PDA

View Full Version : Everyone thinks the SOCOM 16 is sooo cool...


Kenshin
12-08-2006, 3:13 PM
but can it stand up to a long term (few months to years) SHTF? Would you trust your life on this handy+powerful but noisy flashmaker?

FatKatMatt
12-08-2006, 3:18 PM
Do you have any other questions that are not SHTF related?

JPglee1
12-08-2006, 3:20 PM
but can it stand up to a long term (few months to years) SHTF? Would you trust your life on this handy+powerful but noisy flashmaker?

How do you think it would compare to the M1 Carbine, for a SHTF weapon :rolleyes: :p


JP

Ryan HBC
12-08-2006, 3:25 PM
I wish there was a way to ban certain people from starting new threads.

Kenshin
12-08-2006, 3:28 PM
I can't help it.....SHTF threads are addicting.

JPglee1
12-08-2006, 3:30 PM
I can't help it.....SHTF threads are addicting.

Hey dude, see how I posted my picture in my avatar? Thats really me, I'm really that loonie dude with the TF hat on, skeered of my own shadow...

I would pay $5.00 to see a picture of you. I wanna see if my "preconceived notions" pan out... hahaha :cool: :eek:


JP

bu-bye
12-08-2006, 3:31 PM
I'm sure it will stand up but I don't really see the need for a 16" 308 rifle. I would rather have a rifle in 223 for CQB. 308 makes a much better long range rifle (200+ yards).

bwiese
12-08-2006, 3:35 PM
SOCOM concept is nice.... BUT...

I will buy one when Springfield Armory includes a chrome-lined barrel.
Hell, I'll buy two. But not before then.

I've told this to Springfield reps several times and they look at me like I'm silly.

I'd rather pay $150 extra, or not buy it at all. That concept boggles them.

One rep told me they don't have a supply of chrome-lined barrels. I told them they could build their own. "That's expensive!" they say.

"Armalite does it," I reply. "It'll raise your costs $30-$40 bbl, if that. Multiply that by 3 and price it that way and I'll buy it."

Long faces.

grammaton76
12-08-2006, 3:37 PM
I can't help it.....SHTF threads are addicting.

Starting the threads on an SHTF oriented board would get you much better discussion, and much less annoyance from members here.

The old sksboards.com was ideal for this, but there's a landing pad for its "survivors" at:

http://www.topfreeforum.com/lavasksboards/

JPglee1
12-08-2006, 3:37 PM
I'm sure it will stand up but I don't really see the need for a 16" 308 rifle. I would rather have a rifle in 223 for CQB. 308 makes a much better long range rifle (200+ yards).

Exactly...Anything under 18" and it gets real similar to a 762x39, ballistically speaking.

As with you, I'd prefer the lighter carried load of the .223. Actually I'd prolly carry the same number of rounds as I would with .308, which would leave a whole bunch of "weight" left to fill with water food and dryclothes...maybe even a tent.

There is a whole lot more to SHTF than just guns n ammo.



JP

TonyNorCal
12-08-2006, 3:38 PM
I don't think the Socom is overly cool. The version with all the rails just looks silly. And both are made using cast parts, proprietary gas system, and non-chrome-lined barrel. They really aren't battle rifles in the sense that a USGI Garand, FAL, or even an earlier all USGI part/chrome-lined SA Inc rifle is (not quite, I know, but much closer).

If I wanted a short-barrel battle-type rifle in .308 I'd go with 18 inches. I'd send a CMP Garand to Fulton Armory and have them install a chrome-lined barrel (which they have).

Or I'd pick up or build a DSA/Imbel-based FAL built-up with a good surplus parts kit.

For a compact 16 inch barrel rifle I'd also just go with a .223 or an AK.

blkA4alb
12-08-2006, 3:40 PM
*Sigh*, I'd just like to know how you contribute to the board.....

bwiese
12-08-2006, 3:40 PM
And both are made using cast parts, proprietary gas system, and non-chrome-lined barrel.

