Setting Up a Practical Combat Rifle

Brushbeater ^ | 4MAR17 | ncscout

[vannrox]

I don’t typically like writing about firearms on this blog, as there’s a lot of other outlets that do that, and I think that guns get WAY too much focus in the Survivalism and Preparedness community. They’re important and fun, but other stuff, like growing food and having a good store of tools, is just as important. That being said, like with all things, a baseline must first be recognized and then built upon, never detracted from- in order to maximize our capabilities.

Hanging out on the sidelines of a public range can be a hobby all to its own; watching the tacticool budget gun bunnies, the 500lb know-it-all benchresters, and even the undergrad Hipster, replete in leather buckle shoes and skinny jeans mastering his fundamentals with a .22. I’m not here to knock them at all, I enjoy the company (it beats the snot out of my other option I would have been doing that day), it’s just an observation. But another parallel observation was the sheer number of AR-15 type rifles on the line- every stall had at least one- and I think, at this point, it’s safe to say that Eugene’s garage project, once a taboo kinda-deal everyday folks thought ‘put you on the list’ has firmly cemented in its place as ‘Murica’s gun.

The fascination with the Stoner platform is largely due to it’s efficiency and ease of use, coupled with the fear of suspension of niceties and social issues reaching critical mass at some point down the road. A fear that is certainly not illogical. Regarding this however, there’s a few guidelines that don’t exactly transition from the hunting/range gun to a weapon you plan on defending yourself and posterity with- in fact, there’s a tremendous difference. Recognizing this need while honestly evaluating your skill and role within the Group/Tribe is paramount to building an efficient platform without dumping lots of money finding out what you thought worked in theory actually really sucks in practice.

The Rifle as a System

Much of the thinking (and writing) concerning combat-oriented weapons get hung up on the platform itself- and that’s a problem. The thing that goes Bang! is one part, but each component of your weapon is a piece of a larger system, each having a specific place and purpose, not there for winning the cool guy contest. The weapon, optic, ammunition, magazine, and sling are each interdependent- and this is a tough concept to learn just sitting on a square range. Some require more attention than others, with a few components being a matter of preference, but that preference only comes with experience built on an established baseline. All of this however is predetermined by our mission, and in this context, that’s a simple, reliable general purpose carbine that could be pressed into combat service from 0-600M.

The Rifle

If you’ll notice from the rifle pictured above, the weapon is kept pretty slick. Save for a couple of small add-ons (more on this in a second), it’s basically a bone-stock mid-length gas system gun. I strongly encourage a 1/7 twist barrel to stabilize both common 55gr and heavier 77gr SMKs. The mid-length gas system runs a little slower and cooler over the shorter carbine length. This means a little less wear on the bolt lugs in the long run, meaning a little more reliability. The maximum barrel length needed on a fighting 5.56 is 16 inches- there’s nothing a longer barrel will do for 5.56 that stepping up in caliber would do better. Everything else is basically what you’d expect from an off-the-shelf rifle. This is done for a couple of reasons. The first is that more modifications lead to shortcuts in training- bad, bad, bad. These take away from the muscle memory of running a stock weapon, and should the need arise to run one that’s not yours, you’re gonna have problems. The second issue is that modifications to the manual of arms or internal components leads to unpredictable reliability. This is the major qualm I have with homebuilt guns- if they’re sourced from a variety of makers, then there’s no established standard. Issues will result, being far harder to isolate and remedy amid various tolerances. So in short, every weapon of that type in an arsenal should match, both for interchangeability and mastery of the manual of arms.

