But is it practical?

[fireluvrandrew@gmail.com]

Well..... Let me start. While pondering how to drop my next grand on a new gun I began thinking, everyone keeps telling me get an AR get an AR, but I was thinking, If I build a NICE AR, because I wouldnt build a cheap one, Im not going to use it for comps. Now, dont get me wrong range and MOA is important, but I guess heres my main point, If I make a nice AR, will it even be usefull for everyday plinking? Basically, I am starting to think, say 308 siaga and a nice optic, would be more practical.
I mean can I use the AR for as many things as a SIAGA?
I know this is vague im trying to convey my thoughts,
A siaga is good for plinking, shtf, 308 takedown power, and not horrible accuracy
AR is accurate, but a nice one might not be good with cheap plinking ammo, a ar10 would just cost way to much for my taste, so a 223, takedown power not so much

I guess my main point is, If im not going to be using the rifle mainly for comps, but accuracy and range is important, whats more practical an AR15 or a siaga 308 with the longer barrel?


ADDED:
or maybe a FAL?
which is most practical?

[USN CHIEF]

SA Loaded....

[NeoWeird]

I am taking this as you don't own an AR already and only plan on owning one if you ever do get one. If that's not the case then correct me.

The AR is just about the perfect all around entry gun into the world of shooting. Ammo was cheap enough at one point, and will hopefully be that way again soon, that you could plink with it when you went shooting but could also get specialty ammo for special events. Ranges out past most gun ranges is possible and 600 yards is not too far fetched.

The problem with the AR is that they are SO heavily used by SO many countries that aftermarket products are out of this world. I speak from personal experience that the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) philosophy is the best for either the beginner or someone looking for an all around rifle. Rails add weight and make the rifle less desirable to hold. Traditional optics allow for longer range shooting but detract from carbine style classes or fun while plinking. High power scopes also tend to make it a bit difficult to hunt with them (in case you ever want/need to). Added accessories just get in the way and cost money when they are rarely used. The list goes on.

If someone asked me what would be the perfect AR to cover as many possible uses, of many different personalities, while also being very reliable and just an all around great gun I would give this advice:

Carbine with USGI style retractable stock
Flat top upper
16" chrome lined non-bull barrel
Midlength gas system
Folding BUIS and Folding gas block
Standard handguards (NO forward pistol grip)
Trijicon ACOG (try and find one used to save on price, compacts are prefered)

That will give you a rifle that can be used to plink, survival, target practice at both short and relatively long distances, defense and would be a great set up for SHTF. A simple sling is an option as well, and a flash light is all but required for a home defense gun.

So there you have it. Outside of the optics, that could easily be had for under $1k, and then it's just saving or finding a good deal for the optic.

Again, this is all assuming you don't own an AR and will only EVER own one AR.

ETA: Whatever you do, do NOT skimp on the parts. If it's your only AR, you might as well save for three months and have a gun that will last than to have the gun NOW and have to replace parts in three months. For some reason, CMMG keeps poping in my head for you. Never used them, but for some reason that's the only company that pops in my head as I read this topic and as I was responding.

Also, DON'T go .308. You'll never shoot it and it will be a waste of money because ammo prices are pretty out there right now. Unless you NEED it, like if you want to shoot past 500 yards on a regular basis or if you want to hunt larger game, don't even bother...yet. For the average range gun, there is nothing a .308 will do that a .223 can't do.

[Cypriss32]

FAL own!

[76231b]

.308 and plinking just don't go together. Get an AK or saiga in 7.62x39

[Fobjoe]

for less than $1000 I was able to purchase both my AR ($500) and Saiga 308 ($360)

Out of the two you listed, I'd recommend the AR. I love the Saiga but for some reason I think it's absolutely crazy to waste money on a good optic for it. Would you consider a Saiga in 7.62x39? Saiga 7.62 would be best for plinking since they are cheap and the ammo can be found cheap. Accuracy is...mediocre...I highly doubt that it will consistently shoot MOA.

The cost for decent .223 (for your AR) runs near the same cost of steel case 308 (for your Saiga 308). Your AR will be more accurate and you will have faster follow up shots. Your AR in MMG or other gripless config will allow you to use high cap mags that you owned before 2000. Yes, the Saiga is a GREAT value...this is why I suggest you get both eventually.

[Josh3239]

so a 223, takedown power not so much

I am sure there will be plenty of people to disagree with me on this, but I completely disagree.

