Comprehensive Range report
I went to the range twice this past weekend. Once by myself, once with my wife, son, and pops. The second trip, with the family, was fun. I shot a bit, but was there more to help the wife and son.
Pops was shooting man-sized targets at 100 yards with a pistol. A short-barreled .380, no less. Talk about a "dangerous old man." This guy can shoot you dead at ranges that no pistol should be used, with an "inferior caliber," while not having vision in his right eye due to cataracts (and he is naturally right handed, which makes this feat all that much more difficult), and while standing on only one natural leg and one prosthetic.
Oh, and my 5-year-old son can shoot a man sized target at that range with his Crickett rifle and a red-dot sight. No support. Sitting.
He also shot squirrel and rat sized targets at 15 yards with the same rifle. Sometimes he misses. Other times he hits. Either way, it is amazing to me he can do it at that age.
Mrs. Usagi is quite the pistol shot. And her Marlin 60 hits where she points it.
Recently, I purchased an M1 Garand rifle. Depending on who you ask, this is either one of the premier rifles ever made, or is antiquated and still revered. After this last weekend, I am leaning toward the later.
Make no mistake, I really enjoy the M1, and it shoots well. Using it while attached to it via sling and in a prone position is actually a bit better than using an AR15 in the same circumstances. The M1 s a true battle rifle. It helped us win two wars, and is a rifle that should be in every collector's possession. It is also the last rifle issued to the US military that can be owned by a civilian, unless laws change drastically.
But, the AR15 is the Patriot Weapon of Choice. It is superior to the M1 in every way but one, and here'smy analysis on it:
Size:
The M1 is a beast. I don't mind it, but I'm 6'3" and 275. Most people are not. My son cannot even hold the rifle. My sister and my wife both grumble when picking it up due to the weight.
The AR 15 is lightweight. Of rifles I'd actually use in combat, it is second only to the M1 Carbine in terms of which rifle is lightest.
Recoil:
.223 / 5.56 mm vs. .30-06? Really? If you have to ask...
Rate of fire:
Due to the more modest (read: almost non-existent) recoil of the .223, one can get back on target more quickly with an AR15. I'd say I could take as much as 20-30 well aimed shots with an M1 in one minute. I could easily double that in an AR15.
Volume of fire:
Every 8 shots, the M1 needs reloading.
The AR15 holds 30 per mag. Mags are much easier to change than clips with the M1. Plus, nobody's ever heard of "AR15 thumb," but go and Google "M1 Thumb."
Accuracy:
The "books" will say that the AR15 and the M1 are both about 2 MOA rifles with bulk ammo. Add the factors of weight, recoil, and bullet design, and it is no wonder that most AR15's do better.
NRA High Power competition has made a separate class for AR15 shooters - because the platform is more accurate than the M1 and M14. Some time back, when AR15 shooters switched to heavy bullets and fast twist rates, they shattered old records held by M1A shooters. Up to that point, highly modified M1A's had outshot M1's with consistency.
With bulk ammo and rack grade barrels, the AR15 has the edge.
Ergonomics:
Hands down, the AR15 takes the cake.
Power:
No comparison, the .30-06 round is superior to the .223. Here is the lone category the M1 wins.
Manipulation:
Eugene Stoner designed his platform to be easier to handle than the standard military rifles at the time. Add to this the fact that AR15s hold more rounds, and it becomes painfully obvious which rifle is a clear cut winner.
A shooter must adapt himself to an M1. The AR15 can be adapted to the shooter. Enough said.
Position Shooting:
Standing is clearly the AR15's winning area. It is lighter and easier to control. Since most combat is done while standing (or some derivative of it), the AR15 would win based on this fact only.
Sitting - again, I'd have to go with the AR15. The center of balance on the rifle is closer to the shooter, and the weight is also a smaller factor, lending to the success.
Prone - the only advantage of the M1 is the flat underside, assisting in the classic prone position. However, the AR 15 can easily be propped on its 30-round magazine for support. This steadies the rifle tremendously - more so than the same shooter could steady the rifle with a proper hold position. It is also easily modified to take a bipod.
Expense:
The initial purchase price favors the M1 - mine was $595, vs. the AR15 price tag of $895.
However, ammo favors the AR15 by a wide margin. Currently, surplus .30-06 ammo for the M1 is, at best, $0.50 per round - and is not plentiful. .223 ammo can be found everywhere, and surplus is about $0.30-$0.40 per round.
Average that, and the $0.15 per shot savings means that the shooter only needs to fire 2000 rounds over the lifetime of the rifle to save money.
Customization:
I know, this is blasphemy in the M1 world. But if you would like to alter your M1 in any way, there are very few alterations that can be done. And they are all difficult to do, and fairly expensive.
An AR15 is more like a Lego set - many different parts that can be easily and inexpensively swapped out. In most cases, no gunsmithing is necessary.
