Guys, I have been wondering for close quarters, I think most would say a AR10 .308 would be not wise because of muzzle blast, slower follow up shots, and hearing loss. From what I have read, most soldiers who were serving in the middle east, it would take 5 to 6 shots to stop a bad guy using 5.56. So wouldn't it make more sense to use a .308 and be one and done? In WWII soldiers used the M1 Garand for everything. I am happy with my 5.56 but I am constantly reminded it's a poor stopping round. But I would think proper shot placement it would not matter the size of the round.

OK then if I am not going to get an AR10, I really do like the .308 in bolt action. I love bolt action for the simplicity and accuracy you can't get with an AR platform. Bolt actions also seem much cheaper. anyway your thoughts

There is always the balancing act of "Which gun is best all round!" The answer is NONE! That is why you are to buy all you want.

I like my sniper rifles, the 308 is at 13 pounds and the 338 is at 18.5.
I like that 8-8.5 pound AR with a scope, That is good for varmints to 500 yds. I can carry it for hours.
But for things that go bump in the night, I love a 12 gauge pump.
And EDC for me, is a J-frame and cell phone.

Not one will do everything well, but I try to be flexible!

Ivan

My thought is 12 gauge for CQB.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The issues with 5.56 in the various sandboxes are largely due to the 14.5" barrel of the M4, the use of a round designed to penetrate body armour and the lack of meat on the meth crazed/opioid doped targets. The end result is neat .223 holes unless you make a CNS shot.

If you think 5.56 won't do it in the home defense scenario, get an AR in 300 Blackout or 6.8 SPC.

As for the AR10, they can be built up to get very close to bolt action accuracy WITH THE RIGHT AMMO. It's not happening with bulk 7.62 NATO surplus. I agree that there are plenty of .308 bolt guns at great prices that will be accurate straight out of the box. Big plus is that they are often lighter than the AR10 as well.

__________________
Release the Kraken

What is it you want. Close up or long range. AR10 works pretty good out to 200 yards.. or is that to close.

I got an AR10. A PSA. I like it, but it is heavy.

__________________
Smith..and Wesson..and myself.

Good reading. I was looking at the MP AR10 and there seemed to be some who had major issues with reliability. I have read and heard from others that AR10 will never be as reliable as most AR15's for X amount of reasons, such as exractors breaking, overgassed, undergassed, short stroking, feeding issues because chamber is too small etc... If that is true, I think Bolt action if I do get a .308 would be nice. I have a ruger american 5.56 and that bolt gun is a lot of fun.

My go to .308 is the colt 901 platform. I can even swap out the upper with a 5.56 if I like. Some folks kid me about the modularity feature of the rifle but for me it works. It is a great rifle, a bit pricey but it is a well built, reliable rifle. I use a variety of ammo and gun is accurate as I can be with bad eyes and all.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If someone can shrug off 5 rounds of 223 I would not count on them falling like they got hit with the hammer of Thor when shot by a 308.

While the military has to use some sort of FMJ you do not. The older 55 grain ammo would tumble and break up but the newer 62 grain ammo is designed to favor penetration so it often results in 22 caliber holes. A 30 caliber hole would be more effective but in either caliber something that expands, tumbles or breaks up would be much better.

My vote would be to use something other than 62 grain green tip ammo in your 5.56 and buy a bolt gun to satisfy your desire for a 308.

After looking at a few of the low cost bolt guns I ended up buying a Weatherby Vanguard select made by Howa instead. At about $500 after I bought rings it was more expensive than the low cost rifles but I think I got what I paid for. Good trigger, nice recoil pad, smooth bolt, seems well made in general and Weatherby guarantees 1 MOA 3 shot groups with good ammo. I just put a scope on it last week and have not had a chance to take to the range but if it lives up to the accuracy claims I will be very happy with it.

I think the Weatherby Vanguard rifles are a much overlooked rifles, as were the S&W 1500's and others made by Howa. Weatherby's specs and unique appearance make them a little more expensive than most, but my personal results seem to vindicate those rifles.

All of my Vanguards were bought in the 1985-1987 time frame and were the VGX finish package and looked like True Weatherby rifles with all the glitz and glitter that scares some people away. I bought 3 and still have one. First was a 22-250 with their heavier barrel. The factory target showed a group of 1.25" using a Remington trash ammo (The old guarantee was 3 shot in 1.5") The salesman told me, if I could only get that poor of group the gun shop would replace the rifle. I mounted a 6.5-20x40mm Veri-X III Leupold on a one price Redfield type base. Using Federal Premium ammo 50 gr HPBT I did have a little trouble getting the scope adjusted. The first 3 Three-Shot groups were one hole each, end of box of ammo, end of session!

