View Full Version : Anyone here run thier AR as a MPR (Multi Purpose Rifle)?
I've seen a lot of pics and descriptions of various AR's set up as QCB (typically SBRs), Duty (RDS and BUIS) then SPRs with the longer barrels and optics.
Anyone here set up with a basic 16" and run it as any of the above when the time requires it? I.E. - RDS/BUIS set for 55 or 62 gr, then a magnified scope sighted for 70+ gr and a bipod in the case.
I currently only have the one AR, and after the hemorrhage of cash this winter, I don't see that changing anytime soon.
I have not timed it yet, but I am guessing that I could swap out optics (Aimpoint PRO with my PSOP 6x) and mount the bipod in less than a minute.
Not that there would be much need for it, after shooting a buddies AR with a 3x ACOG @ 600y at an 18" gong, unless you were confronted with a target closer to 8" and sitting on the ground where you would want or need the higher magnification to verify you are on target instead of "It's somewhere behind the dot"
Lots of people try setups like this and eventually wind up with, at the very least, a separate upper.
IME a 16" carbine with RDS will do just about anything well enough. I have never had success trying to Lego the thing into different roles.
If you want to shoot distant targets because you think it's fun, then going to other optics, bipods, uppers, etc. may be worthwhile. If you want to shoot distant targets because you think you might have to, or to work on your fundamentals, you're better off doing that with the gun setup as it is, not as it could be 30-60 seconds from now.
The way I would run a lone rifle would be with a 1x4 optic but that might be my eyes getting old. The best 1x4 ive seen and i bought it is the vortex viper hd 1x4 but you wont be as fast as with a rds i love my other rifle with my t1 but if i only had to pick one it would be the magnified by a long shot im not comfortable shooting past 200-300 yards with a rds and yes you can hit targets or steel but if im out on my property and want to know what im observing and what hog or whatnot im fixing to shoot the 1x4 is my choice
If you're already running a 16" barrel, it'll certainly work for longer stuff. The sight config is where you'd swap... Hard to beat a 4X ACOG for 300-600 yards... but then that magnification sucks inside of 100....
Raven Armament
02-07-12, 09:37
I have a 16" AR with Magpul sights as my standard configuration for home defense and recreational shooting. If I use it for coyote hunting, I'll toss on the cheap 2-6x28 Famous Maker scope and fold the Magpuls down.
ICANHITHIMMAN
02-07-12, 09:44
I have tried to fallow that idea but I walays end up with extra parts that morph them selves into other rifles.
This is as close to a "16" multi purpose" rifle as it gets IMHO.
14.5 Noveske with pinned SF 212A - NF 1-4 - Troy BUIS- SF X300 WML-VCAS Sling
I wouldn't run it as my HD setup as I think the RDS/T1 rules the roost in that role even though the NF has an illuminated dot.
I can run it from 10yds out to 400+/-
http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t5/d90king/ce5f64e6.jpg
This is the ret that I have found works well in close and also works well out to 400+/-
http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t5/d90king/84d2992a.jpg
A 16'' gun with a 1-6X (or a 1-8X if you're a rich man) is a great multi-purpose setup, and the "opportunity cost" of the barrel length and optic selection is very low. In other words, the lost benefit of choosing the next best thing is minimal. You're not losing much at close range by not using a RDS, and you're not losing much at extended range by not choosing a 3-9X or similar. Add the fact that you don't have to constantly switch optics and you have a winning combination.
Once I can get hands on the new Leupold MK6 and SWFA 1-6 and do a comparison, one of those will reside on my "go to" gun. I think it's a great solution.
