ulf
New Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by ulf on Apr 27, 2017 10:39:41 GMT -5
I grew up shooting 1911s, Garands, M1 Carbines, hunting bolt guns, shotguns and .22s.
20 years in the Army put a lot of other weapons in my hands - M16s, M9s, M4s and beltfeds to start. After I moved into higher speed outfits, I was exposed to AKs, FALs, G3s and a host of other foreign weapons.
When I was younger and had no dependents, I owned a sizable gun collection. Over the years, I've thinned the herd down to defensive and working guns.
After getting out and forming a friends and family based tribe, l helped set the group standard for weapons. At that time the AK and Glock were the best value for the money. We settled on x39 and .40S&W. Every family group has at least one of each, 1k of ammo for each and two fighting loads of mags for each.
In light of recent changes - the drop in quality AR rifle and component prices and the improvements in 9mm lethality - I'm considering recommending a change in group standard to ARs in 5.56 and Glocks in 9mm.
I already have a couple of M4geries with plenty of ammo and mags as well as 9mm conversion barrels and mags for my Glocks. I'm planning on building more ARs and picking up more Glocks.
I'm planning to raise the change at our next get together in a couple of weeks. Thoughts?
|
|
ulf
New Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by ulf on Apr 27, 2017 10:48:19 GMT -5
I should add that my tribe consists of nearly 20 adults with varying income levels.
My immediate family team consists of four adults - each with a x39 AK and Glock. We have two Saiga 308s, 12ga and a Rem 700 in 308 for special applications.
My thought is that the AKs and Saigas will become second line rifles for retreat defense and that the 5.56 and 7.62 NATO ARs will be for field/patrol use - eliminating the cost burden for those in the group who get them.
|
|
|
Post by panzer0170 on Apr 27, 2017 14:01:13 GMT -5
One thought;
Is there anything else you don't have in your wider plan, yet? If so, get that before you start switching guns.
|
|
ulf
New Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by ulf on Apr 27, 2017 14:29:33 GMT -5
More NODs and additional commo gear. I'm always adding consumables to the medical and food stocks. I pick up gear as needed or when I happen on a good deal. All our family team and wider group basics are squared away.
Weapons wise? I'm contemplating a .300WM bolt gun and a .50BMG - both are "nice but, not nescessary"!
|
|
|
Post by panzer0170 on Apr 27, 2017 14:33:54 GMT -5
I'd look at something like NVG before I changed rifles. One per 'section' (group, fireteam, party... pick a name and a size as appropriate) for a point man would be a good start.
|
|
ulf
New Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by ulf on Apr 27, 2017 15:03:03 GMT -5
I've got four sets for my team and there are six more in the larger group - I'm planning to upgrade my team's units and pass the others on to the rest of the group. If I can get a good deal on the upgrades then we'll do a group buy.
I train based on buddy teams of two and fire teams of four - makes things easier and more flexible.
|
|
|
Post by Erick on Apr 28, 2017 20:14:50 GMT -5
To the original question:
Given as inexpensive as even high quality ARs are these days it may be a good idea to switch to the most common rifle in the land. Also IMHO the AR15 IS very much ergonomically superior to the AK and as a result noticably faster to bring into action from the safed Patrol ready.
Speed into action is important.
Also ARs are easier to equip with a big choice of optics and the ammo as long as you stick with steel is nearly the same price as AK ammo.
And they are generally more accurate than AKs which is important for support by fire roles.
... since we dont field LMGs or GPMGs our Support by fire will have to be carried out by our primary rifles,...... so we need to be extra competent with them for quick fire if need be .......since they are not just our rifleman weapon but also our SPF weapon.
Mags are also easier/faster to change will helps speed in general (and is extra useful in a SPF or ambush role)
As for handguns... Handguns are fun but in a tactical environment quite peripheral IMHO. Save the money of replacing these pistols for now.
Eventually switching to 9mm may be a good idea because the ammo is so much cheaper than 40 cal so you cna stack it deeper.
But nothing urgent the primary training budget is ( should be) mostly determined by the ammo cost for your primaries because thats were 99.99% of your combat power lives (in a "prepper" Operational Environment not .mil)
|
|
ulf
New Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by ulf on Apr 28, 2017 23:16:50 GMT -5
I agree with all of your points.
On running steel - have you noticed any undue wear either in the chamber or the extractor?
My two current ARs are 16" A4s with optics - one is a DI and the other is a piston gun.
The plan for my family team is to buy ten 80% lowers for 5.56 guns to take advantage of the quantity discount. I'm planning four pistols, two 14.5-16" carbines, two SPRs and two heavy bbl pseudo SAWs.
I'm also planning on buying four 80% lowers for .308 guns. Two will be 16" carbines and the other two will be SPRs.
Clearly, this is a LONG term plan as I will be shopping the online sales and gun shows.
Mags and ammo for each weapon will also need to be stocked.
I'll also be building rifles for any and all in the group who want them.
In the short term, conversion barrels and 9mm mags for the Glocks will be a step in the right direction. I'll also be shopping the sales online and gun shows.
|
|
|
Post by Erick on Apr 29, 2017 19:16:08 GMT -5
I agree with all of your points. 1) On running steel - have you noticed any undue wear either in the chamber or the extractor? 2) The plan for my family team is to buy ten 80% lowers for 5.56 guns to take advantage of the quantity discount. I'm planning four pistols, two 14.5-16" carbines, two SPRs and two heavy bbl pseudo SAWs. 3) Mags and ammo for each weapon will also need to be stocked. 4) I'll also be building rifles for any and all in the group who want them. Allow me my 2 cents: 1) Never noticed any undue wear on either. My primary training rifle is now on 20,000 -25,000 rounds of steel in last 3.5 years. Still running original bolt (of course its a piston so its easier on the bolt than say a DI , 16 inch w/ Carbine lenght gas) I put a new extractor in at the 13,000 round mark as part of my own personal "depot" ;level maintenance of the rifle but never had any issues. Same w/ Chamber. Steel will run dirtier tho.. brass does a better job of quickly closing the chamber via expansion. Not all ARs can handle steel w/o issues but in my experience most can. If I ever get one who cant I get rid of it the price difference is simply too large not to run steel. Steel case ammo (or more accurately its bi metal bullets) will wear out barrels twice as fast though. Not a big issue for a prepper because u generally will not be able to stash enough ammo to start wearing out barrels if all rifle partake in the ammo usage during SHTF firefights..financially you are also way ahead even if u do replace barrels twice as often ... In the grand scheme of things barrels are cheaper than Ammo 2) a)I have been an early adopter of meloniting and other nitriding processes... But.. lately I am less and less convinced that the original "just as durable as chrome lining" is really true. Even tho it is nice that the meloniting goes all over the barrel not just the inside.. b) Also I am convinced that 16 inch is the sweet spot for an AR15 configured as an Infantry rifle (as opposed to a DMR or a CQB/SWAT etc configuration). 16 inch offers significant handling improvements over 20 inch barrel.. while suffering little velocity loss and little increase in barrel exit pressures. As barrels get shorter below 16 both these problems worsen quickly. 14.5 is still tolerable with both these issue but if you look at various graphs 16 inch looks real good..Of course mid-lenght gas is a given when u are building new 16 inch ARs on your own.. Most my ARs are 16 inch but I have a DMR rifle at 20 inch and a Convoi rifle at 14.5 inches.. c)Also even though 1 in 7 is the rage in the market for milspec reasons remember the ONLY reason it was adopted by the Army was to stabilize the extra long incendiary rounds. Do you stack them? No? I didnt think so.. Contrary to internet chaff the 1 in 9 stabilizes not just the 55gr better,... but also the 62gr.. its just that the 62gr tolerates 1 in 7 better which many people confuse with being "better for it". Do I have mostly 1 in 7 barrels? yes, but thats because the market has driven most the high end makers to 1 in 7 (except Ruger which has fantastic CHF barrels in 1 in 9). Some folks say 1 in 7 is good because you can stabilize 75gr and 77 gr better.. well maybe .. but who stacks that dollar/round ammo deep? Answer; no one.. not even the wannabes on Arfcom. On my DMR is which is a melonited , 1 in 9 twist , 20 inch lenght, I get 0.7 MOA with 69gr match from PPU (least expensive match grade at 50 cents a round) Also 1 in 9 wears better. 3) I tried a lot of mags.. while there is nothing wrong with PMags my favorites are Lancers and TangoDown. But the tangodowns are even bulkier than PMags and are near impossible to get on sale... But Lancers are sometime on sale for 10-12 dollars each on Botach. For ammo reference ,may I suggest checking this thread: uwgear.proboards.com/thread/1102/ericks-review-commercial-ammo-ar15s4) Awesome! I started doing this on a very small scale for my group (which started out on ARs).. built 1 and put in better triggers and did some general above-operator maintenance on others ...but have not taken it as far as you are.. You will be able to teach us a lot soon as your journey progresses.
