Russia must replace Kalashnikovs with American and French rifles?

[~~whimsy~~]

Russia's Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov has caused quite a controversy in the country with his remarks about Russian small arms, particularly the legendary Kalashkikovs and the Dragunov SVD sniper rifles. Mr. Serdyukov stated that the Russian small arms had become outdated, and added that Russia could purchase small arms from abroad after it was decided to acquire Mistral helicopter carriers from France.

What do Russian professions think on the subject?

"Foreigners admit that Russian small arms are one of the best in the world. Just show me a foreign rifle which would compete with a Russian one on all specifications, including the integrity level. How would a soldier feel in combat action if his rifle, which is widely, albeit unreasonably advertised as "more accurate," would unexpectedly malfunction? The main problem here is that Russia does not have anyone to work in the ***-making industry because of low salaries. Purchasing small arms from abroad can entirely destroy the industry in Russia," *** designer Dmitry Shirayev told Pravda.Ru.

"These arms are not likely to be become outdated ever. I am no stranger to either AK-74 or SVD, and I can say this for sure. I have not heard any bad comments about these rifles from any of my comrades-in-arms," Sergei Glussky, a former member of Rosich special task ***** unit, a participant of the counter-terrorist operation in Chechnya said.

"Terrorists from the Caucasus always use Kalashnikovs and SVDs. The funding, which they receive from abroad, gives them a very good opportunity to receive American and French small arms. They often use foreign-made communication systems at times, but they most frequently, if not always, use Russian-made rifles. All their snipers use SVD sniper rifles. This rifle stands out of criticism in all respects. What made Serdyukov think that Russian assault and sniper rifles are no good? What is good then? He did not say. Let him clarify the point, we will conduct the range practice and see what works better.

"The sitting Russian defense minister is not a military man - this is the problem. How can he judge the advantages and disadvantages of this or that type of weapon? The people who do not have an expert opinion in such questions should not make such important decisions, because they may lead to lamentable consequences in the future. Why does he think that Russia has no good sniper rifles? It brings up a story about Klim Voroshilov, which happened when he visited a field firing range. A Red Army soldier complained of Mosin's rifle to him saying that the rifle was bad. Voroshilov took the rifle and hit all the targets with it. I think we are now having a similar situation," the former military man said.

Alexander Khramchikhin, deputy director of the Institute for Political and Military Analysis: "There is a share of truth in what the minister said. It does not mean, though, that we should purchase arms from abroad. What is good about Kalashnikovs? They are simple and easy to use. This is an unrivaled rifle from this point of view. These rifles were designed for mass production, for large classic wars. However, Russia has other, more modern types of small arms, such as Nikonov assault rifle. However, unlike the Kalashnikov, the Nikonov does not have the advantages of the legendary AK-74 - its easy use, for example. Its flaws include insufficient accuracy and a high rate of the consumption of cartridges. Their accuracy range of 400 meters is not enough for present-day warfare realias.

"As for the Dragunov sniper rifle (SVD), this is a very good sniper rifle. However, this fine sniper rifle begins to go out of date too. It uses optical sights, while electronic sights are needed to increase the strike accuracy. It also needs a larger caliber.

"Before Serdyukov, Russia used to sell limited batches of sniper rifles to Britain and Austria. We still have many types of small arms that meet all modern requirements, but they are not in mass production yet. Russia needs competition with foreign arms, because competition is the driving ***** of progress - it will help us get rid of stagnation. It does not mean, though, that we must fully proceed to using foreign weapons," the expert said.

Viktor Litovkin of Independent Defense Review: "AK-74 is an old assault rifle indeed, not to mention other, earlier versions like AK-47, AKM, etc. One may set serious claims to this rifle today: when being used in action, this rifle gets diverted, no matter how solid you might be holding it. It has one big advantage, though: anyone can shoot from this rifle. If you drop it in the sand or in the dirt - nothing will happen to the rifle. Russia has another rifle that does not have such serious flaws. However, it does not have the advantages of AK-74 either. If it falls in the dirt, it will not operate, and it will take a lot of time to clean the rifle.

"There are claims to Russian sniper weapons. All our rifles are automatic. They lose precision after a first shot in *** action. Some Russian experts say that the nation's best sniper rifle is the old Mosin optical rifle. Another sniper rifle, known as Val, also receives a lot of appraisal.

"As for foreign small arms, let's take, for instance, American and Israeli arms. They are high precision weapons, but they are designed for very accurate and responsible soldiers, who do not forget to clean them. I believe that it is unrealistic and unnecessary for Russia to purchase small arms from other countries," the expert said.

http://english.pravda.ru/world/ussr/17-01-2011/116535-kalashnikov-0/

 

[vodkazvictim]

Fucking lunatic.
Dragunov SVD was not originally a sniper rifle, but a designated marksmans rifle. Only the more modern versions of it can be considered sniper rifles.
The standard AK74 has an excellent compensator, limitting barrel rise.
Russia is the only country I know of to field an assault rifle firing rocket bullets which can be fired from underwater or above water.
Russia is the only country I know of to employ a sniper rifle firing subsonic ammunition.
Ak74 may use a small round, but so do M16s.
Should Russia desire to adopt 5.56 she can field Ak101s.
Russia fields the AN94 which is an excellent technical achievement but not a rifle you want to hand out among the troops.
Russian weapons designers produced a 9MM round powerfull enough to combat modern body armour advances, meaning you can hang on to all those old 9mm HK5s and HK UMPs that bit longer.
Russia has a specifically designed assault rifle firing subsonic rounds.
Russia has a specifically designed covert ****** not requiring a silencer.
Russia's weapons are famously reliable.
This guy is a fucking lunatic. The only thing the Russians are doing wrong is not deploying a 20MM anti-material rifle.

I find it hard to believe this is serious.

Compare that to the fact that the French FAMAS assault rifle is famously unreliable and the american assault rifle is famously unreliable and suffers from short barrel length causing a loss of lethality in its 5.56MM varmint cartridge.

 

[CunningStunts]

Compare that to the fact that the French FAMAS assault rifle is famously unreliable and the american assault rifle is famously unreliable and suffers from short barrel length causing a loss of lethality in its 5.56MM varmint cartridge.

You lost me there... if you keep an AR/M4 variant clean, it's very reliable and more accurate than an AK-47 any day of the week. And the AR/M4 rifles come in different barrel lengths, but even with a 16", it is more accurate than the average shooter can hit at distances he can barely see without optics.

 

[vodkazvictim]

You lost me there... if you keep an AR/M4 variant clean, it's very reliable and more accurate than an AK-47 any day of the week. And the AR/M4 rifles come in different barrel lengths, but even with a 16", it is more accurate than the average shooter can hit at distances he can barely see without optics.

But most combat happens within ranges at which the old AKM is accurate enough.
As for reliability... M16/M4s have a long history of problems... not to mention that the stock of an M4 doesn't fold, just collapses... slightly.
You really want a 20" hexagonally rifled barrel on a rifle to make best use of 5.56.
5.56 was originally deployed with a 20" barrel after all.

I was talking to a British squaddie and he said the new model SA80A2 is the best assault rifle in the world... I'm not sure if that makes 5.56 viable or not, because I'm always hearing that it's too weak, but that's mostly from sources using short barreled carbines. I'm just not sure what to think :dunno: Equipping the infantry correctly should be priority 1. No infantry=No victory.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

The only problem with the AK IS the caliber. More weapons have been modeled after it, then any other. The 7.62x39 is good for about 100yds...maybe 150 if you're lucky, and the newer round...5.45, or something, is no better then a 5.56x45. I think the US would do well to look into the 6.3SPC, many guys I know, have said they needed to double/triple tap their targets to be sure they got a ****. The US is also moving to .338Lapua mag. for it's sniper round. The AR platform would work as it was originally claimed to, as long as you use top notch, high performance ammo, and keep the *** squeaky clean. Unfortunately, that's not always possible in combat. It also functions much better with a .62 grain bullet, as opposed to the .55 grain that's been used for years. The newer M4 variants work much better then the older, original designs, and considering the total lack of quality control that has plagued Colt manufacturing over the last few years, it's no wonder the AR15/M16 reputation is crap. I think most NATO countries that employ the 5.56x45 round, have their own designs, or use FAL's. Personally, I like a gas piston rifle, and would love to have one in .308, however, there are only so many I would consider buying....and they cost big dollars.

 

[Kingfisher]

Fucking lunatic.
Dragunov SVD was not originally a sniper rifle, but a designated marksmans rifle. Only the more modern versions of it can be considered sniper rifles.
The standard AK74 has an excellent compensator, limitting barrel rise.
Russia is the only country I know of to field an assault rifle firing rocket bullets which can be fired from underwater or above water.
Russia is the only country I know of to employ a sniper rifle firing subsonic ammunition.
Ak74 may use a small round, but so do M16s.
Should Russia desire to adopt 5.56 she can field Ak101s.
Russia fields the AN94 which is an excellent technical achievement but not a rifle you want to hand out among the troops.
Russian weapons designers produced a 9MM round powerfull enough to combat modern body armour advances, meaning you can hang on to all those old 9mm HK5s and HK UMPs that bit longer.
Russia has a specifically designed assault rifle firing subsonic rounds.
Russia has a specifically designed covert ****** not requiring a silencer.
Russia's weapons are famously reliable.
This guy is a fucking lunatic. The only thing the Russians are doing wrong is not deploying a 20MM anti-material rifle.

I find it hard to believe this is serious.

Compare that to the fact that the French FAMAS assault rifle is famously unreliable and the american assault rifle is famously unreliable and suffers from short barrel length causing a loss of lethality in its 5.56MM varmint cartridge.

All very valid points. I also thing this decision is stupid and rash. Going on the cost basis of restoring operational capabilities to a factory over buying low buck stuff, because your supplies were all sold off to *** runners in a post cold war is dumb.

People need to remember, that the 556 round is an attrition round. That's what it was originally designed for. Stress the enemies resources and manpower.

My piston-drive M4 can shoot out accurately to 400 yards with 55 ball, all day, no problem. But I still enjoy an AK.

 

[Supafly]

Fucking lunatic.
Dragunov SVD was not originally a sniper rifle, but a designated marksmans rifle. Only the more modern versions of it can be considered sniper rifles.
The standard AK74 has an excellent compensator, limitting barrel rise.
Russia is the only country I know of to field an assault rifle firing rocket bullets which can be fired from underwater or above water.
Russia is the only country I know of to employ a sniper rifle firing subsonic ammunition.
Ak74 may use a small round, but so do M16s.
Should Russia desire to adopt 5.56 she can field Ak101s.
Russia fields the AN94 which is an excellent technical achievement but not a rifle you want to hand out among the troops.
Russian weapons designers produced a 9MM round powerfull enough to combat modern body armour advances, meaning you can hang on to all those old 9mm HK5s and HK UMPs that bit longer.
Russia has a specifically designed assault rifle firing subsonic rounds.
Russia has a specifically designed covert ****** not requiring a silencer.
Russia's weapons are famously reliable.
This guy is a fucking lunatic. The only thing the Russians are doing wrong is not deploying a 20MM anti-material rifle.

I find it hard to believe this is serious.

Compare that to the fact that the French FAMAS assault rifle is famously unreliable and the american assault rifle is famously unreliable and suffers from short barrel length causing a loss of lethality in its 5.56MM varmint cartridge.

Lee Harvey Oswald, I thought you were gone :1orglaugh

 

[vodkazvictim]

The only problem with the AK IS the caliber. More weapons have been modeled after it, then any other. The 7.62x39 is good for about 100yds...maybe 150 if you're lucky, and the newer round...5.45, or something, is no better then a 5.56x45. I think the US would do well to look into the 6.3SPC, many guys I know, have said they needed to double/triple tap their targets to be sure they got a ****. The US is also moving to .338Lapua mag. for it's sniper round. The AR platform would work as it was originally claimed to, as long as you use top notch, high performance ammo, and keep the *** squeaky clean. Unfortunately, that's not always possible in combat. It also functions much better with a .62 grain bullet, as opposed to the .55 grain that's been used for years. The newer M4 variants work much better then the older, original designs, and considering the total lack of quality control that has plagued Colt manufacturing over the last few years, it's no wonder the AR15/M16 reputation is crap. I think most NATO countries that employ the 5.56x45 round, have their own designs, or use FAL's. Personally, I like a gas piston rifle, and would love to have one in .308, however, there are only so many I would consider buying....and they cost big dollars.

150 yards if lucky? So how about you stand 150 yards away and I take 30 pot shots at you with an AKM. Would you agree to that?
Lets not forget that in Vietnam the Vietcong could use trees as cover from 5.56 but shoot thru trees with 7.62X39.

5.45X39.... I dunno... Kalashnikov himself dissaproved.
6.35 I've never heard of, what about 6.5 SPC, for example? But hten; can you use it in a DMR?
The M16 ****** had a **** rep from the XM16... everybody seems to have forgotten about the AR18...
NATO countries using 5.56: Brits use the new SA80, because the old one was ****.
French use the FAMAS. The old one was **** and I don't hear stories that the new one is the best in the world.
The Germans use a carbine, but it is an uber flexible carbine.
The Austrians use the original 5.56 bullpup. If the Brits and Frogs had been smart they'd have purchased that when their own bullpups proved to be ****.
I've never heard anyt complaints that 7.62 NATO is underpowered, but then it does have control issues. Burst fire maybe?

All very valid points. I also thing this decision is stupid and rash. Going on the cost basis of restoring operational capabilities to a factory over buying low buck stuff, because your supplies were all sold off to *** runners in a post cold war is dumb.

People need to remember, that the 556 round is an attrition round. That's what it was originally designed for. Stress the enemies resources and manpower.

My piston-drive M4 can shoot out accurately to 400 yards with 55 ball, all day, no problem. But I still enjoy an AK.

The original design mentioned nothing about wounding, it was supposed to have the power to knock a man down from a 20" barrel.
Good for you, but what about the american grunt stuck with an M16A2 on burst fire (no full auto) when a squad of insurgents bust thru a door 10 metres behind him?

Lee Harvey Oswald, I thought you were gone :1orglaugh

Scheisse! Nicht sage, verstandun?! :cussing:

 

[Mr. Daystar]

150 yards if lucky? So how about you stand 150 yards away and I take 30 pot shots at you with an AKM. Would you agree to that?
Lets not forget that in Vietnam the Vietcong could use trees as cover from 5.56 but shoot thru trees with 7.62X39.

5.45X39.... I dunno... Kalashnikov himself dissaproved.
6.35 I've never heard of, what about 6.5 SPC, for example? But hten; can you use it in a DMR?
The M16 ****** had a **** rep from the XM16... everybody seems to have forgotten about the AR18...
NATO countries using 5.56: Brits use the new SA80, because the old one was ****.
French use the FAMAS. The old one was **** and I don't hear stories that the new one is the best in the world.
The Germans use a carbine, but it is an uber flexible carbine.
The Austrians use the original 5.56 bullpup. If the Brits and Frogs had been smart they'd have purchased that when their own bullpups proved to be ****.
I've never heard anyt complaints that 7.62 NATO is underpowered, but then it does have control issues. Burst fire maybe?

The original design mentioned nothing about wounding, it was supposed to have the power to knock a man down from a 20" barrel.
Good for you, but what about the american grunt stuck with an M16A2 on burst fire (no full auto) when a squad of insurgents bust thru a door 10 metres behind him?


Scheisse! Nicht sage, verstandun?! :cussing:

Few combatants will allow you the luxury of standing still for a 30rnd salvo...but it you're gonna do it, you better aim good and high. The AK round is very similar to a 30-30, and drops significantly.

I meant 6.5, I think that was pretty obvious.

The only real problem with the currant AR's as I've heard, is the round isn't powerful enough to make the operating system work effectively...hence a 62 grain bullet, to allow gas to stay in the system longer. A heavier round would make the AR a good battle rifle, and make it easier to **** the enemy with less then 2 or 3 rounds.

 

[vodkazvictim]

Few combatants will allow you the luxury of standing still for a 30rnd salvo...but it you're gonna do it, you better aim good and high. The AK round is very similar to a 30-30, and drops significantly.

I meant 6.5, I think that was pretty obvious.

The only real problem with the currant AR's as I've heard, is the round isn't powerful enough to make the operating system work effectively...hence a 62 grain bullet, to allow gas to stay in the system longer. A heavier round would make the AR a good battle rifle, and make it easier to **** the enemy with less then 2 or 3 rounds.

So one minute the fact that an AKM goes high fast is a detriment, the next it is to be aimed for? I'm confused.
Yeah, it was pretty obvious, I'm sorry.
Current ARs have heavy grain bullets because it's 5.56 and it's a varmint cartridge... although it is apparently good enough up close out of a 20" barrel.
You like the idea of a ehavier round AR, maybe you should buy an AR18?
As for battle rifles... do you really want to go back to such atrocities as the M14?

 

[Mr. Daystar]

So one minute the fact that an AKM goes high fast is a detriment, the next it is to be aimed for? I'm confused.
Yeah, it was pretty obvious, I'm sorry.
Current ARs have heavy grain bullets because it's 5.56 and it's a varmint cartridge... although it is apparently good enough up close out of a 20" barrel.
You like the idea of a ehavier round AR, maybe you should buy an AR18?
As for battle rifles... do you really want to go back to such atrocities as the M14?

What's so confusing? The bullet drops significantly at around 150yds, so if you wanna hit a vital organ at that distance, aim for the head. It's an under powered round, period.

Current AR's have a heavier round because it makes the *** operate better, and ***** the enemy easier. The 5.56's velocity, at least will carry it for 2 or 3 hundred yds....better then an AK round.

Why would I buy an AR18...there are many guns out there that are far better, that utilize the 7.62x51 cartridge.

If you really think the M14 is an atrocity, you clearly have cranial rectal disorder. The M14 was one of, if not THE best battle rifle ever to serve, and in many cases, still serves today. Many special ****** squads use it as a sniper rifle, and the Marine shooting team still uses it in the M1A format.

 

[zdenka]

I think the reality here is that Russia preparing a war against the Chinese, who are using Russian AK-47's. Therefore Russia needs more advanced weapons from overseas to keep 'one-up' on China. It's an arm race in Eurasia, in progress.

 

[vodkazvictim]

What's so confusing? The bullet drops significantly at around 150yds, so if you wanna hit a vital organ at that distance, aim for the head. It's an under powered round, period.

Current AR's have a heavier round because it makes the *** operate better, and ***** the enemy easier. The 5.56's velocity, at least will carry it for 2 or 3 hundred yds....better then an AK round.

Why would I buy an AR18...there are many guns out there that are far better, that utilize the 7.62x51 cartridge.

If you really think the M14 is an atrocity, you clearly have cranial rectal disorder. The M14 was one of, if not THE best battle rifle ever to serve, and in many cases, still serves today. Many special ****** squads use it as a sniper rifle, and the Marine shooting team still uses it in the M1A format.

But it's not useless over 150 yards, that's why you wouldn't happily stand 160 yards away and let someone unload a clip at you.

5.56 may carry, but I'm always hearing it's underpowered.

I heard the AR18 was excellent, what would you recommend instead? FAL?

Perhaps I should qualify that: While the M14 is a fine battle rifle/DMR, it's an uncontrollable atrocity as an assault rifle and should never have been standard issue, as we realise when we look at how fast it was replaced.

I think the reality here is that Russia preparing a war against the Chinese, who are using Russian AK-47's. Therefore Russia needs more advanced weapons from overseas to keep 'one-up' on China. It's an arm race in Eurasia, in progress.

Russia won't start a war with the chinese; Russia has few men and they're poorly motivated to defend a Russian state that treats it's populace so poorly.
The chinese are not using Russian AKs, the chinese use the QBZ which is probably a piece of **** and uses neither 7.62, 7.62NATO, 5.56 or 5.54. The result is that they're not gonna be able to use captured ammo from anybody they invade, but their similar size round will have similar performance; in a nut shell, all the stopping power problems, none of the commonality bonuses. Not the first time the laughably titled P.L.A. has failed to think things through.

Note that china never innovates, but constantly buys and copies from the Russians. so when the chinese attempt to ****** the Russians they may well run up against the same problem as Chechen rebels trying to take down Su25s with Russian made anti-aircraft guns - inbuilt systems prevented the weapons firing upon Russian jets.
The Russians are not stupid (even if they are crazy) and it's telling that they're the masters of chess (which the chinese did NOT invent, before anybody says it).

 

[Ravenholm]

AK47 kicks ass!.

It's the *** I always go for when playing Left 4 Dead 2. I choose it over every other weapon in the game.

Ali G loves the rifle too. And with good reason.

 

[LukeEl]

You know what I miss, the Daisy Air Rifle, **** you need to pump that thing 20 times to break the skin.

 

[Rey C.]

I don't really keep up with it, but Russia certainly seems like an odd place. Like it's constantly in a state of boom or bust. One minute you hear that they've got things headed in the right direction, and then the next minute you hear that they can't afford to put fuel in their fighter jets and Russian girls are selling their asses on the street to buy blue jeans and toilet paper.

As for small arms, I don't see that it really matters what the Russians have. If this does have something to do with a perceived threat from the Chinese (or the Americans), the Russians are falling so far behind technologically that unless they can afford to give every Russian soldier a ray ***, they'd all be living in the stone age after a good fight anyway.

One thing I will give the Russians credit for though: they make some wild ass porn! :nanner: I'd have to ***** a gallon of bad moonshine to think of some of the weird **** they come up with just as general practice.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

But it's not useless over 150 yards, that's why you wouldn't happily stand 160 yards away and let someone unload a clip at you.

5.56 may carry, but I'm always hearing it's underpowered.

I heard the AR18 was excellent, what would you recommend instead? FAL?

Perhaps I should qualify that: While the M14 is a fine battle rifle/DMR, it's an uncontrollable atrocity as an assault rifle and should never have been standard issue, as we realise when we look at how fast it was replaced.

Because I wouldn't stand happily and let anybody, shoot anything at me! What the fuck...why would you do that. It is an underpowered round, it just is. Great ***, shitty round. If it fired a .308, it would be almost perfect.

Yes, it is underpowered, that's why soldiers are double tapping enemy targets, and why the 6.5SPC is being looked at.

I would go with a FN, or a DSArms FAL...if you can swing it...H&K or Galil.

The M14 ISN"T an assault rifle, it's a battle rifle, and it's still in service today...SIXTY YEARS latter, and being used, for duty in the Middle East, it's also been improved upon, like all things, and was only uncontrollable, in full auto. It was developed to combine the M1 Garand, which is the design it was based upon, and improved on, and the BAR...which was VERY heavy, and a great squad machine ***...but heavy, and cumbersome. The answer was one weapon...the M14 fit that bill.

 

[georges]

If I had to use an accurate weapon whether it is in 5.56 or 7.62*51 nato I would go for the galil, it is very durable, accurate and reliable and so much better than the ak (not whithout reason it is widely used in south africa, south american and some asian countries). My choice for the sniping rifle would be an m1a1 or the old beretta bm59 mark ITAL both being based on the garant rifle.

 

[vodkazvictim]

I don't really keep up with it, but Russia certainly seems like an odd place. Like it's constantly in a state of boom or bust. One minute you hear that they've got things headed in the right direction, and then the next minute you hear that they can't afford to put fuel in their fighter jets and Russian girls are selling their asses on the street to buy blue jeans and toilet paper.

As for small arms, I don't see that it really matters what the Russians have. If this does have something to do with a perceived threat from the Chinese (or the Americans), the Russians are falling so far behind technologically that unless they can afford to give every Russian soldier a ray ***, they'd all be living in the stone age after a good fight anyway.

One thing I will give the Russians credit for though: they make some wild ass porn! :nanner: I'd have to ***** a gallon of bad moonshine to think of some of the weird **** they come up with just as general practice.

I can tell you've never been to Russia. In some ways their tech is ahead of ours; they have gen 5 plasma stealth while we're in gen 3 (Plasma stealth isn't the worlds greatest thing, but that's the first example that springs to mind...)
Russia has more millionaires than any other country. But most Russians are very poor.
Russia's military has some problems, maintenance, investment, etc... but also some excellent stuff.

Because I wouldn't stand happily and let anybody, shoot anything at me! What the fuck...why would you do that. It is an underpowered round, it just is. Great ***, shitty round. If it fired a .308, it would be almost perfect.

Yes, it is underpowered, that's why soldiers are double tapping enemy targets, and why the 6.5SPC is being looked at.

I would go with a FN, or a DSArms FAL...if you can swing it...H&K or Galil.

The M14 ISN"T an assault rifle, it's a battle rifle, and it's still in service today...SIXTY YEARS latter, and being used, for duty in the Middle East, it's also been improved upon, like all things, and was only uncontrollable, in full auto. It was developed to combine the M1 Garand, which is the design it was based upon, and improved on, and the BAR...which was VERY heavy, and a great squad machine ***...but heavy, and cumbersome. The answer was one weapon...the M14 fit that bill.

6.5 does look like the way forward... I'm beginning to think we should have 5.56 SSWs, 6.5 ARs and 7.62 DMRs... but then the logistics would be back to being a ****** mess :dunno:

 

[CunningStunts]

Some of you guys have overlooked the fact that the AR/M4 is based on predecessors that have been around for a long time, but they are completely new, redesigned in the 90s and the current version compared to the Vietnam era rifle is like comparing a Porche 911 Turbo to an Edsel.

For a sniper rifle, you still can't beat a nice .308 bolt action with good optics. :2 cents: