mil. ch's top ten combat rifles (what do you think)

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - mil. ch's top ten combat rifles (what do you think) (Page 1 of 4)

Posted: 7/22/2008 8:53:06 AM EDT

wached it again last night. in case you have not seen the show thay grade the top ten combat rifles of all time. the rank is based on innovation, handling, combat effectivness, accuracy, and service lengh.
here is the list
-10: M-14
-9: Sturmgewehr 44 (not a miss spell, it's german)
-8: 1903 Springfield
-7: Stryr aug
-6: Mauser 98k carbine
-5: FN FAL
-4: M1 Garand
-3: Lee Enfield S.M.L.E.
-2: M-16
-1: AK-47
the british L852 was a near miss

so? agree? disagree? what do you think?

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:11:49 AM EDT

[#1]

A gun that fires reliably, but can't hit shit, I think the ak47 is over-rated.

I guess it depends on the training of the user.

For my money, I'd take the m-14 everytime.

TXL

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:13:33 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
A gun that fires reliably, but can't hit shit, I think the ak47 is over-rated.

I guess it depends on the training of the user.

For my money, I'd take the m-14 everytime.

TXL

I can hit shit with my AK.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:16:54 AM EDT

[#3]

AK, and you forgot the SKS and G3.

The M14 should be number 4 or lower.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:17:44 AM EDT

[#4]

The FN-FAL/L1A1 family of rifles should be #3 due to it's reliability and very widespread use all over the world.....

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:21:02 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
A gun that fires reliably, but can't hit shit, I think the ak47 is over-rated.

I guess it depends on the training of the user.

For my money, I'd take the m-14 everytime.

TXL

that's funny, i'm regularly at the top of my local 3 gun matches using a stock Wasr-10 w/ side folder and some Mojo's. To say it can't hit anything shows your ignorance. While it's not as accurate as the AR platform or m1a family, it is plenty accurate.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:22:01 AM EDT

[#6]

Most of them I agree with, however I don't particularly agree with the 1903-A3 simply because it is based off the Mauser design. It is a great rifle and I love mine, but in the category of innovation it ranks a zero because its basically a copy. The M-14 is also a great rifle, but it is a 308 garand with a magazine that was only in service for less than two decades. just my two cents.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:25:01 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
A gun that fires reliably, but can't hit shit, I think the ak47 is over-rated.

I guess it depends on the training of the user.

For my money, I'd take the m-14 everytime.

TXL

Well, the AK-47 is no where near as accurate as the M-16 and I think that it is inferior to the M-16 in pretty much every way. That said, the AK-47 (at least the European and Russian mfg. ones that I have fired) are accurate enough for their purpose: 'Destroying enemy personnel at distances of up to 100 yards'. It's not a target gun. It was made so that peasant conscripts could kill NATO troops at modern combat distances. It is more than capable of that.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:33:00 AM EDT

[#8]

The AK-47 should not be #1. Shouldn't even be in the top 5.

It's a piece of shit designed to be 3rd world conscript proof. Look at which countries choose M-16 type weapons vs. AK-47 type weapons. It's essentially the 1st world vs. the 3rd world.

Unacceptable accuracy. Can't hit shit at typical combat distances being found in Iraq and Afghanistan today.

Shitty ergonomics. A safety that requires you to remove your firing hand to use, and makes a loud click.

A magazine that has to be rocked into place.

Uncontrollable on full auto.

Loose tolerances that lead to parts breakage/seized up weapons that require more than immediate remedial action to fix. Sure, it'll run with sand dumped in it, but who the fuck dumps sand in their combat weapon? Oh yea, 3rd world conscripts.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:33:45 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:

Quoted:
A gun that fires reliably, but can't hit shit, I think the ak47 is over-rated.

I guess it depends on the training of the user.

For my money, I'd take the m-14 everytime.

TXL

Well, the AK-47 is no where near as accurate as the M-16 and I think that it is inferior to the M-16 in pretty much every way. That said, the AK-47 (at least the European and Russian mfg. ones that I have fired) are accurate enough for their purpose: 'Destroying enemy personnel at distances of up to 100 yards'. It's not a target gun. It was made so that peasant conscripts could kill NATO troops at modern combat distances. It is more than capable of that.

It is not unusual to see distances of three hundred meters or more in modern combat. An AK cannot hit shit at that range. It's an area weapon.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:36:46 AM EDT

[#10]

The AUG is there, but the Mosin Nagant is not?