There are a lot of people no longer breathing because of the .223. Have we ever even lost a battle since our military adopted the M16 series? I know we lost zero battles in Vietnam and we killed well over a million commies during the war. We have had our small conflicts over the world, for instance in Somalia we suffered 19 dead and the Somalis suffered 2,000 dead. In the current Iraqi war the UN brought in doctors who specialize in gunshot wounds because they suspected that the massive amounts of dead Iraqis from headshots were executed. The UN doctors all agreed that they weren't close range shots, the Iraqis would only present their heads during the battles and US forces tended to hit what they presented.

Unless you plan on fighting enemies in Vietnam or Afghanistan who tend take opiats before entering a fight, I doubt you need to worry about the knockdown power. Besides, your supposed to shoot zombies in the head anyways

Go with the AR, you won't be dissapointed.

[fireluvrandrew@gmail.com]

I am sure there will be plenty of people to disagree with me on this, but I completely disagree.

There are a lot of people no longer breathing because of the .223. Have we ever even lost a battle since our military adopted the M16 series? I know we lost zero battles in Vietnam and we killed well over a million commies during the war. We have had our small conflicts over the world, for instance in Somalia we suffered 19 dead and the Somalis suffered 2,000 dead. In the current Iraqi war the UN brought in doctors who specialize in gunshot wounds because they suspected that the massive amounts of dead Iraqis from headshots were executed. The UN doctors all agreed that they weren't close range shots, the Iraqis would only present their heads during the battles and US forces tended to hit what they presented.

Unless you plan on fighting enemies in Vietnam or Afghanistan who tend take opiats before entering a fight, I doubt you need to worry about the knockdown power. Besides, your supposed to shoot zombies in the head anyways

Go with the AR, you won't be dissapointed.

not disagreeing with you, however my brother who just returned from Iraq (go 80 deuce!!) carried a SAW which is .223 and said it took a good 4-5 rounds to knock someone down.
But also consider according to DOD they cant use hollowpoints.. or anything else that would actually work better (go figure, we can only use one type of ammo but our enemies can use hidden gruesome IEDS that shred people and innocent civilians)


anyways
I think the AR will be the best choice after all.... just gotta get me some hollowpoints


PS God bless our soldiers fighting for our freedoms!

[NeoWeird]

I've heard that with the velocities the .223 is pushing, and at the average range of engagment for civilians, hollow point or not won't do much. Even if it decides to fragment it is going so fast it just punches through before major tissue damage is done. Many times hollow points also trap cloth in their cavity which can both work for or against either the shooter or the target.

I remember hearing that the military originally went with a slower twist rate to intentionally destabilize the bullet in flight. The hopes, and effects quite often, was the bullet would be key holing by the time it reached it's target. Range suffered, but at the ranges we were fighting the deviation was minimal but the added tissue damage was great. Now it's a different story so the added range of using faster twist rates out weighs the ability to do more damage. Urban combat also has the added obstacle of having to shoot through different items and the added penetration is also wanted.

The .223 is a mean little round. It may not be as mean as the larger bullets but it's better than the smaller ones. It's the same debate as the 9mm and .45acp. Besides, your original topic said you wanted to use it for comps and/or plinking. The AR will do those just fine.

Now if you're looking for a great gun to stop the bad guys dead in their tracks on the first shot then get a shotgun and load it with buck.

[aplinker]

I'll make the suggestion that the reason so many headshots are seen with 5.56 is because of the accuracy of the M16, as well. Nothing competes with it.

The 308 Saigas are extremely accurate for a battle-type/hunting rifle. They're known to be <2MOA, sometimes much better, which is on par with the M1A.

However, ammo for 308 is significantly more expensive (about $360/1000 for .223 vs $500/1000+ for 308)

I've heard that with the velocities the .223 is pushing, and at the average range of engagment for civilians, hollow point or not won't do much. Even if it decides to fragment it is going so fast it just punches through before major tissue damage is done. Many times hollow points also trap cloth in their cavity which can both work for or against either the shooter or the target.

I remember hearing that the military originally went with a slower twist rate to intentionally destabilize the bullet in flight. The hopes, and effects quite often, was the bullet would be key holing by the time it reached it's target. Range suffered, but at the ranges we were fighting the deviation was minimal but the added tissue damage was great. Now it's a different story so the added range of using faster twist rates out weighs the ability to do more damage. Urban combat also has the added obstacle of having to shoot through different items and the added penetration is also wanted.

