User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/4/2024 2:53:14 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tank241: I would say a 12 gauge shotgun. Normally I’d say an AR-15 or variant of but the simplistic design of a pump gun and its durability makes more sense. Shotguns are far less durable and less reliable than a basic ar. They are also harder to shoot, and good quality ammo like flite control/versatite buckshot or slugs is far less common than .223 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2024 3:48:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: KitBuilder]
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jm11513: They are also harder to shoot, and good quality ammo like flite control/versatite buckshot or slugs is far less common than .223 The reduced range and capacity negate any arguments favoring shotguns IMHO. They're also a bad choice with so many combatants wearing body armor nowadays (even if they do happen to be within effective range). |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/5/2024 1:49:36 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By KitBuilder: Even if you have unlimited access to all you can carry, you can't carry as much 12ga as you can 5.56mm ammo (or even 7.62mm ammo). The reduced range and capacity negate any arguments favoring shotguns IMHO. They're also a bad choice with so many combatants wearing body armor nowadays (even if they do happen to be within effective range). Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By KitBuilder: Originally Posted By Jm11513: They are also harder to shoot, and good quality ammo like flite control/versatite buckshot or slugs is far less common than .223 The reduced range and capacity negate any arguments favoring shotguns IMHO. They're also a bad choice with so many combatants wearing body armor nowadays (even if they do happen to be within effective range). I think I'm one of the local shotgun supporters here and I don't think that would be a good idea. If you have a shotgun in a squad or for home defense sure but I think for the Chinese, Russian, zombies, aliens a carbine is better. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/5/2024 2:20:33 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 03RN: I think I'm one of the local shotgun supporters here and I don't think that would be a good idea. If you have a shotgun in a squad or for home defense sure but I think for the Chinese, Russian, zombies, aliens a carbine is better. I agree that shotguns are very useful tool. Just not a gun for general issue to everyone in civil defense militia. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2024 4:36:38 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: I'm not sure what AR-15 you're referring to so I can't really argue with you. But let me discuss the AR-15 as if it's either the original M4 or one of the modernized ones with an MLOK handguard. I think we're talking about two different things. I'm talking about making a gun for people who have basically zero training and are not into guns. I'd agree that an AR-15's better for people who are trained or mechanically inclined. Let me tell you a story about my friend. He's a new gun owner. He bought a Colt 6960 as a first rifle. A few things I've noticed: -He dented a D&H aluminum 30 round magazine by slamming it too hard. -The castle nut staking was messed up from the factory but he didn't notice it. -He's been running his BCG bone dry and hasn't cleaned it because he was only shown how to do it once and didn't care enough to take it apart. -The safety came from the factory with no tension on it. I fixed it for him. -He has been struggling with mounting MLOK accessories. I don't think he'd have had any of these problems with my modernized Mini 14 concept. Because the mag would be rock-and-lock style, no castle nut, it's a piston system so it requires less lubrication, the safety tension doesn't depend on the grip, and I'd mold the sling slots and tapeswitch holders into the stock. That's the Kalashnikov argument, and a properly built AK is a much better rifle all around than a Mini-14 will ever be. The only thing the AK and Mini-14 share is the rock-and-lock magazine and bad modern optics mounting options. I love shooting Mini-14's but if I had to go war and had to choose, the Mini-14 would pretty far down on the list. The M1 was revolutionary at the time, but has been replaced by better designs. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2024 8:55:04 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By homeyclaus: That's the Kalashnikov argument, and a properly built AK is a much better rifle all around than a Mini-14 will ever be. The only thing the AK and Mini-14 share is the rock-and-lock magazine and bad modern optics mounting options. I love shooting Mini-14's but if I had to go war and had to choose, the Mini-14 would pretty far down on the list. The M1 was revolutionary at the time, but has been replaced by better designs. The mini and ak are just 2 delineations of the same gun The only reason why the ak is as good as it is, is because it had state backing and the soviets "politely" asked some clever germans to fix it. The closest the mini came to having state backing was being used in a prison. |
|
|
|
LA, USA
|
Posted: 3/6/2024 9:08:19 PM EDT
[#7]
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 3/6/2024 9:13:33 PM EDT
[#8]
A M1 Carbine in a plastic pistol grip stock is about as trouble free and simple to use weapon that I have ever used. For untrained civilians...IT WOULD BE PERFECT!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2024 9:24:25 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Jm11513]
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ISEEYOU2: A M1 Carbine in a plastic pistol grip stock is about as trouble free and simple to use weapon that I have ever used. For untrained civilians...IT WOULD BE PERFECT! No way. Carbines have some pretty severe design issues, ranging from poorly designed magazines to bolt strength issues. A total noob would be far more effective with a $400 ar and $150 red dot than an M1 carbine with irons |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2024 1:40:16 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 03RN: I think I'm one of the local shotgun supporters here and I don't think that would be a good idea. If you have a shotgun in a squad or for home defense sure but I think for the Chinese, Russian, zombies, aliens a carbine is better. Agreed. I am a diehard Benelli M4 guy but I just would rather have my AR or CZ Bren 2 if things went South. The M4 is good at being an HD gun. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2024 3:14:51 AM EDT
[#11]
No shotguns need to be issued.
