cayman R of cars. It may not be the fastest, have the highest skidpad ratings, etc. but all in all, it's a helluva driver's car and will get it done.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: Ws6
The fact that it is illegal to hunt deer with it in some states is just as much validation as the fact that several states view AR15's as "too lethal for civilians". I postulate that these laws cancel each other out, lol!


I "postulate" that anyone given the choice, who would choose to hunt deer with a .223 is an idiot. You can tow a boat with a 4 cylinder pickup. The mere fact that it's been done is hardly reason to do it, when far better choices exist. Again, that simply falls under the definition of stupid. Just as there will always be people who insist on using pliers when they need a wrench.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: Ws6
I get that you want to find fault with the M4, and it isn't WITHOUT fault. What it is, is the best CQB-medium range tool yet made for the job. Is it THE MOST RELIABLE? Maybe not. Is it THE MOST ACCURATE? Maybe not. But what it IS, is a killer mix of reliability, shoot-ability, handling, etc.


I "don't want to find fault" with anything. I'm merely pointing out the fault is there, and it's been there forever. And it's not going to go away. As I said, if this country was in a position of wealth, rather than debt, this dog with fleas would have been gone decades ago. It isn't what anyone wants. It's just the best anyone can do at this point. That hardly qualifies it as a superior weapon. If all you can afford is a run down beater, it doesn't make it the best car. It's just better than walking.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Robenstein
5.56 actually has a tendency to come apart instead of simply going "through and through" especially M193 at shorter range.


I've only shot it from a bolt gun (Savage 10PC, which I used to own) and a Ruger Mini-14. I haven't use the Ruger on anything that moves (it is my buddy's gun, not mine) but when I was shooting the Winchester JHP's, the performance was small in and out hole, no fragmentation or evidence of expansion either. Probably depends on the round I assume?

 

[hatt]

That Washington Times article has an amazing amount of derp. They need to hire a person with experience in the area to write articles about small arms and combat. Some takeaways:

Quote:
The M4 carbine’s Iraq-Afghanistan history is replete with spotty tests and performance, but also with praise from a devoted cadre who took it to war. The M4, a lighter, shorter-range version of the M16 rifle, is generally popular among the majority of combat-savvy soldiers who completed questionnaires, Army surveys show.

The Times interviewed two active-duty special operations troops who noted flaws but expressed love for the Colt-developed gun.

“The reality for all armies is that governments cannot afford to purchase a perfect assault rifle. It is simply cost-prohibitive,” said an Army Green Beret who is not authorized to speak on the record. “For its cost, I consider the M4 to be an amazing assault rifle. Between the M16 and M4, I’ve carried weapons from that family for nearly 30 years and would not trade them for any other fielded families of assault rifles.”

A Marine commando who served in Afghanistan praised the firearm but noted that it requires constant cleaning or becomes vulnerable to jamming. “The first thing you do back at camp is clean the gun,” he said.

Mr. Zinke, the former SEAL, said the M4A1 improved as its flaws were worked out.
“The M4 has become the standard special forces weapon system,” said Mr. Zinke. “The rail system has greatly improved over time and can easily accommodate advances in optics, illumination and targeting. The 5.56 mm M4 provides an appropriate trade-off between range and firepower. Improvements and diversity in ammunition types has also improved its versatility.”

Most soldiers happy with it.

Quote:
“An M4A1, when equipped with those parts, will fire continuously on full-automatic magazine after magazine until its barrel disintegrates,” Mr. Traudt said. “In our tests, M4A1 barrel failure occurred at 1,375 rounds. A normal Army M4A1 is out of action at 840 shots fired when equipped with its standard, metallurgically and technologically antiquated parts — and this isn’t even barrel failure. It’s gas system or bolt failure.”

What soldier is going to fire 28 mags back to back on full auto?

Quote:
At the time of the tests, internal reports by SoCom and Picatinny said the M4A1 was terribly flawed and not suited for commando missions.

Quote:
Alarmed after the 2001 test, SoCom developed its own gun, the Special Operations Forces Assault Rifle (SCAR), and handed it out to Army Rangers, Green Berets and Navy SEALs. Delta Force, the Army’s elite counterterrorism unit, bought a German-designed rifle(HK416). Sources say SoCom is not entirely happy with either gun and still relies on the M4A1.

“The 5.56 [caliber] SCAR was a failure from the viewpoint of the men,” said Ryan Zinke, a former member of SEAL Team 6, the elite terrorist-hunting unit.


Oh really.

About the only thing that made sense is that the M4 and 5.56 are not suited to long range work. And that the M16 series with rifle gas system are more reliable than M4 guns with carbine gas systems. M16 likely a better weapon in A-stan.

 

[billt460]

If you don't approve of the content of that article, look around. Believe me there are scores more that will give you plenty more of the same. Problems with the M-4 are only overshadowed by the articles confirming them. With that said, you'll have to look at sources other than the military if you want Sunshine blown up your a$$ about how wonderful it is.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: hatt
You're stuck on issues from 1965.


Here is more to help you with your "education". "Stuck on issues from 1965". Yeah, right. Wake up.

https://warisboring.com/the-armys-main-r...c76b#.mvbg6bbkx


WANAT was an example of a lot of things gone wrong. That said, one of the CRITICISMS is about a guy who ran 12 mags through a rifle, firing on average a round every 4 seconds (you can bet it was way more than that, and way less, depending, during that 1.5 hours).

You try that with an M14 under similar conditions. Or any rifle. Pick one.

Like I said, steeped in politics. You missed all the firefights in which not a single problem occurred, when soldiers used better mags and maintained the weapons well, even though some weapons were used at least as hard as Wanat saw. But like I said, it's all to push an agenda. And yet USASOC still loves the M4 type, and as you said, they can have whatever.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted By: billt460
If you don't approve of the content of that article, look around. Believe me there are scores more that will give you plenty more of the same. Problems with the M-4 are only overshadowed by the articles confirming them. With that said, you'll have to look at sources other than the military if you want Sunshine blown up your a$$ about how wonderful it is.


My own personal experiences with running them long and hard speak for themselves. The experiences of my friends overseas running them long and hard speaks to their opinion and reason for buying civilian versions stateside. You can read all you like. BTDT people seem to gravitate toward the M4.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted By: hatt
That Washington Times article has an amazing amount of derp. They need to hire a person with experience in the area to write articles about small arms and combat. Some takeaways:

Quote:
The M4 carbine’s Iraq-Afghanistan history is replete with spotty tests and performance, but also with praise from a devoted cadre who took it to war. The M4, a lighter, shorter-range version of the M16 rifle, is generally popular among the majority of combat-savvy soldiers who completed questionnaires, Army surveys show.

The Times interviewed two active-duty special operations troops who noted flaws but expressed love for the Colt-developed gun.

“The reality for all armies is that governments cannot afford to purchase a perfect assault rifle. It is simply cost-prohibitive,” said an Army Green Beret who is not authorized to speak on the record. “For its cost, I consider the M4 to be an amazing assault rifle. Between the M16 and M4, I’ve carried weapons from that family for nearly 30 years and would not trade them for any other fielded families of assault rifles.”

A Marine commando who served in Afghanistan praised the firearm but noted that it requires constant cleaning or becomes vulnerable to jamming. “The first thing you do back at camp is clean the gun,” he said.

Mr. Zinke, the former SEAL, said the M4A1 improved as its flaws were worked out.
“The M4 has become the standard special forces weapon system,” said Mr. Zinke. “The rail system has greatly improved over time and can easily accommodate advances in optics, illumination and targeting. The 5.56 mm M4 provides an appropriate trade-off between range and firepower. Improvements and diversity in ammunition types has also improved its versatility.”

Most soldiers happy with it.

Quote:
“An M4A1, when equipped with those parts, will fire continuously on full-automatic magazine after magazine until its barrel disintegrates,” Mr. Traudt said. “In our tests, M4A1 barrel failure occurred at 1,375 rounds. A normal Army M4A1 is out of action at 840 shots fired when equipped with its standard, metallurgically and technologically antiquated parts — and this isn’t even barrel failure. It’s gas system or bolt failure.”

What soldier is going to fire 28 mags back to back on full auto?
ROFL! Seriously!? "If I fire this on full auto I can only make it 84% through a case of ammo before something breaks!" HAH! Try that with ANY standard issue rifle. I am [censored] impressed!
Quote:
At the time of the tests, internal reports by SoCom and Picatinny said the M4A1 was terribly flawed and not suited for commando missions.

Quote:
Alarmed after the 2001 test, SoCom developed its own gun, the Special Operations Forces Assault Rifle (SCAR), and handed it out to Army Rangers, Green Berets and Navy SEALs. Delta Force, the Army’s elite counterterrorism unit, bought a German-designed rifle(HK416). Sources say SoCom is not entirely happy with either gun and still relies on the M4A1.
The SCAR is on revision 7 or 8, now, and handles much like it is...a rifle designed by a committee.
“The 5.56 [caliber] SCAR was a failure from the viewpoint of the men,” said Ryan Zinke, a former member of SEAL Team 6, the elite terrorist-hunting unit.


Oh really.

About the only thing that made sense is that the M4 and 5.56 are not suited to long range work. And that the M16 series with rifle gas system are more reliable than M4 guns with carbine gas systems. M16 likely a better weapon in A-stan.







Ironically, the USMC is going from the M16 to the M4.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
5.56 actually has a tendency to come apart instead of simply going "through and through" especially M193 at shorter range.


I've only shot it from a bolt gun (Savage 10PC, which I used to own) and a Ruger Mini-14. I haven't use the Ruger on anything that moves (it is my buddy's gun, not mine) but when I was shooting the Winchester JHP's, the performance was small in and out hole, no fragmentation or evidence of expansion either. Probably depends on the round I assume?


Much like any round, yes it does depend on the round. Killed my deer nice and dead. Immediate expansion, through/through broadside through the boiler room. No, you can't use varmint ammo and expect deer ammo performance.

using some logic from another poster, there is a reason that there is a picture of a deer and recommendation to use it for such on certain boxes of .223 ammunition from major manufacturers.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: Ws6
I get that you want to find fault with the M4, and it isn't WITHOUT fault. What it is, is the best CQB-medium range tool yet made for the job. Is it THE MOST RELIABLE? Maybe not. Is it THE MOST ACCURATE? Maybe not. But what it IS, is a killer mix of reliability, shoot-ability, handling, etc.


I "don't want to find fault" with anything. I'm merely pointing out the fault is there, and it's been there forever. And it's not going to go away. As I said, if this country was in a position of wealth, rather than debt, this dog with fleas would have been gone decades ago. It isn't what anyone wants. It's just the best anyone can do at this point. That hardly qualifies it as a superior weapon. If all you can afford is a run down beater, it doesn't make it the best car. It's just better than walking.


Can you explain why NZ just adopted it, then? They fielded many other competitor's designs, and it smashed them all. They are re-fitting from the ground up using the Stoner system, now. If it sucked...why? NZ has the money, and a small force, relatively. They chose what they WANTED, not what they "had to have".

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: Ws6
The fact that it is illegal to hunt deer with it in some states is just as much validation as the fact that several states view AR15's as "too lethal for civilians". I postulate that these laws cancel each other out, lol!


I "postulate" that anyone given the choice, who would choose to hunt deer with a .223 is an idiot. You can tow a boat with a 4 cylinder pickup. The mere fact that it's been done is hardly reason to do it, when far better choices exist. Again, that simply falls under the definition of stupid. Just as there will always be people who insist on using pliers when they need a wrench.


