User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:10:25 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Garand Hands down. I shot an HK 91 for the first time Last Sunday and holy cow that thing beat me up! One of theist uncomfortable guns I've ever shot. The stock beat me in the cheek and I just couldn't find a comfortable way to hold it and still line up the sights. And this coming from a guy who just shot 62 rd match with a Swiss 96/11 in a tee shirt and BDU blouse. And don't think M44s kick all that bad. Tele-stock? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:13:50 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I shot an HK 91 for the first time Last Sunday and holy cow that thing beat me up! One of theist uncomfortable guns I've ever shot. The stock beat me in the cheek and I just couldn't find a comfortable way to hold it and still line up the sights. I shot my HK91 for 15 years, and never did figure out how to keep from getting bopped in the nose by that buttstock. I even tried making the length of pull longer (and I am only 5'6"!) and STILL got tortured by that thing. For whatever reason, and HK91 just beats me mercilessly. Never happens on a FAL, M1/M14, or an AR-10..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:14:12 PM EDT
[#3]
Garands can also take optics.
   |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:14:36 PM EDT
[#4]
Nope. Oem fixed stock. I was amazed at how uncomfortable the rifle was for me. That just never happens.
Wasn't able to hit a damned thing thing either. We were on the steel course and I had shot 10 for 12 with my rifle but missed every single target with that 20 rounds. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:16:46 PM EDT
[#5]
Garand.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:17:28 PM EDT
[#6]
The Garand was designed from a trench warfare perspective, to be rained and snowed on and left in a frozen mud puddle in the bottom of a slit trench then picked up and fired without a cleaning
and then used to bash someone's head in it's not just a heavy duty rifle, it's an ultra-heavy duty rifle fun factoid - why are the shoulder stocks on military rifles always so short? because a tall guy can fire a short guy's rifle pretty good but not vice versa. why aren't commercial rifles like that? because then short guys can have a gunsmith cut the stock down for them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:20:11 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Tele-stock? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Garand Hands down. I shot an HK 91 for the first time Last Sunday and holy cow that thing beat me up! One of theist uncomfortable guns I've ever shot. The stock beat me in the cheek and I just couldn't find a comfortable way to hold it and still line up the sights. And this coming from a guy who just shot 62 rd match with a Swiss 96/11 in a tee shirt and BDU blouse. And don't think M44s kick all that bad. Tele-stock? I found that post odd as well. My last range trip was the evening before last, and I took two rifles: a PTR-91 with a 16" barrel and a K-31. With the PTR, I had no padding, just a T-shirt. The recoil felt different, but not bad. I fired 40 rounds without discomfort. With the K-31, I fired a couple rounds before grabbing the slip on recoil pad. The recoil wasn't terrible, but I wanted to comfortably shoot more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:20:59 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nope. Oem fixed stock. I was amazed at how uncomfortable the rifle was for me. That just never happens. Wasn't able to hit a damned thing thing either. We were on the steel course and I had shot 10 for 12 with my rifle but missed every single target with that 20 rounds. Wow, I never had that problem with mine (when I had it), but I absolutely hated the H&K tele-stocks on anything but my HK94A3 (which I wish I had kept  ).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:23:56 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I found that post odd as well. My last range trip was the evening before last, and I took two rifles: a PTR-91 with a 16" barrel and a K-31. With the PTR, I had no padding, just a T-shirt. The recoil felt different, but not bad. I fired 40 rounds without discomfort. With the K-31, I fired a couple rounds before grabbing the slip on recoil pad. The recoil wasn't terrible, but I wanted to comfortably shoot more. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Garand Hands down. I shot an HK 91 for the first time Last Sunday and holy cow that thing beat me up! One of theist uncomfortable guns I've ever shot. The stock beat me in the cheek and I just couldn't find a comfortable way to hold it and still line up the sights. And this coming from a guy who just shot 62 rd match with a Swiss 96/11 in a tee shirt and BDU blouse. And don't think M44s kick all that bad. Tele-stock? I found that post odd as well. My last range trip was the evening before last, and I took two rifles: a PTR-91 with a 16" barrel and a K-31. With the PTR, I had no padding, just a T-shirt. The recoil felt different, but not bad. I fired 40 rounds without discomfort. With the K-31, I fired a couple rounds before grabbing the slip on recoil pad. The recoil wasn't terrible, but I wanted to comfortably shoot more. A lot of people have that issue with the G3. It's not the buttstock hitting your shoulder, it's the back of the upper receiver (where the stock is attached) hitting your cheekbone. For many people, to get a proper sight picture, you end up getting smacked in the cheekbone when you fire. It can be very distracting - and in extended shooting sessions - quite painful. For some, it can cause an almost involuntary flinch, playing havoc with accuracy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:24:50 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Garand was designed from a trench warfare perspective, to be rained and snowed on and left in a frozen mud puddle in the bottom of a slit trench then picked up and fired without a cleaning and then used to bash someone's head in it's not just a heavy duty rifle, it's an ultra-heavy duty rifle fun factoid - why are the shoulder stocks on military rifles always so short? because a tall guy can fire a short guy's rifle pretty good but not vice versa. why aren't commercial rifles like that? because then short guys can have a gunsmith cut the stock down for them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:24:56 PM EDT
[#11]
Garand for me.
