NEW Welcome Ad

Collapse

Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Patrol Rifle Other than AR.

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by Gene L View Post
    Toasterlocker, you're not even a cop. What qualfied you to make judgements on whether my LE judgements on the AK are reasonable or not? Do you know of any major or minor city or county police agencies who arm their officers with AKs?
    I was wondering when you were going to use the "not even a cop" line. I forgot that anything I say doesn't matter because I'm not an officer. Thanks for putting this "armchair commando" back in his place. Nevermind the fact that there are plenty of folks (cops included) out there that would agree with me...

    Also, the whole AR is better than AK because certain police agencies use it silly and you know it. I personally don't have anything against Glocks, but tons of people recognize that Glocks aren't the most common handgun in LE because they're "better." There is more to it than that, and the same could be said for ARs.

    So you can call names like "armchair commando" all you want, and dismiss what I have to say just because I'm not a cop, without knowing anything else about me. Go ahead. You make whatever "LE judgments" you want, but don't start crying when people (cop and civilian alike) point out your inability to form a logical, well reasoned argument, on a public forum.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Gene L View Post
      Actually, Jwise, I'm an excellent rifle shot. If you find 8" at 100 yards acceptable, then you're obviously not.

      No AKs. If a person wants to own one, and I have owned a few, that's fine. But leave it at home or shoot it at the range and count yourself lucky if you hit something with it.
      I "had" an AK variant -the chinese MAK90 with an aim point sight attachment;could get 4" pattern at 100 yds,but we are talking an off the shelf weapon that is not exactly meant to be that accurate,and I'm not exactly that good of a rifle shot( the czechs,Fins,East Germans made MORE accurate versions of the AK).With friends M-4s-including those officers i work with designated for "urban police rifle deployment" units- I have tried and gotten it down to 2" patterns at same distance and tighter(last was 1.5 " pattern with 5 rds).Basically,an off the shelf AR-15/M-4 is probably alot more accurate,and I doubt anyone would argue that,but IF I wanted to PUT a bad guy down with confidence and had my choice between a semi auto AK and a semi auto M-4,especially on Felony Veh stops,clearing a bldg,or neighborhood house to house search for a gunman,sorry - I'd PICK an "AK".the problem in L.E. is that alot of officers,administrators,supervisors are former military and to them,the AK is the weapon of the "enemy".We've seen it cheaply marketed ,and bought by urban street gangsters,waved around by neo nazi groups,and toted by drug cartel monkeys.

      The public also fears it becuase they've seen the North Hollywood shoot out ,and watched news reports of post office shootings as well as stories of cops and other citizens being chopped to shreds with the rifle.Is it more dangerous than anything else? I own a 60 yr old WW2 surplus .303 enfield and would RUN like HELL from that if I saw a suspect wielding that ! got 2 M-1 carbines, each hold 30 rd mags ,that can cut thru level IIIA body armor and pass thru the kevlar lined car doors of the patrol cars we use in L.A. less than 3 yrs ago we had (2) riverside County sheriffs were cut down by a meth head armed with a WW2 8rd M-1 garand-all of these"old" weapons far more accurate and deadlier than the AK variants people own.Its just plain "image"-the M-16 is the "Hero" weapon,the Bad guys pop people with aks.Izhevsk Co. has tried to enter the U.S.L.E. market with its line of Saiga rifles and shotguns,based on the AK system-they have literally been shut out by the U.S. big names-winchester,ruger,colt ,Beretta USA,Sigarms USA,bushmaster,Remington Arms,Smith and Wesson. although i find the AK and its variants,like SAIGA to be robust and in my opinion- "good" for basic police work( the Saiga semi auto shotgun is excellent ,and the saiga rifle in 7.62X 39 is good for an intermediate police marksman who wouldn't have to fire it more than 75-90 meters) you are not going to get a PD to field that type of weapon,and its based on "bias" ! As for ease of operation? I taught my nephew at 12 yrs old how to dismantle and clean,then shoot a Saiga rifle I have( basic AK action);he did this only once when I took him shooting ,but he's 20 yrs old now and still can do it in less than 5mins.you can't even get mature officers to do that with the Colt and Bushmaster AR -15/M-4 variants we patrol with ,without them going out to the range and taking up to an hour for cleaning and maintenance.