Ammunition wise, it's obviously a waste of money to shoot 77GR SMK's on a 25 yard range for short range training. Zero your match, duty, whatever you choose to call it load, then shoot your inexpensive ammunition of choice. Note the amount of adjustment it takes to get the cheap stuff zeroed. Then adjust accordingly based on what you're shooting. Obviously, you're not going to do this on the fly, but assuming you'll be shooting cheap stuff for training and using the good stuff for duty / HD / whatever it is you do, you will only have to make the adjustments at the beginning and end of each range session. Obviously, it's on you to ensure that the offset is repeatable and brings you to within an acceptable margin of error consistently.
For an all-around one-gun set-up, where you need both close range/long range and day/night capabilities, a 1x-4x Millett DM scope with lighted reticle is a low cost solution (+/- $200).
You're not losing much at close range by not using a RDS,
I don't agree.
We're all victims of our frame of reference, but for a civilian-side shooter close-range is where it's at, and the benefits of a magnified, especially to the extent of a 6x, take a back seat to being able to use the gun most effectively at close range.
Now if we're talking about some perceived need to walk the earth like Mad Max, maybe there's a benefit, but in modern society I wouldn't sacrifice an ounce of close-range for long-range usability, and IMO any tube-optic sacrifices close range.
Based off of the OP's comments, there is obviously a perceived need for increased long range performance over what a RDS offers, or else he would not have been asking in the first place.
You've made it clear that a RDS does everything you need, but the OP mentioned 600 yard shooting in his post, and again, obviously sees a need for magnification.
My suggestion was an attempt at reaching a compromise for his particular needs without having to switch optics all the time. Of course I wouldn't suggest a variable magnification optic for what you do, and that's why I wasn't suggesting it for you.
I stand by my statement that you don't lose "much" by going with a 1-X magnifaction optic at close range. The only way to quantify this is for an individual to race the timer with both setups and see which way it goes.
For the OP's purposes, it seems that the benefit of magnification would outweigh the minimal loss of close range performance. The only way for him to decide is to try it. For me, it does.
I don't agree.
We're all victims of our frame of reference, but for a civilian-side shooter close-range is where it's at, and the benefits of a magnified, especially to the extent of a 6x, take a back seat to being able to use the gun most effectively at close range.
Now if we're talking about some perceived need to walk the earth like Mad Max, maybe there's a benefit, but in modern society I wouldn't sacrifice an ounce of close-range for long-range usability, and IMO any tube-optic sacrifices close range.
If you're already running a 16" barrel, it'll certainly work for longer stuff. The sight config is where you'd swap... Hard to beat a 4X ACOG for 300-600 yards... but then that magnification sucks inside of 100....
Definitely not an ideal setup, but many a Marine have cleared buildings using 4x ACOGs on 20" barrels. Not my first choice for room clearing (by a long way), but one could get the job done.
To build a multipurpose rifle you could take a 16" barrel with a magnified optic (ACOG, Short Dot, etc.) and using a 45-degree mount add a red-dot optic. And for the belt and suspenders look you could even add offset iron sights like those from Dueck Defense. This would result in a (albeit heavy) "do-it-all" type rifle, but is a compromise in my opinion. Personally, at minimum I'd rather go with two different uppers if not complete rifles.
Not mine, but an example of an offset red dot.
http://i53.tinypic.com/28s22au.jpg
If you're already running a 16" barrel, it'll certainly work for longer stuff. The sight config is where you'd swap... Hard to beat a 4X ACOG for 300-600 yards... but then that magnification sucks inside of 100....
Exactly. I want an ACOG bad for that, but the price tag and awkwardness up close keeps me sticking with my Aimpoint.
I have found my ACOG/RMR (Docter) combo works very well on the range and in combat. Since they are both eyes open sights I only have to slightly change my position to use the RMR.
0-25 SRM techniques
25-49 SRM or RMR
50-150 RMR
151–600 AGOG
Based off of the OP's comments, there is obviously a perceived need for increased long range performance over what a RDS offers, or else he would not have been asking in the first place.
You've made it clear that a RDS does everything you need, but the OP mentioned 600 yard shooting in his post, and again, obviously sees a need for magnification.