I don't lose enblocs, either. Snatch 'em out of the air with my right hand when I hear the ping. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:25:28 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I found that post odd as well. My last range trip was the evening before last, and I took two rifles: a PTR-91 with a 16" barrel and a K-31. With the PTR, I had no padding, just a T-shirt. The recoil felt different, but not bad. I fired 40 rounds without discomfort. With the K-31, I fired a couple rounds before grabbing the slip on recoil pad. The recoil wasn't terrible, but I wanted to comfortably shoot more. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Garand Hands down. I shot an HK 91 for the first time Last Sunday and holy cow that thing beat me up! One of theist uncomfortable guns I've ever shot. The stock beat me in the cheek and I just couldn't find a comfortable way to hold it and still line up the sights. And this coming from a guy who just shot 62 rd match with a Swiss 96/11 in a tee shirt and BDU blouse. And don't think M44s kick all that bad. Tele-stock? I found that post odd as well. My last range trip was the evening before last, and I took two rifles: a PTR-91 with a 16" barrel and a K-31. With the PTR, I had no padding, just a T-shirt. The recoil felt different, but not bad. I fired 40 rounds without discomfort. With the K-31, I fired a couple rounds before grabbing the slip on recoil pad. The recoil wasn't terrible, but I wanted to comfortably shoot more. My older AWB era PTR was pretty rough. It had a non-HK plastic stock that I think PTR made. It lacked the rear mounting bolts and the plastic seemed rougher. If I tried to shoot it without shaving first, it felt like it was trying to Epilady my face, one round at a time and it beat the crap out of me. I've since swapped it for a properly mounted stock with the heavy buffer and rubber buttpad and it's a kitten (relatively speaking) now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:31:06 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
If you had to pick between the two, and it was going to be your ONLY rifle - especially if it might have be used as a SHTF gun, and not just a range toy ... which would you prefer? This thread was inspired by something brought up in another thread: HERE, in which I posted the following: ... when I was in the Danish army (2 years guard, and 3 years active duty) - I was issued the G3 at some times, and issued the Garand at other times (and commanded squads and platoons that were issued Garands). To me, it's still a toss-up. The Garand is heavier, but more reliable. The G3 has more capacity, but is less accurate. If there was some alien invasion or zombie uprising, and I had to choose between a Garand and a G3, I'd have to really think about it. Playing offense, I'd probably pick the G3, but if I was on defense, I'd go with the Garand. It may be a stupid question, but I think it's actually somewhat interesting. The way I see it, there are obvious pros and cons to both: G3 Pros: 20-round magazine, reliable, shorter Cons: cumbersome charging handle, no bolt hold, bad ergonomics for some, sights difficult to adjust, stamped metal construction more prone to damage. Garand Pros: Superior accuracy (better sights), better cartridge, extremely reliable Cons: 8-round capacity, weight & length I guess another advantage of the Garand might be that in a SHTF scenario, it looks a bit more inconspicuous than a G3, so it could make it easier to blend in. I voted G3...  I love me some M1 but the G3 is a better all around rifle but it has no soul.