Along with the focus on barrel twist is the need to wring the most accuracy possible out of our platform. To do this, while minimizing weight, I prefer a slim free-float tube (I can feel a certain former Sniper Instructor is slapping me in the back of the head as I wrote that…I can hear him screaming ‘Auto rifles CAN’T BE FREEFLOATED!!! ONLY ACCURIZED!!!’ while ‘helping’ us naturalize our ghillies) with a machined rail at the 12. I’ve never seen much need to go beyond 12 or 13 inches on a tube- everything longer, in my opinion, is just weight, as is extra rails. But to each their own in that respect, I like keeping as light of a weapon as possible for something I may have to carry long distances- even the diminutive M4 starts feeling like a cinderblock after multi day long range patrolling up and down mountains. It’s slick, but I can add rails if need be (I don’t ever foresee that need, unless someone has a AN/PSQ-23A STORM system they wanna donate). Generally I like everything centerline to the bore no matter the weapon, as close to the center of gravity as possible. This keeps the weapon balanced and the same when fired from either shoulder.

The Optic

Notice the AR pictured doesn’t have iron sights. I haven’t used AR irons since my days of rolling in PT pits at Sand Hill, and in this day and age, with the overwhelming number of quality optics out there even at relatively low prices, I don’t think they’re relevant. Now in saying that, there is a value in training with irons. Not too long ago MSG Paul Howe did a video of a shoot and move drill of varying distances with only irons. A lot of the youtube comments were hilarious- filled with apparent tacti-range nozzles ridiculing him for using irons, while failing miserably to realize the point. If you could run that drill with irons, doing it with any sort of optics would be a breeze. And MSG Howe, by the way, is not a man I question when it comes to training, and sure as hell is not a man you’d ridicule to his face.

Most people running red-dot sights maintain irons as a backup, and that’s understandable, as I’m not running to chop the irons off my AKs with red dots mounted. But the AR-15, at least in my experience, is a different animal. If the round allows my engagement range to go to or beyond 600M, which heavy match 5.56 does, a magnified optic, even low powered, is the way to go. I like as simple and rugged as possible- and that’s Trijicon’s engineering marvel, the Advanced Combat Optical Gunsight (ACOG). So while the ACOG may be a bit dated in some circles, I know for a fact the ACOG is bomb-proof. As in, blown up in an IED along with me, and still holds a zero. It’s a fixed four power, has very few points of failure, and requires no batteries.

I’m partial to the TA-01 reticle v. the TA-31 or the others since,  because I have lots of experience with it, it’s fast, efficient, and I can rangefind with the reticle. The stadia lines of the bullet drop compensator (BDC) represent 19in (the average size of a man’s shoulders) at the associated ranges, allowing the shooter to rapidly rangefind and engage. The system works very, very well in practice, and while the BDC is tuned to 62gr m855, it’s perfectly acceptable to the heavier bullet weights with training on a Known Distance (KD) range to verify the drop.

On a general purpose weapon, a simple, rugged optic beats the tar out of irons, and is far easier for new shooters to master. If you don’t feel like coughing up Trijicon cash (the TA-01 actually is not that expensive for what you get, with the TA-01 being around $800, but, I digress), Burris makes a great prismatic optic as well, in 3x and 5x varieties. I owned the 3x for a few years, selling it to a buddy to fund another project (the  rifle I bought it for was stolen in a break-in, so I used it on an AK with a TWS top cover after that). I really liked it, and would have no reservations about buying another one. Vortex makes one that looks identical, and given that its Vortex, is likely good as well.

The optic placement is very important. Not only is the eye relief/eye box critical to shot placement, it should be set right for your eyes with your nose to the charging handle, so that when you bring it up there’s no shadow at all keeping both eyes open. This is different between optics, so knowing where yours will be, repeatably, is critical. Associated with those fundamentals is bringing the weapon to your head, not vice versa, so training with someone beyond Bubba the Benchrester (or the clown spotting for Bubba claiming his shot went over the 30ft berm…think about that one, and yes, he really did say that) is recommended. A combat optic differs from any other in employment, so keep that in mind.

