Friday, September 21, 2018

battle rifle book 9


BATTLE RIFLE BOOK 9
BEST 30 CAL RIFLE
If you have decided that a full cartridge rifle is for you, you have a few choices.  Each one has both problems and advantages.  Just as with the carbines, each will have its own dedicated chapter to follow, but here you need to decide mainly by price point.  I no longer consider the Garand a viable option, it being nothing but overpriced junk to pick from now ( just like my beloved Enfield has sadly become ), and that leaves you the AR, the HK, the M-14, Galil  or FN-FAL.  Next, I discard the Galil due to uncertain pricing and availability and spare parts issues. 
*
Now, let me just get this out of the way.  The AR-10 is a piece of crap by most accounts.  It is also a VERY cheap piece of crap.  And if you use it in its proper role as a sniper rather than a spray and pray, it will probably-not guaranteed, but probably-work okay.  Not great, but okay.  You will find with thirty cal semi’s, you very closely get exactly what you pay for.  For $500, you can get an AR-10, and they are the worst.  For $1,000 you get one of the better G-3’s ( although you’ll find the rifle regardless of manufacture shares a very undesirable Achilles Heel ), and if you can’t quite swing that you can get them for $700, although you would be advised to either afford the $1k or do without.
*
You used to be able to get the Soviet sniper for a grand, but what is offered now is a civilian version which isn’t an option.  That is a shame.  It wasn’t all that accurate, but it was for a designated marksman rather than a sniper anyway.  They made snipers out of users of the Mosin-Nagant, so that tells you they at least have the capacity of trying to modify tactics to match to the less than perfect weapon.  So, at the lower end you get either a $500 rifle or one for a grand.  After that, you jump to $1500. 
*
Now you get to choose between accuracy or ruggedness, again just like the carbines.  The M-14 is the more accurate one although I’ve read it is a bit more delicate, a bit more needy of an armorers attention more often.  Less robust but a more accurate rifle-I see no issue with this trade off, just beware of this feature and be able to provide for it.  To me, accuracy with semi thirties is usually crap, no better than much cheaper options, so if a M-14 is as accurate as they claim this would be a very good thing indeed.  I don’t care for delicateness, but the other option is wasting ammunition.  It is a trade-off either way.
*
That leaves the FN-FAL, at about the same price as the M-14.  But which you get a much more rugged weapon which was battle proven far longer on a much wider scale than the M-14 ever was ( I can’t see the M-14 as a sniper rifle leaving much of a record, since they are given far more lavish attention than a grunts rifle anyway ).  The G-3 was used by many militaries but the FN-FAL saw a lot more combat.  And the troops seem to have universally loved it.  It is hard to tell if the M-14 was loved on its own merits or if it was just a far better alternative to the then Crappy Corporate Colt junk that was given to kill off the GI’s far quicker than the Viet Cong could manage ( Hump Colt.  I’ll never buy one of their guns, not even used ).
*
If it was my decision, I would use the following criteria.  Am I a good shot?  If not, I’d use the FN-FAL at much shorter ranges.  It should last longer with fewer problems.  If I was a marksman I’d go with the M-14 and have plans and parts in place for its more fickle nature.  Those are your two best rifles to pick from.  If I was hurting for money but not desperate, I might consider the $1,000 PTR-91.  I could then get a second clone for $700, the Century Arms version.  Even if I had to buy both in Century Arms, while they are not great they would work good enough IF I knew I always had the advantage of distance.  Close in, I’d worry about the G3’s and the AR-10’s because they simply are NOT reliable enough long term.  With distance, quality control is less of a worry.  This way I could get two rifles of middlin quality for the cost of one great one.
*
If I was just too damn dirt poor to pay attention, I would stick with the AR-10, as you can own two for the price of one middlin rifle.  So, you can own two great rifles for $3k, two middlin rifles for $1500 or two crappy rifles for $1k.  If I was even poorer than that, my only choice is to revert back to the carbines.  It would be a tight race but you could in theory own two AR-15’s for $500 if you made a lot of compromises.  But let’s return focus on the Battle Thirties.  As you can see, this is NOT a cheap option.  Your ammo costs double and your rifles cost two to three times as much.  A lot of this has to do with lack of popularity.
*
If you return to yesteryear, the last time thirties were affordable was almost twenty years ago.  You could say the same about houses or health care.  It sucks, because you had almost ninety years where there was always cheap war surplus rifles of one kind or another available to the poorest person.  That is completely over and done with now.  As the Industrial Oil Age sputters and dies, so does the benefits it allowed.  Such as affordable weapons of higher quality.  You can still get crap quality, more affordable than ever as companies desperately strive to avoid bankruptcy.
*
And THAT phase of the decline is almost over.  So you need to decide NOW, what can you afford in multiples and nut up and buy the damn things no matter how much it hurts.  Because the pain will just increase, until the supply decreases to the point they are no longer an option.  Act now, or you never will be able to act.  This applies double to affordable ammo.  If you can’t afford your weapon of choice, in multiples, AND all the ammunition you think you need, NOW, you are quickly going to run out of time and options.  If you can’t afford full power thirty caliber, go with carbines.  It is definitely better than what you will end up with which is nothing.
( .Y. )
( today's related link https://amzn.to/2x8GjgX )
*
note: free book.  Plague https://amzn.to/2xHAt5u .  
*
Please support Bison by buying through the Amazon ad graphics at the top of the page ( or from www.bisonbulk.blogspot.com ). Or PayPal www.paypal.me/jimd303 

