Added: 1 year ago
From: blackriflear15
Views: 22,200
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (582)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • AK-47 was designed for trench warfare against invading Nazi 's...

  • just buy a 91 or m14 and shoot them once from a distance

  • So that extra 200 yards effective range that the that the AR provides isnt worth the hastle that it brings. The difference between the AR and the AK is that the AR wont function when it's out of spec and the AK will because the design is both durrable and reliable. Meanwhile the AR15/M16 doesnt function evevn if it gets dropped in the sand wrong, let alone get one micron out of spec. But to each their own. something is better than nothing.

  • well yes an no. What you're really trying to say is that if you shoot a weapon made way out of spec/tollerance that it's going to shoot crappy, and if you shoot a weapon made to tight spec/tollerance that it's going to be accurate. that's true. so if you take a typical WASR10 with you're just going to be spraying led randomly. But I have a well made AK that I can performe surgery with at 200 yards, and is still able to get a good grouping in center mass at 400 yards with little effort.

  • Good video, I agree, even though I am an AK man.

  • I love AKs and ARs, a piston driving AR is really reliable, but the AK can eat dirt and about anything you throw at it. They say in Veitnam it took an average 50,000 rounds from a M16 to kill one N.V.A. troop. Maybe more from a AK to kill a U.S. troop. I don't know I wasn't there. I can hit a human sized target at 200-300yds with my AK, and I know when I pull the trigger it goes BOOM. That is good for me, and if they AR is better for you than thats fine. Diff strokes for diff folks.

  • I will agree, the AR is a better rifle for the US military. However, that doesn't mean it's a better rifle all around. To suggest that, is pretty ignorant, and you have a blatantly obvious bias.

    They're both great rifles. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. Your archetype for AK operators, "people who just want to make noise and spray" and undermining the AKs long-term reliability, reeks with a lack of perspective, and maturity.

    Both rifles have their time, place, and person.

  • @mequelli0s With a full automatic switch, there's always a chance untrained soldiers will waste ammo. In Vietnam, soldiers with the M16 many times would spray and pray.

  • @esh325 Most of that is because they were actually trained to area spray.

  • @IamaRifle According to the department of defense, the average numbers of rounds expended in Vietnam to kill one enemy soldier was 50,000 rounds with the M16 rifle. They were just waisting ammo, which is why the M16A2 and M16A4 did not have full auto.

  • @esh325 This was typical top brass thinking. Instead of just training their soldiers differently, they both changed the training and the weapon. Full auto is a life saver when needed and all it would take is a bit more training behind the weapon. Now we see alot of money going into A1 conversions and whole new uppers, which translates into millions of dollars we didn't need to spend.

  • @IamaRifle Yes, I believe it was probably a mistake taking removing fully automatic. It was a training issue like you said, and partly an issue with the weapon also. From what I read, the 3 round burst of the M16A2 and M16A4 doesn't function very well.

  • @esh325 That is true. The modification for 3 round burst wasn't trouble shooted to the extent that any modification to a military piece of hardware should be. The military is always playing catch up to the modifications they put to weapons. It is just like the ammunition performance problems out of the 14.5'' barrel M4. It has taken alot of time and money to create new bullets that will work with the shorter barrel variants of the M16.

  • NEGITIVE! they are not two rifles one is a rifle one is a machine gun! one was designed for full auto fire one was designed to be fired semi auto. look at the selector switch on a military version, AK fire switch is 1 safe 2 auto 3 semi AR is 1  safe 2 semi 3 auto. a better comparison is rifle vs machine gun.

  • @johnnymagnum357 A MP5 goes from semi automatic to full auto, does that make the MP5 a rifle? From what I've gathered, the reason the why the AK was designed to go from fully automatic to semi automatic is because under stress a soldier would put the selector switch all the way down and it would hit the semi automatic option. Had they designed it to go fully to semi the soldier would go from semi to full auto and unload a full magazine in a panic.

  • when it comes to your life, you will make whatever weapon thats given to you work, or you will loose your life.

  • how an untrained individual should learn to fire a gun, who has more recoil then ar-15, faster?