      While I'm all for the "buy American",I look at depts that are struggling for every dollar they can-the avg small Dept could purchase (5)AK variants for the price they pay for (1) "good" Bushmaster or Colt M-4.you can add Aim points sights,lasers and light optics,solid or retractible stocks,then deploy them relatively easy.and for simplicity? the suckers CAN literally EAT dirt and operate-something the "typical" not familiar with guns officer this generation is producing,needs as I've seen maintenance standards of firearms go DOWN,with younger officers literally having to be threatened to clean their sidearms and shotguns(they are MORE concerned about Overtime,Vacation time,and how much work they don't have to do per shift!).The AKs are a "closet and forget" until you need it type of gun-the only other weapons of this type I've seen in my career are the old S&W revolvers and the ithica ,then remington Shotguns.and training armourers?Here in L.A. you can literally stop any taxi cab driver,ethiopean or russian,and they can show you HOW to fix the damn things with a smile ,and have you on your way back to patrol in a matter of minutes ( many have been in the military in their home countries).And as far as confidence? I've seen officers -many with prior military backgrounds,deploy their M-4s on calls,but when they heard the suspect had an AK or the more accurate SKS,they sure didn't act "very confident" about the legendary "blk rifle" they were issued.no matter what weapon systems you are issued,an officer should be very familiar and with them and take pride in being able to utilize it to the best of his/her abilities.If that can't be done,settle for a 100% functional everytime system- and "jwise" just listed one............
      "we're americans ! We don't quit because we're wrong, we just keep doing it wrong UNTIL it turns out Right"...

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by Gene L View Post
        They're fairly reliable, yes. But they're made, mostly, in China, where we've just sent 250,000 tires back for bad recall, cat food for posioning our pets, and kids toys for being painted with lead paint.

        Not a POS, I mispoke. Not a cop rifle, however.
        That rifle was made around 1986. I think if it had any reliability issues, they would have surfaced by now.

        "FAIRLY" reliable!? You're beyond hopeless...

        My grouping was better than most of our officers shoot their Mini-14s. Which, by the way, were chosen over the AR-15 based on their price, not performance. That's the way things go...

        I could put up a 2" grouping at 100yds with my AR-15 (with red dot), but the AK had no such optic mounted at the time.

        Let's be real. How many officers can shoot to their weapons limitation? 1%?? Maybe 3%?? If more could, we'd stop issuing Glocks, that's for SURE!

        Off a bench, I can outshoot my Glocks, AKs, ARs, and most other firearms. SO!?!? Head to head in an actual qualifications course with movements, shooting from cover, reloading, and weapon manipulation (safety engagements/disengagements) I shoot just as well as my brethren with their Mini-14s.

        Does the AR give someone an edge over the AK? YES! Is that edge all that sharp when thrown into the "real world?" NO! But as I had to remind another poster, this thread is about all rifles OTHER than ARs.
        J. Wise

        AR-15 - AK-47 - NFA Trusts - My Pick - Carry Guns - 1911s

        "Some say you can tell how the world stands by the prices of AK-47s...." Chit2001

        Any comments contained herein regarding the legality of firearms, or the application of law, are strictly applicable to Texas. If you live in CA, NY, IL, MA, D.C., etc., the above comments will probably shock you, and should be read for educational purposes only. Most likely nothing I write will apply to you.

        sigpic

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Gene L View Post
          Go ahead, don't say it nicely. Say it convincingly. I think you're probably an armchair commando tied to a weapon that's been obsolete since 1974.