EDIT>thanks for starting this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:34:46 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A lot of people have that issue with the G3. It's not the buttstock hitting your shoulder, it's the back of the upper receiver (where the stock is attached) hitting your cheekbone. For many people, to get a proper sight picture, you end up getting smacked in the cheekbone when you fire. It can be very distracting - and in extended shooting sessions - quite painful. For some, it can cause an almost involuntary flinch, playing havoc with accuracy. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Garand Hands down. I shot an HK 91 for the first time Last Sunday and holy cow that thing beat me up! One of theist uncomfortable guns I've ever shot. The stock beat me in the cheek and I just couldn't find a comfortable way to hold it and still line up the sights. And this coming from a guy who just shot 62 rd match with a Swiss 96/11 in a tee shirt and BDU blouse. And don't think M44s kick all that bad. Tele-stock? I found that post odd as well. My last range trip was the evening before last, and I took two rifles: a PTR-91 with a 16" barrel and a K-31. With the PTR, I had no padding, just a T-shirt. The recoil felt different, but not bad. I fired 40 rounds without discomfort. With the K-31, I fired a couple rounds before grabbing the slip on recoil pad. The recoil wasn't terrible, but I wanted to comfortably shoot more. A lot of people have that issue with the G3. It's not the buttstock hitting your shoulder, it's the back of the upper receiver (where the stock is attached) hitting your cheekbone. For many people, to get a proper sight picture, you end up getting smacked in the cheekbone when you fire. It can be very distracting - and in extended shooting sessions - quite painful. For some, it can cause an almost involuntary flinch, playing havoc with accuracy. That sounds familiar.  <----- I may not have looked this bad but it's how I felt.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:42:33 PM EDT
[#15]
Both, I actually have both, so both
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:43:56 PM EDT
[#16]
M1 Garand because 'Murica, and we suck and HK hates us.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:49:14 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOK, I watched that video. What wire cutter and bottle opener? What flip up and down scope sight? That's all something attached onto the receiver that isn't HK. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 2:52:37 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
OK, I watched that video. What wire cutter and bottle opener? What flip up and down scope sight? That's all something attached onto the receiver that isn't HK. Quote HistoryQuoted:
OK, I watched that video. What wire cutter and bottle opener? What flip up and down scope sight? That's all something attached onto the receiver that isn't HK. The HK wide style handguards have a little metal tab on them that people confuse for a bottle opener. It is actually for the german issued 3 point sling. I don't have one currently but the factory bipod that attaches to the wide handguards might have a wire cutter on them. I could be confusing it with another rifle though (galil maybe?). As far as the flip down scope I have no idea and I had never seen that clip or movie before. Looks interesting. ETA: the area he uses for the "bottle opener" is not where the tab on the handguard is located. Opposite side actually. Same for the wire cutter, he points to the side where the ejection port is. Looks like movie bullshit |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:04:47 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have no experiance with a G3. but I have had some time with non HK clones. I have had experiance with the m1 and BM-59 clones. I'd go with the G-3 over the M1. The G3 clones I have dealt with dont have very good egos, had bad triggers and were one and all overgased. Sight tools cost a crazy ammount. That said the gun was usable and modern optical mounts allow for mounting red dot sights low. You can also get a trigger job for them that puts them on par with any other rifle. These work just as well and cost $3. http://www.amazon.com/5-5-KELLY-Hemostat-FORCEPS-Straight/dp/B000QWK174 |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:06:15 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Finally, an unbiased opinion!!!  Quote HistoryQuoted: Originally Posted By FluffyTheCat: G3: Heavy, wretched trigger. Garand: Smooth crisp trigger G3. No bolt hold open Garand: Bolt hold open. G3. violent ejection. Garand: Smooth ejection. G3. drum aperture sight Garand: Best aperture sight ever on a battle rifle. The only advantage that the G3 has is higher capacity. But then again, a Garand can be reloaded faster. Finally, an unbiased opinion!!! DK... I think you need to put down the pipe for a while man... I think I'd pick a Garand. The G3's I've shot, were uncomfortable. The hump at the back of the action always seems to disagree with my nose. But then again, I have a big nose. On your own, with no team for fire support, having 20 rounds on tap would be nice. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:12:14 PM EDT
[#21]
If I can't have an FAL I would take the Garand
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:13:10 PM EDT
[#22]
For fun, the G3, no question. Nice .308, good shooting and comfortable.