  • im a fan of both. but what i really want to know, so i can make up my mind one which one to buy, is when the shit hits the fan, what rifle would i be better off with?

  • True what you say about the 2 weapons. But I would like to add Marines handle the M16 better the Army. Army could really use the AK at least non comabat MOS's.

  • @dragonseptor Shit!LOL

  • @blackriflear15 What do you think? Your honest opinion

    I was a Marine at one time then went Army don't get me wrong

    I like the Army but man they need to know about good PMI training...

  • @dragonseptor Now it depends on where one served in the Army that dictates the level of training .

  • @blackriflear15 Very true.

  • @dragonseptor you were in the marines and in the army okay i call bullshit lamo

  • @sharpshooternick Then you must have never served in the military at all !

  • @dragonseptor correct lol

  • @sharpshooternick lol we call them re-treds the only service that will not accept another is the airforce. you find alot of navy men go army after their navey commitment. its no bullshit!

  • @dragonseptor I went thru Army Basic training in '81 and qualifying with the M-16 was one of the primary focuses of the training along with passing the final PT test

  • In all honesty, I'd take an M1 over either, for general use.

  • Man, you are comparing a machete to a scalpel. In unskilled hands, you will meet death quicker with a machete. A scalpel is more accurate and, off the shelf, more sharp. It cuts faster, and more precisely. You can jab with it. You can't jab with a machete. But slashing with a machete takes no effort and can be done all day long.

  • Everyone should stop trying to compare the two. They are different weapon systems with varying advantages verses disadvantages. It's like comparing a scalpel to a butcher knife, a pen to pencil or a Phillips to a Flathead. Inherently yes they do the same thing (fire a freaking bullet) but the options you are allotted with each one grants you different outcomes. IMHO buy both and learn how to use them, the zombies are coming :)

  • @rjharvey1983 Good point!

  • @blackriflear15 Great video brotha!!! A lot of great insight on the POU of both systems.

  • @blackriflear15 I think the comparison comes from Vietnam, obviously, but the comparison SHOULD be between the M16 and AK-74. I recently bought an SGL 31 to go with my SGL 21 from Arsenal and it is VERY accurate (came w/a regular paper sized test target w/all 3-shot's in a dime, my old WASR came with a 2'x3' target and a 5" spread), the barrel is inherently thicker and more rigid, the 5.45x39 projectile is flat and accurate. That comparison is pretty much neck/neck, but an AK is still an AK.

  • @reeseman67 Granted I still have space in my safe for the AR and plan on adding another I'm planning on building, but the AK-74-style has QUICKLY proven to be such an accurate and reliable, and cheap to shoot(!!) weapon, I just love it! Honestly, if there was a torture test today between an AR-15 and AK-74-style rifle I would'nt care which one won (I'd be INTERESTED, but would'nt change my mind on anything) since they both just do different thing's for me, same for the AK-47-style rifles.

  • @reeseman67 I'm fairly sure the WASR and new Russian styled AK's have a similar barrel profile. The difference is probably the barrel quality, and the projectile like you said. You can improve the accuracy of your 74 even more with optics and better ammo.

  • @rjharvey1983 great point this nigga blackriflear15 dont know shit .

  • @rjharvey1983 They're both general issue assault rifles.

  • You cant compare a AK-47 to a AR-15. A AR-15 is no match to a AK47. AR15 is more accurate yes but thats all you got.AR 15s suck. AK'S are quality built unlike cheap aluminum and plastic.AK'S have cause more death then the ARs .Besides the russians already created a riffle thats more accurate and reliable then the AR15 its called a AK74 .

  • @BLACKBIRD91FILMS Quality built? LO f-ing L

  • @BLACKBIRD91FILMS a piston driven system will NEVER be more accurate than a DI system.

  • @BLACKBIRD91FILMS Uhh, AKs are stamped out of sheet metal, what the fuck are you talking about.. Also, I own both platforms.. inb4 I am wrong for (x) fanboy reason.

  • @cazybeast2  let me guess what you got a WASR 10 . huh . you got the cheao shit dumb shit my reciever is milled out I got the orinal ak47 not that fake shit . AR-15 = +accurate-aluminum-plastic-unr­eliable-weak stopping power CANT GO THRU WALLS = CHEAP 22. riffle on steriods.

  • @BLACKBIRD91FILMS Wrong, I have an Arsenal sgl 31-94, if you know anything about AKs it comes straight out of the Izhmash weapons plant in Izhevsk Russia, In a spoterized configuration to pass import laws. It's as close as you will ever get to a modern Russian service rifle in the USA, the only difference from an AK74M are a couple furniture pieces and no full auto. And guess what, its stamped sheet metal. Did you know that Izhmash uses polymer? You lack much AK knowledge son.

  • @BLACKBIRD91FILMS I also own another Russian made AK, a siaga .308, converted to pg by me. I have videos.. Please show me your original milled AK47, from 1947, show the full auto selector switch and the markings on the rifle.. I seriously doubt you have a MODEL AK-47 because the original model was EXPERIMENTAL. You do not own an original AK-47, probably just another semi auto pawn shop 7.62 AK with wood furniture, nothing special.. Nice try though.

  • In Maine you can hunt deer with a a AR-15, in fact .22 mag is legal as well.

  • You can hunt deer with an AK and a 5 round mag. I guess you can shoot at varmits with an AR if that is your thing. Really for a red neck all purpose rifle, its hard to beat an ak.

  • I have the solution to the AR and AK dispute!!!!

    Are you ready?

    ...... Get both.... AR for accuracy, AK for suppression!

  • @NZComfort who's going to carry both? think you cant lay down suppresive fire with an AR?

  • Cont 3 and it does serve a purpose. Personally I dont throw my rifle in the mud to fill the receiver

    ( real world here). If you want a AK for a collector piece fine... However if the reason your buying one is because your limited on funds.. save your money, wait, and get the AR. You'll be glad you did I promise you. Your never disappointed you bought the best. Great review by the way..... Thunbs up The Mini 14 is a piece of shit too... But thats another story........

  • @pwchesser I'm not limited with funds and I have both rifles. I prefer the AK though.

  • @esh325 Depends on your environment. in the bush or jungle where engagements and firefights are at 30-50 yards it's fine. at 250 to 500 yards your going to get ventilated as already mentioned in this video.

  • @pwchesser 300m is the effective range of the AK. 30-50 yards? You've got to be kidding me. You haven't fired an AK.

  • @esh325 I have owned several, The AK will not hold a tight group at 300 meters. Remember, under stress you will shoot a minimum of 30% wider groups all this on a target that is moving and bobbing around. Not a stationary target, There is a huge difference. The AR 15 has a much greater advantage at this range. Maximum effective range of the AK is 400 meters Thats the maximum which is the equivalent to harassment fire, NOT effective or reliable for for precision hits on personal. cont...

  • @pwchesser I have not shot to 300 yards with an AK, so I will have to see for myself. Yes, under stress accuracy degrades. Where are you getting 30% wider groups from?

  • @esh325 The study was conducted by the US military and related by Peter Kokalis technical advisor and small arms expert for Soldier of Fortune magazine i have forgotten which issue I'll have to dig it up.

  • @esh325 Keep in mind you want to at least disable the adversary with hopefully one round. Remember, a missed shot bears the full price of incompetence. you have let the enemy know someone is shooting at him and in all probability given away your position. There is no greater tragedy then a accomplished marksman wounded or killed as a result of inferior equipment.. Keep the AR and lose the AK You'll be better off for it.

  • @pwchesser He will already know you're shooting at him once you fire your first shot, and his buddies will know too. The AK is accurate enough. What exactly is the set standard for how accurate a rifle should be? Are you going to shoot a bugler at 400 yards with your AR15?

  • @esh325 No because I would go to prison, unless you would help me bury him and not tell anyone.

  • @esh325 perhaps not, however i would like the capability if desired.

  • @pwchesser An AR10,M1A,FAL, etc is probably a better rifle for you then. A .223 has some long range application, but it's not a very good long range combat cartridge. Hence the why we issue M14's still.

  • @esh325 I have the M1A thats all I need at this point.