Tony,

What differs in a SOCOM's gas system from a regular M1A?? How many parts change?

capitol
12-08-2006, 3:40 PM
I wish there was a way to ban certain people from starting new threads.

LOL http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/grinser/grinning-smiley-021.gif

tpliquid1
12-08-2006, 3:44 PM
my buddy has socom, he will be selling soon for $1200

shark92651
12-08-2006, 3:46 PM
but can it stand up to a long term (few months to years) SHTF? Would you trust your life on this handy+powerful but noisy flashmaker?

Maybe someone should create a matrix that compares various firearms in SHTF and Zombie attacks and make it a sticky :D

TonyNorCal
12-08-2006, 3:58 PM
Tony,

What differs in a SOCOM's gas system from a regular M1A?? How many parts change?

Not sure, I don't own a Socom. It's one of those things I've read in multiple place...gas system that's not compatible (at least partly) with USGI parts. Of course, I could be mistaken.

Either way, I don't really care for the rifle, lack of chrome, and the cast parts.

I know people love them and that's great...it's just not my thing:p

I think a Field Grade Garand that was made in 1943 and has been around the block a few times will ultimately still be more durable than a Socom.

But of course I am somewhat biased and like the unrefined nature of older military arms.

JPglee1
12-08-2006, 4:08 PM
Not sure, I don't own a Socom. It's one of those things I've read in multiple place...gas system that's not compatible (at least partly) with USGI parts. .

The difference as I understand it is with the threads on the piston body/barrel connect are different size/pitch than a normal M1A


J

bwiese
12-08-2006, 4:13 PM
I can live with cast parts, the op-rod is the main culprit for failure and I think the casting process has improved in quality over the years.

(You never hear of Ruger cast stuff blowing up!)

But the lack of chrome lining upsets me.

Spaceghost
12-08-2006, 4:14 PM
You really need to join some forum for SHTF stuff, aren't you one of our zombie guys? A quick google lead me to all thingszombie.com. They have forums about all this kind of stuff you keep asking calguns about over and over until my eyes bleed. I won't speculate abut the quality of information you will get with the chaps from that site and the like, but I won't have to read your threads anymore with a rag to staunch the bleeding.

mike100
12-08-2006, 4:15 PM
I have one..it's alright. In hindsight I'd rather have a usgi scout length (18"), but maybe I'll try to collect the whole set. ..or at least a standard model.

CALI-gula
12-08-2006, 4:23 PM
but can it stand up to a long term (few months to years) SHTF? Would you trust your life on this handy+powerful but noisy flashmaker?

Yes. It's a proven design that is very reliable. It's much less susceptible to feed problems and jams. Many people think of the old fictitiously marketed "tankard" models, or the previously made "bush" versions, relating them to the SOCOM. However those were not made in a way to revise the gas system to make the shorter barrel set-up work well. So when the SOCOM I came out, too many people familiar with the latter, and the disappointments from those time and time again for people wanting a short M14, erroneously compared the SOCOM to those, figuring it to be the same configuration. I have never had any troubles with FTF or jams with either my Squad Scout or SOCOM versions, ever, with several hundred rounds through each.

Personally, I think the SOCOM I is a better value; in a SHTF situation, the extra rails of the II will just get in the way, hinder agility, and you are paying a lot extra for that addition. True, on the 4 rail SOCOM II the bottom rail is easily removable, but if you are going to remove it anyway... I would avoid the SOCOM II, save my money and buy a barely used SOCOM I - you are likely to find someone that got it on a lark or for the gee-whiz factor, or the novelty of it, and is now willing to let it go for about $1100, maybe having never shot it at all!

There have been a lot of people taking stabs at Springfield Armory Inc., lobbing unjustified doubt about the integrity of the SAI receivers. Those receivers will hold up as good as anything else, even if cast instead of forged. While I would never trust a cast aluminum AR receiver, I doubt even under hot .308 loads, will you ever blow up an SAI cast receiver. The magazines are more durable than other makes, and overall, the M1A is very durable. It can take the dirt, and a good beating, where other platforms might fail unbder the same.