My first outdoor range outing with my build gave me a new respect for the abilities of the AR platform. Shooting reman LC 55 gr. @ 600y and getting consistent hits on that 18" gong was nice. 1 click on the elevation dial and using the third chevron for hold over.
I know the energy at that range is somewhere around 250#, so shot placement for anything larger than a prairie rat is critical.
I have my long range go to gun. Honestly I don't see myself carrying both on a hike/camping tirp/or other outing, unless I planned on doing both close range to 1k shooting.
I am going to be loading my own ammo shortly. Need to find my sweet spot for the powder. Have 1k HDY 55 gr. for target/competition and 500 SMK 77 gr. HPBT to make my MK262 clones. So cost is not that much of a hit (IIRC $130 for the 500 total) to set my 6x scope for 77gr.
I have found my ACOG/RMR (Docter) combo works very well on the range and in combat. Since they are both eyes open sights I only have to slightly change my position to use the RMR.
0-25 SRM techniques
25-49 SRM or RMR
50-150 RMR
151–600 AGOG
I have a NSN and have toyed with the idea of adding the RMR that is designed for it, but the height over bore concerns me for CQB type of work so I simply keep it setup for longer range work... YMMV
I have toyed with running it offset but in my case it doesn't make sense as I have other rifles better suited for that work.
I have a NSN and have toyed with the idea of adding the RMR that is designed for it, but the height over bore concerns me for CQB type of work so I simply keep it setup for longer range work... YMMV
I have toyed with running it offset but in my case it doesn't make sense as I have other rifles better suited for that work.
I'm with you on the RMR being too high when it's mounted on top of an ACOG. I gave it an honest shot and really wanted to like it, but the futility of trying to attain a decent stock weld made it impossible for me to like it. Not that I'm a big fan of the 4X ACOGS in the first place, but IMO it's easier to just use the ACOG at close range than it is to float your head in space and try to pick up that RMR.
I've seen a lot of pics and descriptions of various AR's set up as QCB (typically SBRs), Duty (RDS and BUIS) then SPRs with the longer barrels and optics.
What is RDS?
Rob sent me an acronym thread at ar15 but there are still more to learn.
What is RDS?
Rob sent me an acronym thread at ar15 but there are still more to learn.
Red Dot Sight.
You tell me what a SRM and RMR is?
I have a NSN and have toyed with the idea of adding the RMR that is designed for it, but the height over bore concerns me for CQB type of work so I simply keep it setup for longer range work... YMMV
I have toyed with running it offset but in my case it doesn't make sense as I have other rifles better suited for that work.
You don't use any sights for QCB, you use Short Range Marksmanship techniques.
I shouldn't have said this way, I meant sights like my ACOG, RDS and front sight post are part of SRM.
Failure2Stop
02-07-12, 11:06
Optics are the most determining factor in application, or really I should say that the first thing that enhances or hurts fitness for application is the optic employed.
I am also a fan of full spectrum use of the carbine.
My favorite optics solutions are Aimpoints and low-powered variables.
My HD gun wears a T1, and I don't think that there is anything better for that application.
My GP gun wears either an M4S or a low-powered variable. At 5 yards in daylight with no illumination and at 1x I can consistently get hits on a 3x5 in .60 to .80 seconds with the timer on random delay. I do about the same with an M4S, EoTech, or irons.
The only things I give up at close range with a low powered variable compared to an Aimpoint are constant illumination and more work for reverse-prone targeting.
The illumination piece is a little disproportionately represented by many. First, let me be very clear, not all low-powered variables meet my needs. I am very selective about reticles and eye-box. The ones I favor do not require illumination to be used, which makes the optic work like an RDS with deployed irons visible through the tube.
Jumping into the low-powered variable game is not cheap, so if you don't care about mid-range precision greater than torso hits in practical conditions, it's probably not worth the expense.
You don't use any sights for QCB, you use Short Range Marksmanship techniques.