  • @pwchesser So do I. It's a good choice.

  • @esh325 I checked out your video with the dust cover mount...interesting, How do you keep the dust cover from shifting? I know it is only held in place with the spring loaded take down button at the rear. There has to be more support then this. how does the front of the mount secure?

  • @pwchesser Thanks. I didn't really do a good elaborating on it in the video. The front is secured by the rear sight slot. The pictanny rail is a seperate piece from the dust cover. The second mounting is point is two pins attached to the dust cover that go inside the pictanny rail and lock. It's hard to explain in text. But look up the video "SHOT Show 2012 Parabellum Armament Co. AK Adaptive Rail System" to get a better idea.

  • @esh325 Incorrect. The bullet is supersonic therefore the bullet will strike prior to hearing the shot basic Physics. In addition you assume he has company. He could be a lone wolf in that case game over.

  • @esh325 You know this as you have already acknowledged that the sights are very crude. Thats because this rifle was originally designed as a machine gun for close to intermediate ranges. This weapon was never designed for long range refer to ( Nutnfancy POS or Philosophy of use.) or rewatch this video. you don't seem to be paying attention or your in denial. Tighter groups translate to more hits on both stationary and moving targets which is why I prefer the AR-15.

  • @pwchesser That's why I run optics to mitigate that. The AK was designed as an assault rifle. The barrel profile is too light to use it as a sustained fire weapon. Plus, most real machine guns fire from the open bolt. Yes, it wasn't designed for long range use. I don't consider youtube videos to be legitimate sources of information most of the time.

  • @esh325 I agree the Barrel profile on the AK is to thin walled which produces pronounced barrel whip once the gun has been fired several times and the barrel begins to super heat. Hence erratic groups. Notice AR/M16 now use heavier barrels or H-Bars to compensate for this (With the exception of the M-4) which equals tighter groups. As far as optics are concerned I don't know. I have been collecting rifles since the early 1970's and on the early model AK's I never saw optics mounted.Cont.

  • @pwchesser I think the bullet has already left the barrel before it has a chance to move. They've been making AK's with scopes since the 1950's, in limited production though. Every AK out of Russia today can accept a scope.

  • @esh325 Incorrect the initial ignition and powder explosion will cause barrel flex prior to the bullet leaving the barrel. That is why super heated barrels shoot wider and more erratic groups.

  • @esh325 It. seems like a afterthought to improve accuracy and hit probability which brings up another issue. I have seen the mounting systems and brackets used and I'm not impressed. Some receivers are forged and others are stamped sheet metal. I have a hard time believing that under continuous fire the scope will remain zeroed. I was at the camp Perry National matches this summer and ran into a accomplished marksman that was also a SEAL. I was looking for a sniper mount for my Cont...

  • @pwchesser my KVAR mount I have has kept zero so far, so has my Parabellum mount. If the mount is well made, it will keep zero.

  • @esh325 cont.. National match M1A. Aluminum mounts were approximately 100.00 and steel were 265.00 The Operator warned me against getting the aluminum due to the fact that after 700-800 rounds the mount would lose structural integrity and the weapon sight would not retain 0 (he did not work for the vendor) i bought the steel mount and the mounting system on the M1A is solid steel and rock solid. The AK's I have seen with optics have nowhere near this strong a mount or mating surface. cont.

  • @pwchesser I can't say that's true or isn't true. You can buy steel mounts for the AK.

  • @esh325 If yours is aluminum you may want to consider a steel mount particularly if your receiver is forged. Less chance of losing zero is the weapon is jarred or dropped.

  • @pwchesser I'm not a metallurgist, but certain grades of aluminum can come near the strength of steel, or be stronger then steel in some cases. Assuming the aluminum mount in question is near the strength of the steel mount in question, there should not be an issue.

  • @esh325 Incorrect, Aluminum is much softer then steel in all cases. I used to be a machinist check your Rockwell hardness spec's i think you'll be surprised.

  • @pwchesser "Nearly Hard as Steel: Aluminum with Fullerenes" Look up this article.