For every three Minute men, one will have a combat shotgun. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2024 4:15:47 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jm11513: No way. Carbines have some pretty severe design issues, ranging from poorly designed magazines to bolt strength issues. A total noob would be far more effective with a $400 ar and $150 red dot than an M1 carbine with irons Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jm11513: Originally Posted By ISEEYOU2: A M1 Carbine in a plastic pistol grip stock is about as trouble free and simple to use weapon that I have ever used. For untrained civilians...IT WOULD BE PERFECT! No way. Carbines have some pretty severe design issues, ranging from poorly designed magazines to bolt strength issues. A total noob would be far more effective with a $400 ar and $150 red dot than an M1 carbine with irons Absolutely. .30 Carbine ammo leaves a bit to be desired in terms of quality and terminal performance. The M1 stock is not the best for larger-framed individuals. I have to really scrunch down on mine due to the short LOP I have a monkey arms and a barrel chest, though). An adjustable AR stock is leagues ahead for both small- and large-framed folks. Yes, one can get an Ultimak rail for the Carbine, but they're not exactly cheap. Any modern AR has that feature built-in. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2024 5:34:59 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By lew: Absolutely. .30 Carbine ammo leaves a bit to be desired in terms of quality and terminal performance. The M1 stock is not the best for larger-framed individuals. I have to really scrunch down on mine due to the short LOP I have a monkey arms and a barrel chest, though). An adjustable AR stock is leagues ahead for both small- and large-framed folks. Yes, one can get an Ultimak rail for the Carbine, but they're not exactly cheap. Any modern AR has that feature built-in. I think .30 carbine would do well enough. It won't get to 500+ like 5.56 will, but 300 is doable. Big issue for the round is that there is almost no domestic production of it. All the .30 carbine ive seen in any decent quantities is ppu and aguila. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 3/7/2024 8:46:49 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Nick_Adams]
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jm11513: No way. Carbines have some pretty severe design issues, ranging from poorly designed magazines to bolt strength issues. A total noob would be far more effective with a $400 ar and $150 red dot than an M1 carbine with irons Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jm11513: Originally Posted By ISEEYOU2: A M1 Carbine in a plastic pistol grip stock is about as trouble free and simple to use weapon that I have ever used. For untrained civilians...IT WOULD BE PERFECT! No way. Carbines have some pretty severe design issues, ranging from poorly designed magazines to bolt strength issues. A total noob would be far more effective with a $400 ar and $150 red dot than an M1 carbine with irons The M1 Carbine was regarded as combat ineffective in Korea under harsh wartime field conditions. The only ‘Old School’ weapon from that era that would still hold its own today, if you had nothing else, is an M1 Garand - in either .30-06 or .308. And of those two chamberings, .308/7.62 makes better sense for a SHTF M1 weapon. |
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 3/7/2024 9:01:29 PM EDT
[#15]
The little M1 Carbine made it through World War2, Korean War, into the Vietnam War and many years afterwards in Police departments. Israelis used them into the 1980's...
For a newbie....M1 Carbine for the win! |
|
|
MP, USA
|
Posted: 3/8/2024 8:55:08 AM EDT
[Last Edit: JoshNC]
[#16]
I’m really surprised anyone is advocating for anything other than an M4 carbine.