*** Unless you are in extreme poverty, spend a buck a month here, by the above donation methods or mail me some cash/check/money order or buy a book. If you don't do Kindle books, send me the money and I'll e-mail it to you in a PDF file.  If you donated, you may request books no charge.  
*** My e-mail is: jimd303@reagan.com  My address is: James M Dakin, 181 W Bullion Rd #12, Elko NV 89801-4184 ***E-Mail me if you want your name added to the weekly e-newsletter subscriber list.
*** Pay your author-no one works for free.  I’m nice enough to publish for barely above Mere Book Money, so do your part.*** junk land under a grand *  Lord Bison* my bio & biblio*   my web site is www.bisonprepper.com *** Wal-Mart wheat***Amazon Author Page
* By the by, all my writing is copyrighted. For the obtuse out there

36 comments:

  1. What's the problem with the AR10's? I'm building one right now, slowly but surely, already have some parts and have an idea of what the end result will be. I keep seeing mention of feed and extraction problems but nothing concrete and no reasons why. The extraction hook rips grooves in the rims and misalignment between cartridge and chamber.

    As far as the ripped rims is concerned I have seen that with my Rem 870 and walmart bought Winchester bulk #7 shells but all others seem to work fine in that gun. Those same shells that rip in my 870 perform flawlessly in my 100 year old Winchester model 12.

    I'm not going to let other people's problems change my mind because I am going with the same part suppliers that I got my AR15 parts from. I know no one else around here that has an AR10 so I can't get direct info. It'll be another situation where I won't know how to fix it until after it breaks deal. Got any info on the AR10 failures?

    FWIW, my AR10 will look like a standard early 70's M16, stock, front grips, etc, but it will have a much longer barrel (24" twisted flute) and possibly piston rather than gas block. It will also have a Leupold 50X scope on it. My neighbor get's Leupold stuff at 60% off. Oh yeah, the important part, I'm thinking about getting an 80% lower too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have no insider info on the problems. I'm just going by the general reports on both the AR10 and the Mini-14. 90% report problems, so I just assume the worst ( although, granted, everyone loves the HK-91 and that seems to be misplaced ). The biggest concern I've heard isn't feed/extract but parts compatability. Not all mags fit all models, etc. Personally, I don't have any more issue with the AR-10 as I do with the AR15. I just know to stay with one manufacture, to test or review all magazines before deep stocking them, and to assume I'll never be able to find another gun from anyone else post-apoc. But you can say the same with popularity with almost all other guns. Enfield, HK91, Mini-14, M14. If you are doing an 80% AR10, and buy the kit from Palmetto State, it is a $500 gun ( I know you prefer more expensive/higher quality ), so you get two for the price of one HK or 2/3 of one M14/FN-FAL. On a budget, that is important.

      Delete
  2. My command in the Navy was still using the M-14 in the Gulf War (the first one), and despite being stored and used in a saltwater environment, never gave me a bit of problem.

