I've had a couple of AR-15s and they were pretty good guns and there is a zillion after market parts for them, but I was just wondering who makes the best .223 combat/military rifle today? Sig, HK, Beretta, Aug, Galil, ......?

i like DPMS.

__________________
George Jamison

On active duty, the guys are partial the ones made by FN.

__________________
"... shall not be infringed."

I find little to fault with my Ruger Mini 14 Ranch Rifle.

Second vote for the Ruger. Takes a lickin' keeps on tickin'. I Do love the simplicity of the garand action

__________________
Forum consigliere

As soon as we are attacked by hordes of poodles, I will consider a 223 rifle a "battle rifle".

As long as you stay with the brand names, they are all pretty good.
The Ruger has been mentioned several times, and should be, as well as DPMS.
When you move to the more expensive brands, you are getting a little more, but paying a lot for it.

I agree. Caliber .223 (5.56mm) and "battle rifle" are oxymoronic. A battle rifle should be an M1, M14, FN/FAL, G3, etc. Even a K98k would be considered a battle rifle.

Iraq and Afghanistan have really shown the deficiencies in the M16/5.56mm NATO platform. Too many shots to permanently take down the enemy. Engagements are taking place at much longer ranges, and the 5.56 NATO just doesn't have the punch of a larger caliber.

This deficiency is also exacerbated by the U.S. Army's lack of intensive marksmanship training.

+1 Almost as soon as the U.S. military adopted the M16, they began trying to find ways to improve the performance of the .223 cartridge and they've been at it every since. In the latest permutation of the M16 they whack six inches off the barrel which further reduces the performance of a marginal cartridge and call it "improved" again. It really doesn't matter what rifles fires the .223, it amounts to the same thing at the target.

I have a Mini-14 Standard.AK-47 is the best however IMHO.50,000,000 terrorists can't be wrong.

__________________
WALSTIB

Rock River Arms is the top of the line like S&W is . More matches are won with the Rock than any other make at Perry and other matches. Plus it is carried by DEA and many others.

I like Stag Arms, plus you can't beat the price!

__________________
Steve

Colt manufactured M-4.

__________________
John

M14 is my go to.

mini 14 and ar15 bushmaster dpms i would like to have a m1a but i have a good pile of 223 ammo so im sticking with that for now

__________________
WILL WORK FOR AMMO!

We should have stayed with the U.S. Springfield Model 1903!!

I have shot with dozens of AR owners. None.. zero.. nada.. had a rifle as reliable as my Bushmaster. There have been many more accurate, more expensive, more accessorized, but none fed like my Bushmaster. I have put numerous ammo types through my Bushmaster, including thousands of cheap lacquered (with drip marks on the steel case) 15yr old Wolf ammo and it just works each and every time the trigger is squeezed. IMO, the best AR is one that goes bang every time.

The Izhmash factory in Izhevsk, Russia makes a version of the AK74 in .223. It is simple, reliable, and accurate enough for close range fighting. The Heckler & Koch HK33 is also a great rifle. Not as simple as an AK, but definitely reliable and accurate. If I was in Afghanistan, I would prefer an M14, an M60, or an FN FAL. The FN FAL chambered not in 7.62 NATO, but in 7mm-08; just to be different.

Although I would not like someone shooting at me at 400 yards with an M4, I would prefer to shoot back with something a little bigger.

LMT,,,nuff said

__________________
NOT SO FAST,, NOT-- SO-- FAST

Which battle? If it involves open-field targets at fairly long range, I'd opt for my very accurate Wilson Combat carbine with conventional Leupold scope. In CQB, or for in-vehicle use, my MSAR AUG clone with Aimpoint 2x2MOA red dot would be preferred, because of its much shorter length and quicker aiming capability. No question that the larger cartridges are potentially more effective in longer range situations, but I've shot enough animals to have a healthy respect for the .223/5.56mm, and its comparatively diminutive platform.

Gentlemen, the 5.56mm is an okay carbine round, but when push comes to shove, any of the 30 Cal. Battle Rifles beats it hands down.

My opinion is no more than any other, but I like Colt or BCM if you are looking for an 5.56mm rifle. On a budget? Then get the Mini-14 Ruger. Shooting past 400 yards in a battle? Get a larger caliber.

Opinions are worth what you pay for them so here are my recommendations. In 5.56mm, Noveske, Colt, BCM, and LMT. These guns are the champs in the week long training sessions where thousands if rounds go down range. If you want a range toy most any AR will do but if you want a reliable rugged self defense gun pay the extra few bucks for one of the previously mentioned guns.

If you want a 308 it's pretty hard to beat a quality FN FAL. I owned an H&K91, FAL, and M1A. I kept my FAL and sold the others.

The Mini-14 magazines run around $30, the AR's about $6. IMO it is easier to get a target quality AR then to find the same accuracy in a Mini-14.

__________________
Front sight and squeeze

Shot this last Friday with my stock Mini-14 @ 100 yards from a bench rest using my reloads.

untill i get a 50 cal bmg the 3 223s i have will have to do!

__________________
WILL WORK FOR AMMO!

I'll take 100% reliability over target accuracy any day. The newer Mini 14's are somewhat more accurate than many earlier models due largely to a heavier barrel contour.

Oy ve.

First off... There are not going to be any military style rifles with .223 chambers. Even old Colts that are marked .223 actually have 5.56mm NATO chambers. And no, they are not the same.

FN makes the M16A3/4 rifles in service and some M4 carbines, Colt makes most of the carbines. Other rifles are currently in service, some like the HK416 are in 5.56, some are in 7.62 such as the ScarH that Marsoc just adopted.

A Mini14 is a sporting rifle. I've had three or four, still have one. They are not made to military specs and are not as survivable as ARs made to milspec. Parts are not tested to the same level of QC. They are not meant for combat.

If you're saving your pennies for something, the SCAR series looks promising. Personally, I'd wait for the H models to become commercially available.

Despite some problems with the M4 carbines, they've been quite popular. Army marksmanship training is actually pretty good these days and first class optics are fielded. There may have been some problems with GI Green tip out of short barrels, but new ammo has come along to solve this problem.

Colt has some new gas piston guns and such coming out, including a gun with a quick change barrel meant to be essentially a light weight replacement for an M249. There is also a series of 18" barrel AR subvariants to bridge the carbine/rifle gap. In terms of things available, these are rather neat.

In terms of what you can go out and buy right now? Shrug. Colt 6920 and get some good optics for it. As close as you are going to get to an issue M4.

The Izzies dumped their Galils. Century brought the parts, hence the sporters. What did they get instead? M4 carbines.

Can you blame them? When all was said and done with the Galil, they had an intermediate caliber weapon that weighed almost the same as a FAL. Oops.

got a valmet 76 with folding stock on closeout in the early eighties; paid less than $400 great gun;to bad they are out of business. still partial to the dsa fal carbine in 308; short powerful without a lot of weight

While I humped the M-4 and came to like it, in a close range fight (under 150 yards) I'll take an AK any day!
That said, I've always liked the Vietnam issue "black rifle" the M-16! And I wish Colt or somebody reputable would build a clone of it! 20 inch barrel 1-12 twist (1-9 if you just gotta shoot the heavy stuff) and M-193 ball ammo! It's light, has enough barrel to get up to speed and just looks HOT!

Agreed. I would add Daniel Defense and probably CMMG.

I use my AR for target shooting. (It does have a 24" varmint upper).

If I ever need to protect my family I will reach for the AK.

For long range protection, I will reach for my Remington 700 Police.

Colt SP1 mentioned a barrel with a 1-12 twist. I have a Contender Super 14 in .223 that has a 1-12 twist. It likes 40gr bullets better than 55gr. If you think about it, it has a longer barrel than the military M-4.

__________________
Corripe Cervisiam

The only AR-15s I have still have today are Bushmaster and Colt. I've had other makes, and even a number of Mini-14s, but they have never been as reliable, or accurate, as the Bushmaster (XM-15M4A3) or Colt (Match HBAR).

This is almost a useless discussion. The M4 does whatever a 5.56 can do.

The HK is a nice rifle, but it is pointless. I still I wish I had one.

IMHO...

Battle Rifles are .30 cal.

__________________
John 3:16

Since the M16A1 saved my hide more then once I ow an loyalty to it.

Now if I ever had to do it again I'd go the A2 route. I like the sights better and the faster twist. I also like the 20 in barrel.

I have an SP1, (A1 clone) and an A2 with a White Oak Service Rifle Upper.

WOA is about the best there is for HP and 1000 yard Service Rifle Matches, using 77 & 80 grn SMKs.

To all those nay sayers regarding the battle rifle defination:

A battle rifle is a rifle carried into battle, regardless of your likes or dislikes of the AR, its a friggin battle rifle.

For a 5.56 battle rifle, I would go with Colt, BCM or LMT.

But I agree with other posters; in a fight, give me .30 caliber battle rifle.

I have to agree, because regardless of the type of battle, nobody volunteers to be shot with 5.56, never mind 7.62 or 30-06.

Stoner 63.

Russ

I haven't had any problems with my DPMS M4.

CB

Sako Fincub rebarreled from 7.62x39 to .223.
Geoff
Who is being contrary tonight.