Surplus military firearms are what made the American gun market what it is today. What has happened with the AR is that we have over 20 million soldier, sailors, airman, and Marines trained on it for over 45 years - and not one of them can buy one surplus.
And yet they all know for a fact their fathers and grandfathers got to buy them, shoot them, and hunt with them - and hunting is the only live target you can engage in.
Hunting hasn't hurt the AR at all, and the AR isn't going to hurt hunting, either. From the sporter 'O3's, Mausers, Enfields, Arisakas, and SKS's, we've had one type of gun that is affordable and can be used.
I started hunting deer when HK91's were $160 - and used one with a 1Gen Aimpoint in the 1970's. I wasn't about to use a lever action (all I do use now until the AR build is complete in the next few weeks.) The HK has significant advantages over a Rem 700 bolt gun, and I'll likely not go back to using that again. Point being, the advantages of a ergonomically laid out firearm that doesn't lose its sight picture during recoil and invites shooting it without flinching has as much to offer the hunter as it does a combat soldier.
I thoroughly expect the AR design to seriously influence hunting rifle design in the future - as either a direct semi auto rendition, or with the significant design features. The BLR already is using the multilug barrel extension, and Savage the barrel nut. A simple upper extrusion using a shortened bolt carrier and having a straight pull handle is entirely possible - and styled classically, would have the potential to sell quite well. Ask Blaser, who has simply evolutionized the design with a collet lock, instead of a turning bolt head.
I certainly don't excuse the cartridge as being "good enough for hunting." It wasn't even meant for it originally, it was specifically meant as a combat round with more power and range than 5.56, which means more lethality. That is proves to actually do that on deer and hogs is simply widespread anecdotal evidence that SF and the AMU knew their stuff. Combined, the 6.8SPC in the AR is, to me, a synergistic pairing that makes the whole better than the parts separately. That's coming from a guy who thought .308 was completely superior, and the Stoner design inferior, so much I put my money on other guns for the entire 22 years I was forced to suffer using the M16.
I found out I was entirely wrong about the gun - and the 6.8SPC is about as well placed right now as anything. With millions of prior servicemen and women now approaching a time when they want to own their generation's combat rifle, the AR is and will be in great demand, and using it humanely on game animals is the biggest application that every generation has used their battle rifle.
It's not meant to be a cheap paper punching round, circumstances have not conspired to make that happen, any more than dozens of other almost - became - military - issue calibers. But in the restricted atmosphere of game laws, NFA regulations, and the complete loss of the sales of M16's to the public, this generation can at least accomplish much of what it is wanting to do: own their issue weapon, and shoot it in the open field.
Hunting with the AR isn't the exception, it's actually conforming to exactly what previous generations did with their combat rifles, and you can be guaranteed their were those who clucked their tongues and disapproved of it as "not being proper."
Like Jim Zumbo - who shot the military surplus guns of his day, too.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by BDPatriot13
Bookmarks