|
|
ulf
New Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by ulf on May 1, 2017 9:24:52 GMT -5
Thanks for taking the time for a thoughtful reply!
On your points:
1) I appreciate your insights. I have a buddy who works for Bushmaster as a weapons tester and they shoot a LOT of steel without issue but, I've been leery. I know that the grey cased steel is not lacquered like the green cased but, is coated and should be GTG. My first MOS was 68M - Battalion Level Armorer so, I know the system and the PM requirements. Agreed, replacing a barrel is cheaper in the long run than ammo over time!
2) a) I'll bear this in mind. Chrome is good for durability and questionable ammo but, melonite should offer better accuracy.
b) I agree with your thoughts on 16" barrels. I envision the pistols with 8.5 - 10.5" barrels. I think the two carbines will end up being 14.5" for handiness. The SPRs will be 16 - 18". The pseudo SAWs I'm thinking of 16 - 18" heavy barrels.
c) I'm looking for 1/9 but will take 1/7. I plan on sticking 62gr primarily but, want the ability to use 55 - 77.
3) I have a good stock of GI mags and they ALWAYS work! I have some PMags and they work well enough but, I have seen them wear out and fail under field conditions faster than aluminum or steel mags. I like the Lancers with the metal feed tower and polymer body - I need a few to T&E. For the pseudo SAWs, I'm looking at drum mags - steel, X Products and PMag D60. Betas aren't reliable in my experience.
4) Spoke to two key group members on Saturday and they're VERY interested in the proposed switch so, we're going to get the ball rolling. I have been training the group on both platforms and will continue to do so. I will keep everyone up to date as the process continues!
|
|
ulf
New Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by ulf on May 1, 2017 9:32:15 GMT -5
On the .308 guns - I plan on these being used to extend the envelope out to 800m. Given my druthers, I'd go strictly .308 an .45 based on personal experience but, humping enough to be combat effective is a thoroughgoing BASTARD! 5.56 and 9mm work if you do your part and are MUCH more manageable.
|
|
ulf
New Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by ulf on May 1, 2017 11:12:01 GMT -5
I should also add that my AO goes from urban to suburban to exurban/rural. East Coast. Population from dense to sparse. The shorter barrel lengths reflect the need for compactness and the shorter engagement ranges.
|
|
|
Post by wolffpack on May 9, 2017 0:43:27 GMT -5
To answer your original question, if I joined a group that decided everyone had to have a certain rifle and pistol combo, and then a few years later decided we had to change rifles and pistols, I'd be pissed. A good quality AR really hasn't come down, just that quality AKs have gone up to come near to the price of the ARs.
To be honest, if you wanted to save money, you probably should have gone with 9mm from the get-go. 9mm has killed a lot of people in FMJ form, even the older HP ammo did well. Changing now? Maybe, IF you are ALL going to actually train a lot it may save you over the long haul.
Personally, I would want to make it a unanimous decision to change, because you are still aksing people to make a big investment, an investment that could buy a lot of ammunition and training classes for the weapons you already have. I would also suggest that the standard be "Any RELIABLE rifle that uses the same magazines as the preferred weapon", so if someone wanted to buy an MCX, SIG 556, SCAR, Tavor, etc, they could run the same magazines, and there would be no actual commonality problem. Pistols, to be blunt, I wouldn't worry about, For anything that you would be loaded out as a team for, the pistol is really only going to be a distant second "oh shit" piece to the rifle, and isn't terribly significant, not like an EDC situation.
