[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]

/wrol/ - Without rule of law, or shtf.

This is for the discussion and preparation for the possibility of the happening!

Catalog

The next generation of Infinity is here (discussion) (contribute)
A message from @CodeMonkeyZ, 2ch lead developer: "How Hiroyuki Nishimura will sell 4chan data"
8chan ‘Press Conference’
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


Now with more Bugging In!

File: 1432443951312-0.jpg (47.17 KB, 640x416, 20:13, image.jpg)

File: 1432443951312-1.jpg (333.16 KB, 1280x635, 256:127, image.jpg)

File: 1432443951313-2.jpg (160.79 KB, 1000x540, 50:27, image.jpg)

File: 1432443951314-3.jpg (206.22 KB, 1000x540, 50:27, image.jpg)

530285 No.224

ITT: post guns thar are very reliable and talk about them. Also, correct me if i am wrong about these. Use redtext to point it out so everyone can see how dumb OP is.

AKM/AK74 series rifles

G3/PTR-91 series rifles

FAL/SA-58 series rifles

These rifles are extremely reliable.

The AK is known for being able to use any type of ammo thrown in it and still function properly. Some AKs use proprietary parts, while others use commonly found parts which can sell for cheap. The issue is corrosive surplus ammo, and optics. Many AKs are minute-of-man at 100m, usually 3 MoA. They are on the small side for big guys (im 6'3", i cant use one easily), and weigh slightly more than an AR. They may not be accurate, but they work. Not really useful beyond 250m unless you know what youre doing. But at that range. You want a full power round. This cheap intermediate-cartridge firing rifle is nice, but prices have climbed over the years. Expect to pay 600$-800$ for a decent one. High end ones go for 1,600$, and probably arent worth it. 1,000$ is about what is paid for a good one.

The G3/PTR-91, though less known, is more reliable than the FAL series rifles, for the fact it has no gas port, and is less vulnerable to sand issues. Firing the .308/7.62 real fuckin NATO, it is more powerful than the AKM, because .308 > 7,62x39, and more accurate than both. The delayed roller blowback design allows for the bullet to leave the barrel before cycling the gun, getting maximum velocity. There are some issues with some rifles where the roller depths arent proper, but for the most part, this is fine, and can be fixed by replacig the rollers, or entire bolt carrier. G3 mags are 2$/per, and spare furniture is extremely cheap. The downsides are odd mag release (fixed by gunsmith for 60$), and the front non-reciprocating charging handle. This gun is large for me, so it should be huge for small people and those vertically challenged folks. Designed off of the CETME, which was designed by an escaped Nazi off of the STG-45 schematics, this gun is about as old as the AK design. These prices vary on model, from 800$-2,100$. The cheap ones shoot around 1-2MOA. expensive ones are real heavy, but go sub-MOA out of the box. Not really needed in a SHTF rifle.

FAL/SA-58, though the less accurate of the bunch, is very reliable, and looks nice. The sights are good, the piston system works wonders, the charging handle is on the receiver, and it fires the 7.62 real fuckin NATO round. Theyre decent rifles, but mags are less and less common. Another issue is there is the inch pattern, and metric pattern, which can fuck you if you dont pay attention. Aftermarket parts arent as cheap as the G3/PTR, but theyre nice. Not as nice though, because Magpul makes a PRS stock for the G3/PTR, so you can have sexy PSG-1 clone. FAL was used as a Rhodesian battle rifle. Never shot one, i hear theyre as (in)accurate as an AKM is (2-4 MOA). These run 1,000$-1,500$ Each now.

1bb4ec No.248

What about the SKS?

It's a good rifle that works great for it's price. Honestly, SHTF, you shouldn't be engaging targets outside of 300-400 M anyway. Avoid them if you can, but if you can't, you have ample time to set up on their flank and strike when they pass within 200M. Now animals are a different story. That I can see the need for a full power round. Even then though, you should be able to get within killing range of the x39. Just my .02


530285 No.277

An SKS is good, but it isnt so easy to take apart and clean, it is heavy, it is long, and most importantly cant (usually) take magazines.


ee8b37 No.305

SKS. It is also cheaper now.


9e0d7a No.307

Well lets set down some requirements:

>has to have little need for upkeep, when your on the run your not going to have much time for that

>has to have fairly common ammunition

>can take exposure to the elements as well as mud and water

>has to able to hunt with

Any others? I'm sure you can take off two of these but if you take off more than two you might as well empty all the fucking magazines into the air and drop it on the fucking ground.


cc5791 No.317

>>277

>but it isnt so easy to take apart and clean

wut. Pop the pin on the back of the bolt cover and it comes right apart.