I would postulate that it works great for deer in my experience, and in all my friend's experiences, and in many more sportsman's experiences, and this is why many companies make "deer ammo" in .223, and put a picture of the animal on the box, and advertise it as such.

If something works great...why not use it? because some guy on a forum who's never done something says it's not going to work? That's preposterous.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Ws6
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
5.56 actually has a tendency to come apart instead of simply going "through and through" especially M193 at shorter range.


I've only shot it from a bolt gun (Savage 10PC, which I used to own) and a Ruger Mini-14. I haven't use the Ruger on anything that moves (it is my buddy's gun, not mine) but when I was shooting the Winchester JHP's, the performance was small in and out hole, no fragmentation or evidence of expansion either. Probably depends on the round I assume?


Much like any round, yes it does depend on the round. Killed my deer nice and dead. Immediate expansion, through/through broadside through the boiler room. No, you can't use varmint ammo and expect deer ammo performance.

using some logic from another poster, there is a reason that there is a picture of a deer and recommendation to use it for such on certain boxes of .223 ammunition from major manufacturers.


I'm guessing due to the hunting regs, we don't have those up here. I have only seen the Winchester JHP's, Hornady red-tip varmint, the American Eagle FMJ's and then the cheap surplus FMJ stuff. Everything under the sun is available in .308, .300WM and 30-06. I load my own Hornady red-tips for the .338LM, which are 225gr and would kill anything that walks on this continent.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: Ws6
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
5.56 actually has a tendency to come apart instead of simply going "through and through" especially M193 at shorter range.


I've only shot it from a bolt gun (Savage 10PC, which I used to own) and a Ruger Mini-14. I haven't use the Ruger on anything that moves (it is my buddy's gun, not mine) but when I was shooting the Winchester JHP's, the performance was small in and out hole, no fragmentation or evidence of expansion either. Probably depends on the round I assume?


Much like any round, yes it does depend on the round. Killed my deer nice and dead. Immediate expansion, through/through broadside through the boiler room. No, you can't use varmint ammo and expect deer ammo performance.

using some logic from another poster, there is a reason that there is a picture of a deer and recommendation to use it for such on certain boxes of .223 ammunition from major manufacturers.


I'm guessing due to the hunting regs, we don't have those up here. I have only seen the Winchester JHP's, Hornady red-tip varmint, the American Eagle FMJ's and then the cheap surplus FMJ stuff. Everything under the sun is available in .308, .300WM and 30-06. I load my own Hornady red-tips for the .338LM, which are 225gr and would kill anything that walks on this continent.


Yeah, I would not use that ammo on a deer.

62gr Federal Fusion
62gr Tipped Trophy Bonded
64gr Nosler Bonded
62,64,and 75gr Speer Gold Dot
55,62,70gr Barnes TSX
55gr and 70gr Hornady GMX

These are all made for deer and hog type things. Or LE use.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: Ws6
.....one of the CRITICISMS is about a guy who ran 12 mags through a rifle, firing on average a round every 4 seconds (you can bet it was way more than that, and way less, depending, during that 1.5 hours). You try that with an M14 under similar conditions. Or any rifle. Pick one.


“My weapon was overheating,” another soldier said. “I had shot about 12 magazines by this point already and it had only been about half an hour or so into the fight.” In other words, the soldier fired approximately 360 rounds in 30 minutes. That’s 14 rounds a minute—one every four seconds."

Having a weapon fail from overheating, that has shot 360 rounds in a half hour is totally unacceptable performance. Most any semi out there can maintain that rate of fire. Even a Ruger Mini 14. And it's never been "battle tested". I've shot doubles in Trap on a fast squad. And easily fired 50 rounds in less than 10 minutes. And that's 5 rounds a minute out of a thin barreled shotgun pushing an 1-1/8 ounce of lead at 1,200 FPS with every shot. Hardly "battlefield performance". No matter how you want to look at it, the gun is prone to overheating, and jams as a direct result. There are all but countless reports of it not being able to produce the intended rate of fire it is designed to.