    If anyone is trying to decide what to get me for Christmas, you won't go wrong getting me one of those.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They certainly have their fan base and I can't see any issues with them, really, besides the price. You can't love the AR and then hate the 14 when they both have fragility problems to give them their accuracy. Boils down to price.

      Delete
  3. If you recall , I carried the 14 in da jungle. Primarily because of reliability over the 16. That and its one shot kill ability.
    Later when posted stateside in Arizona , I was on a Match team
    using a much refined 14. It and I could easily place a whole magazine into the bullseye at six hundred meters. Usually around a four inch group too.
    You'd think I'd own an M1A now days eh ? Nope , I much prefer an older Remington model 700 bolt gun. Sure wish it had a box mag tho.
    Might be nice to have an HK417 too , if I had bucks to burn...
    Still want a box fed bolt in 5.56 , to use up all the ammo I've ratholed for the mini 14...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just pulling out of my butt, could the Mini be modified like the SKS to turn into a bolt gun?

      Delete
    2. Of course...but then too...WHY !
      The weapon was not designed to be fed ammo from the top. It would effectively be faster to just change mags. If a person was so undisciplined as to require doing this, then perhaps just use the five round mags ?
      BTW Got your recent letter. Still doing the hunting thing at the moment so might not get around to looking into that for a few days yet.

      Its been a true test of will , to stay out there right now. The heat index has averaged right at 120° all week. The deer are only moving at night so the hunting sucks too. Pretty wet also lol.
      Came back to the house for a real shower ha ha.
      Heading back out the door at 4:00 tomorrow morning.
      Gawd this AC feels downright arctic , after being out in these temps all week now !

      Delete
    3. 120 !!!!!!
      Holy crap stick dude! On turning the Mini into a bolt, the whole reason is to not have to buy another gun. You are still using the mag.
      Glad the mail got there-whenever you get a chance, for the second half of the test.
      Enjoy, or be careful out there, whichever one applies :)

      Delete
    4. Naw , I need the second 5.56 rifle just because of the two is one rule. I'd sure hate to have a broken mini and still have thousands of rounds for one.
      Even tho I kinda think they are almost useless as a single shot gun on anything larger than a coyote.

      Yeah it's a wet heat tho lol. Just call me demented...
      Gotta test yourself against the local environment !

      Delete
    5. My Vietnam veteran uncle told me the Americans kept on trying to get Australian soldiers to trade or they'd try to steal the Australian SLR because it was more reliable and hit with authority.

      I remind everyone of the Falklands war. The British with semi-Auto FALs and the Argentinians the select fire. As much as everyone loves full auto it's semi that rules the day. But lets add one more thing into the mix there. The British nearly lost because of logistics.... Maybe semi-auto should be bolt action? Then again I _STILL_ have a bee in my bonnet about Martini Actions. I spent all night "researching" them. 577/450 good for anything that walks within 150 yards of you on this planet (including elephants)

      Delete
    6. I think by and large the Brits were pretty darn good across the board on infantry rifles their entire empire. The US, not so much, almost like they accidentally tripped and fell over the 30-06 and everything before or after blew chunks. I bring that up because of your love affair with the Martini-mirroring my feelings on the Enfield.

      Delete
    7. Spud-okay, sorry, I shouldn't have forgot about One Is None. I acclimated quickly to Florida, but then I had just moved from OK and east Texas. Took me forever with the cold here. Now, I can't see wet or dry heat as being desirable :)

      Delete
  4. The few M-14's that were not destroyed by the Clinton Administration while in storage, are being upgraded as Designated Marksman weapons by the DoD. Not much left but the bolt and receiver, covered in fancy Army-custom hardware.
    These are reported to be very good weapons with excellent accuracy (they should be at the price Uncle pays for each complete one!) and using the stockpile of M-14 magazines that are 60 years old. The tooling for the M-14 was sold to Taiwan, so if you can get an M-14 clone from Taiwan it's as "real" as an American made one. Chance of this are very slim.

    Watch video from Libya during takedown of Kaddaffy and pay attention to the Belgian select-fire FAL's being pulled from original packaging and pointed at the sky for punctuated "Alluah-Snackbar!" MK had plenty of oil money for the best of everything.
    pdxr13

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Alluah-Snackbar!" You are friggin killing me! Okay, I've heard of several different private companies making new M-14's. How "real" are these? How does the tooling given to Taiwan factor in there? Did these companies have duplicates, or was it because the patent expired? Are these mil-spec? If you know. Just curious. Like I could ever afford $1500 per rifle.