>weight

AK74 : 6.7lbs

SKS : 8.5lbs

G3 : 9.05lbs

FAL : 9.5lbs

While it is heavy for an intermediate rifle, it isn't the heaviest of the weapons you listed. granted, they aren't intermediate rifles.

You can get detachable mags for the SKS, I haven't had a problem wit hthem so far. strippers and a 10 round are better IMO.


db0f96 No.535

OP, I hope you know that the AK74 is entirely different from the AKM besides the furniture. In addition, they are more accurate due to a flatter trajectory and far less recoil.


b7a6c7 No.538

File: 1433992047715.jpg (142.53 KB, 1400x750, 28:15, GalilACEviaFB[1].jpg)

>>224

>These rifles are extremely reliable.

While you are correct in that assessment, allow me to interject for a moment.

The AR series of rifles are not significantly worse in the reliability department as long as you get one from a reputable manufacturer. If you are worried about reliability, this is what you should look for first and foremost.

That being said, my personal bias would tell me that the PTR-91 is a good choice. It uses standard NATO ammunition, is reasonably available, and as a great sight system.

However, my personal bias still would say that a smaller round is better, so the 74 type AK is good in that regard, the problem comes when actually selecting a rifle because of the range of manufacturers and the range of different parts. Soon enough you wind up with AR money for an AK that is not much better.

So with all that out of the way, I would suggest you look at more modern weapons that have the AR features, but the reliability of the rifles you posted. Have you thought about the Galil ACE?


530285 No.577

>>535

I do. I didnt feel like writing a whole nother entry paragraph for a gun which is rather similar. Itd be similar to comparing a M16A1 to an M4A1 Carbine.

>>538

most AKs are too small for my liking. I got long arms and huge hands, and to get an AK to be comfortable, id be spending extra money which i could have used to adopt a different pattern rifle. I like the power of a full-sized cartridge such as the 7.62 NATO. The 7.62x39 to me is that oddball between the high velocity and trajectory of the 5.56, as well as its short range,and the penetration of the 7.62 NATO, as well as te weight of it. To me, id be better off going 7.62x51. The added energy, penetration, accuracy, and range is well worth it.

Im heavily considering a PTR-91. As a matter of fact, i am dead set on it. However, i am not sure which model to get.

The FR seems nice, so does the A3R. They should hold around 1-1.5 MoA, but may be a little picky in ammo. Ive heard someone used the A3R to hit 4" groups at 330yds. 1200$-1300$

The GI is the most rugged and reliable, but it is 2-3 MoA. It will eat anything you feed it. 875$

The MSR seems wonderful, especially since i am in that shitty "no spooky flash hider" type of state. It is said to be 0.75 MoA, which is nice. The downside is it doesnt have built in irons, but it is freefloated. I think it is 1,100$.

The MSG model is superior, but it is also much more money. If i had 1,700$ to spend and needed a sniper rifle, id get one, but i am looking for a DMR. If it was really worth it, i would buy one in a heartbeat. The 1,700$ model has sights on it, the 2,600$ one is freefloated.


b7a6c7 No.580

>>577

I wouldn't worry about the lack of iron sights on a rifle if you get the right optic for it, namely an ACOG. You can actually use it like you would a cco by looking at the target with both eyes open, then it works like any collimator sight. So in that way, the ACOG can be used as both a ranged optic and a CCO. Iron sights would be harder to acquire in a closed environment anyway, not to mention low-light conditions.


530285 No.601

>>580

An ACOG costs more than the PTR-91 FR and 100 twenty-round magazines combined. Im probably getting an SWFA-SS 10x scope, which should be just as durable, seeing as it has a navy contract serial number N00164-93-C-205. It sells for like 300$, has 75 MOA adjustments in all directions, which is plenty for my <800m usage with a .308 round, and should have similar quality to a 1,000$ Leupold scope.


b0daa7 No.662

What about SKS? They are not as costly as those.


79a2a8 No.665

>>662

Get what you can afford. If it's a Mosin, then so be it. If it's an SKS, then so be it. You don't NEED a PTR or AR, but they are nice to have if you can afford them.

Most Strelok don't know what MoA is or how it is utilized in shooting. While it is excellent information to have, it's not a debilitating handicap for a simplistic shooter.