          Gene L-Now I "Respect" your opinion,coming from L.E. longer than most of us, but the only "Reason" the AK-47 is "obsolete" is becuase the Soviet,then russian gov't wanted the same things for their soldiers that we had ,a rifle that could still deliver lethal damage on the battle field,but be lighter-hence the AK-74 and its 5.45X39 rd;the rd was modelled after our 5.56 NATO rd
          (the rd still doesn't have the traumatic damage on soft tissue,i.e. human bodies that the SS109 rd from the 5.56mm rd does ).more ammo for same weight in the field for soldiers and more accuracy,at the expense of blunt trauma.but as far as the AK 47 being obsolete ? Thats like calling the M-1A rifle" obsolete" compared to the AR-15/M-16 ( I'd bet you'd rather have an M-1A/M-14 over an AR-15 in semi auto! I know I would). I don't know what distance you are allowed to deploy you long guns in at your Dept,nor the environment you patrol-urban/suburban/rural ,or a combo.but in the inner urban cities a basic patrol officer isn't allowed to deploy his side arm for more than 25 yds,and u to 50 meters in serious emergencies. Shotguns 30-50 meter,with rifle slug up to 75 meters and patrol rifles form 25 to 90 meters; anything beyond that is up to an SRT/SWAT sniper,and even then its a risk most police mgrs won't take .Sadly,the AK-47 will probably still be making an appearance in crime and in conflicts up to the late 22nd and in the 23rd century,such is the amount of rifles and ammo available-when is the last time you saw a henry "yellow boy" or Krag-rifle ????
          "we're americans ! We don't quit because we're wrong, we just keep doing it wrong UNTIL it turns out Right"...

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by jwise View Post

            My grouping was better than most of our officers shoot their Mini-14s. Which, by the way, were chosen over the AR-15 based on their price, not performance. That's the way things go...

            I could put up a 2" grouping at 100yds with my AR-15 (with red dot), but the AK had no such optic mounted at the time.

            Let's be real. How many officers can shoot to their weapons limitation? 1%?? Maybe 3%?? If more could, we'd stop issuing Glocks, that's for SURE!
            .

            "J"- funny you mention the Mini 14- it was Rugers toss in entry to Replace the then"malfunctioning" M-16 in the mid 60s."yes" it is less accurate than the off the shelf AR-15/M-16 variant,but then again it wasn't meant for more than civilian and police use-3" to 4" groups at 100yds was "good enough" for that type of gun,and its often used to kill coyotes,small dear and other"varmints"-I find that the Mini 14 needs less maintenance than the AR-15 and is cheaper-it can deliver 85% of the performance of a AR,which when you think about it ,thats about all the avg patrol officer needs in a weapon deployment,and I'm here in L.A. where officers have their guns out on nearly every T/Stop- anything more and you will see the SWAT call out happening! As far as pushing the performance limit? you're right very few officers can do this-most I know don't shoot their weapons more than the required once a month,or once every other month in L.A.

            I think I'm a fanatic for shooting 2-4 times a month,but there are smarter officers out there who practice every day they can.The GLOCK issue? well it was a military contract-make a "functional" weapon light with cheaper materials -polymer over metal,and durable,that cost very little and could put a bullet on target when needed.There will always be better weapons ( the HK and SIG rifles are BETTER than the ARs) but if we in L.E. had to "work" our weapons regularly,we'd all return to revolvers over semi autos,lever action rilfes over semi autos ,and break down shotguns over pump actions.....
            "we're americans ! We don't quit because we're wrong, we just keep doing it wrong UNTIL it turns out Right"...

            Comment


            • #96
              Here's a write-up I did a while back. It details a range trip practicing shooting drills against the clock. I shot my AR and AK and posted the times for each.