  • @esh325 I realize that 7.62x39 is not the equivalent to 7.62x54 It does however have significant recoil to cause the optics to lose Zero particularly on stamped sheet metal receivers. i wouldent trust the optical mount unless their was a aftermarket quad rail with Nato/Stanag rail mounts. I would not invest this kind of cash in a AK as the rail and optics would be substantially more then the price of the rifle.

  • @pwchesser I think you're parroting information off what you've heard from other people rather then from experience. Don't take my word for it. Try an AK out with a proper mount and scope set up.

  • @esh325 No my opinions are my own. Lot of teenage modern warfare fans and arm chair commandos on this site who think they are experts because they have a year subscription to Guns and Ammo. I'm not one of them I have so may opinions I don't have room for anyone elses You could'ent figure that out?

  • @pwchesser Yes, that is a problem on youtube. You have a right to your opinions, but an opinion backed up with experience holds more weight. You have little to no experience with mouting optics on an AK.

  • @esh325 True However, I have owned and fired several Ak's without optics, and while the scope will improve sight picture and hit probability, it does nothing to improve the quality of the firearm. from the bench in a locked position the AR will still hold tighter groups. And that is from experience.

  • @pwchesser What do you mean quality? It will improve the groupings. This is my experience. Depends on which AK it is. Most will not shoot as good as an AR15 however.

  • @esh325 I have never used a AK with optics as I didnt have my AK set up for it. try your AK at 100-200 yards from the bench and see how you group and get back to me.

  • @pwchesser Look at my videos. "parabellum armament Adaptive Rail System for AK rifles" and "AK at 200 yards"

  • @esh325 That makes 2 of us my BOY

  • @pwchesser I think it's hilarious that you call the AK a collectors piece.

  • @esh325 Personally I don't feel it has any collector value, However I have friends that have paid a good buck for original polytech Ak's just for the pleasure of owning them and to hold on to them as a collectable piece. I no longer own one personally but they will never lose money on them when they are sold. To each his own..

  • @pwchesser I must say that is a mouth full,and very well put. I like the part about asking true operators to trade the Ar for the AK. You put in a few lines what took me a whole video to say.lol

  • Cont. 3. Dont believe me? Talk to a operator in the field. You will be hard pressed to find a true professional that will trade his M-4 or M-16 for a AK. They are very accurate and reliable with the minimal of maintenance. i have had 0 malfunctions. I always see guys slopping mud in the AK action attempting to prove a point about reliability. Big deal what good is reliability if you can't hit your target at distance? Incidentally the AR- does have a dust cover over the bolt.. Cont 3

  • @pwchesser The dust cover on the AR disengages as soon the first shot is fired.

  • @esh325 And you can snap it closed after engagement, or when you need to maneuver.

  • continued part 2 The AR-15 is a finely machined precision weapon. and is far superior weapon system particularly since the A2 modifications incorporated in the 1980;s It. is a truly modular weapon system adaptable to any situation simply by changing the upper receiver to suit the mission. Completely serviceable by the operator in the field with spare parts that are available everywhere, those who hate the AR don't remember the weapon very well or were never issued one in the first place.Cont.3

  • @pwchesser I don't really know many soldiers that carry around an extra upper or are issued two uppers. It's impractical to expect a soldier to maintain both upper receivers. If it was completely serviceable by the operator, then I don't think armorers would have a job anymore.

  • @esh325 I'm not advocating carrying 2 receivers in the field. i'm Simply stating the gun can be easily modified to any situation by changing the upper receiver prior to going on patrol or mission.

  • @pwchesser It's not done that way though. Soldiers are issued 1 upper.

  • @esh325 Yes and No. On specific missions armorers will change the configuration or upper receiver to suit mission parameters. it is done every day.

  • @esh325 Incidentally, parts such as the firing pin, extractor and trigger group if necessary can be replaced in the field by the operator. simply by removing pins. Try that with a AK,,,,

  • @pwchesser You can replace those parts. Punch out the pins on the bolt to acess the firing pin like you would on an ar15.

  • @esh325 Not as easily or as rapidly. and parts are harder to come by unless you have a armorers kit.