I'd say it's safe to assume you're not looking to achieve sub-MoA group, you just want a decent weapon that fits your plan.

If you want an SKS and have an idea of how you're going to implement it into your it and overall plan…go for it.

You may find this comapny very helpful if you purchase a Mosin, SKS, or AK; http://strikehardgear.com/sks-carbine/

The things you need to be concerned about overall are; 1.) familiarity with your weapons, both function and disassembly/reassembly, 2.) training with your weapons, actually firing the weapon and drilling yourself with how to reload, how to contend with a FTF (Failure-to-Fire/Failure-to-Feed), FTE (Failure-to-Eject), ect… 3.) weapons care and maintenance.


febd13 No.766

I'd say that a pump action 12 gauge is a must.

>Extremely reliable

>Ammo is very comm and diverse

>00 Buckshot is more lethal than rifle rounds within 25 yards


d9f084 No.767

>>224

What exactly is wrong with ARs? I don't really see much in the thread.

Why is there still stigma for a firearm that has proven itself time and time again in warzones and used by rebels as well (vietcong used them FARC uses them and countries that have held onto them for decades still have them in serviceable condition, including Vietnam and Cambodia).

>>580

>>601

You don't really need an Acog, you can go with most prism sights and they would do well (if you do want an exact copy of the ACOG TA01 take a look at the Atibal 4x32 scope)

>>577

Iron sights make shots at longer range kinda iffy.

Mostly because you have to focus on the front sight (not the target) to get consistent shots, you're between 3 focal planes.

A decent and durable scope or red dot is really good for 300 yard shots (red dot with a magnifier can get you out to 500~600).

Iron sights aren't really in use nowadays either, lots of deployed admit they never used their BUIS because their Aimpoint or ACOG did them fine. The Austrians and Brits have long done away with ironsights since the 70s and 80s.


e89ff5 No.768

So since armoring your limbs isn't practical, statistically it looks like the first thing to invest in would be a skull bucket


e89ff5 No.769

Whoops wrong thread let me fuck right off back to /wrol/


464eba No.787

>>768

most helmets provide negligible protection from rifle rounds at best


6afba2 No.795

I would go for a VZ-58 if it's common in your area.


3b4487 No.821

>>795

BTW, the vz-2008 is shit


d6aaa7 No.823

>>787

Any skull bucket provides better protection than your hair. Id take even a 6% increase in survivability over bugger all.


6afba2 No.825

>>823

not to mention shrapnel

i dont think everyone needs a helmet wrol, especially if you do not expect to get into frequent heated firefights, i.e. going innawoods.


1aaebd No.826

>>825

Avoidance is the best thing to do.

Is warscribe still around? I just came back to here after a long time and don't know who's all still around.


8e2a47 No.828

>>826

I've debated over getting one myself. I'd treat a helmet more like a extention of my chest rig. Attaching carious items such as a HL-1 light, NODs, IFF, ect… with ballistic protection being an added bonus, but some SOF guys have used helmet with no ballistics protection as well.

I'm still loitering, can't get rid of me that easily


b0bb64 No.841

>>787

http://www.xshellhelmets.com/mk-1-ak.html

boom

granted, they're still in preproduction, and will probably end up being super fucking heavy and cost twice that of a FASThelm, but there is (or will be soon) an option out there


09388a No.845

>>823

>>825

>>826

>>828

>>841

I think that helmets would still be useful just to save yourself from concussion if you trip and fall or if you bang your head on a doorway.

However, I am of the personal opinion that steel pot helmets are probably the best choice for me in a wrol situation because:

A. Essentially the same level of protection as kevlar for around $20

and B. You can use steel helmets as a cook pot, hot water pot, or wash basin and it can be used on a campfire.

However, steel is heavy and it doesn't allow integration of NVGs, so its something I will have to work around in that regard.


8e2a47 No.846

>>845

Steel pots are a good intermediate form of protection. They'll stop lower velocity pistol rounds dead cold, but glancing shots can be deadly and higher velocity rounds may penetrate.

Kevlar is designed to stop incoming projectiles up to Level-IIIA rating, including glancing shots. Remember, Kevlar is a weaved fiber, so it has certain properties that formed steel doesn't.

If you all you can afford or obtain is a steel pot and PASGT-V or similar vest, than you're already a left up on protection over those with nothing.


6afba2 No.855

>>317

wish there was a way of making the SKS lighter, i read that even synthetic sks stocks dont do much




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]