              J. Wise

              AR-15 - AK-47 - NFA Trusts - My Pick - Carry Guns - 1911s

              "Some say you can tell how the world stands by the prices of AK-47s...." Chit2001

              Any comments contained herein regarding the legality of firearms, or the application of law, are strictly applicable to Texas. If you live in CA, NY, IL, MA, D.C., etc., the above comments will probably shock you, and should be read for educational purposes only. Most likely nothing I write will apply to you.

              sigpic

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by DOAcop38 View Post
                Thats like calling the M-1A rifle" obsolete" compared to the AR-15/M-16 ( I'd bet you'd rather have an M-1A/M-14 over an AR-15 in semi auto! I know I would). I don't know what distance you are allowed to deploy you long guns in at your Dept,nor the environment you patrol-urban/suburban/rural ,or a combo.but in the inner urban cities a basic patrol officer isn't allowed to deploy his side arm for more than 25 yds,and u to 50 meters in serious emergencies. Shotguns 30-50 meter,with rifle slug up to 75 meters and patrol rifles form 25 to 90 meters; anything beyond that is up to an SRT/SWAT sniper,and even then its a risk most police mgrs won't take .Sadly,the AK-47 will probably still be making an appearance in crime and in conflicts up to the late 22nd and in the 23rd century,such is the amount of rifles and ammo available-when is the last time you saw a henry "yellow boy" or Krag-rifle ????
                Actually, I don't like the M 14/M 1A at all. It has the shortest time as a Army service rifle of anything except perhaps the 30-/40 Krag.

                I trained on them in basic, I used one at the US Army Sniper Instructor Course, knocking down targets at 900 yards with ease. Later, I owned a M 1A Supermatch. They're accurate enough, but in general the M 14 was the biggest mistake the military ever made.

                Consider what they were up against with the M 14....the AK 47, a fully-auto that allowed you to put out a lot of fire at close range. Stuides, done by S.L.A. Marshall (which the ARmy commissioned, then ignored) showed that 95% of rifle casualties occur at close range...300 being max, and the closer the range, the more rifle casualties.

                The M 14 was a prime example of home cooking. There were better rifles out there, but none built in the USA, and in 1954, when research was started on it, "Made in the USA" was necessary.

                It's essentially a M 1 with a 20 round magazine. It had automatic capabilities, but the individual soldier couldn't make his rifle automatic, and once on auto, that was it...no selectivity. And no human alive can control a M 14 of fully auto. I think it's like the oldl German GEW 88 Commission rifle...something put together by a committee rather than invented by a human.

                The other thing the US is responsible for is the 7.62 Nato. A fine cartridge, and very accurate from a bolt gun or a machine gun. But it's not the Reality Cartridge of the Century, given that rapid fire from a lower-powered weapon is the way to win battles. More lead in the air.

                I'm sure George Armstrong Custer would agree. Powerful, accurate Springfields didn't stand a chance against Indians armed with rapid-firing lever guns. Custer was outnumbered, which is another way of saying he had inferior firepower.

                No, I like my personal M 4. Our agency is big on automatic weapons (mine isn't) and we have 10 Uzis, and 10 HK UMPs (in 45.) We also have 5 original CETMEs that are fine and accurate rifles, but heavy and uncontrollable on full auto fire.

                In Viet Nam, I carred a basic load of something over 400 rounds of ammo. The other day, I saw a can of 7.62 Nato Lake City Match, which had 440 rounds in it, as I recall. I picked it up, and was astounded by the extra weight as compared to the 55 gr. 5.56.

                So no, don't count me as a fan of the M 1A/M 14. It's a fine match rifle (although ARs are wiping the field at most big shoots) but it's less than ideal for bouncing around in a patrol vehicle. Too much recoil for rapid fire.

                The AK is a good military rifle. The civilian versions are not so good. Since history has shown that firepower will beat extreme accuracy (and that's true for as long as people have employe firearms in battle) the best rifle is an accurate, fast-shooting rifle, and for me the M 16/M 4 fits the bill. Accurate rifle fire is a tactic, rapid fire is a strategy.

                And the AK will no doubt be around for a while. Probably not into the 22nd century, though.
                Last edited by Gene L; 08-13-2007, 11:01 AM.
                "Say hal-lo to my leetle frahnd!"

