You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Bushmaster M-17S
- Thread starter Dead
- Start date
Check out the Small Arms Review of it...
at http://www.smallarmsreview.com/april.htm
Aside from that review, I've heard that it tends to be balky (FTF's) and that the trigger pull isn't very nice.
at http://www.smallarmsreview.com/april.htm
Aside from that review, I've heard that it tends to be balky (FTF's) and that the trigger pull isn't very nice.
I've had one for a year and like it. The trigger does take time to get use to but I put a 5X33L ATN scope on it and get from just under moa with Nosler BT to 1.5-2" for some of the IMI or SA blasting ammo. Short, velocity about the same as a 24" AR, cleaner and easier to clean then an AR. It is a rifle you either like a lot or dislike a lot. MWT
cuerno de chivo
Moderator
is it more or less reliable than an AR-15?
The AR is stunningly reliable under what circumstances? Seems to me that it *can* go to several 'unnert rounds between cleanings, at least when being fired off a bench and otherwise not having environmental dust added to the mix.
Then there was the 3-gun match I attended where a Colt HBAR sporter was totally stopped up for more than 15 minutes. It *may* have been a mag problem causing a double feed, but whatever the cause, a round got jammed between the bolt carrier and the rear of the gas tube, above the chamber portion of the barrel.
Betcha the M17s op system doesn't have all those nooks and crannies in the upper receiver for the bullet nose to get jammed in....
Nevertheless, there's probably an AR action in my future. Commonality of parts, etc. From the A1 version forward, the M16 series has proven quite reliable.
Then there was the 3-gun match I attended where a Colt HBAR sporter was totally stopped up for more than 15 minutes. It *may* have been a mag problem causing a double feed, but whatever the cause, a round got jammed between the bolt carrier and the rear of the gas tube, above the chamber portion of the barrel.
Betcha the M17s op system doesn't have all those nooks and crannies in the upper receiver for the bullet nose to get jammed in....
Nevertheless, there's probably an AR action in my future. Commonality of parts, etc. From the A1 version forward, the M16 series has proven quite reliable.
laissezfirearm
New member
> Betcha the M17s op system doesn't have all
> those nooks and crannies in the upper receiver
> for the bullet nose to get jammed in....
Worse. On the original models at least, there
was enough space between the barrel extension
and the walls of the upper receiver that a
round could slide through . . . and then
rattle around up by the reciprocating gas
system parts.
(Oh, and on the AR, when I took Louis Awerbuck's
rifle course, the guys who had problems were
either using parts guns and/or crappy mags.
Give a guy with a Colt, Bushmaster, or Armalite
fed with a cheapo plastic mag a good old GI
twenty-rounder, and all the problems went away.
Good thing I bought forty when they were still
five to eight bucks apiece.)
> those nooks and crannies in the upper receiver
> for the bullet nose to get jammed in....
Worse. On the original models at least, there
was enough space between the barrel extension
and the walls of the upper receiver that a
round could slide through . . . and then
rattle around up by the reciprocating gas
system parts.
(Oh, and on the AR, when I took Louis Awerbuck's
rifle course, the guys who had problems were
either using parts guns and/or crappy mags.
Give a guy with a Colt, Bushmaster, or Armalite
fed with a cheapo plastic mag a good old GI
twenty-rounder, and all the problems went away.
Good thing I bought forty when they were still
five to eight bucks apiece.)