      Delete
  5. It seems that once you start getting into the semi’s (and even some of the bolts) that you’re looking at spending quite a lot after the ammo. I would think that it wouldn’t even be worth considering any semi unless you could factor in at least a couple of thousand rounds of ammo to go along with it, and that’s probably on the low end of ammo considerations.

    So what battle gun do you recommend for the truly poor survivalist? The fellow that if he were to manage to scrape together the dear amount of a few grand, and would be better off putting most of that into junk land, shelter, and food?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If it was me, and I was poor and spending most of my money on land and wheat and had a minimum left over for guns and ammo? Today's choices are crap. First, you need a bolt, period. I consider 1k bolt and 3k semi a starting point and I wouldn't sleep better at night until it was 3k and 9k minimum. So, you have to really stick with carbine rounds at half the price. You can reload down on full size rounds, or go with a chamber adapter if needed, or just go with a carbine long arm. The only problem there is you cannot reload cast lead bullets unless you paint coat them. If you just want to buy factory rounds, I'd say just go with a cheap AR and install a cut off on the gas tube to make it a bolt ( put on a higher quality bolt handle ). But then you went from a $350 rifle to a $425. And bolts firing carbine rounds are under that. So just go with the AR if you are worried about spare parts availability. Single shots are $250-$300, but you are going to sacrifice accuracy for simplicity and price savings. Unless you can defend yourself adequately with a 22lr or 12 gauge, there just isn't much available under $300 ( and I'd beware used guns. Not much mark down and you don't know how much it has been used and abused ). It would help to know a little bit more about your circumstances in this recommendation. Short range, long range, populated, rural? Budget, high or low powered round, bayonet a requirement, that kind of thing. I guess if I had to start over it would have to be at a worst case of a single shot 223 and a thousand rounds for $600. I hope I covered enough.

      Delete
    2. My apologies. You gave a good and detailed response, and it was sort of wasted on me. I am not quite in such a position anymore, but was at one time not too long ago. In fact, right after the layoff, I was faced with a situation in which I had about $5k that I had to stretch out to last for the rest of my days. I think that I had already purchased the junk land, so about half of that would have went towards wheat and garden seeds, and the rest towards shelter and clothing.

      I was just trying to steer the topic back to the poor survivalist, sort of as a “what if” for someone that is in such a position, which I assume is a large part of your audience.

      Personally, if I were actually in such a position, I would probably spend the least of my funds on guns and ammo, but that’s just me I suppose. I get the impression that a lot of survivalists have some sort of wild west fantasy going into the collapse, and regardless of how much they practice, and how good they think that they are, they will not still be alive by the 12th gunfight. Lest someone misunderstands what I’m saying, I’m not saying you should go unarmed, just that everything else should come first. But if you are super poor, eating, clothing, and shelter, is a heck of a lot more important than having lots of guns and ammo. And unless you are really remote to begin with, you almost certainly won’t survive for long regardless.

      Delete
    3. If I may be as bold as to suggest the Marlin 336 in 30-30.

      Delete
    4. The subject was a bit off topic, but a good reminder and synopsis for others. Of course, the book is about the best semi, even though I don't recommend semi's. It is just exploring a niche topic. I like debunking the survival advice that has been around far too long.

      Delete
    5. And actually, to add to the original comment, I wonder how critical an entire case of 223 ammo is to have if you are armed with a single shot. A half case brings your cost down to $400 total. Not what I'd be content with but a darn good start from zero.

      Delete
    6. 12th gunfight? Heck, I'm thinking I'd be lucky to even know that I'm about to be in my first (in that by the time my noggin works out what's going on ..... well someone will be nicking my Martini 12g. I'm hoping my boots don't fit them).

      BUT if I don't stock up you just know my luck I'll be on battle 17 and out of ammo. Hopefully I will be able to think of such a nasty insult that they'll blanch at my harsh words and leave me in peace.

      Delete
    7. Blanch at my harsh words-HA! You get it. Stockpiling is for IF you survive, it isn't life insurance. It is for the inverse of Murphy's Law. Everything that can go wrong, will, including you surviving past when you reasonably should have-so prepare for that. Actually, is that an inverse or a corollary? What am I, an English teacher? Hump all if I know. Carry on.

