"Battle Rifle" vs. "Precision Rifle"

[jonconsiglio]

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.

It's an odd thing with the SCAR.... There's so much speculation and confusion out there. I've read a number of good things about the mk17 being a great addition to the M4 and it has been very reliable. Then of course there are others that question long term durability since it's a newer rifle, which I would/do as well. My guess would be, considering parts life, that it will be very durable over the long term. I don't think reliability is a concern though, compared to durability.

Reading the history on the SCAR program, it's very interesting why certain things played out the way they did. For example, they decided against a dedicated SCAR Light precision version since in their tests they were getting 800 meter, 10 shot groups of 8"... I thought this was utter BS when I read it, but regardless what I think, it's the claim. In all the other tests for the Light and Heavy, it seemed to do everything quite well, but definitely not perfect.

Luckily for me, should I ever see reliability/durability issues, I can just dump it and move on. Considering the other options out there, the only thing I could see moving on to is the Predatar 7.62. I sold the REPR due to weight, so that rules out most of the others. Besides, if I wanted a heavy long range rifle, I have the Barrets just sitting there. So, I personally don't worry too much about it because I have other options and can always move on if need be.

Decoded, if you find any of those threads, I'd like to read through them...

These are the only 7.62 semiauto rifles with which I have extensive experience. For me, the difference isn't cut and dry between a precision semiauto and a battle rifle. We can easily take a battle rifle and use it similarly to a precision rifle. Likewise, we can take a precision semiauto And use it in a battle rifle type role. I'm sure a handful of doors have been kicked by someone running a mk12 just like I'm sure there have been precision shots taken from distance with a mk18.

This is why I keep coming back to weight. I can deal with the difference between 1 and 2 MOA, but for my use and the use of the people I usually shoot with, I cannot as easily deal with the difference between an 8 pound rifle and an 11 pound rifle. Like I said before, we hear all the time about guys wanting a lightweight AR barrel for training because that 5 ounces makes a difference. Now we're talking about a 48 or more ounce difference.

OP, I apologize if I strayed off topic here in any way or have repeated myself. I just think that on the forums in general, including this one as well, we have some very animated members that argue the hell out of this stuff based on nothing more than laying out in a nice field somewhere in perfect weather with everything else exactly how they want. By those standards, grab the most accurate rifle and drive on. Throw movement into the mix, getting in and out of vehicles, climbing, etc. and then other things quickly climb to the top of the priorities list, for me at least.

[Todd.K]

It's interesting to see the 7.62 rifle talk always seems to end up about what the military needs/wants are. In the military they are used as a support weapon. This is to increase the unit's ability to complete the mission, not make the best GP fighting rifle for an individual.

The first thing I'd say is determine your needs as an individual, and take a hard look at the better options we have available. (6.8, better performing 5.56 loads)

Second, I don't think the military shift to adding 7.62 rifles is very well thought out or based on a real need. Marksmanship is the reason we were not making good hits on longer range targets in the mountains, until we get the Army shooting past 300 and the Marines off the KD range a 7.62 rifle isn't going to fix it.

[wild_wild_wes]

It's interesting to see the 7.62 rifle talk always seems to end up about what the military needs/wants are. In the military they are used as a support weapon. This is to increase the unit's ability to complete the mission, not make the best GP fighting rifle for an individual.

True, but I like to set up my weapons as if they were no-nonsense military designs.

I don't think the military shift to adding 7.62 rifles is very well thought out or based on a real need.

I've talked to DM types who are quite adamant that 5.56 is all that is needed out to 700m. They and others have said that 7.62 semi-auto rifles are not needed.

[Shane45]

One look at energy charts between 5.56 and 308 at 500 yds would raise some questions about what DM types held that opinion.....

[yellowfin]

Since we're digging up the matters of 7.62x51, battle rifles, and accuracy: how accurate can a FAL be expected to be with a really good barrel rather than a worn out one? Can it approach SR25/M110 standards with trigger work, the right ammo, and a proper barrel or is it just never going to be that good no matter what?

[Todd.K]

One look at energy charts between 5.56 and 308 at 500 yds would raise some questions about what DM types held that opinion.....

The type that have shot them in combat and never looked at an energy chart.
Both calibers will not upset at that range, so the wounds are not going to be impressive from either.

There is a little bit more than just caliber to consider for an SDM as well.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=70417

[MegademiC]

Ill share some thoughts. What ammo are you gonna use? I ss barrel doesnt make too much sense if your shooting mil surplus, unless its all match loads.

A decent chrome lined barrel should be pretty accurate with good ammo. What kind of groups would you want?

Personally, id go for both, an accurized battle rifle would probably be best all around. FF chrome lined barrel, 1-6x or one the the really expensive 1-8x scopes would go great with an 18" barrel IMO.

I dont know much about .308, but I do know that for .223, it can reach out a lot more than people generally think. hell, good CL barrels can put out <1.5" groups with handloads. Accurate enough to kill a deer everytime at 600yds(given shooter does his part). Im assuming similar numbers for .308s.

[HaydenB]

Personally, id go for both, an accurized battle rifle would probably be best all around. FF chrome lined barrel, 1-6x or one the the really expensive 1-8x scopes would go great with an 18" barrel IMO.

That is almost the exact same thing I said on the previous page.

Great minds think alike.

[MegademiC]

yup. I saw your post, just had my own thoughts to add. Im more of a 5.56/223 guy, and im building a recce type rifle once I graduate, something similar in .308 would be awesome and very useful all around.

[Fox33]

I am a proponent of the Mk17, but it needs work. I think of it much like the m16A2 vs. an M4. it needs updating and some revision. the 7.62 vs 5.56 is much like the 45 vs. 9mmfight. Speed of follow up shots vs. power.

#1 the 7.62 cartridge kills people in one shot, 5.56 sometimes maybe. Why do you think controlled pairs came about? You need a few 5.56 rounds to do the same damage as one 7.62.

#2 the 5.56 has limited AP with the 62gr. m193 the m993 has serious AP capability. Our future enemies will fight more like us. This means CQC with body armor that might resist 5.56 AP. You would need to wear a tank to stop m993 at CQC ranges.

#3 if we teach controlled pars that means 15 pairs per magazine. if you use 7.62 there is no need for controlled pairs so 20 shots per mag. Add to this the SCAR 17 was supposed to have 25 round mags. Which is now possible with a Handl lower.

#4 I have seen what Handl has planned for the SCAR they just might pull off something pretty amazing with that platform. Plus if we shitcan the SCAR the hk417 is a pretty awesome way to go as well.