Ruger Mini 30/14 [Archive]

Havasu Cig

03-03-2004, 11:49 AM

I don't know if you can buy either of those rifles in California anymore with a detachable mag. If you have an Arizona ID/ DL you can still buy the stuff their. I have been to a couple gun shops in Havasu recently and you can still buy stuff their that I have not seen in a California gun shop for at least 10 years.
As far as caliber, I think the .223 (5.56mm) is a better round that the 7.62 x 39. The .223 will not over penetrate in an urban environment, but is a very effective round because of the velocity at which it travels.
I have a friend that recently completed a study for Law Enforcement, and the .223 was shown to be a superior round. this is the reason you know see a lot of local Law Enforcement agencies now carrying AR-15's in theit cars. for years it was thought that any rifle round would over penetrate if used in an urban environment, but the study proved that to be a myth with the .223.
I have rifles in both calibers, and my choice would be the .223 if I could only have one.

NOTALENT

03-03-2004, 11:57 AM

The only reason I dont like the .223 is because in our ar15 the rifle is way to picky with ammo. we used would and it would jam up alot. I wish I could still buy the ak47.. the most durable gun I have ever shot and it would fire any type of ammo. When I was in AZ I stopped at a few gun shops and was told the same thing..I just have to get my AZ Drivers license to purchase. Which would be no problem.

Havasu Cig

03-03-2004, 12:10 PM

They are both good rounds...I have two AK's and two SKS's in 7.62. Fun to shoot, and you can find the ammo cheap.
For a home protection weapon (I live in a rural area) I prefer the .223.

NOTALENT

03-03-2004, 12:14 PM

lol yeah..I grew up in the ghetto...lol thats why my father insisted on having the aks...We hava an egyptian maddi, and a hungarian, Eagle arms AR-15, and he just bought an sks through turners...Wicked guns. My favorite is our M1 garand...my grandpa used it in ww2...best gun I have ever shot..has some kick on that bad boy.

Drunk tank

03-03-2004, 12:30 PM

ah yes... something I can finally help with! My suggestion is to get the mini-14 rather than the 30. As far as shooting is concerned the .223 shoots much flatter and has a hell of alot better range. The 7.62x39 is a great round as well and is my personal choise for home protection as it has alot more knockdown power to it... the .223 just kinda puts holes in things... like 3 people in a row. I have a AK47 and Mossberg 500 I keep loaded and ready in my place. At least this is with the FMJ rounds. But if youre running soft or hollow points either round will definatly make who ever is causing you trouble have one hell of a bad day. On another note, with whichever rifle you choose be sure to get the "ranch rifle" version; this has mounts for scope rings incorperated into the upper. This way if you ever decide to run a scope you can just put the rings on and mount your scope. It only cost about 30 bucks more. whereas if you dont get that version you have to mount the scope on a plate that you attach to the side of the gun... not a very tuff setup if you ask me and a pain in the ass as well. On the talk of magazines... and mini-14 mag will work... the guns sold in cali are the same guns sold in CO. So if you go to AZ and pick up some mags, theyll fit no worries. Hell, if youre going to havasu anytime between the 13th and the 20th and really want some mags for one I can pick ya up some in CO and bring em out with me, I actually need to get a few more for my Mini as well. If ya interested PM me.
As for my Mini-14, I have a bushnell scope on it and a folding stockl (one that folds). the gun and the stock are both SS. I have a few pics at home. BTW... can get ya folding stocks too... its great living in CO. But just remember... if you put anything like that on your gun and anyone ask... say its a preban weapon cause its a big no no to put that cool shit on a postban ;)

fourspeednup

03-03-2004, 12:42 PM

Damn drunk...looks like you know your shit. All I ask is that you don't shoot me cuz I'd be forced to ban you from the river pad;)
--four((has grown quite fond of breathing))speed:D

NOTALENT

03-03-2004, 12:46 PM

lol...post some pics of ur mini 14 I would like to see...And if I were to put on a folding stock isnt there markings on the rifle to determine that it is post ban.? I will be going shopping this weekend hopefully purchasing it.. But then theres the freakin waiting period....Im not crazy I swear..lol and I will probaly pick up a scope as well.