  • @pwchesser and the fire control group and spring is a nightmare to replace and I know. and so should you.

  • I agree completely. I have owned both rifles and the Ak-47 or 74 will never equal the precision long range accuracy of the AR-15/M16 family. The AK is fun for bouncing gallon milk jugs in the dirt at 25-50 yards, however, if your looking for centerline MOA groups on paper targets, your going to be sorely disappointed. In addition the sights are very crude as is the rest of the gun. repair is a nightmare and i should know. Face it the gun is used, breaks, and then is a throw away. .. Continued

  • @pwchesser While many incarnations of the AK are not as accurate as the M4, I think it's very possible that some might be depending on their make. I disagree. I find the AK to be fairly accurate. The sights are crude, yes. You can buy optics to mitigate this.

  • Thats M16 family AR

  • This is a stupid video. Surely if a weapon is easy to use and very durable it is good. There have been more malfunctional fatalities with the m16 than AK. 1000s of US soldiers died because of M16 failure. There should be no debate. That has been proven decades ago with the worldwide sales of AK.

  • @moviejacker Your facts are so out of whack. You need to come back to reality.

  • @moviejacker This is a stupid comment. Try making a stupid vid yourself

  • @moviejacker those soldiers weren't given cleaning kits didn't have forward assist and they were given different powder than it was tested to run on all fixed pretty quickly after and now they are unstoppable when you buy a real one not just a crappy copy my daniel defense has shot 5000 rounds not a single ftf

  • Im nowhere near a pro, but doesnt caliber have a difference? 7.62x39 is pretty mean compared to a 5.56 nato?

  • Agree and disagree . But good vid , brother !

  • Great video, a different perspective than I've seen before but one that makes complete and fair sense of both sides of the coin. And would suggest that the arguement itself will probably never be won. Those who argue for the AK probably favor the same mindset that produced it. Low maintenence, high volume firepower and suppression. And those for the ARs have the mindset which would demand the AR. Precision, training, long range effectiveness.

  • @SERVIAM2008 It's all about an individual's background that will determine there preference

  • @SERVIAM2008 I think some of those things can cross over. Fully automatic fire was very much a touted feature in the M16A1. And I believe the army is bringing full auto back for the upgrade of the M4 carbines.

  • @SERVIAM2008 I think training is definetely something that cross over in the AK category too. As far as precision, almost everybody has a different opinion on what this is. Can one not be precise with an AK?

  • @esh325 I guess you're right. My idea of precision is probably alot different than somebody elses. Just the loose tolerances and the sloppy trigger of the average AK throws my ideas of precision out the window before the shot even breaks

  • @esh325

    No, because the AKs are far less mechanically accurate than the AR system

  • @tpd223 It's not impossible to make one that is close to AR accuracy though.

  • un as an m16 nor is the m16 meant to be run like an ak. They are completely different but both effective platforms. Trying to compare them is like comparing a saw to an Uzi

  • I use an ak 47 as part of my outfit. I agree with you on a. Lot if points. I bought my ak because I wanted an assault rifle and it was CHEAP! I figured it would be inaccurate, however it impressed the heck out of me! I'm talkin half moa! With a 500 dollar rifle and has held that out to three hundred yards! The ak is more accurate than people give it credit for and the m16 is more durable than people give it credit for. Both are excellent platforms in trained hands. An ak is not meant to be r

  • @blacktiflear15 just triple checked. $1995 for an arsenal SA M7. Lol no pun inteanded but I can get more BANG for my buck with something else rather save 700 more and get an LMT .308

  • @elox02 that's nuts.i would love to see that lmt

  • Yes sir wow indeed

  • Ya I used I have a milled arsenal but I sold it a while back and now arsenal wants 1900 bucks for them lol. And 825 or there sgl series now!!! WTF! Even when I purchased my ca legal 23 it was that after tax and licensing! Ak market in My new are in ca is limited to sgl or wasr. Maybe I'll have the old man order it and do the dros.

  • @elox02 Wow 1900

  • @blackriflear15 meant to ask you do you have an FFL? You press your own aks right. My grandfather had an FFL and my father is a retired and makes custom trap guns and has an FFL I'm moving to ca. (where he lives). Wondering if you can make a solid ak to add to my collection next tax season

  • @elox02 no I do not have an FFL. Have you looked at milled AK receivers?

  • @pccchurch that penetration is lost at relatively short ranges with that short casing.

  • @HunterKiller308 I've seen those although ugly running the 5.56 mag in it that doesnt matter. Have to see the price tag and Hiw much of the 5.56 is ar compatable. I hate being married to a manufacturers in a SHTF rifle. My main reason for steering clear of MSAR now they won't do any warranty work. Sounds like a possible option.

  • Also, in real war, ur opposition hides behind barriers, SO U DO WANT PENETRATION of the 7.62x39 vs the 223.

  • @pccchurch No. I want the accuracy, toughness, range, and penetration of the 7.62x51 which is why I have a M1A/M-14

  • In real war, with real full auto rifles, AK all the way.

    Watch this YT video: My Registered Full Auto Ak-47

  • U can't hunt with 223 (It's a 22 bullet). U can with 7.62x39. If u really wanted long rang accuracy, get bolt action (308, 30-06, etc).

    Since we civs can't get full auto, I'd take the heavier caliber for more power, less wind and twig deflection. Remember, there is a big diff between full auto 223 vs single shot 223.

    If I were to go AR, I'd get the 300aac barrel BUT those AMMO are expensive and really hard to find.

    So for now, 7.62x39 for carbine. It's more versatile & makes real world sense

  • @pccchurch 223 is legal to hunt with in a lot of places,here in TN i can hunt deer with it and we can have full autos they arent illegal just restricted 

  • @glock10mm The laws on autos are alittle more complicated that that. Any full auto manufactured after 1986 is illegal for civilian use. Only pre 86 weapons can be transferred or owned by civilians with a class III stamp for each weapon. The only exceptions to the rule being dealer samples for use by Class III dealers. These are not transferrable for sale to civlians. The 1986 law is the reason why civilian full autos are so expensive increasing in value by 15% every year.

  • @SERVIAM2008 And btw, this is a Federal law, covering every state. Some states have additional firearms restrictions making even legitimately owned class III weapons unlawful if brought into that state. California being the worst

  • @SERVIAM2008 yea i didn't mention the pre or post 86 stuff or the states i just simplified the answer its not really complicated but most people that think full autos are illegal will keep arguing that my grandfathers first cousins best friend twice removed was talking to an ex seal and a cop and they said...

  • @pccchurch You can hunt Deer in Maine with .223, in fact you can hunt with .22 mag.

  • @pwchesser BS no you cannot..........Unless you wish a trip to your local correctional facility!!!

  • @Sigp229TRT Then the laws have changed since 1978 because .22 mag was legal and many people hunted deer with the mini 14 and AR-15.

  • @Sigp229TRT Your full of shit, I just went to the state of maine department of wildlife web site. .22 magnum and .223 are both legal. If you don't know what your talking about why dont you just shut up. Your full of shit.

  • @pwchesser Really potty mouth I OWN property in the state of Main out in the Garland area, And this .22 mad and .223 talk is wrong. Been hunting maine from my place all way out to the Allagash and never saw that or read that is is legal. But to satisfy you I will make a call and check with some buds I have in LLE and Fand G.

  • @pwchesser I stand corrected Potty mouth (No need to swear at me) This must have changed or I simply missed it. It is legal (Dumb but then it is Maine) But legal. Oh well I use a Ruger mdl 77 .06 .223 and .22 mag are NOT Deer cals.

  • @Sigp229TRT Sorry about the potty mouth. incidentally, Normally I would agree with you on caliber however, Maine has a lot of bush and thicket. I grew up there. Average shot in my experience in the woods is less then 50 yards Typically 30. .223 or even .22 mag is perfectly acceptable for these ranges with a well placed shot. I have numerous friends that successfully hunted with these calibers and have multiple deer racks adorning there walls to prove it.

  • @pwchesser Like I said I own property in Maine. A few racks on the wall really proves nothing. A blind grey rat finds a nut every so often. And well placed shots are great but hard to come by. A .22mag CAN kill at short range But I would not term it "Perfectly acceptable" A small game cal is just that. No way down here in VA. But anyway I stand corrected and amazed.

    Shoot,Move...........Live!!

  • @blackriflear15 I've seen the mega stuff not too familiar with the .308 stuff through them except it will accept dpms and kac parts and the monolithic upper/lower looks good but it's $1000 (maybe complete it for $2000. I really like the LMT .308 and with the price point of the mono it's comparable. Def want DI in the AR 10 platform

  • @elox02 they do have the non mono uppers too I am using mine with the J P ent V-tac hand guard I do also love them LMTs they are killer

  • Perfect time for this vid.. my "ar jar" is filling up quick

  • I was looking a the LMT in .308 but I can't justify the price either. I just purchase a new house so I'm no getting anything new until next tax season but when I do it will be a .308 semi auto if the the scar 17 falls under 2400 or LMT .308 as well I'll get either of those. I'm not a fan of lwrc or any piston driven ar action so it will be DI or piston from ground up rifle.

  • @elox02 I am finishing up my precision ar-10 project with a matched Mega upper and lower receiver and will build me a practical ar-10 some time down the road with the same Mega combo look them up and tell me what you think

  • @blackriflear15 i got the same uppwe and lower for the same project lol. what kind of barrel are you going with.

  • @elox02 if you do pull the trigger on getting yourself a 308 i urge you to look into the Colt SP901, it is set to make all other semi auto 308s obsolete with its multi-cal lower, just imagine being able to use a short 5.56 upper to egress into an area and being able to slap on a long 308 upper one you set up your hide..sounds like a damn near perfect rifle if you ask me

  • I do like 6.8 spc Unless i reload it pretty expensive to practice and the parts availability is kind of a specialized market (stress kind of a lot of companies have them) but extractors, bcg, and mags are pricy too) I it becomes a standard I will switch over but right now I'm perfectly confident with 5.56 and civ rounds are great and even SOST mil ammo is great.

  • @HunterKiller308 If your engaging "self defense" threats out past the effective 5.56 range it's no longer a matter of self defense if you ask me. My neigbors are close my self defence weapon is a 18.5" 590A1to avoid killing my neighbors if I mis but I do agree if my family or my life is on the line nothing is overkill.

  • @esh325 true but I really don't see us going with a bigger round for a infantry rifle any time soon.

  • @elox02 the 6.5 Grendel would be my pick , but we are a salve to the NATO standard

  • @elox02 i think 6.5 Grendel for full length rifles, 6.8 SPC for carbines and SBRs and 300 AAC blackout for suppressed weapons would be best

  • @esh325 there attached to units as designated marksmen rifles yes not entire units but the m855A1 is supposed to be more consistent against soft & light armored targets then current 7.62 nato (how true that claim is I don't know & im doubtful) I think the report is on YouTube as well if search m855A1

  • @elox02 You have machine gunners too touting around M240's. I wonder how an updated 7.62x51 would compare?

  • @esh325. That's a matter of preference but understand the reasoning behind it. I know you shoot I've seen some of your vids. Right now my go to gun I a 14.5" AR in 5.56 I finished not too long ago. The thing is I can't bring myself to spend the $ on a .308 semi auto...they jack the price up and I think from a $ to what you get ratio is a little off. .308 bolt action a different story.

  • @elox02 It's not so much of a preference as much as it's required for some people. They field .308 rifles in Afghanistan to make up for lack of performance of the 5.56x45. A 5.56x45 and 7.62x39 just can't do what a 7.62x51 does. As far as a self defense gun, a .308 rifle is excessive I think. Your AR in 5.56x45 is a perfectly adequate.

  • @esh325 comparing the 7.62x51 to the 7.62x39 isn't really a comparison. I have to agree with appleseed in this one. I love my ak but the ammo quality isn't really there and the 5.56 has a bit better over all ballistics. Sure you can hit a target with x39 at 400+ yards but your just lobbing it in at that point and the bullet loses its "umf". I've seen your vids and sure you shoot...a do I. so civil please.