WTF?

eta: For innovation alone, the SKS should be ranked above the AK. The AK is simply the next rev of the SKS.

eeta: As much as I love it, the M-14 is in the same boat.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:38:35 AM EDT

[#11]

The AK-47 should be number 1 if only due to it's successful use in almost every single conflict since it's invention. Obviously , it's reliability is up there too. But I think it would have to be #1 because of the sheer numbers of them that are out there. It also hasn't been changed much since 1947. I see what people are saying, but it definitely deserves to be top rated.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:42:24 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:
A gun that fires reliably, but can't hit shit, I think the ak47 is over-rated.

I guess it depends on the training of the user.

For my money, I'd take the m-14 everytime.

TXL

Well, the AK-47 is no where near as accurate as the M-16 and I think that it is inferior to the M-16 in pretty much every way. That said, the AK-47 (at least the European and Russian mfg. ones that I have fired) are accurate enough for their purpose: 'Destroying enemy personnel at distances of up to 100 yards'. It's not a target gun. It was made so that peasant conscripts could kill NATO troops at modern combat distances. It is more than capable of that.

Every single time this thread comes up someone comes in and posts something asinine about how the AK was designed with 100 yards or "minute-of-man" in mind. Do you have any proof to back up your claim or are you just regurgitating the same drivel you hear everyone else spew out?

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:47:09 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
The AK-47 should be number 1 if only due to it's successful use in almost every single conflict since it's invention. Obviously , it's reliability is up there too. But I think it would have to be #1 because of the sheer numbers of them that are out there. It also hasn't been changed much since 1947. I see what people are saying, but it definitely deserves to be top rated.

Obviously the Russians think there is something better out there, or they wouldn't have switched to the AK-74

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:47:12 AM EDT

[#14]

M14 for me too! I saw that show and the onlhy reason the M14 scored low was due to the short amount of time it was used... or something along those lines.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:48:18 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
wached it again last night. in case you have not seen the show thay grade the top ten combat rifles of all time. the rank is based on innovation, handling, combat effectivness, accuracy, and service lengh.
here is the list
-10: M-14
-9: Sturmgewehr 44 (not a miss spell, it's german)
-8: 1903 Springfield
-7: Stryr aug
-6: Mauser 98k carbine
-5: FN FAL
-4: M1 Garand
-3: Lee Enfield S.M.L.E.
-2: M-16
-1: AK-47
the british L852 was a near miss

so? agree? disagree? what do you think?

The AK 47 is a great rifle for our enemies, it looks impressive has a lot of fire power and is usually fried over our heads in combat. I’m sure there are accurate AK’s out there, but every one I’ve ever seen is a cheap stamped piece of metal that can’t hit shit. M-14 great rifle, but I sure as hell don’t want to haul that and a basic load.

M16 for the win, very reliable, very accurate, and very little maintaince if you are a trained soldier. Basic load doesn’t kill you to hump it around all day.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:53:31 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The AK-47 should be number 1 if only due to it's successful use in almost every single conflict since it's invention. Obviously , it's reliability is up there too. But I think it would have to be #1 because of the sheer numbers of them that are out there. It also hasn't been changed much since 1947. I see what people are saying, but it definitely deserves to be top rated.

Obviously the Russians think there is something better out there, or they wouldn't have switched to the AK-74

But the design of the '74 is the same. Only the caliber is different.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:54:37 AM EDT

[#17]

Enfield before Garand? Blasphemy.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:54:47 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:

Quoted:
A gun that fires reliably, but can't hit shit, I think the ak47 is over-rated.

I guess it depends on the training of the user.

For my money, I'd take the m-14 everytime.

TXL

Well, the AK-47 is no where near as accurate as the M-16 and I think that it is inferior to the M-16 in pretty much every way. That said, the AK-47 (at least the European and Russian mfg. ones that I have fired) are accurate enough for their purpose: 'Destroying enemy personnel at distances of up to 100 yards'. It's not a target gun. It was made so that peasant conscripts could kill NATO troops at modern combat distances. It is more than capable of that.

Every single time this thread comes up someone comes in and posts something asinine about how the AK was designed with 100 yards or "minute-of-man" in mind. Do you have any proof to back up your claim or are you just regurgitating the same drivel you hear everyone else spew out?

The original Russian training manuals describe the AK-47 as "a powerful individual automatic weapon designed to destroy enemy personal at short distances".