flat broke

03-03-2004, 01:10 PM

Here is the problem with buying a gun post ban, and then mysteriously having pre-ban mags: If you get rolled by law enforcement and they check the #s on the weapon, it will show when it was DROSed. (for the sake of this conversation, lets say 2/10/04) They then question you as to how/why you have pre ban mags for a post ban weapon. You're not going to have much of a story to tell them.
Ideally, you should have bought the weapon prior to 1/1/00, so that you could conceivably claim that you bought the high cap mags pre-ban.
As for the 5.56 vs 7.62 debate, both rounds are easily procured, but the 7.62 rounds usualy use a bertrand<sp> primer which is more caustic towards the internals of your weapon. It is easier to find non-bertrand primer 5.56 rounds, so that would be a consideration. The other worst case scenario consideration would be that since our armed forces use a 5.56 round, it would be easier to come accross this round in times of extreme domestic unrest. Beyond that, I think you'd be fine with either. But bear in mind that this is not a great urban home protection setup.
The last issue is that if you live in Cali, you will by buying the ranch version of the 14 because of the stock restrictions for conforming post ban weapons. No thumbholes, no pistol grips, no folding stocks etc. Yeah you can smith this stuff onto your gun, but the second law enforcement rolls in you Cali, you are in big trouble.
While should definitely have a nice intermediate power piece in your aresnal, if you're buing the gun for protection purposes, you might want to look into a shotgun. The Saiga 10 and 12 models are nice, cheap, and based of the classic Kalishnikov action. Plus with the wide variety of amo available in the smooth bore market, you could easily come up with something with good stoping power, great close range effectiveness, all while not sending the round through the wall into the next room where your kids are sleeping.
Now if you live in the Southwest along the U.S./Mexico border, by all means, go with the 7.62 or 5.56 weapon and get a nice high powered night vision scope. Better to keep groups of 20 or so potential threats at a good distance on your terms, than shoot it out in close quarters with family nearby.
Chris

G-Ride

03-03-2004, 01:21 PM

For California ONLY:
Mini-14 are not specifically named as a ban weapon in California. Yes, they are the same as the ones sold elsewhere.
Now, if you remove the standard stock and add a folding or telescoping one, wella, "assualt weapon", and ILLEGAL. Also if you add one or more of the following, it would now also be considered an "assault weapon" and illegal.
*barrel shroud
*folding/telescoping stock
*thumbhole stock
*pistol grip
*flash suppressor
*flare or grenade launcher
*higher than 10 capacity magazine
Now you could own a gun that had one or all of these and registered it, but the deadline was March 31, 1992.
Unless it was an SKS , then there was a deadline that was amended to January 1, 2000.
Also high capacity magazines are illegal for manufatcure , sale,import, give, or lend effective January 1, 2000.
Check on the NRA website under gun laws for your state to get specific information.

Drunk tank

03-03-2004, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by fourspeednup
Damn drunk...looks like you know your shit. All I ask is that you don't shoot me cuz I'd be forced to ban you from the river pad;)
--four((has grown quite fond of breathing))speed:D
Dont fret! I lived in southwestern CO... it's normal to have lots of guns. Actually... I feel kinda deprived as I dont have enough. You know your around my type of area when you see pickup trucks with runracks with a 30.06 and a 12ga sittin in it....with the windows rolled down in the parking lot. My sister even carries a 9mm. :D
BTW... there any places around Havasu or Needles to go blow some shit up? If so I might bring a few rifles and we can raise hell with the PDog population... I hate them bastards!
Heres a few pics of my boom sticks... http://community.webshots.com/user/drunk_tank
For some reason I cant figure out how to link from webhots...:confused:

NOTALENT

03-03-2004, 02:24 PM

damn..thats a nice little artillary...thats what mine use to look like...Is that the Eygptian maddi or the russian?

NashvilleBound

03-03-2004, 02:27 PM

So what should I do with all the 30 round mags I have left over from .....my previous life? All the ammo too??? Any suggestions?
Theres a ton of crap....