I like the AR better merely because of the nifty engineering and ability to change it into many things, and all of my ARs are very reliable. However, they are still a complex design and even the basic AR has tight tolerances. I love ARs - but for reliability, I'm a realist; I would go with the M14 system. For even more reliability, I would go with an AK.

Any rifle is a noisy flashmaker, especially in CA - if SHTF, your last worry will be about that - you will want something as effective as possible per round, since you are one person army most likely to be on your lonesome. .308 tends to serve lead with dignity.

Also, the idea of SHTF is a joke, it no longer carries it's original application as thought of during the Cold War, where total nuclear destruction was the true SHTF.

Consider your definition of SHTF! In the 1800s what did that mean? All you might have needed was a Double Barrel Ithaca and two shells. This acronym means so much more in our current world than many of the old tin-foil bibles on survival written in the 1970's and 1980's used to describe. A list of SHTF scenarios during civil unrest and the Cold War may have presented 10 or so possibilities, and now, I tend to think the possibilities are 10 times that number due to terrorism, regional issues, and better knowledge of natural disasters and their frequency. An organized riot by illegal aliens in LA now, would make the Watts or Rodney King riots of the past look like unruly block-party barbecues that got out of hand.

Of course though, scenario dictates need. Just what does SHTF mean here? It can mean holed up under some unjust situation with a surprisingly un-American US government against you (lately, things look more and more like the McCarthy era every day), or a massive earthquake hit half the US, all is destroyed, and you have taken to the hills of ?????. If all is lost, and instead of any kind of need for defense, you are for some reason in the middle of nowhere and the need is food, a little .22LR 10/22 might be the better choice - you can carry over 500 rounds easily, which would give you plenty enough chances to gather rabbit or wild birds on a regular basis to feed yourself. .308 would be great for large game, but for survival, the meat would go bad too fast. Same could be said about .223 - not much left of small game when hit with that. Better to go for small game as you can eat them as you take them.

Scenario and type of SHTF should be considered. In that respect, one might find a pump shotgun to be the best tool.

Just what is SHTF now days? I think one needs an assortment of tools to meet the many possibilities, and trying to subscribe to one firearm to meet all is narrow thinking.


.

CalNRA
12-08-2006, 4:28 PM
wow, you do like talking about SHTF.

do you have food and water supplies too or just want to fanatasize about going on a "self-defense" spree in the absense of the law?

50 Freak
12-08-2006, 4:32 PM
Exactly...Anything under 18" and it gets real similar to a 762x39, ballistically speaking.


You know, I hear that alot but really....

A 7.62x39 out of a 16 will spit out a 123 gr bullet at about 2300 fps....
A 7.62x51 out of a 16 will spit out a 147 gr bullet at about 2800 fps...

Plus the 7.62x51 will have a much long reach than the AK round. Not to mention it's going to do a lot more damage and has more penetration than the AK round at close ranges too.

That's a big difference in my book.

CALI-gula
12-08-2006, 4:40 PM
SOCOM concept is nice.... BUT...

I will buy one when Springfield Armory includes a chrome-lined barrel.
Hell, I'll buy two. But not before then.....


I hear that! They probably invested more money on tooling up for and implementing the silly 4 rail system than if they had gone with chrome lining the barrels. I would trade in the 4 rail for chrome line any day.

But I guess the typical ninja-sword consumer can't "see" how cool a chrome-lined barrel is. :rolleyes:

.

grammaton76
12-08-2006, 4:47 PM
But I guess the typical ninja-sword consumer can't "see" how cool a chrome-lined barrel is. :rolleyes:

{obligatory}Hey, I buy ninja swords and... ooo, shinier barrel is cooler!{/obligatory}

Actually, while I own a bunch of silly swords and a couple good ones, a ninjato isn't in my inventory.