In a serious shootout, you go with what you are most familiar/comfortable with. Which is the Garand, hands down. Mine never balks, and shoots nicely. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:16:23 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Tele-stock? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Garand Hands down. I shot an HK 91 for the first time Last Sunday and holy cow that thing beat me up! One of theist uncomfortable guns I've ever shot. The stock beat me in the cheek and I just couldn't find a comfortable way to hold it and still line up the sights. And this coming from a guy who just shot 62 rd match with a Swiss 96/11 in a tee shirt and BDU blouse. And don't think M44s kick all that bad. Tele-stock? I have a PWS brake on my PTR and recoil is negligible. It kicks like a 10/22. Loud as holy hell yes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:18:45 PM EDT
[#24]
Here's my dilemma. The Garand has better sights and, aside from flukes, a better trigger. I can load one competently, and my speed would increase with daily use. But the Garand has the en-bloc clips that could disappear in run-and-gun situations, where the G3 mags could be accounted for a bit more easily.
At that point, there's another variable in the equation, supply/logistics. If the ammo is coming in bulk and I'm supplying and loading the mags/clips, I'll take the G3. The Garand otherwise, but not by a large margin. I wouldn't feel underequipped with either one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:19:15 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The G3 is certainly accurate, but it is NOT as accurate as a Garand - partly as a result of the crappier trigger. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
G3. Detachable magazines, more accurate, more common ammunition. The G3 is certainly accurate, but it is NOT as accurate as a Garand - partly as a result of the crappier trigger. Everyone keeps talking about a crappy trigger on the G3. I must have gotten a one off PTR91. My trigger is very smooth and breaks very nicely. Its also very light. The trigger on my FNFNS9 is heavier and worse overall. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:28:08 PM EDT
[#26]
I'd take my FN49 before a G3.
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:32:39 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For fun, the G3, no question. Nice .308, good shooting and comfortable. In a serious shootout, you go with what you are most familiar/comfortable with. Which is the Garand, hands down. Mine never balks, and shoots nicely. Exact opposite for me. I love my Garand for a fun day at the range and I appreciate its history. Hell,its just fun to look at and reflect on while I'm watching TV. But the G3 has a pistol grip, left side charging handle, familiar safety, box mags, and is much more modular than the Garand. I can reload the G3 without removing my dominant hand or taking it off target, it takes optics (without that tortured scout setup), and it only takes a couple seconds to replace the stock for better ergos.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:33:17 PM EDT
[#28]
If I could only have 1 rifle, I sure as fuck wouldn't pick a cheaply built piece of shit stamped steel rifle that beats itself silly each time you pull the trigger. I'm also pretty sure those rollers are going to wear out eventually.
The Garand sights are also better, as is the trigger. Reload is just as quick with the Garand Ammo for the G3 might be lighter but that big steel mag probably offsets any weight savings. Garand for me. Every. Damned. Time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:33:40 PM EDT
[#29]
The G3 is better.
1. Shorter and lighter....maybe not much but when humping a rifle, mags, gear etc. it matters. 2. Ammo is lighter...again not much but it is there. 3. Mag changes are very fast with a paddle mag release...G3's have that. 4. Modular. Need it shorter and handier, 2 pins, wide forend with bipod? 1 pin. Trigger group change? 3 pins. 5. Need a scope? Claw mount or go with a welded on rail like the Swede's. Works for a RDS also. Again, it lacks the soul of an M1 rifle but it is better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:36:01 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have no experiance with a G3. but I have had some time with non HK clones. I have had experiance with the m1 and BM-59 clones. I'd go with the G-3 over the M1. The G3 clones I have dealt with dont have very good egos, had bad triggers and were one and all overgased. Sight tools cost a crazy ammount. That said the gun was usable and modern optical mounts allow for mounting red dot sights low. You can also get a trigger job for them that puts them on par with any other rifle. You can more easily mount a red dot sight low on a Garand http://www.m14.ca/M14_M1A_CASM_RD_Scope%20Mount.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:40:02 PM EDT
[#31]
Intacto Arms needs to put them to the test.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:41:54 PM EDT
[#32]
I'd choose one of my Navy Mk2 Mod1 M1 Garands. They are a whole different rifle when chambered in .308, and quite accurate.
Plus, I have the manual of arms down pat, and my short arms make the G3 (HK91 in my case) less than ideal ergonomically. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:43:57 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If I could only have 1 rifle, I sure as fuck wouldn't pick a cheaply built piece of shit stamped steel rifle that beats itself silly each time you pull the trigger. I'm also pretty sure those rollers are going to wear out eventually. The Garand sights are also better, as is the trigger. Reload is just as quick with the Garand Ammo for the G3 might be lighter but that big steel mag probably offsets any weight savings. Garand for me. Every. Damned. Time. Maybe. But you can't keep it on target and you have to remove your dominant hand from the rifle. And you have to do it 2.5X more often... |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:45:32 PM EDT
[#34]
G3 sell for extreme profit and buy a tractor implement
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 3:46:09 PM EDT
[#35]
G3 sell for extreme profit and buy a tractor implement
I have owned a couple of 91's and a 93 |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 4:20:41 PM EDT
[#36]
Garand due to familiarity and personal preference.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 4:27:17 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I found that post odd as well. My last range trip was the evening before last, and I took two rifles: a PTR-91 with a 16" barrel and a K-31. With the PTR, I had no padding, just a T-shirt. The recoil felt different, but not bad. I fired 40 rounds without discomfort. With the K-31, I fired a couple rounds before grabbing the slip on recoil pad. The recoil wasn't terrible, but I wanted to comfortably shoot more. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Garand Hands down. I shot an HK 91 for the first time Last Sunday and holy cow that thing beat me up! One of theist uncomfortable guns I've ever shot. The stock beat me in the cheek and I just couldn't find a comfortable way to hold it and still line up the sights. And this coming from a guy who just shot 62 rd match with a Swiss 96/11 in a tee shirt and BDU blouse. And don't think M44s kick all that bad. Tele-stock? I found that post odd as well. My last range trip was the evening before last, and I took two rifles: a PTR-91 with a 16" barrel and a K-31. With the PTR, I had no padding, just a T-shirt. The recoil felt different, but not bad. I fired 40 rounds without discomfort. With the K-31, I fired a couple rounds before grabbing the slip on recoil pad. The recoil wasn't terrible, but I wanted to comfortably shoot more. I have no problem with mine, you know they were designed for German soldiers and they are all over 6' tall |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 4:33:05 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Garand is of much higher quality, but the G3/91 is more useful. If it was my only rifle, I'd take the G3. If I could have an additional rifle, but only one of the above, I'd take the Garand. Pretty much this. I own an excellent example of both and have found the Garand to be *FAR* more finnicky than the G3. I've broken things on my Garand and shooting full power 30.06 through your Garand will screw it up. I can posibly throw a handful of random dirt into my G3, close the bolt, pull the trigger, and get it to shoot. That thing will take everything from Indian surplus to Lapua match. The G3 can furthermore be topped off at a good lull in SHTF. The Garand you've got to pull your op rod back, press the eject button and where the fuck did all those just go? The only thing the Garand has on the G3 would be a last round hold open, but that's not all that much of a benefit considering the Garand has about the stupidest self feeding system on Earth when you look at the other weapons of the time i.e. BAR and M1 Carbine being mag fed. A Mag fed M1 is an M14 and *THAT* would be a better comparison of the G3 to another rifle system. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 4:36:42 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have no problem with mine, you know they were designed for German soldiers and they are all over 6' tall I'm 6'3" with monkey arms... maybe that's why I never had that issue.
(Too be fair, I have plenty of other issues...) |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 4:36:48 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe. But you can't keep it on target and you have to remove your dominant hand from the rifle. And you have to do it 2.5X more often... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If I could only have 1 rifle, I sure as fuck wouldn't pick a cheaply built piece of shit stamped steel rifle that beats itself silly each time you pull the trigger. I'm also pretty sure those rollers are going to wear out eventually. The Garand sights are also better, as is the trigger. Reload is just as quick with the Garand Ammo for the G3 might be lighter but that big steel mag probably offsets any weight savings. Garand for me. Every. Damned. Time. Maybe. But you can't keep it on target and you have to remove your dominant hand from the rifle. And you have to do it 2.5X more often... That point alone does not outweigh all the negatives of the G3. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 4:42:46 PM EDT
[#41]
In before someone says we should dump the M16 and start issuing Garands
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 4:43:51 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Garand was designed from a trench warfare perspective, to be rained and snowed on and left in a frozen mud puddle in the bottom of a slit trench then picked up and fired without a cleaning and then used to bash someone's head in it's not just a heavy duty rifle, it's an ultra-heavy duty rifle fun factoid - why are the shoulder stocks on military rifles always so short? because a tall guy can fire a short guy's rifle pretty good but not vice versa. why aren't commercial rifles like that? because then short guys can have a gunsmith cut the stock down for them. If you get mud in the bolt, the m1 will jam, same with the m14 |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 4:44:25 PM EDT
[#43]
G3.
Not even close. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 4:44:34 PM EDT
[#44]
G3. I don't particularly like recoil, but I didn't find my PTR-91 all that punishing. Good accuracy, good sights (once adjusted with ridiculous proprietary tool they won't be coming loose), detachable 20rd mags. Grease the cocking tube, and cocking it becomes much easier. The plastic stock is much better to shoot with than the A3 retractable tenderizer/stock (and weighs less) - hard to get a reliable index point on the retractable stock.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 4:45:00 PM EDT
[#45]
G3 stock.. Turns men into little woman
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 4:46:50 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm 6'3" with monkey arms... maybe that's why I never had that issue. (Too be fair, I have plenty of other issues...) Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I have no problem with mine, you know they were designed for German soldiers and they are all over 6' tall I'm 6'3" with monkey arms... maybe that's why I never had that issue. (Too be fair, I have plenty of other issues...) You'd probably love my Benelli M3. Even the "short" stocks for it are uncomfortably long, and I'm of average height. Italians are short. Why would they make a shotgun with such a long LOP? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 4:46:57 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In before someone says we should dump the M16 and start issuing Garands |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 5:16:42 PM EDT
[#48]
M1 Carbine > G3 > BM59 > Garand
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 5:19:00 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Remember the sage words of Jeff Cooper. ( I am paraphrasing his words) A good rifle has to have good sights and a good trigger. If you don't have good sights and a good trigger, you don't have a good rifle. The Garand has good sights and a good trigger. The G3 does not. But if you have a G3, you can fix the trigger. You can send the piece to Williams Trigger Specialties and they can give you a crisp trigger. But the G3 is still poorly balanced Maybe for you. My G3 seems to balance effortlessly. Garand does too, but I very much prefer the G3 if I'm in the shit and need a gun to drag me out of it. . The sights on my Garand and G3 are good for what they're designed to do. The Garand is an awesome target shooting rifle and has sights that make target shooters quiver. The G3 does not. The Garand has a shitstupid retarded feeding system that is just about German in its overengineering, and the act of reloading a Garand is also just about the stupidest fucking thing I've ever seen in a rifle. Bringing a rifle off your shoulder to reload it, and you can EASILY fuck that up and not get the clip seated all the way, or all the other assorted Garand weirdness, is just dumb. The G3 has a pistol grip, magazine fed, left side controls, better magazine release placement, higher capacity magazines, and fits those of us who are average male size and larger like a glove. But within the distance you'll *EVER* shoot at another living thing, the G3's sights are adequate. The next time you're making routine shots on animals, both 2 and 4 leg variety outside 400 meters, yeah, those sights will come in handy, but then so will the bench or bag you're shooting off of. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2015 5:23:19 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
G3: Heavy, wretched trigger. Garand: Smooth crisp trigger G3. No bolt hold open Garand: Bolt hold open. G3. violent ejection. Garand: Smooth ejection. G3. drum aperture sight Garand: Best aperture sight ever on a battle rifle. The only advantage that the G3 has is higher capacity. But then again, a Garand can be reloaded faster. As an individual, the 20 rounds of the G3 and the more enclosed action give it the nod. In a team, with others to cover me during reloads and malfs, I would have a harder time choosing. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