The m4 outclasses essentially everything, has the best ergonomics of any other contemporary design, is easily accessorized, and parts are ubiquitous. Even bottom grade ARs made in the last decade run well. Mini 14? M1 carbine? Seriously? There is absolutely nothing they do better than the M4. Add in the need to update the designs for contemporary roles and the juice is not worth the squeeze. 12ga shotgun? That has to be tongue in cheek. It would be absurd to consider anything other than the M4. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2024 9:33:57 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JoshNC: I’m really surprised anyone is advocating for anything other than an M4 carbine. The m4 outclasses essentially everything, has the best ergonomics of any other contemporary design, is easily accessorized, and parts are ubiquitous. Even bottom grade ARs made in the last decade run well. Mini 14? M1 carbine? Seriously? There is absolutely nothing they do better than the M4. Add in the need to update the designs for contemporary roles and the juice is not worth the squeeze. 12ga shotgun? That has to be tongue in cheek. It would be absurd to consider anything other than the M4. Another view is how many already know the manual of arms of the M4/M16? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2024 7:58:55 PM EDT
[#18]
Just glad Adrewsky is not still posting and arguing for the Mini 14.
 But yeah, M4A1. Although, my very accurately put together clone M16 A4 is what I'm grabbing. |
|
|
|
MP, USA
|
Posted: 3/8/2024 9:20:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: JoshNC]
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Combat_Diver: Another view is how many already know the manual of arms of the M4/M16? Exactly. And given the ergonomics and fairly simple manual of arms, If someone can’t effectively run an AR, that individual should probably stay out of direct fighting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2024 10:34:26 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Nick_Adams: The M1 Carbine was regarded as combat ineffective in Korea under harsh wartime field conditions. The only ‘Old School’ weapon from that era that would still hold its own today, if you had nothing else, is an M1 Garand - in either .30-06 or .308. And of those two chamberings, .308/7.62 makes better sense for a SHTF M1 weapon. The carbine was simply too little for korea. Obviously a full auto m2 in the hands of a teenager isn't going to be a good choice for extreme long distance engagements Remember that the M1918 bar came out of Korea with the entire USMC salivating over it, and thats part of what lead to the M14. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2024 10:37:50 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JoshNC: Exactly. And given the ergonomics and fairly simple manual of arms, If someone can’t effectively run an AR, that individual should probably stay out of direct fighting. Millions of teenagers have spent almost all of their free time playing COD or battlefield and know at the very least how to insert a mag, run the charging handle, and drop the bolt. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2024 12:11:14 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jm11513: The mini and ak are just 2 delineations of the same gun The only reason why the ak is as good as it is, is because it had state backing and the soviets "politely" asked some clever germans to fix it. The closest the mini came to having state backing was being used in a prison. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2024 12:23:46 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ARmory04: Just glad Adrewsky is not still posting and arguing for the Mini 14. But yeah, M4A1. Although, my very accurately put together clone M16 A4 is what I'm grabbing. That's why I would want everyone to have my improved Mini 14 (note: not as Ruger currently sells it) for civil defense. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2024 1:00:34 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: I'm sorry if my ideas are annoying. I see it differently. No offense to you, but when I just hear M4A1 I think "unnecessarily short handguard, crappy trigger, stupid fixed FSB that's in the way of my optics." That's why I would want everyone to have my improved Mini 14 (note: not as Ruger currently sells it) for civil defense. The handguard doesn't need to be that long. It's long enough to hold on to. Crappy trigger isn't actually all that bad. It's also extremely simple and reliable That fixed FSB has a few things going for it. Its strong, serves as a fantastic sling mounting point. If its that big of a deal, 5 minutes with a cut off wheel |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2024 3:41:14 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Andrewsky]
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jm11513: The handguard doesn't need to be that long. It's long enough to hold on to. Crappy trigger isn't actually all that bad. It's also extremely simple and reliable That fixed FSB has a few things going for it. Its strong, serves as a fantastic sling mounting point. If its that big of a deal, 5 minutes with a cut off wheel A 7" handguard isn't really ideal for a lot of reasons, a 15" MLOK is just way easier to work with, especially for NV and white lights. 7" handguard and fixed FSB is a vestigial arrangement all the way back to the Vietnam era. It makes no sense today. If I put on a DBAL and a white light I'm probably going to just have to have a VFG on that 7" to have any hope of manipulating the controls and it's not going to be very ergonomic. I'm going to get bad shadowing from my light and won't be able to rest the handguard on barricades. It was a big mistake to keep that fixed front sight back in 1994. They didn't know how reliable optics were going to be yet and just lazily copied over parts from the M16, and wanted to attach a bayonet, etc. The trigger's one of the biggest improvements you can make to a stock AR. The GI triggers are really really awful. Drop in a G or LaRue and you will forget all about GI triggers. An FSB's not really a great sling mounting point. The best thing to do there is to get the side sling swivel but with MLOK you can put in a swivel too and it can be wherever you want, and it can be QD or hook style too. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2024 4:10:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Combat_Diver]
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: I won't address this in the civil defense context because I disagree with using an AR for that role... A 7" handguard isn't really ideal for a lot of reasons, a 15" MLOK is just way easier to work with, especially for NV and white lights. 7" handguard and fixed FSB is a vestigial arrangement all the way back to the Vietnam era. It makes no sense today. If I put on a DBAL and a white light I'm probably going to just have to have a VFG on that 7" to have any hope of manipulating the controls and it's not going to be very ergonomic. I'm going to get bad shadowing from my light and won't be able to rest the handguard on barricades. It was a big mistake to keep that fixed front sight back in 1994. They didn't know how reliable optics were going to be yet and just lazily copied over parts from the M16, and wanted to attach a bayonet, etc. The trigger's one of the biggest improvements you can make to a stock AR. The GI triggers are really really awful. Drop in a G or LaRue and you will forget all about GI triggers. An FSB's not really a great sling mounting point. The best thing to do there is to get the side sling swivel but with MLOK you can put in a swivel too and it can be wherever you want, and it can be QD or hook style too. All a personal preference. Field couple million guns. A standard Mini14 has none of those features either. However, you can learn to shoot stock triggers out to 600m, done it many times in Army competion with issued guns. Mini-14s are NOT durable enough for a Civilian Defense rifle. Remember gunsmith friends shop in Texas early 90s full of broken bolts.  Attached FileGo long 20", medium 14.5" or short 10.3" bbls. Already a proven system.  Attached File |
|
|
|
MP, USA
|
Posted: 3/11/2024 8:27:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: JoshNC]
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: I won't address this in the civil defense context because I disagree with using an AR for that role... A 7" handguard isn't really ideal for a lot of reasons, a 15" MLOK is just way easier to work with, especially for NV and white lights. 7" handguard and fixed FSB is a vestigial arrangement all the way back to the Vietnam era. It makes no sense today. If I put on a DBAL and a white light I'm probably going to just have to have a VFG on that 7" to have any hope of manipulating the controls and it's not going to be very ergonomic. I'm going to get bad shadowing from my light and won't be able to rest the handguard on barricades. It was a big mistake to keep that fixed front sight back in 1994. They didn't know how reliable optics were going to be yet and just lazily copied over parts from the M16, and wanted to attach a bayonet, etc. The trigger's one of the biggest improvements you can make to a stock AR. The GI triggers are really really awful. Drop in a G or LaRue and you will forget all about GI triggers. An FSB's not really a great sling mounting point. The best thing to do there is to get the side sling swivel but with MLOK you can put in a swivel too and it can be wherever you want, and it can be QD or hook style too. The solution is to issue an AR15 with a longer handguard and improved trigger, not to issue a modified mini-14, which is not a real fighting rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2024 9:23:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Jm11513]
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: I won't address this in the civil defense context because I disagree with using an AR for that role... A 7" handguard isn't really ideal for a lot of reasons, a 15" MLOK is just way easier to work with, especially for NV and white lights. 7" handguard and fixed FSB is a vestigial arrangement all the way back to the Vietnam era. It makes no sense today. If I put on a DBAL and a white light I'm probably going to just have to have a VFG on that 7" to have any hope of manipulating the controls and it's not going to be very ergonomic. I'm going to get bad shadowing from my light and won't be able to rest the handguard on barricades. It was a big mistake to keep that fixed front sight back in 1994. They didn't know how reliable optics were going to be yet and just lazily copied over parts from the M16, and wanted to attach a bayonet, etc. The trigger's one of the biggest improvements you can make to a stock AR. The GI triggers are really really awful. Drop in a G or LaRue and you will forget all about GI triggers. An FSB's not really a great sling mounting point. The best thing to do there is to get the side sling swivel but with MLOK you can put in a swivel too and it can be wherever you want, and it can be QD or hook style too. Its a mass issued civil defense rifle. You aren't going to issue out NV or even white lights. Most aren't even going to get an optic. Irons are much cheaper and it'd be best to hand optics/lasers out to those who need them. It doesn't make sense, but trying to redesign the Mini 14 does? No, again the stock ar trigger isn't awful. Its perfectly serviceable, cheap, and stupidly reliable and durable. Perfect for a mass issue CD rifle. These shooters aren't going to be able to shoot better than their trigger will allow, and even if you told Giessle, larue and schmid to crank out nothing but G2S's, MBT's, and schmid 2 stages, you wouldn't have even a percentage point of enough triggers. Yes, FSB's are great mounting points. Side mounts, top sling adapters, BFG Uloops, hell even paracord makes for a light and comfortable mounting point. Qd cups on a mass issue rifle? Thats a terrible idea. Even using MLOK is a bad idea. You'd have millions of busted rails and accessories after just 1 day. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2024 9:50:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Andrewsky]