      Delete
    8. 9:21 here. Yes, you should absolutely stock as much ammo as possible for the future, but as you say, with the intention of preservation (of the ammo) not for plans on getting into lots of gunfights. I was just trying to point out that for the poor survivalist, thousands of rounds of ammo, and semi’s, are a luxury item. And yes, I recognize that you have been saying this all along as well.

      As much as I love the old western TV series and movies of the past, there are almost times when I wish that they were never produced, for they give many a false sense of how an actual gunfight goes down. In real life, Matt Dillon would not have been town marshal for anywhere near 20 years using such gunfighting techniques; not even close).

      If want to know what makes up an actual effective gunfighter, from a man that would know, check out the book: Famous Gunfighters of the Western Frontier: Wyatt Earp, Doc Holliday, Luke Short and Others, By W. B. (Bat) Masterson (One of his last books I believe?). You can get the kindle for $3. He goes on to give examples of some very accomplished marksman that were very quick to die in a real gunfight, because despite their skills, they just didn’t have what it takes (You either have nerves of steel, or you don’t). I highly recommend this book to all the wannabe’s out there, as a wake up call.

      https://www.amazon.com/Famous-Gunfighters-Western-Frontier-Holliday/dp/0486470148

      Delete
    9. I will check out that book, thank you. Seems like a super resource. One of the reasons I'm writing the semi book now is that with so little to pick from with military bolts, to get a non-civilian designed firearm you almost have to go with semi's, AND some have gotten so cheap it is a viable option again. Yes, of course it should be used as a bolt, but I know the odds are low with 99% of the minions. As for thousands of rounds, you are no better or worse off than any other time prepping. Getting what is needed, and what you can, two different things. Really, the only thing I'm doing is branching out a smidge from totally frugal to a bit more of a budget. Trying to cover the middlin range of things. This doesn't change a thing as far as my preaching Frugal Survivalism. It is just extra. I'm going to check out that book now.

      Delete
    10. Gunfighters, as portrayed by 50's & 60's TV westerns is the most ridiculous stuff invented. Just watched another 1 hr episode of Gunsmoke last night, up to season 13 now, having started with season 1 a couple years ago. All 20 seasons have not been released yet, and each season gets more expensive than the last.

      The most ridiculous of them all was Jess Harper on Laramie. That dood was so cliche'd up with 50's western gunfighter lore he could barely move. The most laughable part? The way theu wore their gunbelts, and the fact that they wore them ALL the time. The belts hung so low they had to remove them to take a piss. LOL Why drop the whole belt down when just the holster could be extended? And, why a whole nuther belt when they already had one holding up the pants?

      Many years ago I read the Time/Life book with the word Gunfighters in the name and the whole thing has been blown so far out of proportion. I could go on and on but the point is TV westerns are decent entertainment and nothing more, same with most of the movies. Gross caricatures. There's history, and there's TV, and they seldom cross paths.

      Delete
    11. “Really, the only thing I'm doing is branching out a smidge from totally frugal to a bit more of a budget.”


      Yeah, I totally get it Jim. This was never intended as a critique. I completely get that it isn’t easy to come up with new and fresh ideas on a day to day basis. That’s why few blogs of this nature, or few blogs period, produce daily, or even weekly content. Frankly, I’m surprised that you are able to do as well as you do posting daily articles. While certain articles shine more than others, none of your articles are what I’d ever consider to bad.

      Delete
    12. It's funny, a lot of times what I consider a waste of an article, a "couldn't figure out a subject to write about today", ends up being popular. Other times what I consider brilliant is mostly ignored. I didn't read anything critical into your comments, I was just trying to be clear I'm not straying from the path of rightousness :)

      Delete
    13. GS-what really gets me in those TV westerns are the "expecting a flood soon?" pants they wear. I mean, WTF? They barely go over the top of the boot. How can you take anyone like that seriously? Ooh, I'm scared! Go put on your big boy pants and get rid of those shorts, boyo. It would be like a terrorist wearing shorts, black socks and sandals.

      Delete
  6. Mauser vs Lee Enfield North Africa Run

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5ovehapgPQ

    Webley Pistol is added to my (impractical)wish list

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I tried to watch that vid, but was quickly bored. And I have a pretty low bar on boring YouTube videos. Perhaps just in the wrong mood.

