What defense/target rifle?

T

tenders

New member
Here's a REALLY broad question:
I am considering buying a rifle. I have a lot of firearms experience, and have owned several rifles in the past, so I am not looking for generalities here. What I am looking for are opinions on several rifles.

I am looking to get a rifle that could be used for defensive purposes, but one that is accurate for long range target / possible hunting work. (Not big game!)

I have considered these, and know a bit about each:

AR-15: Have handled Bushmasters and Armalites. I like the bushie carbines. Never fired one.

AK-type: I would consider a VEPR here. I have shot an SKS, but I don't know much about the AKs.

Robinson M96: Modled after the Stoner. I like these a lot. Never fired one though. Is the price justified? (I could buy two VEPR's for one of these!)

H&K G3: I have seen the Hesse arms ones, and I like the G3 in general. I don't know about the American recievers though.

FAL: I also like these, but again, never fired one.

Opinions? If you had to pick one of these, what would you do? How do they compare in accuracy? (this is important for me) Reliability? What do you think?

Thanks for taking the time!

-Tim Enders
 
Well Self-Defense and Long Range are not exactly oxymorons but close

For a bullet to be acurate at Long range it generaly has to be going pretty fast.

In a Self-defense haveing the projectile going fast means possible overpenatration, and downrange leathality when a miss occours.

That being said my personal recomendations would be. (no warranty or legaly obligations intended or implied)

US-M1 carbine it is not a Great target rifle but can be counted on to group 4 minute of angle but still has pistol like qualities as far as ballistics.

AR-15 combo
use a .223 upper for target shooting and get a .45 upper and mag for self defense ( this will not be cheap)

Lever action rifle in a Cowboy callibur
Get one that will shoot both modern loads and Cowboy load then load the Cowboy stuff for home def.


and for the very esoteric

Browning High Power with stock/hoster

Of course only the AR canbe a "target rife" but the rest will be fine for informal use.

[This message has been edited by Nestor Rivera (edited April 14, 2000).]
 
First off, not meaning to be blunt, if you have owned several rifles in the past, then you know a rifle is not exactly a weapon of choice for self defense, esp in urban society, and that long range and self defense are on opposite ends of the spectrum. That said, I suggest buying two: A handgun for defensive purposes, and something in the bolt action or single shot field (.308 or .223 are cheap and will suit your needs for long range). The rifles you mentioned above are more millitant and not suited for pvt defensive purposes.

Just my opinion,
Baldie
 
For an "all around" rifle, a lightweight AR would be a good choice. Accuracy is generally very good, and firepower is excellent. Add a red dot scope and you have a pretty flexible package.
 
I have always wanted one of these but never got one. When I read your post, it was the first thing I though of. How about a Marlin Camp rifle in 9mm. Plenty of power for game and BGs, but not so much that you are going to shoot through and kill the neighbors in a home defense situation.
I haven't shot a Marlin of any kind that wasn't accurate! And 9mm is a thing of beauty!

Thats it, I've sold myself... I'm gettin one tomorrow
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BaldEagle:
First off, not meaning to be blunt, if you have owned several rifles in the past, then you know a rifle is not exactly a weapon of choice for self defense, esp in urban society, and that long range and self defense are on opposite ends of the spectrum. That said, I suggest buying two: A handgun for defensive purposes, and something in the bolt action or single shot field (.308 or .223 are cheap and will suit your needs for long range). The rifles you mentioned above are more millitant and not suited for pvt defensive purposes.

Just my opinion,
Baldie[/quote]

Actually, if given the choice and opportunity, I would choose a rifle for self defense BEFORE a handgun.

Anyway you look at it, a rifle offers better controlability, better ability to target and hit the target, more energy, and more wounding/killing potential.

I really think that the standard line of "but what if you over penetrate and wipe out old Mrs. Simmons down the block," doesn't have much merit, either.

Yes, it is a possibility, but it is extremely remote. When is the last time that you heard of a round that penetrates the target actually hitting an unintended target in the civilian world?

Quite frankly, ANYTHING is possible.

A miss is something different, so see my first paragraph, that hitting the target it easier with a rifle than it is with a handgun.


[This message has been edited by kframe19 (edited April 15, 2000).]
 