That's kind of a glorified way of saying "Point Shooting", isn't it?
Red Dot Sight.
You tell me what a SRM and RMR is?
Short Range Marksmanship techniques and I think RMR is just what Trijicon is calling their red dot sight.
That's kind of a glorified way of saying "Point Shooting", isn't it?
Basically.
You don't use any sights for QCB, you use Short Range Marksmanship techniques.
Be careful here. While there is merit to "point shooting" at targets that are intimately close, you should endeavor in your training to quickly acquire a sight picture and be precise with your shot placement, even at close range.
Example: In the kill house for room clearing exercises, we inflate 2 balloons to about the size of a small fist for each "bad guy." One goes on each vital zone. Acceptable accuracy is a popped balloon. Aimpoints exist for a reason. You'll likely end up looking pretty silly if you miss a target in your sector repeatedly because you don't believe in acquiring a sight picture "for CQB."
Not mine, but an example of an offset red dot.
That strikes me as a competition romantic's set up. I don't like the idea of puttine ONE optic on a gun.... let alone TWO! :fie:
Be careful here. While there is merit to "point shooting" at targets that are intimately close, you should endeavor in your training to quickly acquire a sight picture and be precise with your shot placement, even at close range.
In the kill house for room clearing exercises, we inflate 2 balloons to about the size of a small fist for each "bad guy." One goes on each vital zone. Acceptable accuracy is a popped balloon. Aimpoints exist for a reason.
I'm not quick to knock point shooting. Have not done any with rifle yet, but 80% of my IDPA matches are point shooting (out to 20y). I may be actually getting a flash sight picture, but I have no memory of the shots as I am moving through the stages.
For an all-around one-gun set-up, where you need both close range/long range and day/night capabilities, a 1x-4x Millet DM scope with lighted reticle is a low cost solution (+/- $200).
Lighted reticles don't give you night capabilities.
Failure2Stop
02-07-12, 11:30
You don't use any sights for QCB, you use Short Range Marksmanship techniques.
You can shoot however you want to, but I put a far higher level of expected performance in these conditions than "point shooting" permits for anything other than near physical contact range.
You don't use any sights for QCB, you use Short Range Marksmanship techniques.
And we're off... :rolleyes: Please don't be the one that needs to make the shot on a "switch", like the ocular cavity, using SRMT's to protect one of my loved ones, or yours for that matter....
What you learned in combat while doing CQB work is not necessarily what works best. Its simply what you learned and were taught. Might be a good idea to seek out additional training that might challenge what you believe. Because something can be done a certain way, certainly does not mean that it is the best way to accomplish the task at hand. No differently than using a 20" topped with a 4x is less than ideal...
Interesting, when I was down at Blackwater in the shoot-houses with some very dialed in instructors, that SRMT's never came up.
As for me, I will continue to use sighted fire, especially in the scenario you describe.
You can shoot however you want to, but I put a far higher level of expected performance in these conditions than "point shooting" permits for anything other than near physical contact range.
I'm US Army Infantry so QCB to me is inside a room, and after 25 meters I'm going to bring the M4 up and get that red dot on target. I don't understand why you think the height above barrel is an issue at 150 meters and below?
As for me, I will continue to use sighted fire, especially in the scenario you describe.
Situation will certainly dictate. I don't take an absolute stance one way or the other.... I could see both being the correct action in specific scenarios.
Failure2Stop
02-07-12, 11:55
I'm US Army Infantry so QCB to me is inside a room, and after 25 meters I'm going to bring the M4 up and get that red dot on target. I don't understand why you think the height above barrel is an issue at 150 meters and below?
I've done an entry or two.
Being able and trained to hit the CNS on demand, or to precisely target a murder-hole, is a needed skill when fighting people inside enclosures, and I have never seen anyone able to meet those marksmanship standards consistently without the use of some aiming technique.