      Delete
    2. Lots of that is because neither of them knows how to operate either rifle, including using wrong hand to load.

      Delete
    3. Ah, perhaps I was seeing this subconcously and it registered as Not All Is Well.

      Delete
  7. I started as a survivalist in the 80s and tended to lean heavily toward semi 30s. Just due to acquiring over time rather than being rich, I ended up with 2 German HK 91s and 2 DSA made Fals.
    Ive come up with sling arrangements for them that work for me being left handed. Bought parts and mags when available over time.
    My two cents on these two designs after carrying each in the field, getting in and out of vehicles, and of course shooting each quite a bit.

    HK 91: My first choice. Very robust. For me more accurate than the Fal. Iron sights less likely to get knocked out of alignment. Barrel length is slightly under 18" which is a good compromise between velocity and a manageable length. If adding optics, the claw type mount seems more solid than Fal mounting options. One negative is the ejection process: combustion gasses blow the fired case out of a fluted chamber, and power kick the case meters away leaving quite a dent in the case side wall. An ejection port buffer remedies the denting.

    Fal: Slightly better to find parts for. Unless you're an Oompa Loompa, the butt stock always seems too short for proper cheek weld and sight picture. Ive added some length with a thicker butt pad DSA sold. But keeping eye out for British long length wooden butt stocks. Treats brass better.

    James is right about lack of current popularity makes 30s expensive. Fewer choices for parts and mags compared to AR weapons. I'm going with what I've got. If starting from scratch I might get an AR and a 308 bolt and call it good for rifles.
    Currently it's all the other needed infrastructure that holds my attention and directs my efforts.
    Oh yeah, my favorite doable carry load for either an HK or FAL is a four mag nylon chest pouch. Rides high and snug to chest with crisscrossing wide soft nylon straps across back. Four in pouch and one in gun for 100 rounds. Can work, run, drive and forget its there. Conceals under a light fleece jacket. 2 pair of earplugs attached to chest pouch.
    S

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can you weigh in on the recent comment about the dust cover dent issue? How the field armorer was constantly fixing them, as a dent stops operation. I understand this only applies to rough field conditions, but how does this issue sit with you? Does it make you worry about a possible future issue? I understand all about Going With What You Have. That is why I'm making the Enfield fit instead of replacing it. My question is theoretical. As if you had a choice. The commentor mentioned this issue, upon learning of it, compelled him to sell off his 91's and go with another arsenal. Just trying to get more input.

      Delete
  8. The right force applied in the right spot to any weapon could be a show stopper.
    The 91 doesnt really have a dust cover as I understand the term (I think of as a removable sheet metal part covering the bolt/carrier/recoil spring, such as the AK, Uzi, FAL.) More like a receiver "tube" that is oblongish with the appropriate channels for bolt carrier to reciprocate.
    The comment on your site, or you mentioning it was the first I had heard of the issue after casually following and reading about the design for many years. And it might be possible to strike the receiver wall enough to cause a dent or distortion restricting the bolt carriers travel. But I lose zero sleep over the possibility.
    A military armourer probably sees everything, not saying it didn't happen once on a while to a militaries communal G3s gtting beat to shit day in and day out. And I did file away the fact that if such an event occurred, it could be fixed with a mandrel set up of some sort.
    Not just because I like the HK system, but I believe you're giving this anecdote too much weight if it causes you to disregard the HK as a possibility.
    Ive had crazy shit happen with ARs and good brand handguns that leave me with thinking nothing is 100% guaranteed. Pins walk, sights get knocked off, etc.
    I just have had zero reliability issues with the 91.
    But then the unpredictable is why we have redundancy when possible.
    Thanks, S

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very good input, thank you. I don't want to discount the weapon per se. I want the issue recognized and accounted for. I have no idea how MUCH to worry about it, but it has to be an issue of this was reported as a common enough occurence. Although, as you say, the guns were communal and by definition were not as well taken care of. If I drop the AR on a rock, I expect crap to break. But from everything I've heard of the HK being a tank, an AK with accuracy, I never thought I'd have to worry about dropping the HK on a rock. Which, let's face it, hungry, tired and cold, it is going to happen.

      Delete

COMMENTS HAVE BEEN CLOSED