Everyone wants to be a tough guy and call someone else out.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:56:10 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The AK-47 should be number 1 if only due to it's successful use in almost every single conflict since it's invention. Obviously , it's reliability is up there too. But I think it would have to be #1 because of the sheer numbers of them that are out there. It also hasn't been changed much since 1947. I see what people are saying, but it definitely deserves to be top rated.

Obviously the Russians think there is something better out there, or they wouldn't have switched to the AK-74

But the design of the '74 is the same. Only the caliber is different.

But it isn't an AK-47 any more than a M14 is an M1.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:57:10 AM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The AK-47 should be number 1 if only due to it's successful use in almost every single conflict since it's invention. Obviously , it's reliability is up there too. But I think it would have to be #1 because of the sheer numbers of them that are out there. It also hasn't been changed much since 1947. I see what people are saying, but it definitely deserves to be top rated.

Obviously the Russians think there is something better out there, or they wouldn't have switched to the AK-74

The Russians developed the AK-74 in response to the M-16. From the reading I have done they thought that we were on to something with the smaller 5.56 caliber and didn't want to be left behind.

Posted: 7/22/2008 9:58:50 AM EDT

[#21]

I had 1,2,3, and 4/10 (M1A) so I can't complain.

Too bad about that boating accident though.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:00:36 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:
A gun that fires reliably, but can't hit shit, I think the ak47 is over-rated.

I guess it depends on the training of the user.

For my money, I'd take the m-14 everytime.

TXL

Well, the AK-47 is no where near as accurate as the M-16 and I think that it is inferior to the M-16 in pretty much every way. That said, the AK-47 (at least the European and Russian mfg. ones that I have fired) are accurate enough for their purpose: 'Destroying enemy personnel at distances of up to 100 yards'. It's not a target gun. It was made so that peasant conscripts could kill NATO troops at modern combat distances. It is more than capable of that.

Every single time this thread comes up someone comes in and posts something asinine about how the AK was designed with 100 yards or "minute-of-man" in mind. Do you have any proof to back up your claim or are you just regurgitating the same drivel you hear everyone else spew out?

The original Russian training manuals describe the AK-47 as "a powerful individual automatic weapon designed to destroy enemy personal at short distances".

Everyone wants to be a tough guy and call someone else out.

This is the internet, and this is serious business. You are going to need better proof than that. We will need a picture of Mikhail Timofeyevich Kalashnikov himself, holding the manual, and today's paper, with a piece of paper saying he approved of someone printing that.

But in all seriousness, it is a very subjective list, and subjective list of variables. I don't understand getting all uptight about the rankings either way.

ETA: I thought the show was interesting, and had lots of gun porn and interesting stories.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:00:42 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
The AK-47 should be number 1 if only due to it's successful use in almost every single conflict since it's invention. Obviously , it's reliability is up there too. But I think it would have to be #1 because of the sheer numbers of them that are out there. It also hasn't been changed much since 1947. I see what people are saying, but it definitely deserves to be top rated.

It's also been on the losing side of every conflict it has been in. The only time an army equipped with AK's has won has been against another army equipped with AK's.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:03:25 AM EDT

[#24]

I think the Mosin should be on the list as well and maybe not the AUG. The AUG was there mostly for innovation being that it was a successfully adopted bullpup (before the Brits).

Also, I know I'll get flamed for it, the 1903 Springfield should not be on there if the K98 is. The K98 should stay.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:07:02 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:

Quoted:
A gun that fires reliably, but can't hit shit, I think the ak47 is over-rated.

I guess it depends on the training of the user.

For my money, I'd take the m-14 everytime.

TXL

Well, the AK-47 is no where near as accurate as the M-16 and I think that it is inferior to the M-16 in pretty much every way. That said, the AK-47 (at least the European and Russian mfg. ones that I have fired) are accurate enough for their purpose: 'Destroying enemy personnel at distances of up to 100 yards'. It's not a target gun. It was made so that peasant conscripts could kill NATO troops at modern combat distances. It is more than capable of that.

It is not unusual to see distances of three hundred meters or more in modern combat. An AK cannot hit shit at that range. It's an area weapon.

Wish I had known that before I started making hits with irons on a gong 440 yards out with a century built yugo.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:07:15 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
The FN-FAL/L1A1 family of rifles should be #3 due to it's reliability and very widespread use all over the world.....

#1! The Free World's Right Arm!

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:07:22 AM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Also, I know I'll get flamed for it, the 1903 Springfield should not be on there if the K98 is. The K98 should stay.

Agreed

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:09:25 AM EDT

[#28]

The M-14 doesn't belong on the list at all. It was a quickly-discarded product of excessive US conservatism in small arms, and one that other countries only adopted when it was given to them free. You may as well put the MAS 56 on the list.

Much the same could be said for the 1903, which at least stuck around a while, but about which the saying "what was good was not original; what was original was not good" applies perfectly well. It wasn't even the main US infantry weapon in either of the major wars that took place during its period of use.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:15:35 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
The AUG is there, but the Mosin Nagant is not?

WTF?

it was in the near miss part, however ihad no idea how to spell it so i left it out. same with the current french battle rifle

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:21:53 AM EDT

[#30]

Here's my personal list:

1: AK47
2: FN FAL
3: SMLE
4: Garand
5: 98
6: M16
7: 1903
8: MP44
9: AUG
10: M14

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:22:26 AM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
Here's my personal list:

1: AK47
2: FN FAL
3: SMLE
4: Garand
5: 98
6: M16
7: 1903
8: MP44
9: AUG
10: M14

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:22:29 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The AK-47 should be number 1 if only due to it's successful use in almost every single conflict since it's invention. Obviously , it's reliability is up there too. But I think it would have to be #1 because of the sheer numbers of them that are out there. It also hasn't been changed much since 1947. I see what people are saying, but it definitely deserves to be top rated.

It's also been on the losing side of every conflict it has been in. The only time an army equipped with AK's has won has been against another army equipped with AK's.

what about nam

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:22:34 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The AK-47 should be number 1 if only due to it's successful use in almost every single conflict since it's invention. Obviously , it's reliability is up there too. But I think it would have to be #1 because of the sheer numbers of them that are out there. It also hasn't been changed much since 1947. I see what people are saying, but it definitely deserves to be top rated.

It's also been on the losing side of every conflict it has been in. The only time an army equipped with AK's has won has been against another army equipped with AK's.

That's not the weapon's fault. The weapon functions fine. Usually that is due to the operator. The reason the M16 is on the winning side of most conflicts is because the nations that use it have the best trained soldiers.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:22:39 AM EDT

[#34]

What do I think?

Mrs. Aryeh pisses me off.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:23:09 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
wached it again last night. in case you have not seen the show thay grade the top ten combat rifles of all time. the rank is based on innovation, handling, combat effectivness, accuracy, and service lengh.
here is the list
-10: M-14
-9: Sturmgewehr 44 (not a miss spell, it's german)
-8: 1903 Springfield
-7: Stryr aug
-6: Mauser 98k carbine
-5: FN FAL
-4: M1 Garand
-3: Lee Enfield S.M.L.E.
-2: M-16
-1: AK-47
the british L852 was a near miss

so? agree? disagree? what do you think?

For entertainment value, this show is great. This show reminds me of the discussions my friends and I used to have in junior high - fun at the time.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:23:18 AM EDT

[#36]

BTW, what conflict has the Steyr AUG been involved in?

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:24:09 AM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The AK-47 should be number 1 if only due to it's successful use in almost every single conflict since it's invention. Obviously , it's reliability is up there too. But I think it would have to be #1 because of the sheer numbers of them that are out there. It also hasn't been changed much since 1947. I see what people are saying, but it definitely deserves to be top rated.

It's also been on the losing side of every conflict it has been in. The only time an army equipped with AK's has won has been against another army equipped with AK's.

what about nam

The politicians lost that one.

We didn't lose too many battles in Vietnam.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:24:40 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:

Quoted:
A gun that fires reliably, but can't hit shit, I think the ak47 is over-rated.

I guess it depends on the training of the user.

For my money, I'd take the m-14 everytime.

TXL

I can hit shit with my AK.

I can also hit shit with my AK.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:27:00 AM EDT

[#39]

The AK 47 is in a class of its own IMO. It may not be the most accurate rifle in the world but its reliability and ruggedness make up for it. No combat rifle even comes close.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:27:58 AM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:

Quoted:
A gun that fires reliably, but can't hit shit, I think the ak47 is over-rated.

I guess it depends on the training of the user.

For my money, I'd take the m-14 everytime.

TXL

I can hit shit with my AK.

I can also hit shit with my AK.

it prob depends size of the pile

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:28:07 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
The AK 47 is in a class of its own IMO. It may not be the most accurate rifle in the world but its reliability and ruggedness make up for it. No combat rifle even comes close.

Do I even need to say it?

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:28:35 AM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:
BTW, what conflict has the Steyr AUG been involved in?

