Page 5 of 18 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 177

Thread: KISS Rifles

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    276
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    oregon
    Posts
    7,126
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    beavo.. i hope you're a girl

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,520
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    My old school frankengun that runs:



    With this setup I can consistently hit 6" plates at 100 yards offhand.

    Upgrades include a mild trigger job, M16 BCG, and handguards with integrated rail for the Surefire. I would like to put a tritium or fiber front dot on it for a little better contrast.

    It is going to get a midlength system when this craze is over.
    "The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental." John Steinbeck

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    276
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by bkb0000 View Post
    beavo.. i hope you're a girl
    Why does pink have to be on a girl's gun?

    It's my wife's rifle.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    344
    Feedback Score
    0
    I agree with those who think keeping it close to stock is keeping in less capable.

    If you shoot your stock carbine very well, imagine how well you could do with an RDS.

    For me, keeping it simple means keeping it in a configuration that will provide ease of use in the worst situations. This includes but is not limited to- RDS, BUIS, Rail, light, sling that is more then a carry strap, a butt stock that keeps the stock from slipping while shooting or manipulating the carbine with one hand.

    I spent a long time with a rifle or carbine that only had a sling and an iron sight. After seeing what the improvements can do for me, I have no interest in backing up. That would be like getting rid of my Wilson CQB so I could go with a SA WW2 milspec.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Aiken, SC
    Posts
    1,132
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Edwards View Post

    That would be like getting rid of my Wilson CQB so I could go with a SA WW2 milspec.
    This thread reminds me of the threads at certain 1911 centric forums, where any 1911 that looks substantially different from one that left Hartford circa 1943, is suspect at best, and usually seen as the mark of a wanna be, and is labeled with derogatory and antagonistic comments like tactikewl, do-dads, gadgets, etc.

    "reduced capability rifle" that good, I called the old school 1911's, "fat, old bald guy guns".

    I'll take every advantage I can get.

    Bob

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,520
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Edwards View Post
    I agree with those who think keeping it close to stock is keeping in less capable.

    If you shoot your stock carbine very well, imagine how well you could do with an RDS.

    For me, keeping it simple means keeping it in a configuration that will provide ease of use in the worst situations. This includes but is not limited to- RDS, BUIS, Rail, light, sling that is more then a carry strap, a butt stock that keeps the stock from slipping while shooting or manipulating the carbine with one hand.

    I spent a long time with a rifle or carbine that only had a sling and an iron sight. After seeing what the improvements can do for me, I have no interest in backing up. That would be like getting rid of my Wilson CQB so I could go with a SA WW2 milspec.
    I mostly agree with what you are saying. It's kinda of like handing a 1st grader an analog and a digital watch, then waiting to see how long it takes them to tell time.

    That being said, there are many out there that can out-shoot us no matter what the platform because of the amount of time that they spend with the gun/setup of choice. The equipment may help improve your shooting, but there is no substitution for practice.
    "The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental." John Steinbeck

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    344
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MarshallDodge View Post
    The equipment may help improve your shooting, but there is no substitution for practice.
    I agree, I just choose not to handicap myself. In another life, I went on one real world mission with out a light on my carbine in a time when it was available. If it is my choice, and now it is, it won't happen again.

    It is kinda like comparing techniques. I know plenty of guys who have out shot me with an inferior technique. However, that does not vindicate their technique, but there level of practice. Using the better technique, they would be even better then they already are.

    To me, that is the point. I have no doubt that there are many who can shoot faster and more accurately then I can while they use iron sights. However, unless there is some kind of physically limiting problem, they will be even better with an RDS. An easier gun to shoot is an easier gun to shoot. Standing off hand is one thing, shooting in an asymmetric position, in low light, in the rain, is totally different.

    I DO think that having a carbine, even if it is stock, is better then not having a carbine, so don't misunderstand what I'm saying. I'm just not down with "anti-elitism". At least the elitists are trying to head in the right direction.

    I was in a class a while ago with instructors that I have the up most respect for. My carbine, a 6920 with a T-1, troy BUIS, Vtac mount with a 6P, KAC rail, magpul butt stock and a Vtac sling. One of the instructors called my gun "KISS". The only difference in capability between my gun and his was the fact that I didn't have a PEQ on my carbine like he did. I'm sure he meant that my carbine has the bare minimum. I agree. The ONLY reason I don't have a PEQ on my carbines is due to the fact that I don't have NVGs. If I had NVGs, I'd have a PEQ also!

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    351
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    my newest AR15:


  10. #50
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    9,246
    Feedback Score
    28 (100%)
    Having a "KISS" rifle/carbine is different between owners. As Matt Edwards alluded to, having a KISS gun is to have only those items that enhance functionality in your use. To some, that means nothing more than iron sights and stock handguard, because they never moved past that point in training or employment. To others, that means two white lights, two optical aiming devices, a BUIS, an IR laser and flood, a visible laser, and a VFG to keep their hand in position to use it all. Sure, dude 1 will probably be able to hold his own when it comes to the 200 yard standing slow-fire, but will be completely outclassed in the dark, engaging threats from 2 to 300 meters. In the first instance "Simple" means in relation to the very narrow band of employment that the user has for his gun. In the second, "Simple" refers to the easiest and most efficient means to achieve impact on the enemy in any given circumstance.

    When people show images of a stock carbine and call it (with a degree of self-righteousness and condescention) KISS, what I read is "Incompetant", and the acronym is more suited to: Kept Irrelevant and Self-Satisfied.
    Jack Leuba
    Director, Military and Government Sales
    Knight's Armament Company
    jleuba@knightarmco.com

Page 5 of 18 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •