Posted on 06/24/2005 12:27:42 PM PDT by 45Auto
The Bushmaster .308 differs from the typical AR in a few of its controls. While the forward assist and safety are normal AR type controls, the bolt release is at the bottom front of the trigger guard, and is ambidextrous, having a mirror-image release on each side. This is an excellent design for the bolt release, and it is easily reached with the trigger finger of either a right-handed or left-handed shooter. The magazine release is in the normal AR position, but also has an ambidextrous twin on the opposite side of the receiver. The upper and lower receivers are forged, and are well-fitted. The twenty inch barrel has a twist rate of one turn in ten inches. The gas block has attachment rails machined into the top and sides to accommodate sights and accessories.
One of the best features of the Bushmaster .308 is its magazine. Unlike most of their competition, Bushmaster is supplying its rifles with twenty-round magazines. They are able to do this because they designed the rifle to use the readily available, cheap, and reliable surplus FAL rifle magazines.
(Excerpt) Read more at gunblast.com ...
I think most of us would agree that we'd like something between the .223 and .308 for a service rifle. I know I would. Our Special Forces folks have been working on a 6.8 mm round, I believe, and it sounds like a good idea.
Full auto .308 in a hand held rifle is a bit much for most. I heard stories about full auto fire in the FN FAL. Unless trapped by an enemy squad in tight formation in close quarters, I prefer semi auto .308.
I once did some casual testing between an 18 inch barrel .308 (a Remington 788) and a regular HBar in .223.
I was shooting surplus .308 and some of the new 68 grain .223. Up close they both penetrated an old syrup cooker. At longer ranges, to my surprise the .308 did not penetrate while the .223 did.
I'd be very interested in the chrony results of that test.
finally it seems the Army is waking up to the fact that them pea-shooters just ain't gettin' 'er done!(found at mausercentral):
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1430038/posts
I can't argue with that. A few weeks ago I watched a fellow shooter put all ten rounds of military match ammo in a four inch ring at 100 yards offhand with one of those using only the iron sights.
I have a DPMS LR.308. Same mags as the SR-25. Very Expensive. The gun is a great piece of weaponry, the only draw back is the mags. The guy at the shop that sold me the optics tried to warn me about the mags, said bushmaster would end up cheaper. Should have listened.
The reason is the ballistic perormance of that bullet is great at longer ranges.
I am sure the .308 develops more energy at any reasonable range although at some point that SS109 would probably overtake it.
The problem with those M4's (I think that is what they are called) is the short barrels which really lower the velocity and energy of the .223.
They seem to be gaining a reputation for busting bolts...
I would wait and see if they get this fixed
They also need to offer chrome lined barrels and chambers
as they do with their AR15s...4150 steel
imo
On my SR-25 I recently had the chromed extractor break - the edge just chipped away. I suspect the hard-chromed parts can be a little brittle. The problem is, I figure that I shot less than 1000 rounds through it. Knight's quoted me $100 for just the extractor. I got an Armalite extractor for $30 and it works just fine.
I'll call him and see if he can unscrew my rifle.
I miss my AR-10. Since I refused to register a rifle in Kalifornia that I already owned, my rifle has been residing out-of-state for some time now.
When I first purchased it, I had reliability problems.
The first problem was a failure to properly eject. The expended brass would get caught by the bolt and prevent proper feed of the next round. I puzzled over this quite a bit, finally taking measurements of clearances. Much to my surprise I discovered that the manufacturer had mis-assembled my rifle and installed an AR-15 buffer which is longer than that for the AR-10. The proper part allowed the bolt to retract about a half inch farther and the ejection problems were over.
I then discovered that there was a problem with chambering some ammo. Examination of the rounds that failed to chamber revealed that they were getting caught on a slight ledge where the barrel mated with the feed ramp. A local gunsmith polished this area for me. Since that time I had no reliability problems whatever. It's a fun rifle to shoot.
When my Springfield Armory M1A arrived (the replacement for my AR-10) I had feed problems with it. My success in trouble-shooting the AR-10 made me confident that I could find the problem. The problem turned out to be that the hole which directs gas from the barrel to drive the ejection apparently had a burr in it, preventing sufficient ejection force. A couple of small drill bits cleared the hole and the rifle now works fine.
If the manufacturer hasn't been able to make the rifle work, then I recommend that you find someone to go shooting with you who is comfortable with how the rifle works and who can experiment with it to find the problem.
well crap, they pulled my thread(I shouldn't have posted the entire article)
your test made me remember the first time I shot my Glock 23. Was out plinking with another buddy(he had a copy of an Army .45). We were shooting at a piece of old culvert pipe at about 35 yards. You could hear a clear gap between the time he fired and the impact. It was so noticeable that we were laughing at about it. FWIW he was shooting some cheap LRN reloads.
I was shooting some flat-point FMJ re-loads that I had picked up at a gun show. For the longest time I thought I wasn't even hitting the pipe. Turns out his bullets were splattering(somewhat expected)against the pipe and mine were penetrating it-through both sides!(completely unexpected!) And their impact was happening so much faster that we never could hear it...
I've ofter wondered how all the other available .40 S&W bullets would perform.
I also think as long as the enemy "insurgents" aren't willing to obey the Geneva convention, and until a more potent caliber is available, I see no problem with issuing our soldiers hollow points.
There is a reason the FBI HRT, etc. transitioned to the M-4 from the MP-5....penetration. At short range, the 5.56 won't reliably penetrate sheetrock without a lot of fragmentation.
At the ranges that count, the 7.62 holds together and goes through things and into people, which is good because people tend to try to hide behind things.
I'm done with it, and will be purchasing an M1A SOCOM ASAP.
I'm done with it, and will be purchasing an M1A SOCOM ASAP.
The real complaint against the M-4 is that it OVER penetrates. Those long heavy 69 grain bullets go right through without doing much damage.
I'd love to buy one but not until Bushmaster starts making spare parts available. I'd also like to see them chrome line the barrels, as they do on their AR-15s.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.