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JoshNC: The solution is to issue an AR15 with a longer handguard and improved trigger, not to issue a modified mini-14, which is not a real fighting rifle.  My point is, the weapon would need to be more idiot-proof than a DI AR. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2024 10:07:14 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jm11513: Its a mass issued civil defense rifle. You aren't going to issue out NV or even white lights. Most aren't even going to get an optic. Irons are much cheaper and it'd be best to hand optics/lasers out to those who need them. It doesn't make sense, but trying to redesign the Mini 14 does? No, again the stock ar trigger isn't awful. Its perfectly serviceable, cheap, and stupidly reliable and durable. Perfect for a mass issue CD rifle. These shooters aren't going to be able to shoot better than their trigger will allow, and even if you told Giessle, larue and schmid to crank out nothing but G2S's, MBT's, and schmid 2 stages, you wouldn't have even a percentage point of enough triggers. Yes, FSB's are great mounting points. Side mounts, top sling adapters, BFG Uloops, hell even paracord makes for a light and comfortable mounting point. Qd cups on a mass issue rifle? Thats a terrible idea. Even using MLOK is a bad idea. You'd have millions of busted rails and accessories after just 1 day. Like I said, I wasn't arguing in the civil defense context because I was already against it for that purpose. My improved Mini-14 would have the same Mini-14 trigger which is good, but it would have sling slots molded into the synthetic stock. It would have irons but the easy ability to add night accessories as I described, without MLOK. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2024 10:29:45 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: This is my response to your statement: https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QdOvljnrKj8/TmEloQcEQ3I/AAAAAAAAAE4/8eAq9uGYiXI/s1600/magazine+backwards.jpg My point is, the weapon would need to be more idiot-proof than a DI AR. Unfortunately a bone stock m4 is about as KISS as you can get. Plus you already have about 10 billion of them already in circulation |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2024 10:40:31 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: The stock AR-15 trigger actually is stunningly bad. A crunchy and heavy trigger is the last thing you ever want on a rifle. It's a downgrade from every US military rifle that came before it, which is pretty shocking if you think about it. I've shot thousands of rounds with them including in high power matches, total trash. Just throw them away or donate them to a church or something. Like I said, I wasn't arguing in the civil defense context because I was already against it for that purpose. My improved Mini-14 would have the same Mini-14 trigger which is good, but it would have sling slots molded into the synthetic stock. It would have irons but the easy ability to add night accessories as I described, without MLOK. Not all "USGI" triggers are equal. FN and colt USGI triggers are pretty good. DD is pretty bad. Anderson is pretty bad too. But you know what? They work and they won't break. They're cheap and easy to make. You can keep going on about how they're worse than other US military rifles, but you aren't going to be able to crank out even a tenth as many Mini FCG's as you could USGI ar triggers. In the event the gov't is willingly handing out rifles, they aren't going to train everyone to be able to make use of a nice 2 stage trigger. I deal with the average joe shooter 5 days out of the week. Most are so terrible i can absolutely 110% guarantee you that the nicest Giessle HSNM trigger will not help them. Upgrades only matter if you have the capability to use them. A Giessle in the hands of a new shooter is the equivalent of a flashlight without a battery. |
|
|
|
MP, USA
|
Posted: 3/12/2024 11:16:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: JoshNC]
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: This is my response to your statement: https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QdOvljnrKj8/TmEloQcEQ3I/AAAAAAAAAE4/8eAq9uGYiXI/s1600/magazine+backwards.jpg My point is, the weapon would need to be more idiot-proof than a DI AR. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: This is my response to your statement: https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QdOvljnrKj8/TmEloQcEQ3I/AAAAAAAAAE4/8eAq9uGYiXI/s1600/magazine+backwards.jpg My point is, the weapon would need to be more idiot-proof than a DI AR. If there is an idiot who can’t be taught to work an AR, we don’t need that individual fighting, really probably shouldn’t be in our gene pool. Also, the mini14 isn’t the panacea of simplicity. Originally Posted By Andrewsky: The stock AR-15 trigger actually is stunningly bad. A crunchy and heavy trigger is the last thing you ever want on a rifle. It's a downgrade from every US military rifle that came before it, which is pretty shocking if you think about it. I've shot thousands of rounds with them including in high power matches, total trash. Just throw them away or donate them to a church or something. Like I said, I wasn't arguing in the civil defense context because I was already against it for that purpose. My improved Mini-14 would have the same Mini-14 trigger which is good, but it would have sling slots molded into the synthetic stock. It would have irons but the easy ability to add night accessories as I described, without MLOK. Essentially every factory Colt trigger I’ve shot has been fine. I have many Geissele SSA, SSA-E, SSF triggers, many stock Colt triggers. Yes the G are a huge upgrade. But the factory Colt triggers are fine and I can still make effective hits with those rifles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2024 11:23:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Frank762]
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: I won't address this in the civil defense context because I disagree with using an AR for that role... A 7" handguard isn't really ideal for a lot of reasons, a 15" MLOK is just way easier to work with, especially for NV and white lights. 7" handguard and fixed FSB is a vestigial arrangement all the way back to the Vietnam era. It makes no sense today. If I put on a DBAL and a white light I'm probably going to just have to have a VFG on that 7" to have any hope of manipulating the controls and it's not going to be very ergonomic. I'm going to get bad shadowing from my light and won't be able to rest the handguard on barricades. It was a big mistake to keep that fixed front sight back in 1994. They didn't know how reliable optics were going to be yet and just lazily copied over parts from the M16, and wanted to attach a bayonet, etc. The trigger's one of the biggest improvements you can make to a stock AR. The GI triggers are really really awful. Drop in a G or LaRue and you will forget all about GI triggers. An FSB's not really a great sling mounting point. The best thing to do there is to get the side sling swivel but with MLOK you can put in a swivel too and it can be wherever you want, and it can be QD or hook style too. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: Originally Posted By Jm11513: The handguard doesn't need to be that long. It's long enough to hold on to. Crappy trigger isn't actually all that bad. It's also extremely simple and reliable That fixed FSB has a few things going for it. Its strong, serves as a fantastic sling mounting point. If its that big of a deal, 5 minutes with a cut off wheel A 7" handguard isn't really ideal for a lot of reasons, a 15" MLOK is just way easier to work with, especially for NV and white lights. 7" handguard and fixed FSB is a vestigial arrangement all the way back to the Vietnam era. It makes no sense today. If I put on a DBAL and a white light I'm probably going to just have to have a VFG on that 7" to have any hope of manipulating the controls and it's not going to be very ergonomic. I'm going to get bad shadowing from my light and won't be able to rest the handguard on barricades. It was a big mistake to keep that fixed front sight back in 1994. They didn't know how reliable optics were going to be yet and just lazily copied over parts from the M16, and wanted to attach a bayonet, etc. The trigger's one of the biggest improvements you can make to a stock AR. The GI triggers are really really awful. Drop in a G or LaRue and you will forget all about GI triggers. An FSB's not really a great sling mounting point. The best thing to do there is to get the side sling swivel but with MLOK you can put in a swivel too and it can be wherever you want, and it can be QD or hook style too. I am unsure how the placement of the white light would be more or less advantageous on either rifle. Also, combat/duty issue guns do not have match/fancy triggers for a reason. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2024 11:28:19 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: Have you seen the Korean steel mags that are sold by Global Ordnance? They are tanks. Why does it matter how common they are currently? I thought we were making new guns. Is this off-the-shelf only? The HK416 has a firing pin safety. HK felt it was needed to help pass a drop test. Here's a go steel mag 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2024 2:06:05 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By weapons_free: Here's a go steel mag https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/326579/b91017a0-9d3e-4ef0-813e-f17b78d16e55-3157688.jpg |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2024 2:10:20 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Frank762: I am unsure how the placement of the white light would be more or less advantageous on either rifle. Also, combat/duty issue guns do not have match/fancy triggers for a reason. A lot of combat/duty guns do actually have better triggers than a GI AR trigger. The M1 and M14 are good examples. It's odd to me that people would defend a trigger that was a step backward even in the 1950s when it was designed. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2024 2:32:27 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Frank762]
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: I was making the point that on a 15" handguard AR you can put the light a lot further forward and have way more options for where you put the tapeswitch. A lot of combat/duty guns do actually have better triggers than a GI AR trigger. The M1 and M14 are good examples. It's odd to me that people would defend a trigger that was a step backward even in the 1950s when it was designed. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: Originally Posted By Frank762: I am unsure how the placement of the white light would be more or less advantageous on either rifle. Also, combat/duty issue guns do not have match/fancy triggers for a reason. A lot of combat/duty guns do actually have better triggers than a GI AR trigger. The M1 and M14 are good examples. It's odd to me that people would defend a trigger that was a step backward even in the 1950s when it was designed. A trigger may be modified to do all manner of goals. But, in a standard issue/mass produced firearm, it must be uniform. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2024 2:51:38 AM EDT
[#39]
Fun topic but it sounds like preparing to fight WW2 with the tactics of WW1. Sort of fixed positions vs motorized only much more nightmarish.
Today it’s psychological and drone warfare. Tomorrow I expect that to exponentially increase. If an adversary is successful in attacking us it will be via cheap drone swarms, likely nanotechnology. Or just campaigns pushing demoralization, immorality and drug abuse. That has already hurt us tremendously. To the topic of small arms, I also really like the Stoner. Never actually touched one but as I understand the idea is modularity done on a scale large enough to make it more affordable. With today’s manufacturing it seems to me like maybe the Steyr AUG or CavArms is the modern equivalent. DMR, LMG or standard infantry weapon with a barrel or upper swap. It should be cheaper, quicker to make and more resistant to rust. We don’t have the skill to press, weld and form steel like we used to but sure can mold plastic. A few cracks notwithstanding. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2024 9:45:27 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: I was making the point that on a 15" handguard AR you can put the light a lot further forward and have way more options for where you put the tapeswitch. A lot of combat/duty guns do actually have better triggers than a GI AR trigger. The M1 and M14 are good examples. It's odd to me that people would defend a trigger that was a step backward even in the 1950s when it was designed. Because a good trigger is a nicety. Yes it's nice to have but it's not a *need* |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2024 12:09:33 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By weapons_free: Here's a go steel mag https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/326579/b91017a0-9d3e-4ef0-813e-f17b78d16e55-3157688.jpg I weathered a few by sanding them and letting them sit with rubbed on salt water for a day. They barely corroded at all. I’m impressed. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2024 12:39:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: King_Mud]
[#42]
https://palmettostatearmory.com/psa-16-mid-length-pencil-5-56-nato-1-7-nitride-15-lightweight-m-lok-upper-with-bcg-ch-mbus-sight-set.html
 Attached FileNo need to make it hard. I don’t know that the rail is going to survive being beaten on but an Aimpoint makes that pretty much moot. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2024 4:28:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: MK318]
[#43]
Reading some of the ideas here is interesting and frighting at the same time. While I thought the shotgun was terrible, the Mini-14 idea is by far the worst of them all. The Mini is a copy of a design fraught with flaws like weak bolts, op rods breaking, a gas system that causes a lot of corrosion in a short period of time. The Mini-14 only existed successfully as a less expensive alternative to the AR15. It has never existed as an equal alternative as it lacks in durability, reliability and accuracy. Beyond its abilities, or lack really, it is harder to manufacture and cost more to manfacture.
The M4 with a carry handle and a KAC/P&S rail is the best option from a supply chain perspective but also it has been a design in use for 60 years. Millions of people have served and used an M16/M4 and you could probably easily find at least four or five people in every town in America that served and used them. They could easily teach others. So from a training perspective, you can simplify it but using the M4. Adding things like a red dot or light isn’t something I think is necessary. It just adds complexity but also adds more of a logistic footprint. An M4, a sling, a bandolier with a seven mags. All of these things already exist in the current inventory chain. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2024 5:19:21 PM EDT
[#44]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2024 10:58:16 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Klee: https://i.imgur.com/qBtKkut.jpg Not a great rifle for a Civil Defense weapon. But, I would rather carry this rifle instead of the mini-14. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2024 3:18:39 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Frank762: Not a great rifle for a Civil Defense weapon. But, I would rather carry this rifle instead of the mini-14. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Frank762: Originally Posted By Klee: https://i.imgur.com/qBtKkut.jpg Not a great rifle for a Civil Defense weapon. But, I would rather carry this rifle instead of the mini-14. Yeah the FAL would be a terrible choice but it would still be better than a Mini-14. This is all that is needed. It’s light, simple, accurate with an already well established logistical footprint. It is also expandable in that if things were to escalate and the need for optics, weapon lights, PEQs, and grenade launchers are needed, these are easily installed at the end user level without any special tools or modifications.  Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2024 12:29:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Andrewsky]
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MK318: Reading some of the ideas here is interesting and frighting at the same time. While I thought the shotgun was terrible, the Mini-14 idea is by far the worst of them all. The Mini is a copy of a design fraught with flaws like weak bolts, op rods breaking, a gas system that causes a lot of corrosion in a short period of time. The Mini-14 only existed successfully as a less expensive alternative to the AR15. It has never existed as an equal alternative as it lacks in durability, reliability and accuracy. Beyond its abilities, or lack really, it is harder to manufacture and cost more to manfacture. The M4 with a carry handle and a KAC/P&S rail is the best option from a supply chain perspective but also it has been a design in use for 60 years. Millions of people have served and used an M16/M4 and you could probably easily find at least four or five people in every town in America that served and used them. They could easily teach others. So from a training perspective, you can simplify it but using the M4. Adding things like a red dot or light isn't something I think is necessary. It just adds complexity but also adds more of a logistic footprint. An M4, a sling, a bandolier with a seven mags. All of these things already exist in the current inventory chain. The M4 that you are suggesting in the picture isn't really an appropriate option for a lot of reasons. Like I've mentioned it's just not really an idiot-proof design. The rear sight's overcomplicated, noob's don't understand how to lock the bolt open or how to insert a mag properly and make sure it's inserted, it really needs proper lubrication and frequent cleaning, maybe gas ring maintenance, it has sharp edges where the trigger guard approaches the pistol grip, etc. I have an AR just like the one in the photo, but with a 16" barrel. I like the gun, I'm just not sure it's ideal for what we are saying when we talk about civil defense. Feel free to agree/disagree, just my opinion. No offense. |
|
|
|
SC, USA
|
Posted: 4/6/2024 9:38:02 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Voland: Ar-15 in 5.56 and choice of pistol in 9mm. PC with plates, 7 mags for rifle, 3 for pistol. Pack with 3 days worth of supplies and an IFAK. Register, and training, (by local NG, Sheriff, First responders, Civil defense) annual issue of loadout 5.56and 9mm ammo, monthly military / civil defense training available, first aid, small unit tactics / insurgent tactics. No central records kept of who is active, no firearm requirements other than the standard 5.56 and 9mm, mag carrier and first aid kit provided. Intent is there will be rifle behind every blade of grass for any invader and no record of who has training and equipment, so everyone is a defender. |
|
|
MP, USA
|
Posted: 4/6/2024 9:59:36 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Greybeard: Register, and training, (by local NG, Sheriff, First responders, Civil defense) annual issue of loadout 5.56and 9mm ammo, monthly military / civil defense training available, first aid, small unit tactics / insurgent tactics. No central records kept of who is active, no firearm requirements other than the standard 5.56 and 9mm, mag carrier and first aid kit provided. Intent is there will be rifle behind every blade of grass for any invader and no record of who has training and equipment, so everyone is a defender. Agreed. And the kit should be gov issued with requirements for at least quarterly training. |
|
|
MP, USA
|
Posted: 4/6/2024 10:07:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: JoshNC]
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Andrewsky: I'm not sure which design you're referring to. M1 Garand, M14, M1 Carbine? To be clear I wasn't suggesting the Mini-14 in its present form as made by Ruger but rather an evolved/ruggedized version of it. If you think even then there'd be issues with the bolt I'd ask you why you're suggesting a carbine-gas DI AR. Those put extra stress on the bolt. The M4 that you are suggesting in the picture isn't really an appropriate option for a lot of reasons. Like I've mentioned it's just not really an idiot-proof design. The rear sight's overcomplicated, noob's don't understand how to lock the bolt open or how to insert a mag properly and make sure it's inserted, it really needs proper lubrication and frequent cleaning, maybe gas ring maintenance, it has sharp edges where the trigger guard approaches the pistol grip, etc. I have an AR just like the one in the photo, but with a 16" barrel. I like the gun, I'm just not sure it's ideal for what we are saying when we talk about civil defense. Feel free to agree/disagree, just my opinion. No offense. I believe AR is the most ergonomic, user friendly rifle at present. It’s very easy to learn the controls and manual of arms. The design is extremely well proven and well vetted. If you’re arguing for a dumbed down rifle for the dumbed down masses, an AKM beats any iteration of a mini14. Proper implementation of firearms requires training. All of the points you raise are easily overcome with a modicum of training. |
|
|
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.