H20 Party Starter

03-03-2004, 02:30 PM

My type of people in this thread:cool:
both the guns in this pic with composite folding stocks are both Rugers. The top one is the 10/22 and the bottom one is a ruger mini-14 ranch w/ scope. http://www.havasubarney.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=1&t=2011
The extended 20/30/50/100 round clips are widely available. look at Cheaperthandirt.com for great clip and ammo deals. Most need to be shipped to a non CA address:rolleyes:
I've got a pre-ban AR-15 and have a federal assult weapons permit. I have asked many different authorities, and the consensus is that...... Once the clip is in CA, there is no way for any law-enforcement to tell when you purchased the clip. Only Law-enforcement clips have serial #'s.
Note: The folding stocks are illegal in CA on anything other than 22's:rolleyes:

NOTALENT

03-03-2004, 02:34 PM

God DAMN!!!!!!!! Thats an arsenal..!!!!!!! I think there about 17 guns there....I thought my arsenal was bad..lol

NOTALENT

03-03-2004, 02:36 PM

do u have those minis here in ca?

DEEZ NUTTS

03-03-2004, 03:05 PM

Anybody know how long the spring will stay strong in a loaded clip?
I only keep 1 loaded up for my AK, thinking eventualy the springs gonna crap out. Been months since I went shooting.

NOTALENT

03-03-2004, 03:10 PM

if I were u I would buy a 75 round drum and keep it loaded..then only wind it up when u have to use it...:D Since mine were stolen I think I may have a few drums for sale..if anyone is interested...

NOTALENT

03-03-2004, 03:25 PM

Here is a link to what the 75 round drums look like and the price... They are not making them anymore I could let them go for a bit cheaper used twice.

H20 Party Starter

03-03-2004, 04:00 PM

What link:confused:
I've know a few peeps that might be interested....out of state of coarse;)
In reguards to clip springs.......you can buy spring re-build kits for around $10. Cops and military never re-spring clips, they just use them for-ever. My Dad's buddy had an uzi clip loaded for 15 years.......it went all 30 rounds no prob

NOTALENT

03-03-2004, 04:07 PM

sorry was so busy forgot the link...
http://www.tjgeneralstore.com/ak-47_drum_mag.htm

Drunk tank

03-03-2004, 04:11 PM

As for springs... if they are desinged properly you should never have an issue with them. As long as the metal in the spring is not loaded past its yilding point and starts going into plastic deformation its all good. Sure having it loaded for years at a time may cause creep to set in but even then the amount the spring would deform would be negligable in in a mag. These are just principles that aplly to mechanics of materials... But I'm not sure on the exact principles that govern springs... For what we're talking about I'm sure its not a big deal at all.

Drunk tank

03-03-2004, 04:13 PM

Originally posted by Bropb16
sorry was so busy forgot the link...
http://www.tjgeneralstore.com/ak-47_drum_mag.htm
I CALL DIBS ON ONE! If ya sellin of course :D I could lay down whoopass at an amazing rate with that shit!

NOTALENT

03-03-2004, 04:19 PM

I will go home and check to see if I still have them...I got them somewhere...I will also take pics and post them for u guys..

77charger

03-03-2004, 04:31 PM

I own a mini 14 also it is not ammo sensetive at all will fire anything thru it no matter how clean or dirty.As for my ar 15 it also fires all ammo trouble free but it gets cleaned all the time.I also handload for the ar too(69 sierra match kings).
The mini 14 (i think all are btw) is mag sensative(very).I have found factory or PMI mags are the only way to go.Also massens work well too.Wait til you learn to bumpfire a mini thats were mags are important:D (i can go thru 30 rounds in about 3 seconds)

MudPumper

03-03-2004, 05:26 PM

You guys are my kind of people. Boats and Guns.
MilSpec weapons tend to be a bit more picky with ammo because of the tight tolerances, my AR-15 would not shoot reloaded rounds. This is one reason the AK is such a great weapon. Very loose internals, will shoot anything, full of mud, sand, never cleaned, but it lacks in accuracy. Just a pet peave of mine, the clips some of you are speaking of are magazines, not clips. Too bad I live in this communist state of California. Also, FYI many of the law inforcement people I have talked to, FBI, ATF, PD, and Sheriff have all stated that if you are transporting your weapons legally(locked and unloaded) to or from the range, gunsmith etc. They would never hassle or have reason to hassle you about your shit, magz pre or post ban etc.... Not that it can't happen but as long as you arent out killing people in the street, or being a total dick, they really don't care.

repo man

03-03-2004, 05:38 PM

no question get the 14 the mags are alot easier to obtain. i have one of each and prefer the 14 by far

burbanite

03-03-2004, 07:11 PM

I love you gun people...you make me feel all warm and fuzzy....:D
Slightly off topic but I just got back from picking up my third Colt CCO in the last 5 days. :cool:
My C&R license arrived last Friday, sent out copies to 56 places on Saturday and am now ready to rock! Come on you Mosin's, SKS's and whatever else I feel the urge to buy!

77charger

03-03-2004, 07:56 PM

I like the 1911 autos also.I have a commander model(my favorite) like it so i bought a full size springfield.Now looking at a compact 1911 also.I bought a dillion loader for my .45s makes loading alot easier and left the rockchucker to the rifles..223,30-30,300mag.

LOWRIVER2

03-03-2004, 11:00 PM

12020 (a) (2) P.C.: It is unlawful for any person to to manufacture, cause to be manufactured , import into the state, keep for sale, or offer or expose for sale, or give lend, any large capacity magazine
A LARGE CAPACITY MAGAZINE means any ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than ten rounds, but shall not be construed to include a feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than ten rounds, any tubular magazine that is contained in a leve-action firearm, or any .22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device (Penal code 12020(c)(25).
Gentleman,
Hi cap. mags don't have serial numbers, they have a stamp if LEGALLY sold in Ca. that reads: "For military or law enforcement use only". If you see a serial number on a high cap. mag, it's not being recorded by Ca. Dept. of Justice firearms section, rest assured.
For the record:
All handgun purchases have been recorded in Ca. DOJ files since 1991, all long gun sales have been recorded since 1999. If you bought the respective guns prior to those dates, chances are 98% your gun is not on file with the DOJ.
As for high cap. mags, don't worry about your gun being new and the mag being old. Remember, the mag does'nt have a date of mfg. and who says you could NOT own a high cap. mag for a gun you did not own before the ban? Read the law as it stands.
I work for the only police dept. in the state (LAPD) that has an active Gun Unit dedicated solely to investigating gun crimes. The only other agencies that do this in Ca. are Ca. Dept of Justice firearms investigators and ATFE agents (feds).
Let's just say for the record that enforcement on these laws varies GREATLY depending on which county you live in.
All Ca. firearms laws can be found at http://www.ag.ca.gov/
I did'nt read all the posts, if anyone has any questions on Ca. firearms laws, send a pm to me for a more detailed answer. These laws are tricky as I can think of few other types of laws that can land you in violation of an infraction to a felony based solely on a few small distinctions on a particular case.
Oh, and most city agencies use the .223 for an urban rifle because it's mass produced being a military caliber. The .308 (7.62X54) is a much better round as it won't veer off in the wind but too many small officers could'nt handle the recoil and the windfall of govt. M16A1's to police dept's for free did'nt hurt either. My work A1 works well as it was Natl. guard surplus circa 1977 and was brand new (not used) when issued to me.
My only question with any Stoner rifle is if it's so reliable, why do you need a forward assist? HK91's and AK series rifles don't need them, makes you wonder. I sure as hell clean my rifle after every shoot trng. day, seen many an A1 have a double feed when not oiled on the range. I can't afford to have that to happen in the field. Of course, I usually grab my 14" Benelli M1 slug gun first, it's best for penetrating cars and is good out to 25 yards, which is in range for most of the problems I encounter.
And the Benelli fits nicely in my Ultra's ski locker/LOL.

dc96819

03-04-2004, 01:21 AM

One down side of mini 30 the 7.62 never go on sale
like the 223 :confused:

NashvilleBound

03-04-2004, 06:15 AM

Riodog: Loud and clear on the reply.
Thanks.
NB

Seadog

03-04-2004, 06:25 AM

I used to be an armorer with both M14s and M16A2. We tweaked the M14 for use as a sniper weapon, as the round would retain its effective hitting power longer than the M16. The M16 had a lot of good characteristics, but if you did not hit anything substantial, it would just pass through without do any damage. If you hit something like bone, the round would tumble and do nasty things to a body.

Chase

03-04-2004, 10:00 AM

Originally posted by Drunk tank
Dont fret! I lived in southwestern CO... it's normal to have lots of guns. Actually... I feel kinda deprived as I dont have enough. You know your around my type of area when you see pickup trucks with runracks with a 30.06 and a 12ga sittin in it....with the windows rolled down in the parking lot. My sister even carries a 9mm. :D
BTW... there any places around Havasu or Needles to go blow some shit up? If so I might bring a few rifles and we can raise hell with the PDog population... I hate them bastards!
Heres a few pics of my boom sticks... http://community.webshots.com/user/drunk_tank
For some reason I cant figure out how to link from webhots...:confused:
http://community.webshots.com/s/image8/2/95/26/122829526HLlkGf_ph.jpg
I tried but I see it didn't work..

H20 Party Starter

03-04-2004, 10:14 AM

LowRiver Kick ASS:cool: :cool: :D

flat broke

03-04-2004, 10:33 AM

Originally posted by Seadog
I used to be an armorer with both M14s and M16A2. We tweaked the M14 for use as a sniper weapon, as the round would retain its effective hitting power longer than the M16. The M16 had a lot of good characteristics, but if you did not hit anything substantial, it would just pass through without do any damage. If you hit something like bone, the round would tumble and do nasty things to a body.
I could be wrong on this, but I believe that the 5.56mm round was actually designed to be less damaging to flesh. As I remember reading, NATO called for a projectile that could incapacitate, but be less likely to cause massive internal injuries or otherwise maim infantrymen. Talk about a kinder, gentler world...
Chris

NOTALENT

03-04-2004, 10:35 AM

I was told by a wolf manufaturer that the .223 was made to that instead of flying straight that it flips when it is shot so when it hits the body it will richochet inside and do more damage.?? I was told this at the pomona gun show 2 years ago.

flat broke

03-04-2004, 01:03 PM

Looks like I'll have to do a little research this afternoon. :)
Chris

Drunk tank

03-04-2004, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by Bropb16
I was told by a wolf manufaturer that the .223 was made to that instead of flying straight that it flips when it is shot so when it hits the body it will richochet inside and do more damage.?? I was told this at the pomona gun show 2 years ago.
Whoever told you that is a complete moron!!! :eek: If a bullet flipped as it went through the air its aerodynamics would go to absolute shit....it probably wouldnt even shoot straight. Whatever you do, strick that from your memory... that individual which told that to you probably cant even count to 10

Drunk tank

03-04-2004, 01:25 PM

I believe the .223 (5.56 mm) round was developed for the simple fact that how big of a hole do you really have to put in a person to kill them. Also, if memory serves right, the .223 round was put into service after the vietnam war began. The reason being that the heathens had the superior AK's (in the fact that they had 30 rd mags). while our soldiers had guns that shot .308 and since that being such a large round the mags were generally smaller. Maybe 20 rd max? With the .203 and the M-16 type weapons it evened in out more since now we could carry a hell of alot of ammo since it was much lighter AND had 30rd mags for those guns. Also there wasnt that much open range over there, more or less hills and forest so you didnt need a round that could fly for a mile and then kill someone.... cause 99.9% of the time it'd hit a tree, bushes, hills... whatever befor it ever had a chance to get that far.
I'm sure some of the old timers who were around durring that time can correct me if I'm mistaken. Since that was before my time all the info I'm bassing this on is what I've read about and watched on the History Channel and Discovery. :) Guess its better than being totally ignorant :D

flat broke

03-04-2004, 02:22 PM

I was wrong on Nato's adoption of the 5.56 round. An excerpt from a globalsecurity.org whitepaper... "the lethality of the
5.56mm projectile is greater than the 7.62mm projectile at normal
combat ranges, due to the tendency of the lighter projectile to
tumble or shatter on impact. " In other words, the bullet's velocity/weight ratio allows it to be thrown off trajectory easier than a 7.62 round.
In regard to drunktank's statement about the 308 round in the initial ar15, There was a big problem with them. The capacity issue was a consideration, but far more important was the chemical composition in the powder of the cartridge. The spent gasses of the .308 round didn't opperate the particularly finicky internals of the AR in a consistent manner leading to many of the jamming/feeding issues associated with the early AR models.
This is what I love about these forums though. Different opinions/information coming together to enhance the knowledge base of all willing participants. I had bad info and if someone hadn't called me on it, I would have continued to rely upon that bad info.
Either way, I'm always glad that these types of conversations can be open without the fear of government intervention. Gotta love our 1st and 2nd ammendments. :)
Chris