As for the AR, if you do go that way, not to contraindicate anything above, except to say that it is correct that the 1:7 twist was a compromise to stabilize the very long 800m tracer round (which prefers a 1:6). A 1:9 will stabilize up to a 62-gr. with no problem, and SOME will stabilize a 69-gr. 1:8 is the sweet spot. Though usually found in match grade 18" barrels, Bravo Company (I do not work for them) makes 16" midlength uppers with a 1:8 twist.
|
|
ulf
New Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by ulf on May 9, 2017 9:25:00 GMT -5
To answer your original question, if I joined a group that decided everyone had to have a certain rifle and pistol combo, and then a few years later decided we had to change rifles and pistols, I'd be pissed. A good quality AR really hasn't come down, just that quality AKs have gone up to come near to the price of the ARs. To be honest, if you wanted to save money, you probably should have gone with 9mm from the get-go. 9mm has killed a lot of people in FMJ form, even the older HP ammo did well. Changing now? Maybe, IF you are ALL going to actually train a lot it may save you over the long haul. Personally, I would want to make it a unanimous decision to change, because you are still aksing people to make a big investment, an investment that could buy a lot of ammunition and training classes for the weapons you already have. I would also suggest that the standard be "Any RELIABLE rifle that uses the same magazines as the preferred weapon", so if someone wanted to buy an MCX, SIG 556, SCAR, Tavor, etc, they could run the same magazines, and there would be no actual commonality problem. Pistols, to be blunt, I wouldn't worry about, For anything that you would be loaded out as a team for, the pistol is really only going to be a distant second "oh shit" piece to the rifle, and isn't terribly significant, not like an EDC situation. As for the AR, if you do go that way, not to contraindicate anything above, except to say that it is correct that the 1:7 twist was a compromise to stabilize the very long 800m tracer round (which prefers a 1:6). A 1:9 will stabilize up to a 62-gr. with no problem, and SOME will stabilize a 69-gr. 1:8 is the sweet spot. Though usually found in match grade 18" barrels, Bravo Company (I do not work for them) makes 16" midlength uppers with a 1:8 twist. We have been training on both AK and AR on a biweekly basis for going on ten years now. Several group members have both systems. All members are trained on both. I can build a quality AR for about $600 today. A quality AK parts kit costs at least that much if not more. A built, quality AK is roughly $700. Most of our AKs were built or bought for $400 or less. Those days are gone. The goal wasn't saving money it was a compromise to get the best value and performance for the money. 9mm will do if you will do - shot placement being the key as always. Improved bullet designs and loadings have increased its lethality over the last five years - which is one of the reasons LE is turning back to 9mm. All our non-combat decisions are unanimous - this is being discussed by the whole group. Same magazine is fine in so far as it goes but, it creates more logistics and training problems. Spare parts? Different system one hasn't spent hours training on? I prefer to keep it as simple as possible to maximize training time. When your long gun runs dry or malfs and you're face to face with an opponent or opponents, a pistol becomes primary in a hurry! I wasn't aware of the Bravo Company 1:8 uppers - I'll take a look at them!
|
|
|
Post by panzer0170 on May 9, 2017 10:03:28 GMT -5
I would suggest that given the size of your group, if you're 'operating' in anything like a sensible format you will never find yourself without covering fire/buddy with a rifle.
You're not going doorkicking, and I would suggest if push came to shove and you HAD to go doorkicking you'd take the whole clan and make sure you had as much firepower as possible at hand and as much overwatch on all levels as possible.
Across the board the only people I've heard of needing pistols have been high speed doorkicking types who, being a little gung ho and competitive, have overstepped their TEAM footprint and needed backup, or for people doing admin tasks where having a rifle will just frustrate you, or you'll leave it 'nearby' and a pistol is a nice 'blanket'. Some would argue medics should have a pistol, but I'd say that if a medic CAN go to work, the fight is under control and a pistol range encounter is out of the question.
|
|