Battle Rifles (John Farnam) DUF mailer

2 Oct 09

Battle Rifles:

I received this morning a note from a subscriber with regard to rifles with which he would equip his unit. This person puts together teams who do security work in exciting places.

He indicated that, for his money, the AR/M4 (in 223) tops the heap of currently-available battle-rifles. He agrees that the Kalashnikov is indeed inherently reliable, but its stock, Soviet-style, open-sights are only operable within 150m. At 200m-300m, the typical issue-Kalashnikov lacks sufficient accuracy to be genuinely usable against animated, battlefield targets, said he.

He is mostly correct. Indeed, the AR/223 platform was selected, in large part, because of its inherent accuracy.

The problem is with the 223 (5.56X45) round. It is profoundly effective on animated, human targets within 150m, typically producing substantive de-animation with one, solid hit. However, inherently accurate though it may be, beyond 150m, the 223 bullet is substantially de-energized, and, although the AR is certainly precise at extended ranges, the bullet, at 200m-500m, cannot be depended upon to take enemy combatants out of action quickly, even when solidly struck, nor at these extended ranges, is the bullet capable of even modest penetration.

So, for (1) rear-area defense, (2) domestic policing, and (3) domestic home-defense, the AR/M4 in 223 is close to ideal, since most challenges in these scenarios are within 150m, and the 223's subdued penetration is of less concern than on the battlefield. Indeed, high-penetration is undesirable in most domestic instances.

Although the M4 will technically deliver accurate fire out to 500m, the bullet's effectiveness at that range is predictably disappointing, as noted above. Conversely, the Soviet/30 (7.62X39), from an issue-Kalashnikov, is effective, and genuinely penetrative, out to 300m, but its open-sights will make it useable, for all but the eagle-eyed, only to 150m. In order to take full advantage of the Soviet/30's inherent range, open-sights will have to be replaced with Western-style peep-sights, or optics.

To summarize:

(1) An AR/M4 in 223 is a 150m rifle, with poor penetration. Reasonably reliable, light, and handy, but maintenance-sensitive. Currently, $900.00-$1,600.00

(2) An issue-Kalashnikov in Soviet/30 is a 150m rifle, with excellent penetration. Extremely reliable and far less maintenance-sensitive, but heavier and less user-friendly. Currently $600.00-$1,000.00.

(3) A Krebs/Kalashnikov or RA/XCR in Soviet/30 with rail-mounted red-dot is a genuine 300m rifle, with excellent penetration. Both are considerably less maintenance-sensitive than a typical AR. XCR's ergonomics represent a substantial improvement over the Kalashnikov, and its gas-adjustment greatly increases shooting-comfort. Currently $1,600.00-$1,900.00 for rifle only. Optic is additional.

(4) A DSA/FAL, SA/M1A, or PTR-91 in 308 (7.62X51) is a genuine 500m rifle, with outstanding penetration, but inherent weight and bulk of the ammunition makes it possible to carry only a modest supply, and small-statured people will find them ponderous and a good deal less pleasant to shoot than any 223. Happily, gas-adjustment on the FAL can be used to greatly increase the shooting-comfort factor, a real advantage of the FAL System. Currently $1,700.00-$2,200.00

(5) A Kahr/M1 Carbine is a 100m rifle, with modest penetration. Don't overlook this option! The M1 Carbine is light, short, slim, and very handy, ideal for the small-statured. Recoil is negligible, and, because of the low-pressure 30/Carbine round, report is greatly subdued, compared with any of the foregoing. Currently $900.00-$1,100.00

I know we've all hear it before, but, once again, you don't get everything you want in a single package. No one system is ideal, and, even when you have copies of all of them, you'll discover great advantages, along with irksome annoyances, in each.

You have to start somewhere, so pick one up and bring it to a Class. Any of the foregoing, and even most that I didn't mention, will work fine. You'll observe a phenomenal synergy developing between you and your rifle, no matter which one you have, that will endow you with a new, critical, and wonderful repertoire of capabilities.

No American should be without one!

Aren't most of the Soviet (and allies) arms produced in 5.45X39 now? Isn't that round less effective overall than the 5.56 NATO round?

Where does the M-14 fit in? It has a .30 cal projectile, a 20 round magazine, operates semi and full auto and is less susceptible to dirt and grime than the M-16 style weapons. It is also accurate to ranges in excess of 500M. The M-14 receiver facilitates telescopic and night vision sights far better than most other battle rifles. (M-16 style weapons with flat top receivers are probably on par but the AK-47 type weapons are not even close)

RonE wrote:Aren't most of the Soviet (and allies) arms produced in 5.45X39 now? Isn't that round less effective overall than the 5.56 NATO round?

Where does the M-14 fit in? It has a .30 cal projectile, a 20 round magazine, operates semi and full auto and is less susceptible to dirt and grime than the M-16 style weapons. It is also accurate to ranges in excess of 500M. The M-14 receiver facilitates telescopic and night vision sights far better than most other battle rifles. (M-16 style weapons with flat top receivers are probably on par but the AK-47 type weapons are not even close)

The 5.45x39 is the soviet answer to the 5.56 (almost identical ballistics)
The poster is saying that one rifle will not be the total package. Some rifles are better for close in and some are better for long range, depending on the round.
As far as I know the 762x39 and the 762x54 are the staple of the soviet small arms. the 545x39 is used in the polish Tantel, which is a Kalashnikov design.