If you don't think that being intimately familiar with offset requirements from 3 to 25 is a necessary skill I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise.
My Colt is set up as a do all weapon with an ACOG on top. I have trained a lot with ACOGs over the years and while it is slower at close range (especially under 10 yards) I can still get good fast hits on target with it.
From my experience past 25 yards the time gap between my ACOG and my Aimpoint shortens significantly and the ACOG gets more preicse hits.
Situation will certainly dictate. I don't take an absolute stance one way or the other.... I could see both being the correct action in specific scenarios.
I'm a strong proponent of multiple TTP's being learned and the scenario you face will dictate which one is appropriate. Larry taught me a great point shooting method a few years back that I still use and practice regularly. Point shooting absolutely has its place, and there are times that it excels with both a rifle and a pistol.
In this particular discussion, I'm not sure that it is the best TTP to use though, the multiple challenges that we face in a CQB/HD environment seems better suited to sighted fire.
I'm US Army Infantry so QCB to me is inside a room, and after 25 meters I'm going to bring the M4 up and get that red dot on target. I don't understand why you think the height above barrel is an issue at 150 meters and below?
Height over bore creates issues exclusively on the near side of the maximum ordinate of the projectile's trajectory. Once the round crosses LOS again beyond the apogee, HOB is less relevant and you're into memorizing holdovers. So your argument that HOB doesn't matter at 150 and below makes little sense.
Second, the argument against the RMR on top of the ACOG is primarily a cheek to stock weld issue more than a trajectory / HOB issue.
Third, simply hitting a full size torso target indoors is not good enough for many of us. There are other considerations that make an increased level of accuracy a necessity. I'm sure you can think of some...non combatants in the room, hostages, other team members in close proximity to the target but where the target is still in your sector of responsibility etc.
If you can move through a shoot house and engage 3 - 4'' targets between 0 and 25M without acquiring a sight picture, then more power to you. But you'd be far better served by using your sights unless you're at physical contact range.
I understand that "you don't know what you don't know." The training most Army Infantrymen receive, in many ways falls short of a complete education. Think of it as a high school diploma on your way to a PHD.
PS. I'm less than an hour from FT. Dix. PM me if you want to work through some of this discussion in person on the range some time. Are there decent facilities on post?
I've done an entry or two.
Being able and trained to hit the CNS on demand, or to precisely target a murder-hole, is a needed skill when fighting people inside enclosures, and I have never seen anyone able to meet those marksmanship standards consistently without the use of some aiming technique.
If you don't think that being intimately familiar with offset requirements from 3 to 25 is a necessary skill I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise.
I said SRM techniques, and I don't need convincing of anything, all skills are good to have but we are using different languages, what do you mean by "offset requirements?"
If you can move through a shoot house and engage 3 - 4'' targets between 0 and 25M without acquiring a sight picture
I never said that, US Army SRM at its most basic level teaches proper body position, both eyes open and on target, with front sight post center mass, and from there it goes all the way to a 4 week SF course. SRM is not hip shooting. Dix has one live fire shoot house, but otherwise is still stuck in 1994.
From FM3-22.9
"Pointed
When using this technique, a Soldier can engage a target at 15 meters or less in less than one second.
To use pointed quick fire (Figure 7-10)—
(1) Keep the weapon at your side.
(2) Keeps both eyes open, and use instinct and peripheral vision to line up the weapon with the
target.
(3) Quickly fire a single shot or burst"
While not opposed to Point shooting, I believe as it says in the book, instinct. Someone who has fired tens of thousands of rounds, at close ranges, will probably be able to pull this off. If not, not going to happen.
Get yourself up to FT Drum, we have an advanced marksmanship class to get you up to speed. Or go to an AMU class. or start small and google FM3-22.9. It even has pictures
I said SRM techniques, and I don't need convincing of anything, all skills are good to have but we are using different languages, what do you mean by "offset requirements?"