The .223 is a mean little round. It may not be as mean as the larger bullets but it's better than the smaller ones. It's the same debate as the 9mm and .45acp. Besides, your original topic said you wanted to use it for comps and/or plinking. The AR will do those just fine.

Now if you're looking for a great gun to stop the bad guys dead in their tracks on the first shot then get a shotgun and load it with buck.

I'm really doubtful any of that is true about the twist rate. More twist = lower velocity and they designers were well aware that velocity is what causes the 5.56 to do damage from fragmenting.

[NeoWeird]

I'm really doubtful any of that is true about the twist rate. More twist = lower velocity and they designers were well aware that velocity is what causes the 5.56 to do damage from fragmenting.

I never said fragment, I said key hole. Two entirely different reactions to a bullet in flight. And if the designers knew that the faster twist rate was better, why then did they go with a 1:12 instead of the modern 1:9 or specialized 1:7?

ETA: I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong. I am a student in all regards and much of my knowledge on firearms is second hand from reading and enteracting with people who know more than I. I never met any of the designers or engineers in regards to the M16 so I can't say for fact what they thought or why they did it. I am simply passing on what I have heard second hand that appears to make sense to me. I have been wrong many times in the past and will continue to be wrong many times more. If I can be proved wrong, please do as I'd rather be educated with accurate information.

[aplinker]

I think somewhere what I mean to say was either mistook or it didn't come out right.

What I'm saying is that the slower twist was for the original bullets (55gr) and was a decision to maintain velocity with these lighter weight bullets. Lower twist = less friction. So, this decision was to maintain that high velocity so the bullets would fragment.

Life changed when they decided on the SS109 round and the LONG tracer variants... and they had to up it a bunch (1/7)... at least that's how I remember the story going.

I wasn't trying to smack talk you here, buddy. I was just saying the original design wasn't with the intent to keyhole, but rather low twist for high velocity, compact, lightweight bullets.. In fact, keyholing might make for a good entrance wound, but the loss of velocity will prevent the fragmentation, as well, which, again, is the primary wound mechanism for the M193.

I'm sure you've read this before, but for the sake of others... great stuff:

http://ammo.ar15.com/

I never said fragment, I said key hole. Two entirely different reactions to a bullet in flight. And if the designers knew that the faster twist rate was better, why then did they go with a 1:12 instead of the modern 1:9 or specialized 1:7?

ETA: I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong. I am a student in all regards and much of my knowledge on firearms is second hand from reading and enteracting with people who know more than I. I never met any of the designers or engineers in regards to the M16 so I can't say for fact what they thought or why they did it. I am simply passing on what I have heard second hand that appears to make sense to me. I have been wrong many times in the past and will continue to be wrong many times more. If I can be proved wrong, please do as I'd rather be educated with accurate information.

[Fjold]

US Military bullets are not designed to fragment.

[Blacktail 8541]

Go with an AR. Ammo is cheaper. They can be highly accurate and be changed to a caliber other than 5.56 very easily.

If you reload you can have any type of ammo you want. If you do not, there are plenty of types of ammo commercialy available. Winchester 64 grain softpoints come to mind. I would not use ball ammo in a shtf senerio, There is better ammo for this. The military is restricted in what they can use. we are not.

[Paratus et Vigilans]

The AR platform is great for plinking and general purpose shooting, as well as home defense. Get one with a 1/9 barrel to give you the broadest range of choices for ammo. Use the 55 gr. FMJ for plinking and general shooting. Use 69 gr. rounds (Black Hills makes good ones) for longer range target shooting and maximum distance accuracy. Get a flat top upper receiver to give yourself the best range of options for sights and optics. Get a removable carry handle for the best iron sights, and then if you're into 1x red dot/holo sights, get an Aimpoint or EOTech (I prefer the latter but own both) and some kind of flip up rear sight for back up. A.R.M.S. is pretty common, but there are lots of options. Most BUIS give you windage but no elevation adjustments - - that's why they're "back ups" and why it's good to have a carry handle option with the windage and elevation adjustable sight in it. Learn the irons first, then move on to optics. Put a 4x ACOG or even a decent variable power scope on top (quick detach/repeat zero mounts are highly recommended here) and your AR will get you out to 600 yards plus and its accuracy will only be limited by your shooting skills and choice of ammo.

.308 is fun to shoot, but expensive if you're not a reloader, and is not something most would consider for plinking. .308 is to enhance killing power at long distance and to punch through cover at short range. Personally I would save .308 for something more accurate than a Saiga, like an AR-10 clone or an M14/M1A or a bolt action precision shooting build.