Battle rifle ''showdown''

m1a, and ar 10. if its going to be a battle rifle, it has to be chambered in 7.62 nato....just sayin.

both are good imho. slight lean towards the ar10 for accuracy out of the box.
 
Wish that damn Tavor 7 was good to go a year or two ago(highly anticipating this rifle).. Thanks for sharing, makes me want to keep an eye out for an xcr-m.
 
of course I don't think the M14/M1A was fairly represented in this trial although I think the way they ran it is pretty cool.
They could have used a modern pistol grip stock system to make the trial comparisons fair.
 
The people shooting the guns are more familiar with AR15/10 pattern rifle, so I wouldn't take any conclusion from that. It's entertainment, not a scientific test.
 
I had an M1A for a while and frankly my only surprise was that it tied for dead last instead of being alone at the bottom. A handsome rifle, sure, but next to other offerings it does simply does not compare.

I would have liked to have seen a Kel-Tek and maybe they should have held out for a Tavor 7 to throw some bullpups into the mix for better representation.
 
Jarvy said:
I had an M1A for a while and frankly my only surprise was that it tied for dead last instead of being alone at the bottom. A handsome rifle, sure, but next to other offerings it does simply does not compare.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I've only shot 4 of those rifles but of the 4 I have shot the M14 is easily in last place. It gets more credit than it deserves here in Canada simply because it was cheap and NR for so long. In the grand scheme of things, price and availability held constant, it's not a great rifle. It's only lasted so long in US service because there were so many of them sitting around.
 
I keep hearing that the scar-17 is really over rated

Sad to see the m14 come in so last but it is a enhanced ww2 battle rifle. Its old school tacticool and ill always love the platform for what it is.
 
The real loser was the MDR, for doing so poorly despite being a recent design.
 
I'd still take a properly set up M14 over just about anything else in the caliber, at least in an irons sights only context.

Of course, "properly set up" excludes anything factory Springfield Armory.
 
Mostly nonsense. Shooters unfamiliar with some but not all of the designs, and some rifles but not all of them equipped with important attributes like muzzle brakes and proper sights will undoubtedly skew results.
 
870P said:
I'd still take a properly set up M14 over just about anything else in the caliber, at least in an irons sights only context.

Of course, "properly set up" excludes anything factory Springfield Armory.
Click to expand...

yup, those were my thoughts too.
They should have had the springfield bush rifle model in a vltor or similar , adjustable, pistol gripped stock.
This rifle with only her irons would change the outcome of that test significantly .... I'd put money on it.
TaaxxkU.jpg
 
this is a bunch of AR-15 competition shooters shooting firearms they are unfamiliar with and a cartridge that is more powerful than they are comfortable with. The FAL, G3 and M14 are all at the bottom ?

The G-3/ HK-91 ergo's are not great, I will give them that.
 
Did Desert Tech finally work out the kinks in the MDR? I remember watching a review of it last year and the thing would jam on every other round.
 
looks like our American cousins have lost the ability to use rock-in mags....raised with a C1 I guess rockin is just easier for me....so keep on rockin, rockin me baby....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom