[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Getting a .308 semi auto (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 12/4/2016 11:11:58 PM EDT
|
Looking at getting a semi auto .308, Would love a SCAR but cant afford that.
I have it down to two rifles a Springfield M1a1 Scout or a PTR-91 GI model. Anyone have either of these, Which one would you go with? I heard PTR rifles have a required break in peroid, Is that true? Thanks |
|
Go with a .308 AR10, or better yet, build a 6.5 Grendel from parts from Alexander Arms and stock up on ~25 cents a round Wolf . Or buy a complete upper from AA. But yeah, S&W M&P 10, Armalite Def 10, Aero precision, or PSA are what you seek if you want to stick with a value priced .308 for a semi auto. LMT, Daniel Defense, Knights, Larue, etc. for high end AR10s. G3, FAL, and M14 pattern rifles are all fun guns and great range toys but each design has serious shortcomings that the newer AR10s have mostly surpassed.
Modern AR10s from reputable manufacturers are very reliable and more accurate than FALs and M14s. You MIGHT get a PTR down to .5-1.5 MOA but they have other issues and their ergos are terrible. SR25 pattern mags from magpul and lancer are getting cheaper and are widespread, while surplus mags for FALs, G3s, and M14s all seem to be harder to get and are a lot more expensive lately. AR10s are all somewhat proprietary, but so are most semi-auto .308s. Name one prolific semi .308 that has the aftermarket support of the AR15. It's not the 80s, so the closest is now the AR10 which at least often share many parts with AR15s, including trigger groups. A lot of modern first world militaries are adopting various AR10 platforms from companies like LMT, LWRC, and Knights. There's a reason for that. You'll find a lot more info on the AR variant subforum. eta: all of this is not to say that the PTR and M14 suck. They're really fun guns and while outdated, are still effective. Modern AR10s just vastly surpass them in aftermarket support, ergos, accuracy, optics/accessory mounting, and depending on the model, weight and even reliability. |
|
Quoted:
I have a FAL, HK91 & M14 and if I had to choose between the three, it would be the FAL. Same. HK/G3/PTR-91 all have shitty ergos for reloading. M14 is a 1950's bullseye target rifle that is fun to shoot irons with. My STG-58 (Steyr barrel) is more accurate than most think possible with a FAL and is probably the most reliable semiauto I own. |
|
Quoted:
.308 AR followed by an M1A and then FAL. But it all comes down to purpose. If you want a shooter or one that will see a lot of heavy use the .308AR will give you the most options. Modifying and getting additional mags for the M1A or FAL could get expensive. Or he can get a PTR with $2 mags 
|
|
Quoted:
Those don't have a detachable 20 round magazine. Quoted:
Quoted:
maybe a tanker 308 Grand? Those don't have a detachable 20 round magazine. They can if you want them to. BM59 or M-14 mag conversion. Shuff's Mini G with a mag conversion would make for a sweet little carbine. |
|
Quoted:
Same. HK/G3/PTR-91 all have shitty ergos for reloading. M14 is a 1950's bullseye target rifle that is fun to shoot irons with. My STG-58 (Steyr barrel) is more accurate than most think possible with a FAL and is probably the most reliable semiauto I own. With match ammo, I've seen a StG-58 on IMBEL build get under 2 MOA. At 715 yards all shots were in the black on one of those shoot and see targets. The guy did use a scope, though, on a DSA mount. Honestly, a FAL built right with quality parts in good condition and shooting quality ammo will generally give sufficient practical accuracy for most intents and purposes. I like the ergonomics better than ARs, too, when used with a SAW grip and extended selector. |
|
Quoted:
What's wrong with 308 ARs? My Aero runs like a top. Quoted:
Quoted:
AFAIK .308 ARs aren't exactly the most reliable. Maybe that has changed in the last few years though. FAL is a good choice though.  What's wrong with 308 ARs? My Aero runs like a top. Early ones were notorious for having reliability issues. Those issues are now worked out. OP - from the choices you gave, I'd take the M1A. But get a full sized one. |
|
Quoted:
Buy an AR10 take a look at these. http://www.fulton-armory.com/FAR-308-Rifles.aspx https://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/cPath/2084_36_135/products_id/97751/ARML+AR10TAC16+TACTICAL+RFL+308+16 you can build that tac16 for less. Chrome lined barrel, not stainless, see my avatar |
|
Quoted:
you can build that tac16 for less. Chrome lined barrel, not stainless, see my avatar Most people don't want to build but if the OP's interested that is the best way to get the most for the money. I'm sure there are some knowledgeable people around here somewhere that can help. What was the end cost of your build? |
|
My totally unscientific opinion of various sub 1500 dollar .308 "MBRs".