The Sling

A sling’s just a sling, right? Well, yeah, technically. They are however a requirement for a combat weapon. I like to keep them simple- I absolutely hate anything other than two points of attachment. A single point sucks for anything other than in and out of vehicles, and a three point sling gets hung on gear, loosens up on its own, and pinpoints you as a clown (seriously, you’ll look like that cherry Joe who’s trying WAY too hard). A two point, with a simple tension slide to tighten it on the fly (helps with steady aiming and keeps your weapon from flopping around during movement), works great. Viking Tactics, run by CSM Kyle Lamb, and Larry Vickers, both veterans of CAG, have their marketed versions that are good quality but the basic design has been around for a long while. I bought the one pictured many years ago before attending a school, used it in Afghanistan on both the M4 and M249, and since have picked up a couple more for my other weapons.

Speaking of Afghanistan, there’s a little story. Once upon a time there was this TL who was 100% squared away, 100% of the time. He had one of those push-in QD sling swivel thingies, just in front of the delta ring on his M4. Then one fine day, about day three of one of our multi-day Long Range Patrols, the little rollers keeping the swivel in place broke. Thoroughly PO’d at this cheap POS, he slung it into the desert of Afghanistan, never again to be used, replacing it with a hasty 550 cord loop. Since then, him and all of his associated miscreants (us) discovered the Magpul one piece sling rings, which bolt on and are infinitely more rugged. It is the only add-on thing, besides a simple sling, I really think is essential as the GI-standard M4 sling ring, 1 each, causes shifts in zero if yanked on hard enough and usually gets thrown out when you put a 12in rail to accurize (yep, there we go, I can climb out of the cold mud now) your rifle. On my weapons it gives me a memory point for hand placement as well, and I placed it far enough behind the first rail to mount my tac light ( Surefire G2 in a Vltor offset mount I’ve had for eons) in order to maintain that muscle memory and sameness across platforms. While I don’t look like some sorta Chris Costa wanna-be range knob, the manipulation is efficient and repeatable.

Magazines

In the tens (maybe hundreds, I dunno) of thousands of rounds I’ve shot in training (and the handful while deployed), the source of malfunctions I’ve observed from the AR platform have been overwhelmingly from magazine issues. To the contrary, there was one catastrophic bolt failure (two sheared lugs), but that was during a 5 day high round count class, at the very end, resolved by simply swapping the bolt. Getting back to magazines though, the AR mag was originally designed to be mostly expendable; and without a doubt, the first time one gets into a firefight, they will be. So have a lot of them. The aluminum GI mags have always worked well for me, as they’ve always been free and when the feed lips get bent on them I can throw them away and not shed a tear. The plastic ones from Magpul and a few others are ok too, but not above issues and are not the second coming, as the marketers would have you believe. The Magpul 7.62×51 SR-25 mags for example, suck (but that’s another topic, on a whole other animal), and the HK steel mags are neat, but I’ve always just kept with what I have boxes full of from my time in. The point is when a magazine starts giving issues, trash it…like the stuck up girl who turned you down for a date, it ain’t worth your time.

Concluding Thoughts

This is a baseline- something to be added to, but never detracted from. My experience has taught me that like everything, simplicity is best, and quality is King. For a general purpose weapon that one intends to use, the parameters are certainly different than those filling other roles. You’d certainly be very, very capable in keeping a stripped down rugged weapon that is practical for most purposes versus a rifle at home only on the range, provided you do your part in training. Because of this, it might be a good idea to take a step back and reevaluate the purpose behind your weapons, and reevaluate how to maximize your potential. You were granted a temporary reprieve, but socially as well as economically, things are not looking rosy. If you’re still fence-sitting, or still in need of that all knowing clue-bat, get on it. Simple, rugged, reliable, effective.

[Darth Mall]

BFL

[2111USMC]

That’s cool. Thank you for your service to the Corps!

We didn’t have them back in my day. Just the iron sights that came with the rifle. (They’re actually pretty good if you have young eyes.)

[SuperLuminal]

"That would be an SKS with open sights."

Correct, but I might add an old M1 since it can get you to 600-yds and makes a much better club when the ammo runs out...

[gundog]

Now I said “basic” as in minimal, not ideal as in perfect.

"Perfect" can change in a trice. SKS to 12 gauge and back. Slugs to OO buckshot. Can't carry a golf bag full of guns, though. They're all compromises.

[gundog]

Travis McGee recommends a 3x Burris for that very reason. For an AR, anyhow.

[2111USMC]

I will have to look into that.

I have a 3-9 x 40 scope on it and it does fine for when I’m shooting into an area like a meadow. However, when hunting thick brush it can take time to acquire the target in the scope even at 3x.

I’d like something that would allow me faster target acquisition. I’m also considering a reflex sight or a red dot with some magnification.

[schurmann]

“...My recollection is the AR was actually designed for the Air Force ...But I still prefer something SKS’ish or M14’ish.” [redfreedom, post 11]

The real timeline was rather different.

The ArmaLite team - led by Eugene Stoner - designed the AR-10, chambered in 7.62 NATO (Stoner, a USMC veteran of WW2, was said to dislike the small calibers). They attempted to enter it in the US Army Ordnance trials seeking to replace the M1 Garand. It arrived to late to be a serious contender; Ordnance was emotionally committed to the T44 (M14 predecessor) anyway. The M14 was selected as the M1’s replacement in 1957.

Stoner left the employ of ArmaLite. His erstwhile colleagues found out about Ordnance’s Small Caliber High Velocity (SCHV) program, which was exploring the potential of 22 caliber cartridges and very light rifles, with strong support from some user communities inside the Army. ArmaLite redesigned the AR-10 into the original AR-15, chambering 22 cal developmental cartridges based on Remington’s 222. The miniaturized arm found favor; field tests by US Secops/advisor teams in Southeast Asia delivered great results and enthusiastic endorsement from operatives.

Army Ordnance proudly declared that the M14 would simplify logistics because it would replace six arms (Garand M1, BAR M1918A2, M1 and M2 Carbine, Submachine Guns M1 and M3/M3A1) in three chamberings (30 Carbine, 45 ACP, 30-06).

The US Air Force took a dim view of developments because it was being ordered to give up its M2 Carbines, which had been issued to Air Police and air base security units; no one was thrilled at the prospect of pulling guard duty while toting an M14 (11 pounds loaded).

The Air Force searched about for alternatives and discovered the AR-15. ArmaLite had no production facilities - it was principally an engineering/development firm - and licensed production rights to Colt’s along with trademark rights to the name “AR-15.” USAF did conclude a contract with Colt’s, but the Army Dept intervened and invalidated it, citing its authority as DoD executive agent for small arms development (a status conferred by War Dept reorganization back in 1903).

So the first deliveries of what became the M16 went to advisor/trainer detachments then in Vietnam. Deliveries to the Air Force were delayed some, and quantities were initially reduced.

The ArmaLite SCHV select-fire AR-15 was developed around IMR chopped-tube propellant, but ammo suppliers changed to a ball propellant for cost and charge variability reduction. This move wasn’t coordinated with Colt’s nor SCHV managers, and boosted the full-auto rate considerably, leading to accelerated wear and reliability issues. Early requirements users suggested chrome-lined barrels, but Army Ordnance held the line against chrome plating, citing accuracy and cost issues; combined with initial issue of M16s without cleaning kits or detailed user-maintenance procedures, this led to corrosion and failures in action. Propellant suppliers also upped the percentage of calcium carbonate used as a drying and pH-balancing agent in ball powder production; this clogged M16 gas tubes and led to additional failures. It took some time to investigate and track down the problems. Blame the rush to field new stuff, which left no room for operational testing.

I do think the miniature ArmaLite platform got a bad rep undeserved, which has since been corrected. But like you, I prefer a 7.62mm platform. Don’t feel inclined to give up my M1A (an early, rough-finished example with early-WW2 rear sight) for anything else. It’s a poor match, though, for modern squad-level tactics.

[M Kehoe]

Bttt.

5.56mm

[redfreedom]

Excellent info, thanks.

[redfreedom]

You are referring to “a young VC gal” as “This young lady”, where zero hatred for a former enemy is shown. I feel the same way. Those that actually played those deadly for real war games, regardless of which side, were actually similar people being led to do what they each felt they had to do.

