Awesome, I want to live in the USA !

Shame the actions of a few, spoil things for the majority eh.

 

That is true Sir, I agree.

 

Dave it is pointless to learn on a .22, if you are going to take up shooting as a serious hobby then go big, 7.62 150grain. It only hurts if your hold the rifle wrong and unless you are bone thin then your shoulder will absorb the recoil easily, and there is nothing more satisfying than feeling it kick back and seeing the target drop, over and over. I miss the physical challenge of shooting on the ranges it is such fun, as long as it isn't raining.

 

Basicly pull that bitch in tight, and hang on..oh and don't simply rest your face on it either.. I learned the hard way 7.62 can slap you silly in the face.

 

I only shoot rabbits. Not off moose hunting lol. Fired shotguns and recoil with them was not an issue for me. Like I say I wouldnt mind going down the range and having a play with some grown up toys. It is not a hobby worth getting into though. Too much hassel.

 

It's been raining like hell around here this year. But my range is covered. Look at all the water and mud on the ground in this picture.


Even a rainy day at the range beats a day at home.

 

I'm getting more and more into the NFA (National Firearms Act) game. Currently building both an SBS (short barrel shotgun) and an SBR (short barrel rifle). The SBS is a Mossberg 500a with shortened magazine tube and a 14" barrel. The SBR is an old JC Higgins .22 that I'm going to cut down quite a bit, but I haven't done the work necessary to get it ready yet.

Apart from that I buy and sell a lot of guns. My personal favorite is my custom 1911. It's the first gun a built (from a Kimber Custom II) and it's my favorite to shoot.

 

I guess I should have answered the original post.

The switch to the AR15, M16, and now M4 was made because the U.S. military chose to adopt a weapon which could perform well at both close and long ranges. The AK-47 simply couldn't do the job at any significant distance. Even the Russians moved away from 7.62 when they introduced the AK-74 (5.45 round).

The 5.56 round also does a lot more damage than people give it credit for. It tends to tumble and rip through flesh as it decelerates upon impact. This tearing is a horrible wound. 7.62 packs more of a "punch" but its difference in complete terminal ballistics is negligible when shot from a standard (for lack of a better term) "assault rifle."

Finally, stopping power just doesn't exist the way movies say it does. The human body can withstand an incredible amount of punishment during a short time without ceasing to function.

Hope that helps.

 

Frankly, I'd rather see a service-wide switch to 6.8. From what I understand, it has the fragmentation qualities of 5.56 with the stopping power of 7.62.

 

I personally would like to see a move away from weapons of war and more towards sports and fun shooting.
But if we need weapons of war I will take the preference of the 7.62 SLR, accurate and powerful and longer range than the M16, easier to maintain, as for the argument that the ammo is heavier, well a few extra pounds isn't going to worry me, like I said earlier I want a rifle that will shoot through that double brick wall and surprise the guy with the AK I want the bullet to go through bushes without deflection.

Full auto is a waste, the British Army since WW1 are trained to maintain a fire rate of one round every four seconds, easily achievable with a bolt action Enfield and easier with a L1A1, one round one target, and if you need to suppress then up the rate to one a second.

 

Yes and yes. Years ago I had a fun little rifle that was the grandfather of the M4 too...the CAR15. Fun to shoot and a dream to handle compaired to the M16 rifle. The M4 still has the hevy barrel just shortened and looses some of the light weight handling capabilities of the old CAR but its not bad as long as you dont hang a bunch of junk like MP3 players and 38 inch flat screen TVs off of the rails.

Again...the M16/M4 are not complete failures as military rifles. They just arent the best choice for a variety of reasons. When you are issued a rifle that doesnt even met to militaries original specifications for reliability under field conditions there have to be some questions asked. The US army even relaxed thier specifications for the M16 series just to be able to adopt for general issue back in 1965.

Another question that has to be asked is the adoption of so many accessories that are currently found on US military rifles and carbines. Many of these accessories are in fact more expensive than the rifle or carbine itself. Take for example the Trijicon ACOG scopes that are so popular. The variant that the military is issuing has a cost of about $1,000. They pay less for a complete M4 carbine. Add on lasers which have been shown to be less than useless under all but the most specific circumstances, flashlights that are often broken or have dead batteries, car stereos, hot water heaters, optional air conditioning and mag wheels and you have a rifle where the accessories cost more than twice as much as the rifle itself. A real money maker for the manufacturers of accessories and toys.

I have to admit they are cool...they look cool and chicks dig 'em...but thats not realy the mission now...is it?