The Ar10 is the best option based on price, reliability, accuracy and accessories available by a massive long shot. the PTR91 is next up, inexpensive, very accurate and reliable and can be effectively scoped for cheap (unlike the M14) and solidly (unlike the FAL). The FAL is third, good ergos but generally poor accuracy and reliability that is nothing to write home about. The M1A is dead last, while the sights scream "ULTRA PRECISION" just pulling the action from the stock during cleaning can throw the gun off by feet at a few hundred yards and the action is wide open to be fouled by dirt and mud. |
|
I have shot a lot of FALs. They are fun to shoot, but I have grown bored of every one I have ever owned and traded it away.Â
I currently own an M1a which is essentially a semi-auto only M14 (it has as many USGI part as possible without it being a machine gun). I really like that gun. I would vote for an M1a over the other options. |
|
Quoted:
My totally unscientific opinion of various sub 1500 dollar .308 "MBRs". The Ar10 is the best option based on price, reliability, accuracy and accessories available by a massive long shot. the PTR91 is next up, inexpensive, very accurate and reliable and can be effectively scoped for cheap (unlike the M14) and solidly (unlike the FAL). The FAL is third, good ergos but generally poor accuracy and reliability that is nothing to write home about. The M1A is dead last, while the sights scream "ULTRA PRECISION" just pulling the action from the stock during cleaning can throw the gun off by feet at a few hundred yards and the action is wide open to be fouled by dirt and mud. I don't know why people talk about how hard it is to mount a scope on a FAL or about how it's not solid, etc. when the DSA mounts have been around for years and make mounting optics fairly easy and are also quite solid. |
|
Quoted:
I don't know why people talk about how hard it is to mount a scope on a FAL or about how it's not solid, etc. when the DSA mounts have been around for years and make mounting optics fairly easy and are also quite solid. The one I handled, with a proper DSA mount even, rattled only slightly less than a railed AK top cover but maybe it was improperly fitted. Not to mention, doesn't the dust cover need to be removed every time you break the gun down for maintenance? That doesn't bode well for repeat-ability. |
|
Quoted:
The one I handled, with a proper DSA mount even, rattled only slightly less than a railed AK top cover but maybe it was improperly fitted. Not to mention, doesn't the dust cover need to be removed every time you break the gun down for maintenance? That doesn't bode well for repeat-ability. Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't know why people talk about how hard it is to mount a scope on a FAL or about how it's not solid, etc. when the DSA mounts have been around for years and make mounting optics fairly easy and are also quite solid. The one I handled, with a proper DSA mount even, rattled only slightly less than a railed AK top cover but maybe it was improperly fitted. Not to mention, doesn't the dust cover need to be removed every time you break the gun down for maintenance? That doesn't bode well for repeat-ability. I've never seen one rattle. When you install them correctly, they are locked down pretty well. And no, you don't need to remove them for maintenance. Once it's on, you shouldn't remove it without a really good reason; if you do remove it, you will need to at minimum check your zero. The only downside is how heavy they are. DSA made a lightened version for some ultralight FAL they had intended to market, but it doesn't appear to have made it into production. |
|
if it's a range toy/social purposes rifle, find a buddy who will let you shoot a PTR-91, an FAL, a .308 AR, and an M1A, then pick which one fits you best, which one whose ergonomics you prefer, which one you shoot best.
I prefer a rifle with a good trigger, so that ruled out PTR-91. FAL just didn't fit me right. But I respect their reliability and combat accuracy. M1A was pure sex. Fit me perfectly, and I can shoot them damn well. So that was my choice. .308 AR with flat-top upper is easiest to scope. I had an LMT MWS and loved it, but sold it when I was in a cash crunch a few years ago. YMMV. |
|
Build cost was 1240, before the troy sights and MRO.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_121/680958_Armalite_AR_10_DEF10_teardown_and_remake.html |
|
Quoted:
Those don't have a detachable 20 round magazine. Quoted:
Quoted:
maybe a tanker 308 Grand? Those don't have a detachable 20 round magazine. That just means you aren't throwing enough money at the problem. |