Would depend upon your zero and the amount of precision that is required. If I want to hit the ocular cavity and I am running a 100yd zero my POA is forehead, brim of hat etc, so that my POI is where it HAS to be.
As far as height over bore, shooting with barricades/cover etc, it is a PITA and something that you always need to keep focused on, or as I, and everyone else who trains has done, you WILL launch holes in your barricade/cover etc. When using cover/concealment it comes into play more than most realize.
F2S answer will probably be much better than mine, but thats just my quick take on it.
Would depend upon your zero and the amount of precision that is required. If I want to hit the ocular cavity and I am running a 100yd zero my POA is forehead, brim of hat etc, so that my POI is where it HAS to be.
As far as height over bore, shooting with barricades/cover etc, it is a PITA and something that you always need to keep focused on, or as I, and everyone else who trains has done, you WILL launch holes in your barricade/cover etc. When using cover/concealment it comes into play more than most realize.
F2S answer will probably be much better than mine, but thats just my quick take on it. I see what you mean now, and have seen my fare share of guys put holes in Humvee hoods. LOL It all boils down to training and the regular Infantry is so much better than when I was a LT it's a shame it took 10 years of combat to get us to this level.
Back to the original topic.....
my friends and I were running some drills out to 300 yds this weekend. They mostly involved some form of stressor (like exercise, etc) then engaging the steel targets to make a required number of hits. Typically the time for the entire drill including the exercise was less than 30 seconds. The folks who were shooting RDS/magnifiers (and one guy shooting just RDS) were just as effective making hits as the acogs/leupy/etc equipped guys
jonconsiglio
02-07-12, 16:49
I started to reply very early but got side tracked... Anyway, recently someone brought up a "only two rifles" thread, or something similar. Whether I'm using a rifle for work, training and classes, home defense, hunting hogs and coyotes or just punching paper, and whether most of my time is spent indoors with 1 to 5 yard shots or in an open field shooting at 300 yards or more, I could get by with just one 14.5" or 16" rifle. I could also get by with just an Aimpoint with a QD magnifier.
With what I own, I could do everything with that rifle with my Aimpoint/magnifier combo and my ACOG TA31. If I could only have one optic for everything, it would be a 1-4 from S&B or maybe Nightforce, I'd also consider the Elcan Specter DR.
Yes. My 16" Noveske N4 Recce with a 1-4X Elcan SpecterDR fills this role.
All of my rifles are SBR'd 10.5" except for one. My Scar17 and that has a 13" barrel. I threw a Valdada eliminator 1-10x on it so it will suffice all my CQC to 800+ yard shooting. The short barrel does take away some but the ballistics on a .308 make up for it. I get the entire package with this optic option in a lightweight 30 cal. round. Its not my beloved AR platform but it gets the job done every time:D
http://i1139.photobucket.com/albums/n556/lmurtha1/final3-1.jpg
http://i1139.photobucket.com/albums/n556/lmurtha1/final2-1.jpg
QuietShootr
02-07-12, 19:03
This is mostly the role I use my SCAR17 in. The TA11H-308G suffers from the same sorts of issues that all the ACOGs do, except its eye relief is much more forgiving than the other ACOGs. It's not quite as fast as a 10.5" with RDS, but it'll do in a pinch. I have toyed with the idea of trying an RMR on an offset mount, but I'd like to try that on someone else's gun before I spend the money on it.
That strikes me as a competition romantic's set up. I don't like the idea of puttine ONE optic on a gun.... let alone TWO! :fie:
Hahahaha! Well I'm good with ONE optic.... TWO is just ostentatious. :D
RogerinTPA
02-07-12, 22:00
To the OP, get a good 1x4 power scope with a cat tail, for an all around GP gun. Get some serious range time from 5m, to what ever reasonable distance you and your rifle/ammo combo are capable of (can accurately, consistently and effectively engage), learn your hold overs, and call it a day.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.