I went to the LGS the next day and put a 300 Win Mag on lay-away. They allowed the gun to be shipped to Mag-na-port while on lay-away, so I had Williams front and rear barrel sights installed and the gun ported. By the time the gun returned, I had everything paid for. Installed a Leupold 3-9x30mm Compact scope on weaver bases (so I could use the iron sights also) It worked out very well with Federal Premium 200 grain GameKing bullet. Several Three-Shot groups in .25 to .5 inch groups. I continued to practice with that gun and ammo combo and was shooting offhand groups at 100 yards in the .5 inch size group regularly. This is the gun I still have and keep 4 to 8 boxes of that ammo on the shelf at all times! I ended up giving this gun temporarily to my Pastor, but it turned out to be too much gun for him. So I bought him a VGX in 270 Winchester. I never saw a person shoot so bad on paper, then turn around and drop game like my Pastor, but he could not group on paper less than 3 inches! I would shoot .25 inch groups with the same box of ammo. He took the gun to Wyoming for a Prong Horn hunt. He bagged a running Prong Horn running at about 175 yards with one shot, and two years latter a running Mule Deer at about 200 again with one shot! His Prong Horn is still in the top 5 for record Prong Horns!

Your results may very, but it shouldn't be by much!

I was also looking at the vanguard but the price was OK but I was expecting a chrome lined barrel. I do not like carbon steel as it is more maintenance.

You can buy 5.56 or better yet 223 ammo that will do the job. My local cops are using standard varmint ammo in their M4's.

My thoughts and opinions on the accuracy potential of semi-auto rifles:

I shot service rifle competition for years with M14s and M1As and I built a number of Garands for competitors in DCM matches back when bedding and metal work wasn't the problem it is in CMP matches.

The match grade M14s and M1As would all hold at least 1.5 MOA 10 round groups with M852 match ammo, (but all nets were off with the newer lots of M118). Mine would hold 1 MOA with tuned hand loads. A NM prepared M1 Garand with a match barrel would give similar 1.5 MOA accuracy with good lots of M72, and most would improve on that a bit with tuned hand loads using 168 gr SMKs.

I eventually switched to an AR-15 and, with a heavy match barrel, a free float handguard, NM sights and a good trigger, it was also 1 MOA capable.

I've also built Varmint ARs with bull barrels that are sub MOA capable.

Planning on going to war or civilian type target/hunting? As to the noise factor, a short barreled 5.56 indoors vs a 308??? Both are gonna be loud. Define close. For civilian use close, (in a fantasy type engagement) I'll take a hi cap shotgun along with a hi cap semi auto. In the real world, whatever I can lay hands on first.

I am a reloader and I like accuracy , rifles that can shoot tiny groups at long range make me happy. Rate of fire is unimportant.

The Bolt Action is my vote. I can do more , reloading wise with a bolt action. Bullet weights, powder charges , velocity ...etc.
The semi-auto is limited in ammo due the cycling dynamics of the action.

The bolt may not be the best choice for the upcoming Zombie apocolapse , but I will just have to pick the long range ones off and let the AR guys handle the rest.
Gary

I would not call the .223 a poor stopping round.

The M16 was developed with the idea of a 55 gr bullet launched at around 3200 fps tumbling and fragmenting after impact down to velocities around 2700 fps and just plain tumbling at impact velocities down to around 2600 fps.

That made the M193 ball round pretty effective out to around 200m. Where 5.56mm stopping power started to become a problem was at ranges over 200 meters. We made it worse when we adopted the SS109 round in the M855 ball ammunition - a larger, heavier bullet that had a tumbling/fragmentation range of around 100 meters. Then we doubled down with 14.7" barreled M4 which reduced the M855's fragmentation range to about 50 meters.

For civilian self defense purposes, I'd stay away from lightly constructed varmint rounds, but the controlled expansion soft point rounds make a good choice if you need longer range effectiveness. For home defense where ranges are very short, a cannelured 55 gr FMJ is still a great choice as it will tumble and fragment - and it'll start doing that as soon as it strikes dry wall so it has less risk of exiting a structure and killing a neighbor than most pistol rounds. The downside is that a short barreled .223 is gawdawful load, particularly in an enclosed space.