I have no hatred for the Vietnamese.

I do have absolute contempt for the dems for “throwing in the towel” and undercutting the South’s ability to continue the fight. This in effect was like just throwing away all of our KIA’s as being a waste. Not to mention those of us with permanent injuries of various sorts that live to this day.

What’s even more sickening is this defensive war/nation building strategy from Vietnam is exactly what we are doing today in our current endless wars. The difference is the draft. Since there is no draft, our military industrial wing of the swamp can continue to send our best young people off to war and no one really gives a shit.

Sorry for the rant, but it’s how I feel about all of this.

[BuffaloJack]

I had no animosity for the young woman. She was out of the war after the firefight was over. I even went to visit her 5 or 6 weeks later, at her request. She kissed me on the cheek and thanked me for getting her the medical treatment to save her life. Once someone is out of the fighting they are just another human being deserving of human rights.

[schurmann]

“Excellent info, thanks.” [redfreedom, post 69]

Thanks yourself.

Much of this information has appeared in the print periodicals _American Rifleman_, _Small Arms Review_ or its predecessor periodical _Machine Gun News_, over the past 25 years or so. Some of the data on SCHV came from the most recent article sticking in memory, which appeared in the _Rifleman_ some three years back.

Most of that piece addressed Winchester’s “Lightweight Rifle,” their SCHV candidate which strongly recalled the M1 Carbine, made along very traditional lines out of walnut and steel. Despite solid manufacturing, it failed to meet accuracy/precision criteria and they withdrew from the program, grousing (in internal company communications) that a “new breed” of Ordnance officers had come on the scene, enamored of plastics and light alloys.

Perhaps the most interesting information in the article concerned Soviet research into small-caliber cartridges. Designers and engineers in the USSR began experimenting in the late 1950s, not long after US Army Ordnance initiated SCHV; their work was not in response to field observation of US systems in action in Southeast Asia. It ultimately led to the adoption in the 1970s of 5.45x39mm as the standard Red Army small arms round.

[Charles Martel]

Confession time: I have had my SKS for 25 years and never, ever cleaned it once. Oiled it, yes, but to actually dissemble or run a brush down the barrel, never.

Years ago, a buddy of mine traded a Bersa .380 to his neighbor for an SKS. Showing it to me, he said "Yeah, it's a real mess, isn't it?" It absolutely was - improvised sling made of very worn leather, wooden stock with an amazing amount of dirt ground in and also deeply cracked at the wrist (with a large splinter missing and the crack reinforced by a handmade leather sleeve, laced up tight and shrunken against the wood). The outer metal surfaces were heavily worn and/or rusted, but the bore looked serviceable.

I told my friend that it must've been some Vietnam veteran's battlefield trophy (it looked like it had been dragged through a thousand miles of rice paddies). He never could confirm that, but we did discover that the gas piston was rusted in place. We knocked the piston out with a hammer and punch, ran a bore brush and oiled patch through the gas tube, and it worked just fine thereafter. Tough rifle.

[gundog]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3725985/posts

Travis’ reply #20 on this thread addresses that issue, for his eyes, anyway.

[pigsmith]

Bump for later

[NorthMountain]

The SKS she had could fire fully auto, but why? It had a 5 round built-in magazine and was not replaceable. It needed reloading through the breach after every 5 shots.

That's a weird SKS ... Did you see more than the one set up like that (full auto, 5rd fixed mag)?

[BuffaloJack]

It might have been a 10 round mag. It was 50 years ago and I only had the captured weapon in my possession for about 2 hours. What I am sure of is that the magazine folded down open and had to be hand reloaded.

[NorthMountain]

That’s a the way a normal SKS magazine works. I had never heard of one being full auto before. Learn something new every day. Thanks!

[2harddrive]

Do you just plain like firearms? Or do you support the American 2nd Amendment in principle? If so, do check out this BOLD new website before they censor it: https://GunDynamics.com