Tenders - I just finished building a rifle for very similar purposes to yours. Here's what I chose:
Bushmaster AR with 20" Vmatch freefloated barrel and flat top upper. The freefloated barrel is supposed to be more acurate because it isn't subject to pressure on the handguard from slings or resting the barrel on sandbags.
Trijicon Compact ACOG 1.5x16 with cross hair reticle. It's low power so close work is not a problem but the crosshairs don't completely cover a target (or coyote) at 200 yards like a dot sight would.
 
Oops, looks like I offended someone. I apologize for any miscommunication on my part. Given the actual perimeters of the situation specified (urban self-defense), what we have to look at are the actual scenarios that could occur if a confrontation presented itself. First off, it would most likely be at close quarters, involving two participants, the attacker and the person being attacked. Granted, multiple attackers could be thrown in, but for here we will omit. Second, we need to define what type of surroundings this would take place in. In a house, a longer gun would be tougher to point due to a) obstruction b) simple confine c) close proximity of attacker. However, in the street (if walking/driving from the car to/from home/ATM/work) it would be possible to benefit from a long range weapon if a sniper was involved from a distance, provided the shooter could be spotted and a shooting solution presented itself. In most other cases, I’d rather have a handgun due to the a) concealable nature of the weapon b) faster target acquisition (from holster to target) c) aided maneuverability of the smaller weapon from different positions (i.e. car seat-in case of car jacking). Granted, the rifle can fire more accurately at longer ranges, but when the case goes before a court, it would be very tough to prove just cause if you shot a man more than 50yds out and claimed self defense (unless circumstances presented themselves that would offer evidence of a feeling of “immediate and mortal” danger to the shooter). As for the “pass-through” comment, can you imagine the law suit that would ensue if someone accidentally shot an innocent bystander and the negative publicity it would bring down on the gun community-not to mention the fact of how poorly the shooter would feel if the person died, was crippled, or maimed
But I digress, the issue at point here was the best rifle for long range shooting and self-defense. I simply suggested, and still do; that the individual seeks out a rifle for the long range shooting and a handgun for self defense.
 
OK I've watched this go back and forth, back and forth. Now.... Tada... my $.02

My normal defense arm is a 1911 simply because a handgun is easier to carry all the time (and it's illegal to carry a concealed long arm ;) ) Now, given the original defense/target rifle question.

Mine is a Flat-top AR and/or Lightweight AR (wifes). This will be the first thing I grab when something goes bump in the night (read I'm home). For me the reasons are obvious. Handguns are actually a poor choice of weapon for self-defense... this is the reason DOD issues RIFLES and entry teams go in with RIFLES but have a handgun as a back-up!

You have better range, better accuracy, more power, etc, etc. Some may be concerned with "over penetration" with a rifle. If I remember correctly it is not the power of the cartridge that determines penetration but the design of the bullet. Given the correct choice of projectial a .223 will penetrate less then some handgun projectials (which is one of the reasons some LEO/Govt Agencies are shifting to the M-4 type of rifle over the MP-5 for entry weapons).

Thats it... IMO of course.

------------------
Schmit
GySgt, USMC(Ret)
NRA Life, Lodge 1201-UOSSS
"Si vis Pacem Para Bellum"
 
I remember reading a study on overpenetration which showed that a .223 round has LESS over-penetration than a 9mm or .45ACP (anyone have a cite?)

The logic was that a much lighter projectile will lose its energy quicker while passing through wood, sheetrock, drywall - for the same reason that a .223 loses much more velocity at 800 yards than a .308 - while still having "stopping power".

For personal defense, if your state allows CCW, I suggest a small pistol in 9mm, .40 Liberty (formerly known as .40S&W), or .45 ACP.

For home defense, I suggest a pump shotgun loaded with #2 buck.

You could also use an AR-15 in this role, but it will require more skill to use, and it will be less reliable.

If you want a semi-auto centerfire rifle for shooting at the range, and you want either a .223 or .308, here are the choices, more or less:

.223:
AR-15, Mini-14. The AR-15 is more expensive, but lots of neat parts and accessories are available for it, and it can be very accurate. AR magazines are about $15 - $30, depending.

The mini-14 is a fine rifle, but it has a bad rap for not being very accurate. Anecdotal examples exist on both sides.

The Robinson Arms M96 Expeditionary Rifle. It's based on the Stoner design, and is supposedly very good, but expensive ($1500).

.308 - you don't want to use this in a self-defense situation, it will overpenetrate.

M1A: Springfield Armory makes a good rifle. Most suggest the "New Loaded" configuration which goes for around $1500. These can be very accurate, but require some work to make extremely accurate. They look "PC". Mags are about $45 - $75.