MudPumper

03-04-2004, 02:28 PM

The military developed the 5.56 (.223) to replace the 7.62(.308) in their main battle rifles for various reasons. Some of which are, smaller size and weight so personel can carry more ammo. Less recoil for more control and accuracy on follow up shots. The most important reason is that the 5.56 was less likely to kill the enemy than the 7.62. The object here is that it is more beneficial to wound the enemy than to kill the enemy in battle. The reason for this is that it slows the advance of the enemy. If people are killed in battle they are left unattended for the duration of that battle whereas the wounded are immediately cared for. The U.S. military has done extensive balistic testing to compare the two rounds and this was their findings. The progression was from the M1 to the M14 both 7.62 to the AR-15/M-16 which is 5.56. Also, the 5.56 tumbles after hiting soft tissue and it has been found that the 5.56 will penetrate less than many slug handgun rounds.

MudPumper

03-04-2004, 02:36 PM

Flat Broke, I just read your post and obviously our info is different. The info I received is from Military Weapons Historians. Now you got me thinking. I guess the truth is out there, we just gotta find it. Who else has some info?:D :D :D

Drunk tank

03-04-2004, 03:13 PM

I'm sure the truth of it all is some combination of all of this stuff. Either way... .223 is a damn nice round! I LOVE IT! :D
My next gun is gonna be a M17S... Dont know why I like it... but I do. Shot one once and its really loud but since all the weight is far back and close to your body its really easy to control. Now I just need $800 :(

DEEZ NUTTS

03-04-2004, 03:32 PM

I too have heard a version of MudPumpers theory. It takes 2 men to carry 1 wounded.

77charger

03-04-2004, 04:52 PM

As for .223 accuracy heres a target from when i first loaded the 69 grain sierras. 150yds out of my ar15. Gary i have never needed to use the foward assist either:D (has never jammed).The top 3 are in the same hole 5 shots total
http://www.hotboatpics.com/pics/data/500/398223_accrcy.JPG

Havasu Cig

03-04-2004, 06:35 PM

In the study that my friend did, he found that the .223 round tends to fragment upon impact with a person or other object. He has developed a 40 hour class from the study which is now being used nation wide to train Law Enforcement.
We recently had a sniper on a rooftop close to my house that was taken down by a Deputy with an AR-15 from about 200 yards. The sniper had three other Deputies pined (sp) down when he was hit. If not for the AR it could have been ugly.
I would be hesitant to use a round such as a .308 in an urban environment (except for a dedicated sniper) because of fear of over penetration.
I have a a rifle in .308 as well as .338 Win Mag, and they are both very effective weapons.
I also have a .416 Remington Magnum that will reach out and touch just about anything.
;)

flat broke

03-04-2004, 06:41 PM

Originally posted by MudPumper
Flat Broke, I just read your post and obviously our info is different. The info I received is from Military Weapons Historians. Now you got me thinking. I guess the truth is out there, we just gotta find it. Who else has some info?:D :D :D
Actually I think my previous erroneous statement about the 5.56 being a less invasive round was based of a time related errosion of the statement you made about it being more effective to wound than kill.
A while back (around 99) I did a lot of research on Kalishnikov variants. Through that research I crossed upon lots of ballistics information. Undoubtedly, I probably read something similar to what you had mentioned and cross pollinated that info with something else I read. Once again I apologize for my initial erroneous statement about the 5.56 round, and that's why I searched this afternoon and found more definitive information, then posted it here to clear any misconceptions I may have caused.
But enough about the .223, lets see some users that are sportin .50BMG arms. :D
Chris

Nokomis

03-04-2004, 06:50 PM

My understanding is the first AR15/M16's had barrels with a rifling twist rate to induce the bullet to tumble upon impact and do more internal damage. Instead of a entry wound the size of a 22 cal it was more like a keyhole, even bigger that a 30 cal entry wound.
The fact that the ammo is a high speed round lends itself to come apart upon impact even in soft tissue and cause fragmentation wounds.
Later varients of the rifle had a different twist rate in the barrel to help stablize the bullet because of international pressure.
The Swiss have tried to have the ammo banned worldwide because of these traits as recently as 1995. Their argument is that the ammo is too "inhumane".

