Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 58

Thread: "Battle Rifle" vs. "Precision Rifle"

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Coeur d'Alene, ID
    Posts
    466
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Accidental post.
    Last edited by HaydenB; 11-05-11 at 20:33.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Sacramento
    Posts
    2,317
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by decodeddiesel View Post
    I think the 2 rifle theory is completely unfeasible. To the best of my knowledge Big Army is still trying to figure out a gas operated 7.62x51 for platoon level and below. The capability to have something at the platoon, or better yet, squad level that can punch bigger holes in tougher targets quickly, and has the ability to successfully engage point targets to 800m would be extremely useful. I think the move to standardize the M110 as the Army sniper rifle is a good step forward, but not really enough in my opinion.
    SOCOM is implementing 2-gun, with SCAR-H and Mk.20 Mod.0 SSR. Wether or not that would be a good solution for Big Army is another question. I'm not sure exactly how SOCOM uses the SCAR-H though.
    "The secret to happiness is freedom, and the secret to freedom is courage." - Thucydides, c. 410 BC

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Coeur d'Alene, ID
    Posts
    466
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by wild_wild_wes View Post
    Sounds like you vote for the two-rifle solution...both 7.62, but different configurations: Battle rifle and Precision rifle.
    Not really. Look at my comment directly below the ones you quoted.

    I think balance is best most applications.

    For example I think for the most part if your going to have 14lb rifle, with a 20" SS barrel, and a 15x optic, you may as well have a bolt gun.

    At the same time I think a 7.62x51 SBR is a little counter productive.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas
    Posts
    2,251
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Hayden Billick View Post
    Not really. Look at my comment directly below the ones you quoted.

    I think balance is best most applications.

    For example I think for the most part if your going to have 14lb rifle, with a 20" SS barrel, and a 15x optic, you may as well have a bolt gun.

    At the same time I think a 7.62x51 SBR is a little counter productive.
    As far as SBR's and 7.62, I'm thinking of cutting the SCAR to 13". From the two people I now that have done this then ran them through classes, they've become MORE accurate. If I can have a 7.62 that's extremely maneuverable and accurate that is still very effective on larger game at the distances I typically find myself shooting, I think it's a great choice.

    I have plenty of rifles, including some of the big ones, and the SCAR H (or similar type of rifle) does everything I need and more.
    Proven combat techniques may not be flashy and may require a bit more physical effort on the part of the shooter. Further, they may not win competition matches, but they will help ensure your survival in a shooting or gunfight on the street. ~ Paul Howe

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    3,921
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by wild_wild_wes View Post
    SOCOM is implementing 2-gun, with SCAR-H and Mk.20 Mod.0 SSR. Wether or not that would be a good solution for Big Army is another question. I'm not sure exactly how SOCOM uses the SCAR-H though.
    True, but SOCOM and Big Army are 2 very different things.

    I just don't see big Army EVER adopting two separate 7.62mm weapon systems, much less a dedicated 7.62 battle rifle. The SCAR-H is interesting, but I don't think it is the solution.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    3,921
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by jonconsiglio View Post
    I have plenty of rifles, including some of the big ones, and the SCAR H (or similar type of rifle) does everything I need and more.
    I would love to see how a SCAR-H does after 12 months of hell and hard use in Iraq or Afghanistan in the hands of an E-3 or an E-4.

    Not saying it would fail...but I have some reservations as to if it could actually make it without breaking or failing.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas
    Posts
    2,251
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by decodeddiesel View Post
    I would love to see how a SCAR-H does after 12 months of hell and hard use in Iraq or Afghanistan in the hands of an E-3 or an E-4.

    Not saying it would fail...but I have some reservations as to if it could actually make it without breaking or failing.
    I'd be interested as well. This rifle is a solid performer and very manageable. I don't run my 7.62's to the extent that I do my ARs though so I can't speculate how it would handle abuse. I have a SCAR Light as well that's been great but I don't run it that often.

    I know hootiewho and Stephen from Blue Force Gear have many thousands of rounds through there's and a number of classes, but that's a different situation as well. The only issue I've even heard of so far is Stephen's screws came loose (or weren't ever installed possibly) in the stock body and it came off, if I remember correctly.

    For my use which is mostly at the ranch for a few days at a time and a full 3 or 4 days of constant shooting and hunting, it works extremely well.
    Proven combat techniques may not be flashy and may require a bit more physical effort on the part of the shooter. Further, they may not win competition matches, but they will help ensure your survival in a shooting or gunfight on the street. ~ Paul Howe

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    3,921
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    I will try to dig up the threads here at M4C, but from my understanding the long term durability reports on the Mk.17 are mixed. I have seen posts from reputable sources which indicate there could be some problems with the Mk.17, but I have also seen posts from reputable sources indicating it is doing quite well.

    In all honesty if I were still in and found myself on my way to some 3rd world shit-hole tomorrow I would want a Mk.17 with some sort of good medium range magnified optic on it. That is assuming of course that the weapon system worked as advertised for the entire 12 months.
    Last edited by decodeddiesel; 11-05-11 at 23:16.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Coeur d'Alene, ID
    Posts
    466
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by jonconsiglio View Post
    As far as SBR's and 7.62, I'm thinking of cutting the SCAR to 13". From the two people I now that have done this then ran them through classes, they've become MORE accurate. If I can have a 7.62 that's extremely maneuverable and accurate that is still very effective on larger game at the distances I typically find myself shooting, I think it's a great choice.
    For sure you should see an accuracy improvement because your making a thin barrel more rigid. I was just referring to the gas getting burnt in the air. But then again, I've never shot one, so I don't know how bad the blast is.

    13" isn't so bad. I was more referring to <12" 762x51 SBRs. At which point is kinda like a 7.5" 5.56 AR to me.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas
    Posts
    2,251
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Hayden Billick View Post
    For sure you should see an accuracy improvement because your making a thin barrel more rigid. I was just referring to the gas getting burnt in the air. But then again, I've never shot one, so I don't know how bad the blast is.

    13" isn't so bad. I was more referring to <12" 762x51 SBRs. At which point is kinda like a 7.5" 5.56 AR to me.
    Sorry, I misunderstood that one. I don't think I'd want anything less than a 13" in 7.62. From what I understand, as I haven't spent any time on a short barreled SCAR H, it seems to be a sweet spot for accuracy, shoot ability and maneuverability and I've not heard any complaints about the blast on the 13"...but that means nothing. My guess is with a flash hider on a 13" it would be more tolerable than a 16" with a brake. Once my Surefire 212 comes in, I'll start the process for the new Surefire 7.62 mini and on the SCAR H as well.
    Proven combat techniques may not be flashy and may require a bit more physical effort on the part of the shooter. Further, they may not win competition matches, but they will help ensure your survival in a shooting or gunfight on the street. ~ Paul Howe

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •