assault rifle vs battle rifle - Page 4

SuRpLuS · October 2nd, 2009, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QKShooter

Well, there are "AKs" that are the best of all worlds with regard to extreme functional reliability, accuracy, & range.
These days it takes a pretty heavy cash outlay to own one though.

Well that's a Galil .223 right?

Now an AK-47 7.62 by 39 can hit a target at that range... So long as you have the right instinct... I found that if you raise the sight 3 notches and adjust for windage and with a 5 round mag, I hit 4 rounds on the target.. Scattered but a 4 by 3 is still a small target at that 190 yards... I paid $400 for mine... Seems to work fine...

SuRpLuS · October 2nd, 2009, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C hawk Glock

Nice mods on that rifle QK.

Yeah I've always wanted a Galil (kickass gun) But I actually like the 5.45 by 39 round better than the .223... My AK-74 is accurate as all get out... I tend to be targeting alongside an ar-15, and with the rounds being cheap as hell I LOVE IT!!!

edr9x23super · October 2nd, 2009, 01:49 PM

The way I see it, a Winchester 94 lever gun is a battle rifle. Any rifle to me that you can carry into a fight is a battle rifle. Realistic combat range for me is 200 yards. Further out than that and any military unit is going to call out a sniper.

Besides, "assault rifle" is a term marketers and media types came up with to draw attention.....

So my take is within 200 yards I don't which caliber you use, they will work. If I have a choice, I will gladly use my AR in .223; Then again I would also use a .308 too in a heartbeat. I have top ends for both calibers, so its 6 of one or a half dozen of the other....

SuRpLuS · October 2nd, 2009, 03:28 PM

Personally I would probably take my AK-74 for anything that requires more than 150 yards. AK-47 for shorter range (125-150 yards max..) Due to the fact that aiming beyond that point becomes doable but more of a hassle with an AK-47...

But the way I figure it is a rifle is a rifle I'd rather be stuck with a cheap one that's reliable than be completely unarmed...

kazzaerexys · October 2nd, 2009, 04:40 PM

Even allowing for the possibility that there was a legitimate definition of the term "assault rifle" prior to the Brady Bunch, I personally avoid that term because of its over-wrought anti-gun political connotations. The phrase is used to make guns sound scary.

If you want to call your "asault rifles" Sturmgewehre go ahead, but keep in mind that the people who came up with the name Sturmgewehr also named their rockets Vergeltungswaffen---"Vengeance" or "Retribution" Weapons (that would be the "V" in "V-1" and "V-2"). That is, Sturmgewehr itself was politically chosen as a scary name to incite fear in their enemies.

I'll stick with battle rifle, thanks.

I agree with J.D. that these tools are best described by their intended roles or features.

QKShooter · October 2nd, 2009, 06:11 PM

Above Galil - 7.62mm X 51mm (.308)

It can "reach out and touch someone"

SuRpLuS · October 2nd, 2009, 07:39 PM

Sorry my bad... I'm used to the .223...

SuRpLuS · October 2nd, 2009, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kazzaerexys

Even allowing for the possibility that there was a legitimate definition of the term "assault rifle" prior to the Brady Bunch, I personally avoid that term because of its over-wrought anti-gun political connotations. The phrase is used to make guns sound scary.

If you want to call your "asault rifles" Sturmgewehre go ahead, but keep in mind that the people who came up with the name Sturmgewehr also named their rockets Vergeltungswaffen---"Vengeance" or "Retribution" Weapons (that would be the "V" in "V-1" and "V-2"). That is, Sturmgewehr itself was politically chosen as a scary name to incite fear in their enemies.

I'll stick with battle rifle, thanks.

I agree with J.D. that these tools are best described by their intended roles or features.

I like your pic XD Invader Zim!!!

Katana · October 3rd, 2009, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QKShooter

Well, there are "AKs" that are the best of all worlds with regard to extreme functional reliability, accuracy, & range.
These days it takes a pretty heavy cash outlay to own one though.

Yes, they're made in Finland by Valmet, and they use $2 a round Lapua ammunition.

Nothing wrong with the Galil by any stretch of the imagination though. I'd give my left

to have one in my collection if the SHTF. They're reliable, accurate enough, and since the majority are 5.56/.223 and .308/7.62, ammo is fairly easy to locate here in the States.

ibesarcasm · October 3rd, 2009, 02:41 PM

Can I just interject into this a quick thought?

We are trying to battle anti gun legislation, by anti gun opponents who say we do not need "assault" rifles. And I believe they are 100% correct..... we, as responsable gun owners, and citizens do not need "assault" weaponry of any type!

However, I refuse to give up my "anti-assault" AR-15 style weapons, My "anti-assault" shotguns, or my "anti-assault" handguns! Because that is what they are for..... I'm NOT going to assault anyone, but I WILL use them to DEFEND myself..... there by making them "Anti" assault weapons......

What do you think the

and the news and the anti gunners would say if we started calling them "anti-assault" weapons??

October 2nd, 2009, 01:49 PM	#33
edr9x23super Distinguished Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Texas Posts: 1,733	The way I see it, a Winchester 94 lever gun is a battle rifle. Any rifle to me that you can carry into a fight is a battle rifle. Realistic combat range for me is 200 yards. Further out than that and any military unit is going to call out a sniper. Besides, "assault rifle" is a term marketers and media types came up with to draw attention..... So my take is within 200 yards I don't which caliber you use, they will work. If I have a choice, I will gladly use my AR in .223; Then again I would also use a .308 too in a heartbeat. I have top ends for both calibers, so its 6 of one or a half dozen of the other.... __________________ "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry

October 2nd, 2009, 04:40 PM	#35
kazzaerexys Distinguished Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Maryland Posts: 1,426	Even allowing for the possibility that there was a legitimate definition of the term "assault rifle" prior to the Brady Bunch, I personally avoid that term because of its over-wrought anti-gun political connotations. The phrase is used to make guns sound scary. If you want to call your "asault rifles" Sturmgewehre go ahead, but keep in mind that the people who came up with the name Sturmgewehr also named their rockets Vergeltungswaffen---"Vengeance" or "Retribution" Weapons (that would be the "V" in "V-1" and "V-2"). That is, Sturmgewehr itself was politically chosen as a scary name to incite fear in their enemies. I'll stick with battle rifle, thanks. I agree with J.D. that these tools are best described by their intended roles or features. __________________ “What is a moderate interpretation of [the Constitution]? Halfway between what it says and [...] what you want it to say?” —Justice Antonin Scalia SIG: P220R SS Elite SAO, P220R SAO, P220R Carry SRT, P226, P239 (.40S&W), P2022 (.40S&W); GSR 5", P6.

October 3rd, 2009, 02:41 PM	#40
ibesarcasm Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Colorado Posts: 195	Can I just interject into this a quick thought? We are trying to battle anti gun legislation, by anti gun opponents who say we do not need "assault" rifles. And I believe they are 100% correct..... we, as responsable gun owners, and citizens do not need "assault" weaponry of any type! However, I refuse to give up my "anti-assault" AR-15 style weapons, My "anti-assault" shotguns, or my "anti-assault" handguns! Because that is what they are for..... I'm NOT going to assault anyone, but I WILL use them to DEFEND myself..... there by making them "Anti" assault weapons...... What do you think the and the news and the anti gunners would say if we started calling them "anti-assault" weapons?? __________________ Sarcasm - Just one of the many services I provide! Never argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

October 2nd, 2009, 03:28 PM	#34
SuRpLuS Ex Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 37	Personally I would probably take my AK-74 for anything that requires more than 150 yards. AK-47 for shorter range (125-150 yards max..) Due to the fact that aiming beyond that point becomes doable but more of a hassle with an AK-47... But the way I figure it is a rifle is a rifle I'd rather be stuck with a cheap one that's reliable than be completely unarmed...

October 2nd, 2009, 06:11 PM	#36
QKShooter Assistant Administrator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Off Of The X Posts: 23,473	Above Galil - *7.62mm X 51mm (.308)* It can "reach out and touch someone"

October 2nd, 2009, 07:39 PM	#37
SuRpLuS Ex Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 37	Sorry my bad... I'm used to the .223...