77charger

03-04-2004, 07:30 PM

the 55grn bullet from the .223 as far i know was made to tumble when it hit or made contact.Early ar 15s had a 1x12 twist barrel which turned the expelled bullet SLOW.(the purpose of the 55 grain fmj)Also early ars gave the ar a bad rap in 67-68
Now today most AR15S have a 1x9 -1x7 twist so that they can shoot the heavier bullets(ss109 -62grain fmj)The current military bullet would not work well with the older A1 type ar 15s 1x12 barrels(it would basically tumble out the barrel).This is why the .223 has become popular with high power shooting(faster twist barrels) out to 600+yds and as far as punching oles in paper it will now give the .308 a run for the money bullet weights range from 52-80 grains now.
With the bullet tech of today you can make an ar a very versatile weapon that is why it is highly sought after.
I havent been following guns as much as i use too(i use to shoot comps and at least shoot once a week) but did do alot of reading on ars and reloading the .223 cartridge since it is my favorite rifle of all time so i might be a little off about this but i can get info i f i need to.

MudPumper

03-04-2004, 10:13 PM

Originally posted by flat broke
Actually I think my previous erroneous statement about the 5.56 being a less invasive round was based of a time related errosion of the statement you made about it being more effective to wound than kill.
A while back (around 99) I did a lot of research on Kalishnikov variants. Through that research I crossed upon lots of ballistics information. Undoubtedly, I probably read something similar to what you had mentioned and cross pollinated that info with something else I read. Once again I apologize for my initial erroneous statement about the 5.56 round, and that's why I searched this afternoon and found more definitive information, then posted it here to clear any misconceptions I may have caused.
But enough about the .223, lets see some users that are sportin .50BMG arms. :D
Chris
No apology necessary here. There is a big movement to ban the .50BMG. I have wanted one for a while and if the movement starts making progress I will pick one up before they are banned.

Kilrtoy

03-04-2004, 10:27 PM

Is this the new HOT BOAT MALITIA

flat broke

03-04-2004, 11:30 PM

MudPumper,
From what I have read, it looks like the angling on a ban of .50BMG weapons like the M82A1 is a largely Calicentric phenomenon. There was however concern that these weapons posed a significant "terrorist related activities" threat and some banter has been heard now at the Federal level.
I want one in a bad way. I Would probably shoot it next to never, but its just one of those weapons I feeel is well within my constitutional right to own. It is not an assualt riffle, and the average idiot (myself currently included) couldn't use the weapon to it's effective range, so why ban the things? I found an okay deal on a test fired setup with 2 mags and a scope at $7999.99. (if anyone is interested, pm me for details) I'm sorry but a 8k riffle isn't fitting the demographic of random gun related violence. Those with the means to purchase these rifles are your straight shooting, law abiding citizen types. Those that are procuring them illegally will continue to do so weather they are banned or not. Why not ensure that the people of the United States ALWAYS have the ability to protect themselves, by ensuring that they are never out gunned by terrorist nutjobs seeking to undermine our way of life.
I would love to see a couple of these employed by property owners along the CA/AZ/TX - Mexico borders. After a lot of the crap I have read/heard about lately, it looks like the ranchers out there have some problems that are getting a little out of hand. Though the weapon's power is wasted upon soft targets; the usefull range it provides would allow property owners to make illegal aliens/trespasser's aware of their infringment of our property rights from a very safe distance. :D Kind of expensive to be poping of warning shots at a buck each, but honestly if the Gov't can't fund a full fledged patrol, might as well leave it up to the property owners whose livestock are being murdered, and family's safety is being threatened.
I fail to see how there is room for interpretation about the spirit of the second amendment. The damn thing was written to make sure that the people of the United States always had adequate protection against enemies foreign and domestic. Not that the citizens should be given .22 cal crap while the bad guys (be they foreign or domestic) have free reign of what to use in their efforts to subvert our way of life. For christ's sake, the amendment was written right after the revolutionary war, wherein our victory hinged on the fact that the milita owned and were well versed in weapons comparable to those of the British Army. Any jackass that argues that we should only be allowed to keep weapons for hunting and sporting purposes obviously remembers little of our national orrigins, and even less of the history of the human race. Has our society become so perfet that we no longer need to rely on a means of self defense? Give me a break.
I'm done for my rant for the night, but remember... Keep firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens or face the reality that by removing them from the hands of said law abiding citizens; you will only be leaving them in the hands of those wishing to do ill to our society.
Chris