My home defense AR is a brace equipped 9mm pistol firing 115 gr hollow points. They are effective, particularly at 10.5'' pistol velocities, and the noise level is down around 117 dB - compared to 155 dB for a 4" 9mm pistol, and around 160 dB for a short barrel .223.

Despite years of shooting service rifle competition, I'm in general agreement with all of what you've said above.

You have a lot more flexibility in load development with a bolt action, in terms of both powder choice and bullet weight, without having to worry about functioning, bending an operating rod (M1A and M1 Garand), or being incompatible with the rollers in a roller locked rifle like the HK 91, SAR-8, PTR-91, etc.

This is my favorite longer range bolt action rifle, in large part because it's a solid 1 MOA rifle that will put the first round from a cold bore on target and then put the next nine rounds in the same 1" circle. It holds its zero week after week, month after month, and the adjustments on the scope are exact, consistent and repeatable.



Where we may or may not be in total agreement is on the "tiny group" issue. I've evolved to the mindset that "perfect is the mortal enemy of good enough". I used to focus on extreme accuracy - indexing cases, uniforming flash holes and primer pockets, sorting cases by volume, hand weighing bullets and powder charges, etc.

Now, I load on my Dillon 550B and I shoot a lot more and load a lot less. My sole concessions to accuracy are the use of a floating tool head on the 550B to align the cases during the sizing and seating operations, the one time flash hole uniforming, and hand weighing powder charges. I'll tumble my cases with the primer in and I have not cleaned a primer pocket in more than a decade. I'm plenty happy with consistent and repeatable 1 MOA accuracy in a world where the variability in wind and range estimation greatly overshadows the benefits of 1/2" MOA or even 1/4 MOA accuracy.

.308 or 5.56 or 12ga?

My answer is....

.308 and 5.56 and 12ga.

My Armalite 20" AR-10 was sub-MOA out of the box. Excellent platform and never a hiccup. With a suppressor, it's a great deer/hog/varmint rifle.

The home gun is a POF SBR .308.

__________________
Smith & Wesson beat four aces

I read your post multiple times, but I didn't see a type.

__________________
Release the Kraken

It started out as a box stock Remington SPS Tactical. You can find them new in the box for around $600. They are however entry level "tactical" rifles and that means three things:

1) the original Hogue over molded stocks are too flexible for serious shooting with a sling or a bi-pod, so you go into it with that in mind.

However, you can get a Bell and Carlson Sendero/Police/Varmint stock like the one this rifle for around $270, or a very similar stock from HS Precision for about $340 - or choose from a large variety of other stock styles.

2) The barrels on the SPS Tacticals are a bit of a **** shoot, but nearly all of them will hold a solid 1 MOA and the better ones are sub MOA capable. I got somewhat lucky in that mine is extremely stable and consistent, and did not have to re-barrel it to get the accuracy and consistency I wanted.

3) The X Mark Pro triggers they come with are nothing to write home about. However, you can get a very nice adjustable Timney Trigger for a Remington 700 for $140.

My total cost for the rifle was $1010 - $600 for the rifle, $270 for the stock plus $140 for the trigger.

That compares to the Remington XCR compact Tactical at around $1,400, street price. However it still comes with the less than stellar X Mark Pro trigger, so you're still looking at around $1,540 if you go that route. However, it comes with an very good stock, and the 416 stainless barrel is quite good.

Consequently, if you buy a SPS tactical and lose the barrel lottery, you'll have to re-barrel and will end up spending a bit less to a bit more money, depending on the barrel you choose.

On the other hand, if you go the SPS Tactical route you can build it the way you want it rather than just taking what Remington puts on it - and that was the major appeal for me. Again, I got lucky on the barrel so I'm about $400 ahead, and I'll spend that on a new barrel when I wear this one out.

----

Optics wise I spent around $900 on a Nightforce SHV 4-14x56, which along with mounts and accessories brought the total cost for the rifle to around $2200.

I'm picky about scope adjustments - I want them to be very consistent, produce the MOA change they are supposed to and return to zero, even after going all the way out and back in terms of windage and elevation adjustment. I also want an optic that will hold it's zero and the Nightforce scopes do that quite well.

I'll be honest though - in terms of optical quality you can get better optical performance for not much more money. The Leupold VX-3i series scopes, for example, are just as sharp in terms of resolution, and don't suffer from slight chromatic aberration you see in the Nightforce NXS and SHV scopes. And you can get a Leupold LRP model similar to my scope for a about the same money - although I'm not sure how well the adjustments perform in comparison.

However, at the time I bought mine, the 3i series wasn't around, and the Nightforce SHV models were a better buy than what was available given the accuracy and range of the adjustments and the available reticles.