NRAhighpowershooter
12-08-2006, 4:47 PM
SOCOM cool??? nope... just a marketing ploy by SA Inc to sever people from their money.

JPglee1
12-08-2006, 4:54 PM
You know, I hear that alot but really....

A 7.62x39 out of a 16 will spit out a 123 gr bullet at about 2300 fps....
A 7.62x51 out of a 16 will spit out a 147 gr bullet at about 2800 fps...

Plus the 7.62x51 will have a much long reach than the AK round. Not to mention it's going to do a lot more damage and has more penetration than the AK round at close ranges too.

That's a big difference in my book.

Have you actually chrono'd it???

Cuz in real life a 16" .308 chronos out at closer to 2550fps.

My 21" FAL with SA surplus would only get 2720fps, real world test with a chrony chronograph.

16" SKS with 762x39 commercial ammo was 2420fps.

Yah the bullet is 20 grains heavier, so you do get a couple more foot-pounds of energy, but the point is the .308 isn't meant to be used in a sub 18" barrel.

IF you're gonna do that, run 110gr TAP ammo from Hornady so you can get your velocity back and get some good penetration.


I really see no purpouse in these things:

http://webarms.com/Gun%20Suppliers/DSA/sa58osw.jpg

11 and 13" barrel for a .308? WTF for? LOL :p

Again, maybe with 110gr TAP ammo, or something, but to me its completely pointless.

13" barrel version weighs NINE pounds. An AR with a 11.5" barrel is around 6.25"...

To each his own I guess, to me .308 is for 18" barrels and 300+ yards. Basically, un realistic fighting distances and scenarios that would probably NOT pop up unless you live in the desert during SHTF. For urban combat I'd much rather have the AR-15 with a 11.5" barrel than a FAL with an 11" barrel.

You can carry 2x the ammo for the same weight, I mean you're giving up THREE pounds on the gun alone...


JP

CALI-gula
12-08-2006, 4:56 PM
{obligatory}Hey, I buy ninja swords and... ooo, shinier barrel is cooler!{/obligatory}

Actually, while I own a bunch of silly swords and a couple good ones, a ninjato isn't in my inventory.


I guess I should have said mall-ninja sword, or now days, maybe even the term "gun-show ninja sword" might apply.

I've always like the idea of a .308 Carbine, having a G3 for many years. But I agree with NRAhighpowershooter - Springfield's marketing and doo-dads have really mucked up the idea, to the point of deplorable. Glancing through gun rags, I sometimes can't tell between the latest ads for the newest PS3 or X-Box shoot-em up video game versus Springfield's ads for the SOCOM.

I like my guns simple without a lot of crap to get in the way. What JP posted above is a utilitarian nightmare and half that stuff would cause more ills than good. Excess baggage taht someone says "you need this" which has been the heart of marketing at Mattel for over 40 years.

.

.

.

SemiAutoSam
12-08-2006, 5:18 PM
Would rather own one of these and pay 10 times the price of an average M1A or clone. As socomms will be around and will never have the collector value this rifle will have. This one stays in the safe but Ill take the DSA Para out and have a blast.

Just on a personal note I would call the FN FAL more reliable than the M1A.
Less parts to break and much better made.



http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j184/mag-lock/G7375GL835.jpg

Here is another toy
http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j184/mag-lock/5063Right.jpg

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j184/mag-lock/5063Left.jpg

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j184/mag-lock/5063LeftButtstockFolded.jpg

JPglee1
12-08-2006, 5:23 PM
Just on a personal note I would call the FN FAL more reliable than the M1A.
Less parts to break and much better made.


Less parts to break? LOL, the FAL has a ton more little screws and springs and detents and crap, like the AR-15... thats always a turn-off in a battle rifle.

I think the .308 SAIGA w/G3 magazine mods is the best battle rifle ever hahaha.


Seriously tho, if someone could perfect a .308 AK-based rifle with a true last round bolt hold open that used common/cheap HK or FAL mags it would be the greatest thing since sliced bread. Especially if it would do sub 2MOA.