East Timor

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:29:11 AM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:

Quoted:
BTW, what conflict has the Steyr AUG been involved in?

East Timor

How did it do? I have heard of that fight, but not too much about details.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:31:14 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The AK-47 should be number 1 if only due to it's successful use in almost every single conflict since it's invention. Obviously , it's reliability is up there too. But I think it would have to be #1 because of the sheer numbers of them that are out there. It also hasn't been changed much since 1947. I see what people are saying, but it definitely deserves to be top rated.

It's also been on the losing side of every conflict it has been in. The only time an army equipped with AK's has won has been against another army equipped with AK's.

One obvious win comes to mind.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:34:39 AM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The AK-47 should be number 1 if only due to it's successful use in almost every single conflict since it's invention. Obviously , it's reliability is up there too. But I think it would have to be #1 because of the sheer numbers of them that are out there. It also hasn't been changed much since 1947. I see what people are saying, but it definitely deserves to be top rated.

It's also been on the losing side of every conflict it has been in. The only time an army equipped with AK's has won has been against another army equipped with AK's.

One obvious win comes to mind.

If your referring to nam we would have won but due to the ROE and fucked up politics it came out to be a stalemate. I wouldn't say we lost.

Iraq and Afgan could be valid points for argument.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:36:02 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The AK-47 should be number 1 if only due to it's successful use in almost every single conflict since it's invention. Obviously , it's reliability is up there too. But I think it would have to be #1 because of the sheer numbers of them that are out there. It also hasn't been changed much since 1947. I see what people are saying, but it definitely deserves to be top rated.

Obviously the Russians think there is something better out there, or they wouldn't have switched to the AK-74

But the design of the '74 is the same. Only the caliber is different.

But it isn't an AK-47 any more than a M14 is an M1.

That would be like saying that an AR-15 in 6.8 SPC isn't an AR-15 because the original was .223. Yes, technically, it isn't. But the design hasn't changed.

I was trying to say that the AK-47's design remains the same 50 years later.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:38:57 AM EDT

[#47]

This is how it should be:

1. AK47 and variants

2. Mauser

3. Sturmgewehr 44

4. Garand

5. Lee Enfield

6. FAL

7. M16/AR15

8. G3

9. Mosin Nagant

10. Steyr AUG

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:39:53 AM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:

Quoted:

But it isn't an AK-47 any more than a M14 is an M1.

That would be like saying that an AR-15 in 6.8 SPC isn't an AR-15 because the original was .223. Yes, technically, it isn't. But the design hasn't changed.

I was trying to say that the AK-47's design remains the same 50 years later.

I understand...and of course the AK-47 design is the same as it was 50 years ago.

But the AK-47 is no longer in production by the people who designed it...at least not for general military use.

It's the AK-74 and it's a different weapon.

The Russians gave it another name...so I'll run with that.

The M16A2/A4 is the same design as the original M16 or AR-15, but it is a wholly different weapon.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:40:53 AM EDT

[#49]

The M14 has a cult following. It doesn't even deserve to be listed by itself. It is simply a modified M1 Garand and as such ought to be listed this way: M1 Garand/M14 platform.

Let's look at the criteria:

Innovation: Just an upgraded Garand (which began in the 1920s).

Handling: Uncontrollable at full-auto. Otherwise, it's a Garand in NATO 7.62.

Combat: A little time in VN. Otherwise, it is a relic occasionally brought out for religious adoration.

Effectiveness: It is a very good .30 caliber SA rifle.

Accuracy: It can be a very accurate SA rifle.

Service length: Briefly in VN. Otherwise, only in very small and strategically insignificant numbers.

Posted: 7/22/2008 10:42:27 AM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
The M14 has a cult following. It doesn't even deserve to be listed by itself. It is simply a modified M1 Garand and as such ought to be listed this way: M1 Garand/M14 platform.

Let's look at the criteria:

Innovation: Just an upgraded Garand (which began in the 1920s).

Handling: Uncontrollable at full-auto. Otherwise, it's a Garand in NATO 7.62.

Combat: A little time in VN. Otherwise, it is a relic occasionally brought out for religious adoration.

Effectiveness: It is a very good .30 caliber SA rifle.

Accuracy: It can be a very accurate SA rifle.

Service length: Briefly in VN. Otherwise, only in very small and strategically insignificant numbers.

+1

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - mil. ch's top ten combat rifles (what do you think) (Page 1 of 4)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us