Nightforce has addressed the chromatic aberration issue in their ATACR series, but a similar scope in that series would cost upwards of $2600. I'm ok with spending as much on the optic as I spent on the rifle, but that's my limit, which makes that series about two and a half times more than I want to spend.

A heavy barreled Remington 700 can be a little heavy for all day carry, and my preferred longer range hunting rifle is a Ruger 77 Mk II VT, with a much slimmer and lighter composite stock. I bought it in 1996, when I was looking for a new deer and antelope rifle when I lived in western South Dakota, where ranges on mule deer and antelope can be in the 500-600 yards, in areas where they are frequently hunted (units in reservation areas).

It's shown here along side my pre-modified Remington 700 SPS Tactical:



I chose the Ruger as it had an excellent 26" medium heavy barrel, and the trigger was both adjustable and very good, especially by production rifle standards. The barrel length let me get maximum performance out of the .308 cartridge, and it was light enough to enable it to be carried without undue effort.

The only issue was the extremely stable but heavy laminated stock. Once I confirmed the rifle could shoot, I bought a composite stock and pillar bedded the action. The result has been an accurate, stable and consistent rifle that while not a lightweight, also isn't out of line for carrying out on the prairie, climbing buttes, or hunting in the Black Hills.



I opted to stay with the .308 as I know the ballistics and trajectory like the back of my hand, and it's also easy on barrels, especially compared to cartridges like the .300 Win Mag, 7mm STW, or .264 Win Mag. The .308 is an inherently accurate cartridge and there's little difference in ballistics between a Sierra's 168 gr match king and Sierra's 165 gr game king. In an age where laser range finders are readily available, and scopes allow for putting the dope on the scope, flat shooting isn't the primary consideration for a rifle being used at 800 yards or less.

Late to the party and this was my approach to this matter. I already had a "Navy Trophy" M1 Garand in 7.62 Nato that is a reliable accurate rifle but optics are out for it. So I added a Ruger Gunsight Scout in .308 Win and scoped it in the "Cooper" style out front Burris 2.75X Scout scope. very accurate with 165gr Game King hand loads and pretty fair with service ammo.

Last but not least was the addition of a Armalite DF-10, added the Armalite front sight and for the rear a Troy folding sight. Swapped out the M4 telescoping rear stock for a proper A2 buttstock.Then added a cantilever scope mount with a Burris 3X9 Fullfield II. Maybe 600 or so rounds down the tube so far with all sorts of surplus 7.62 Nato and commercial ammo with zero malfunctions. Accuracy from fair to really good depending on the ammo.

As for the why for the .308 Win, in the event of a SHTF scenario the extra power of the .308 Win would be a asset for use on vehicles and hard cover over the .223/5.56 in my opinion. This is also why I have AK-47's in 7.62X39 as well. I am not trashing the AR-15's as I own a few of those as well. I guess I just like a well stocked tool box!

__________________
Stay safe people!

yesterday I received my third 308 win, a Springfield Armory M1A 16 in squad rifle. I also have a Ruger Scout Rifle and a AR 10 by DPMS. Now I am going to have to develop 3 loads, one for each rifle. I will have to maintain 3 different groups of brass. I also have an M-4, a Ruger Scout Rife in 5.56. mini 14 in 5.56, I like the carbine length rifles. Inside for home defense I want a shotgun, 12 or 20 gauge pump action with a pumpkin smasher on the barrel end

for defense outside and for just the joy of shooting I think I would use the M1A. for distance shooting either bolt scouts.

I have been thinking of selling both the ARs, they don't have the style or feel of a rifle, it's the pistol grip.

__________________
Carpriver.

For home as in in-house defense, I would prefer a shot gun or pistol. ARs in my opinion are for protecting the ranch or traveling when shtf. If my are was the first thing I could get to, for sure I'd use it in the home. In a shtf scenario I think your family needs both 223 and 308. The con of one caliber will be replaced by the other caliber. Having both would be money well spent. And gun money is never loss, just fired ammo money lol.

As for the op, I think any defense weapon in 223 or 308 should be semi auto. It's a very good possibility they are shooting back with one. Now for long range accuracy, the 338 lapua lol. That will be my next purchase and only bolt action.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

IMHO a bolt action will make you a better shooter.

Also, .30 calibers are outside toys...

I also agree with BB57, if you get the Rem 700 SPS in .308 you'll need to change out the stock, maybe trigger and maybe barrel.

__________________
Isaiah 41:10