HK91 clones. Most suggest avoiding the Hesse receivers. They are supposedly very reliable, and pretty accurate. The Springfield SAR-8 and Federal-arms versions are pretty good. In my opinion, they are too big and heavy, and the balance is too high. Mags are about the same price as AR mags.

FN-FAL clones. Again, most suggest avoiding Hesse receivers. The Imbdel recievers are good, as are DSArms receivers (http://www.dsarms.com). DSArms also builds entirely US-made guns, but they are expensive ($1500) and the wait is 10 months. I personally think the FAL has much better balance than the HK91, and it's pretty accurate too. Beware, the quality of individual guns built from parts kits can vary based on who built it and the quality of parts.

If you want a rifle for long-range shooting, but aren't going to be hunting, then get a .223. Ammo's cheaper, and the recoil is hardly noticable. If you are going to be hunting ever, go .308.

Really, all of these guns are good, it just depends on what you like and can afford. Think carefully about what you will be using it for most of the time.

You can find lots of information on all of these rifles by searching TFL for old threads about them.

( begin edit )

Sorry, I forgot to answer your question. If you want .308, get a FAL. For between $600 and $800, you can get a good one built on an Imbel receiver. If you want to spend more, get a "New Loaded" Springfield M1A for about $1400.

If you want a .223, get an AR-15. Bushmaster and Armalite are both excellent. You can buy one for about $750 - $850. If you have an extra $600, buy the M96. It's supposed to be really good.

If you want to put a scope on it, you can get a cheap one for $100 + $50 for rings and stuff. For a good one (I suggest Leupold), it'll be $300 - $600 for the scope, and another $100 - $300 in mounting hardware.

In .308, I suggest buying a rifle with a 18 - 22" barrel, to get good velocity. For .223, a shorter, 16" barrel is fine because it's a faster round.




[This message has been edited by smithz (edited April 16, 2000).]
 
Here's my .02.

The .223 is an excellant urban defense round. Choose a load using a frangible bullet and you will not have to worry about overpenetration. Most handgun calibers and defensive shotgun loads will pose a far greater overpenetration risk. The AR15, at close range and using frangible bullets is a formidable self defense round. It is very accurate and pretty reliable. Certainly reliable enough for target shooting and home defense. If you are willing to pay the money for an M96 then a pre ban AR15 should not be objectionable. If you think you might be needing this rifle to defend yourself in a dark house then a flash supressor is highly suggested. The muzzle flash from a short barrelled AR without a flash suppressor is blinding! This is something that is seldom discussed but can be crucial to your survival in a dark environment. The AR is also VERY loud when fired in an indoor sitution. Most any firearm (especially a rifle) will be loud indoors so be prepared to be deaf for a while. Based on your options and criteria I think the pre ban AR would give you the best compromise. A 22LR conversion kit will allow you to practice a LOT for very little $.

Everyone else seems to have ignored the VEPR. It is chambered in 308 and is really nothing more than a modified RPK. Basically it is an AK47 on steroids. It has no peer as far as reliability goes. They are very simple to use and to maintain. AKs have a reputation for poor accuracy. The VEPR, however, does not. It probably won't be as accurate as an AR but you can expect 2moa using good ammo and a scope. They VEPR is limited to 10 round magazines. This may or may not be a consideration for you. This is a very fine weapon and would be my suggestion if you were going to do any hunting. The 308 can be a viable home defense round. You must choose your ammo carefully. Again, like the .223 you should stick to frangible bullets. CorBon makes some excellant defensive .308 ammo using a 125gr Speer TNT bullet. (they also use that bullet in their 7.62X39 load. My personal choice for home defense!) I am a big fan of the AK type rifles and would personally love to own one of these.

If I were choosing a military rifle it would either be the FAL or the VEPR. (I don't care for the feel of the HK rifles) The AR is a great rifle and is very versatile but is outclassed by the other rifles when it come to reliability and pales in comparision when using military ammunition. For your purposes,however, I think it is the best choice. (a very painful admission from an AK lover!)
 
Another advantage of the AR, for target shooting, is that it has a flat trajectory, and a very light recoil.

I was shooting at 280 yards today. My shoulder was sore after about 50 rounds of .308, but I burned through 150 rounds of .223 without noticing it at all.

IMO, one disadvantage of the AR is that it's a pain in ass to clean (partly because its action is very dirty), and you sometimes need a shim or tension pin to keep the upper and lower snug together.

[This message has been edited by smithz (edited April 17, 2000).]
 
I'm not very sophisticated when it comes to rifle defense. My handgun of choice is a Glock 20, but I only own one rifle, an M1A.

There are a lot of people who advocate the .308 for the home, and as you also want long range capability, I think it's a better choice than a .223. At 500 yards the .308 has more energy than the .223 does at the muzzle. If by long range you meant 500 yards or so, this should be a consideration. Also, at 500 yards the .223 has about as much energy as a .38 special. I load my M1A with Hornady 110gr TAP, with a spare mag of Federal 168gr JSPs. I figure after he's hopped the fence, defeated the alarm and killed my Akita I may need a .308 to put him down if the 10mm doesn't work.

OK, that said, in the house the .223 will still be devastating, and if you only want accuracy at long ranges, not super killing power, the AR-15 types will serve you well as they are superbly accurate. I qualfied EXPERT in the Marines with one (M-16 A1)

I like the idea of the M1 carbine. Still has more downrange energy than the .223 at 400-500 yards, is smaller than the M1A, but with good ballistics.

Tomas
 
For the question that you have posed, I would suggest an AR15.

There is little recoil, you said that you like it, it is commonplace at High Power rifle matches. . . . . ..

It seems to fit your criteria.

Ben
 
An idea I have been considering (actually it was suggested by someone else in this board) was to get an AR-15, and TWO uppers...one a competition class one with a 20" for DCM matches, and a "shorty" 16" for lightness and manuverability.

This goes to what many others have said...there is just a TON of AR-15 parts out there. That is useful to have...the ability to fix what you buy.

Consider that as more and more things are banned and restricted (which unfortunately seems to be the trend) the rifles which have the most readily available parts will be the ones that stay in service longer...and parts will be scarcer for rifles without the huge production volumes of the AR-15.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BaldEagle:
First off, not meaning to be blunt, if you have owned several rifles in the past, then you know a rifle is not exactly a weapon of choice for self defense, esp in urban society, and that long range and self defense are on opposite ends of the spectrum. That said, I suggest buying two: A handgun for defensive purposes, and something in the bolt action or single shot field (.308 or .223 are cheap and will suit your needs for long range). The rifles you mentioned above are more millitant and not suited for pvt defensive purposes.

Just my opinion,
Baldie[/quote]

Well, not to be blunt, but I don't think much of your opinion! When something goes "bump" in the night at my house, it'll be greeted with either my 870 or my AR. A rifle is a fine defensive weapon, and it's a hell of a lot more effective than a pistol! I'm not impressed with your choice of a bolt action for a defensive weapon either, since it's likely that rapid fire may be the order of the day if you really have to use it. Now you have "just my opinion".
 
There seems to be some confusion as to what constitutes "home defense" with a rifle/shotgun. If a person is barricaded in a room then a longarm makes perfect sense. But if a person is moving through their home looking for an intruder then a handgun would probably be better. A handgun is easier to retain in struggle and can be brought to bear more quickly than a rifle. The easiest answer to the question is to have both.
 
I think the AR is probably the best choice for both the defensive and target (medium range) applications. I know that there are guys out there using their 223 for 1000 yd competition, but they are not your average every day shooters. At least I dont think they are. If you want to go long range 500 yds+ I'd go with a 308. My personal preference would be for a bolt gun, but since you want self defense capability I'd get a gas gun or lever at the least. The AR is a pretty acccurate gun, my shorty AK shoots well under 4 Moa at 100 yds and if you get a free floated barrel/target jobber they can be tack drivers with the right ammo.

As for the best self defense tool being a handgun, I think that is a mistake. The primary function of a handgun is to allow you to fight your way to a rifle. The only reason we use handguns for defense in general life is cause they are easy to carry around and hide. Aside from that, if you choose to go to a gunfight with a handgun you would not be making a wise choice. There is a reason why entry teams, both LEO and military, use carbines rather than pistols. They know they are going into a hot area and want the firepower to keep themselves alive and unperforated. Retention is not an issue of weapon, but an issue of training and technique. A handgun can be just as easily removed from an untrained user as carbine.

Finally, the Camp carbine: I have never understood the need for an oversized and overweight handgun. My personal opinion, is that if I am going to be puting up with the size and weight of a rifle, it better pack a better punch than my sideram.

------------------
"Liberty is never unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it always vanishes."
-R.A. Heinlein
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top