                Comment


                • #98
                  Unfortunately for your argument Gene, the US military doesnt agree with you, they are fielding more and more m-14's in Iraq and Afghanistan avery day.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Kpdpipes View Post
                    Unfortunately for your argument Gene, the US military doesnt agree with you, they are fielding more and more m-14's in Iraq and Afghanistan avery day.
                    The "over penetration" on human targets and less penetration on moderate gard targets( like mudbrick)? Had a fellow coworker who did tours as a Marine (force Recon) in somolia,as well as the early deployment in to afghanistan-he said on the issue that the Rds they were using in the M-4s and M-16A2s were "just punching through" bad guys,often watching them get up and run off somewhere (only to die later).But Gene L has a Point -the U.S. who refused to use anything other than the 30.06 cal. for yrs(nearly 60 to be exact)Have a Sgt who deployed to vietnam as an advisor in 1963 with a M-1 garand!) forced the 7.62X 51 on our NATO allies-the british wanted to use the EFFECTIVE but light .243 rd,and the FN-FAL,cetme,G3 were all better rifles than the M-14! even today A fal rifle in 5.56 mm is a better performer than the M-4 /M-16 family of rifles.That bud that went to Afghanistan only thoight a bigger rd was good becuase of longer distance engagements and the discovery that some of the insurgents were wearing Chinese/russian and even european body armor that was capable of slowing down or defeating the 5.56 rd( recently miltary.com had an article on this problem)My only arguement for the AK as a patrol weapon is cost,durability and "good enough " performance.when the avg officer has to take a shot on a target at 50 to 75 meters,OF course the semi auto M-4 is MORE accurate,but then again, you need only be as good as 3" groupings at that range,and the 7.62X 39 delivers a bigger,heavier rd to neutralize the target.

                    Interesting Note- when the big WWII comemorations were going on several yrs ago- the M-1 carbine started to really disappear off local gunshop shelves! Isreali Military Industries produced a batch of good replicas for common shooter market,at about $400 bucks apiece( I'm sure that if a contract had been procured from a gov't entity,the price would have dropped to around $250-300) I own 2 -a IBM produced one and a International Harvester produced one.Despite alot of guys claiming they have NO "punch"( again the older, big 30 cal crowd) I read that the Germans in WW2 loved to pick them up from our fallen G.I.s and use them in street fighting in /along the western front .The m-1 is robust,sturdy and accurate up to 250 ft,plus the 110 gr FMJ can easily penetrate car doors,window glass and body armor up to level III-it can be loaded with FMJ ball or hollow point , 10-30 rd mags ,and is easy as heck to strip and clean.I'm surprised that this never made it in to police inventories in the past as well as today in terms of a "alternative" to the ARs...
                    "we're americans ! We don't quit because we're wrong, we just keep doing it wrong UNTIL it turns out Right"...

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by DOAcop38 View Post
                      The "over penetration" on human targets and less penetration on moderate gard targets( like mudbrick)? Had a fellow coworker who did tours as a Marine (force Recon) in somolia,as well as the early deployment in to afghanistan-he said on the issue that the Rds they were using in the M-4s and M-16A2s were "just punching through" bad guys,often watching them get up and run off somewhere (only to die later).
                      Edited for space...
                      I had similar experiences. Mostly during fights in Afghanistan and the invasion of Iraq in 2003, not so much my last deployment in 2005. It became an issue when the person we were shooting at was on drugs. Saddam and the Taliban in Afghanistan would issue bags of opium (who knows what kind of coctail) to their fighters in order to get them to fight us. Heck, one particular skirmish I went through in Iraq felt like a scene from "Night of the Living Dead".

                      The way I understood it was that the 5.56mm round we use (the green tips) were designed and tested by people with firearm competition background. The round itself is very stable in flight and accuracy holds up out to distance. Also it was designed to better penetrate armor. However we're dealing with an enemy that uses narcotics to convince their fighters to go up against us and I've never ran across one wearing body armor. That changes things quite a bit. This is probably why the started to issue old M14s (now called M21 I believe) to the big Army. Also, in order to make use of the characteristics of the 7.62mm they designed the Designated Marksman program and started to issue converted M16s that shot the 7.62mm.