Family part:
Pops was shooting man-sized targets at 100 yards with a pistol. A short-barreled .380, no less. Talk about a "dangerous old man." This guy can shoot you dead at ranges that no pistol should be used, with an "inferior caliber," while not having vision in his right eye due to cataracts (and he is naturally right handed, which makes this feat all that much more difficult), and while standing on only one natural leg and one prosthetic.
Oh, and my 5-year-old son can shoot a man sized target at that range with his Crickett rifle and a red-dot sight. No support. Sitting.
He also shot squirrel and rat sized targets at 15 yards with the same rifle. Sometimes he misses. Other times he hits. Either way, it is amazing to me he can do it at that age.
Mrs. Usagi is quite the pistol shot. And her Marlin 60 hits where she points it.
Comparison:
Recently, I purchased an M1 Garand rifle. Depending on who you ask, this is either one of the premier rifles ever made, or is antiquated and still revered. After this last weekend, I am leaning toward the later.
Make no mistake, I really enjoy the M1, and it shoots well. Using it while attached to it via sling and in a prone position is actually a bit better than using an AR15 in the same circumstances. The M1 s a true battle rifle. It helped us win two wars, and is a rifle that should be in every collector's possession. It is also the last rifle issued to the US military that can be owned by a civilian, unless laws change drastically.
But, the AR15 is the Patriot Weapon of Choice. It is superior to the M1 in every way but one, and here'smy analysis on it:
Size:
The M1 is a beast. I don't mind it, but I'm 6'3" and 275. Most people are not. My son cannot even hold the rifle. My sister and my wife both grumble when picking it up due to the weight.
The AR 15 is lightweight. Of rifles I'd actually use in combat, it is second only to the M1 Carbine in terms of which rifle is lightest.
Recoil:
.223 / 5.56 mm vs. .30-06? Really? If you have to ask...
Rate of fire:
Due to the more modest (read: almost non-existent) recoil of the .223, one can get back on target more quickly with an AR15. I'd say I could take as much as 20-30 well aimed shots with an M1 in one minute. I could easily double that in an AR15.
Volume of fire:
Every 8 shots, the M1 needs reloading.
The AR15 holds 30 per mag. Mags are much easier to change than clips with the M1. Plus, nobody's ever heard of "AR15 thumb," but go and Google "M1 Thumb."
Accuracy:
The "books" will say that the AR15 and the M1 are both about 2 MOA rifles with bulk ammo. Add the factors of weight, recoil, and bullet design, and it is no wonder that most AR15's do better.
NRA High Power competition has made a separate class for AR15 shooters - because the platform is more accurate than the M1 and M14. Some time back, when AR15 shooters switched to heavy bullets and fast twist rates, they shattered old records held by M1A shooters. Up to that point, highly modified M1A's had outshot M1's with consistency.
With bulk ammo and rack grade barrels, the AR15 has the edge.
Ergonomics:
Hands down, the AR15 takes the cake.
Power:
No comparison, the .30-06 round is superior to the .223. Here is the lone category the M1 wins.
Manipulation:
Eugene Stoner designed his platform to be easier to handle than the standard military rifles at the time. Add to this the fact that AR15s hold more rounds, and it becomes painfully obvious which rifle is a clear cut winner.
A shooter must adapt himself to an M1. The AR15 can be adapted to the shooter. Enough said.
Position Shooting:
Standing is clearly the AR15's winning area. It is lighter and easier to control. Since most combat is done while standing (or some derivative of it), the AR15 would win based on this fact only.
Sitting - again, I'd have to go with the AR15. The center of balance on the rifle is closer to the shooter, and the weight is also a smaller factor, lending to the success.
Prone - the only advantage of the M1 is the flat underside, assisting in the classic prone position. However, the AR 15 can easily be propped on its 30-round magazine for support. This steadies the rifle tremendously - more so than the same shooter could steady the rifle with a proper hold position. It is also easily modified to take a bipod.
Expense:
The initial purchase price favors the M1 - mine was $595, vs. the AR15 price tag of $895.
However, ammo favors the AR15 by a wide margin. Currently, surplus .30-06 ammo for the M1 is, at best, $0.50 per round - and is not plentiful. .223 ammo can be found everywhere, and surplus is about $0.30-$0.40 per round.
Average that, and the $0.15 per shot savings means that the shooter only needs to fire 2000 rounds over the lifetime of the rifle to save money.
Customization:
I know, this is blasphemy in the M1 world. But if you would like to alter your M1 in any way, there are very few alterations that can be done. And they are all difficult to do, and fairly expensive.
An AR15 is more like a Lego set - many different parts that can be easily and inexpensively swapped out. In most cases, no gunsmithing is necessary.
Comments
Post a Comment
Your comment will be displayed after approval.
Approval depends on what you say and how you say it.