Seadog

03-05-2004, 06:58 AM

My understanding was that when the M16 was first designed, it was suppose to use a more powerful powder with faster burn characteristics than that being used for the M14. The bean counters decided that the new powder was too expensive and told them to go back to the old powder, so they made some adjustments to compensate. In combat, the shortcomings of the old powder was soon apparent, requiring additional changes, including the ram assist. It was also discovered that even underbrush could deflect rounds.
Finally, after several years, they got the OK to go to the original powder. Trouble is now it had to work with the older rifles. Fortunately, it seems that they have gotten things worked out pretty well now. The M16A2 is not a great weapon by any means, but it was designed to be mass produced at low cost. If you look at the differences between the M14 and M1, and the M16, you can se the advantage on long combat treks.

burbanite

03-05-2004, 07:59 AM

Originally posted by 77charger
i first loaded the 69 grain sierras. 150yds out of my ar15. http://www.hotboatpics.com/pics/data/500/398223_accrcy.JPG
What twist are you using for that weight?

burbanite

03-05-2004, 08:01 AM

Originally posted by MudPumper
I have wanted one for a while and if the movement starts making progress I will pick one up before they are banned.
If I were you I wouldn't wait, no time like the present. CA congress critters in particular seem to have a hard on for these things, they are going after ammo as well so grab some reloading equipment while you are at it....:)

XTRM22

03-05-2004, 08:06 AM

[i]
I'm done for my rant for the night, but remember... Keep firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens or face the reality that by removing them from the hands of said law abiding citizens; you will only be leaving them in the hands of those wishing to do ill to our society.
Chris [/B]
Those who pound their swords into plows......will eventually plow for those who don't!!:p :D
Chuck

LOWRIVER2

03-05-2004, 09:24 AM

I'd get that .50 cal. soon if you live in Ca. , The city of LA has been actively attempting to ban it's sale in the city for the last 2 years. Go to Barrett rifle's website and the owner writes a long rap on it. I have no problem with folks owning .50 cal. rifles but my politically minded bosses do, they will most likely go down the road of assault rifles with registration being mandatory and sales to be banned. My only beef with Mr. Barrett is that he blames some LAPD personnel for the ban that are officers who were ORDERED to display the rifle to the city council, they (officers) did NOT speak against the ownership of the guns. Mr. Barrett has every right to be mad but lay blame where it belongs, on the politicians, not on us rank and file tunnel rats/lol.

G-Ride

03-05-2004, 09:54 AM

Lowriver2 check your PM.

flat broke

03-05-2004, 09:59 AM

Gary,
I read a lot about that particular incident on AR15.com. In fact, most of the guys over there were sympathetic to the officer who was only doing as he was ordered. I applaud Barrett for his resonse, but agree that he should have more accurately directed his comments towards the ingorant SOBs that seek to take these weapons out of the hands of the public.
I had a general question about his weapons in general with regard to California law. I tried searching at http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/index.html, but came up empty. Are any of the model 99, model 95, or m82a1 weapons currently legal for the average joe (non law enforcement) to own? I've been thinking that perhaps I should snatch what I can before things change. I can't justify the coin on the m82a1, but the model 95 might be doable apres wedding.
If you would rather answer this via PM or email, thats cool as well.
Chris

NOTALENT

03-05-2004, 10:44 AM

Is it possible to still buy those .50 calibers here in CA?

LOWRIVER2

03-05-2004, 11:27 AM

I'm not up on the exact model descriptions on the barretts, however, they and all semi auto rifles that can take detachable box magazines are ONLY assault rifles per Ca. law if they are on the current list (barretts are not) or have one of the following with the capacity for a detachable mag.:
pistol grip
thumbhole stock
flash suppressor
barrel shroud for heat shielding against shooter
folding/telescoping stock
grenade/flare launcher
forward pistol grip
and of course, is sold with a mag that holds more than ten rounds.
I know Barrett makes a semi auto rifle that is legal to buy in Cal. without these items on it.
Only .50 cal. we took in I have a problem with people owning was a fully operational full auto M2. Even the semi auto version of an M2 would fly sans the pistol grip and flash suppressor.
There's a debate over the definition of flash suppressor vs. muzzle brake at the DOJ. If you have a muzzle brake on a hunting rifle or shotgun,it obviously is'nt construed as a flash suppressor.
However, who has done a test/ govt. or otherwise, to see if a flash suppressor actually suppresses the muzzle flash, I've never seen an acutual test to measure the effectiveness. Any govt. guys here that have?