J

50 Freak
12-08-2006, 5:50 PM
Have you actually chrono'd it???

Cuz in real life a 16" .308 chronos out at closer to 2550fps.

My 21" FAL with SA surplus would only get 2720fps, real world test with a chrony chronograph.

16" SKS with 762x39 commercial ammo was 2420fps.



First of all, a 7.62x51 is not the same as .308 (we're talking 147 grain versus 168 typical weights). So your chrono may have recorded a .308 at 2550, but using standard Port ammo, it should record about 2800 out of a 18 inch FAL. Standard velocity lost per inch out of a 308 barrel is 25-40 fps per inch. I'd think it'd be less for a 7.62x51.

So my estimation for a 16inch FAL would chrono about 2700-2750 fps shooting 7.62x51 NATO.

And then you are using comercial 7.62x39. Was that hunting ammo? If so, isn't hunting ammo usually a little hotter? I don't remember the exact numbers but a Mak90 shooting a 16.25 inch barrel chrono'ed about 2375 using Wolf.

So again. You are comparing a 123 grain bullet traveling about 2400 fps versus 147 grain bullet traveling at 2750.

Either way, it doesn't matter...you pick the gun you are most familiar with and for plinking, you use the one with the most readily available surplus laying around.

Cheers.

JPglee1
12-08-2006, 5:56 PM
So again. You are comparing a 123 grain bullet traveling about 2400 fps versus 147 grain bullet traveling at 2750.


I chrono'd Cavim, handloads from Big Jon and SA from my 21" FAL and none of them broke 2700FPS. WOLF .308 was barely breaking 2500FPS from my 21" barrel. Ask Big Jon, we used his chrono. My CZ52 pistol was doing 1800fps w/88gr bullets from 5" barrel. My makarov was doing 1070 w/ CCI blazer and LESS with WOLF 9x18...

I chrono'd WOLF in my SKS and it was at 2300-ish. Commercial was at 2420.

Its all conjecture, but there is NO WAY a .308 out of a 16" barrel is gonna be doing 2700FPS, I'm sorry it doesn't match up with my real-world experiences.

Like I said, 2550-ish is par for a 16" .308.

2550FPS w/a 147gr bullet isn't too far from 2420 w/a 123gr bullet.

24 grains and 130 ft/sec difference... not HUGELY different, compared to say a 55gr 223 at 2700 vs. a 147gr .308 at 2550. My 11.5" AR upper chronos at 2700fps w/55gr lake city.

I just like to argue, for the weight penalty involved I don't see any advantage to a short barrel .308.

My opinion, yadda yadda


J

50 Freak
12-08-2006, 6:00 PM
Less parts to break? LOL, the FAL has a ton more little screws and springs and detents and crap, like the AR-15... thats always a turn-off in a battle rifle.

OHHHHH Buddy, you better put on your flame suit.....Them's fighting words.....

There is a reason why the M-14 is only carried by one country (US) and the FAL is carried by about 100 different countries.

And in the original test between the FAL versus the M-14, the tests were "tipped" in the favor of the "American made" M-14 over the FAL. Unfortunately the rest of the world thought the FAL was a better weapon.

Comparing a STOCK FAL with a STOCK M-14, they are both equal in accuracy (with the M-14 edging the FAL out a little better due to better sights). The M-14 is also easier to covert to a Marksman's weapon as the FAL is a true soldier's weapon. In durability and reliability, the FAL wins hands down.

Having owned both rifles, if I were to go into battle, I'd pick a FAL without a second thought.

rorschach
12-08-2006, 6:09 PM
^^^ What 50 said.

I recently read a story (I think in Duncan Longs FAL book) about the rigged T48 tests back in the 50's.

I love my HK's, but the FAL ain't called "The Right Arm of the Free World" for nothing.