                      Just my .02
                      Last edited by JTShooter; 08-13-2007, 08:51 PM.
                      “The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed."

                      "You go for a man hard enough and fast enough, he don't have time to think about how many's with him; he thinks about himself, and how he might get clear of that wrath that's about to set down on him."

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Kpdpipes View Post
                        Unfortunately for your argument Gene, the US military doesnt agree with you, they are fielding more and more m-14's in Iraq and Afghanistan avery day.

                        Yeah, I talked about that two years ago at our Law Enforcement Firearms Instrutors conference with the then-head of the Army Marksmanship Unit at Ft. Benning. He was our guest speaker.

                        He said also they were developing a 7.62 Nato on a AR platform for sniper assistants, or secondaries, or whatever you call them. But look at the films of Iraq and Afghanistan and see how many M 14s you see in the hands of troops. They're fine for support troops, I suppose, but create a problem in the supply loop. I don't know how long it's been since the military arsenals loaded M 14 rounds...of course they load M 60 rounds, which I suppose have to do.

                        I can imagine a scenario where a M 14 would be a slight advantage, but it takes some effort. Especially at long range, but when you consider the fact that you're facing an AK with limited range and much more firepower, I'll take the M 16. Also consider the AR will likely outshoot an M 14 at practical combat ranges.
                        "Say hal-lo to my leetle frahnd!"

                        Comment


                        • Gene, your argument for the M16 over the AK is somewhat identical to the argument for a M14 over the M16. It is superior at distance. Which is why the army deployed (and is deploying) them in Afghanistan where the ranges of engagement are longer.

                          When you started talking about close quarters battle being the norm on the battle field (and even moreso on our city streets), you started to sound like you were arguing IN FAVOR of the AK. I had to read it twice!

                          I agree (mostly) with your comments concerning the M1 Carbine. I have one, and like it very much. It is a soft shooting, VERY lightweight little carbine that has a good ammo capacity. I think it ideal for women and men of small stature, as it is easy to bring to bear and fits them better than larger rifles.

                          I've also heard good things about 110gr softpoints. Supposed to work quite well. Do you (by chance) know the muzzle velocity of these rounds?

                          The Brits had the right rifle in the right caliber: FN FAL in either .243 or .260 if I'm not mistaken.
                          J. Wise

                          AR-15 - AK-47 - NFA Trusts - My Pick - Carry Guns - 1911s

                          "Some say you can tell how the world stands by the prices of AK-47s...." Chit2001

                          Any comments contained herein regarding the legality of firearms, or the application of law, are strictly applicable to Texas. If you live in CA, NY, IL, MA, D.C., etc., the above comments will probably shock you, and should be read for educational purposes only. Most likely nothing I write will apply to you.

                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • .280 British was the original caliber developed for the FAL. Dimensions of 7x43 mm 139 gr. ball rds. produced 2530 fp/s and 1980 ft.lbs/f would have been awesome military round but the US military brass convinced the other NATO country's to go with 7.62x51(.308) for the FAL saying if they made the caliber change we would also adopt the weapon which the military politics prevented in favor of the US designed M-14.

                            Comment


                            • The M 1 carbine was Audie Murphy's favorite weapon. He kept one throughout most of the war. When the stock broke, he wired and glued it back together.

                              Murphy was a gunfighter, at close range, and that's why he liked the small rifle.
                              "Say hal-lo to my leetle frahnd!"

                              Comment


                              • "Murphy was a gunfighter, at close range, and that's why he liked the small rifle." That and he was only 5'5" or so.

                                Comment

                                MR300x250 Tablet

                                Collapse

                                What's Going On

                                Collapse

                                There are currently 4763 users online. 286 members and 4477 guests.

                                Most users ever online was 158,966 at 05:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                                Welcome Ad

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X