And the US isnt the only country to carry the M14, didnt you watch that Cinematic Masterpiece "The Green Berets" the other night?? Good ol' Charlie Cong carried M14's too!!

::watches sun setting in the east::

JPglee1
12-08-2006, 6:20 PM
Having owned both rifles, if I were to go into battle, I'd pick a FAL without a second thought.

Me too... I much prefer the FAL over the M1A, but specifically for CALI use the M1A wins for being able to use hicaps w/no special mods (aside from a muzzle brake instead of a FH)

But yes, I agree, the FAL is vastly superior. I already miss mine. Well sorta. I don't miss the 10 pound weight, and I don't miss top loading 10rds one at a time hahaha.

Gripless AR-15 = fun fun...


I've got an M1 Garand Tanker (well sorta, it needs to be assembled, the last gun smith flaked big time) to cover the high caliber needs. .30-06 from 18" barrel, woooot :D


Now I just need to find someone to assemble it for me. If I can't find someone reasonable Im gonna buy the tools and do it myself. Then I'll start dinking with M1 Garands for people (while they wait of course)


JP

50 Freak
12-08-2006, 6:35 PM
Actually, the Israelis use a very limited number of highly modified M-14s in a sniper/marksman role.

But I have a feeling it's because we practically gave them to the Israelis for free. And who'd be stupid enough to turn down free M-14s.

SemiAutoSam
12-08-2006, 7:12 PM
Talk about the FAL has anyone heard anything about R Blake Stevens being departed ?

http://www.collectorgrade.com/bookshelf4.html

madjack956
12-08-2006, 7:12 PM
Wow, interesting thread. I can't comment on SA's Socom but I built a Socom using SA's stock and a Socom muzzlebrake, all the rest of the parts were USGI except for a Sadlak op rod guide and a Fulton Armory receiver. The rifle shoots nice and performs better than my Supermatch. Yeah it loses velocity from the 16 " barrel but I guarantee you wouldn't want to be hit by it. The muzzlebrake does a good job of tameing the recoil and the shorter barrel makes it easier to wield. If I had to engage a group of unfriendlies, I would grab it over my AR's anyday. I like what the .308 round does to the bad guys. As far as SA"s cast parts, I think their receiver is strong enough, but it is out of spec. I couldn't get an ARMS mount on it . It fell onto my FA receiver. Other people have experienced the same problem. I had a lot of quality control issues with SA that are still ongoing so I wouldn't recommend them. If you ever consider one I recommend building one with GI parts while they are still around. It won't be cheap, but when you are through you will have a reliable, hard hitter.

my .02

xenophobe
12-08-2006, 7:28 PM
Comparing a STOCK FAL with a STOCK M-14, they are both equal in accuracy (with the M-14 edging the FAL out a little better due to better sights). The M-14 is also easier to covert to a Marksman's weapon as the FAL is a true soldier's weapon. In durability and reliability, the FAL wins hands down.

Absolutely. Very well put as well. The FAL has seen theater-wide use in many campaigns, many of which were FALs vs FALs. As much as long as it's been in use, the M14 has seen limited use in comparison.

Stavros
12-08-2006, 7:55 PM
I really see no purpouse in these things:

http://webarms.com/Gun%20Suppliers/DSA/sa58osw.jpg

JP

Me neither but they sure look purty

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/4703/falgirlbg3.jpg

Maddog5150
12-09-2006, 4:07 AM
Just tell Kenshin what he wants to hear.
Yes Kenshin the M1 carbine is the ultimate weapon. I would choose it over an AK. I would choose it over an m14. I would choose it over an AR-15 and I would choose it over keltec.
Now if you all would excuse me. I hear lying causes tumors so I need to get checked out.

BigMac
12-09-2006, 7:38 AM
If the SHTF I'm hiding under my bed ;)

JPglee1
12-09-2006, 8:25 AM
Me neither but they sure look purty

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/4703/falgirlbg3.jpg


Yah, but she don't... yuck. LOL

those 30rd .208 mags are WAY too long.

JP