Shane45

Commercial performance 5.56, yes.

Dan, I certainly find the thought of two rounds in nearly the same hole interesting for sure! Ray, just keep in mind that stopping power will be FAR behind that of commercial 5.56 if you are using milsurp 7.62X39. If you use performance ammo in the 7.62X39 caliber I think you will find it more expensive than 5.56 performance ammo. But for plinking, the AK and surplus ammo sure is an attractive proposition.

Devils Advocate, I think you are still subscribing to the banter that the AR needs some super support to remain reliable. It just isnt so. The anectdotal evidence is overwhelmingly in the opposite direction from many many many AAR's. There are a few reasons the SCAR16 purchasing by SOCOM stopped. The biggest is dwindling budget and the fact that a multi caliber SCAR reciever exists that can be outfitted 5.56 or 7.62. So SOCOM focused on the immediate need of the 308 platform and it is my bet that the Multi Cal SCAR reciever will be a strong contendor in future purchases. BUT the SCAR didnt garner widespread adoption. Why is that? Its my belief that the SCAR IS a superior rifle in MANY ways. But is it superior enough to deal with the minor differences in the manual of arms? I think in the eyes of those using these systems, the advantage isnt worth it BECAUSE there is no real problem with the M4. It seems to me that if SOCOM operators were having such issues the errornet would have you believe, they would have screamed for the SCAR. They didnt. And as for lethality, since 262 and 318 have come on line even the caliber complaints have largely died down because of the effectiveness of the better performing ammo. Another minor point. The Russian military dropped the AK a LOOOOONG time ago. I think many dont even realise that fact. However since there are so many AK's in inventory only their operators get the AN94 which despite its looks is NOT an AK at all. That rifle has an action that makes an AR look child simple by comparison.

You mean like the KAC SR16 or the SCAR?

Nope, ones made for mil trials are made at Remy factory. And if Im not mistaken, are a metal lower too! Edited to add, its been a while since I paid any attention to the ACR so things may have changed but I believe that the two factories supporting each market was always the intention.

But the slap in the face to the public is that you cant have the mil spec version made at the remy factory, you can only have the civy one made by Bushmaster.

Campers never win and winners never camp!

What can a SCAR do that an AR cant? How about fold . 2 things that really bugged me about the ACR is the way it handles. Its very front heavy to me. And I hate the way the Ambi safety digs into my trigger finger knuckle. Nothing a file couldnt fix I suppose. The other concerns were as mentioned QC issues. I do not care for the barrel attachment method either of the ACR. The bolt setup doesnt give me the warm fuzzies either. This is not to say that overall its a bad rifle, these are just the things that matter to me. On the topic of the SCAR, well it handles great for me. But it too has a few things I dont care for. I hate the method in which the PLASTIC side rails are mounted. I mildly dislike the reciprokating charging handle. But that sumbitch is seriously reliable. My buddy has over 5k through his with no lube or cleaning. Carbon is oooozing out of the damn thing and she is still running strong. As for price.... well my AR and my SCAR were within 200 bucks of each other. What I will give the ACR is looks. I really like the looks of it. BUT looks never really play into my buying decisions. The article by my friend hootiewho who is an industrial mechanical failure analysis expert weighed in fairly strong on my buying decision. Will I ever need all that reliability and robustness? Probably not but I like knowing its capable. As a side note, performance is what matters to me. And during those otics test I was performing recently, I noticed that my times and accuracy were starting to really jump forward of my AR's with my SCAR. In other words I think Im starting to shoot my SCAR faster and more accuratly than my AR's despite the fact I have way more time on the AR platform. Shane

Using an actual example makes it easier to understand the concept imo and better illustrates why the error matters.

Ooof the formula looks all twisted in the post. moa = inches X 100 devided by 1.047 X Distance in yards. moa = 420 X 100 / 1.047 X 1000 moa = 42000 / 1047 moa = 40.1

ok so lets say your scope was calibrated in inches on the ret but the dials were in moa. So lets say that drop in inches @ 1000 for a 308 is 420 inches. Here is the formula inches * 100 MOA = -------------------------- 1.047 * distance in yards That gives you 40.1 moa rounded. If you used inches per hundred yards you would crank in 42. That gives you a difference of 1.9 moa. If I did my math right thats 19.9 inches rounded at 1000yds of difference between the point of aim vs the point of impact.

Yes.

Some links for those wanting to chase that rabbit down the deep hole. http://static.scribd.com/docs/d2ke2aetnlp77.pdf http://www.scribd.com/doc/4617008/Mils-and-Moa-Simplified

For example the mildot in my premier heritage 5-25 scope is .1mrad. A quick look at your link and it looks like they are using "Army" mills at .2 in the Leupold referenced. The Marine Corps uses football mills. But its all the same scale. In MOA you ned to know which scale your in because there are different scales. Frankly I dont care for the mildot as I range much more accuratly with hash marks. And for those following along that wonder why it matters, that difference in inch per hundred yards vs true moa would equal about 18" for a 308 at 1000 yds. Thats a BIG difference.

I think you are confusing mil dots with milradien. A mil dot is whatever the scope manufacturer/reticle designer say it subtends BUT its always on the same mil scale. So a mill is always a mil. Its one scale. MOA has a few different scales and reticles for those differences. Whats worse is when a scope manufacturer puts one scale in the ret and a different scale in the click value like Leupold did on certain models.

I like the STI Trojan except for the name. Every time I hear the name the Trojan man condom commercial song starts playing in my head!!!

Not the shooters I know Use 1.047. An MOA is 1/60th of one degree. That is an angle which subtends an arc whose length at 100 yards is 1.047 inches. A case for NOT using 1.047 is if your scope is calibrated in IPHY. And this is why I use mill . A mill is a mill. There are no different standards.

Maks I took you comment more along the lines of an absolute, sorry. There will always be a sociatal "greater good" component to individual rights. Which is why in my opinion it should be carfully considered just how far to chase down that rabbit hole. Perception is the reality is our biggest enemy.

Because maks, the Criminal or mentaly deranged cant kill me with their religion or speach. How about the right to vote? Its a right that is revoked upon conviction. I do not believe that those that sacrifice their rights is a BOR issue.

The airplane argument is silly and some of you guys have some funny ideas about the fragility of an airplane. Also one could easily argue the opposite position that an armed passenger could have averted a thousand deaths on 9/11......

The only solution I see to the class component of CCW is simply there is no pass or fail. You just need to attend.

http://press.discovery.com/us/mil/programs/triggers/

Comparing crew served weapons with quick change barrel systems to ar's and ak's is silly. I guess you have never seen a barrel droop on an M60 that has maintained a firing schedule to high... Im the king of relaxed schedules. Ask anyone that bought a rifle from me . Yet every time I take an AR out to the range alas it works. Im not into abusing weapons to prove anything other than to myself, but I know a few that do. One guy I know has around 2700 rounds through his tier 1 ar with no cleaning and no lube. No malfs to date. Its a 308. I know a ton of 5.56 owners that have done the same. They all seem to easily exceed 2000 rounds on a HARD firing schedule. That is enough for me. A) because I cant carry 2000 rounds easily. B) because I dont have a supply corps to bring me 2000 rounds. C) If I need 2000 rounds just how many zombies are there???? Pat Rogers and I had a conversation about AR reliability and firing schedules. What he had to say was basically any AR seems to be able to hold it together for intermittant range sessions. Its the high round count/hard schedules that cause rifles to fail in his classes, and not just AR's. So the casual rode not so hard and put away dirty hasnt made a single AR of mine fail and that has been many.

But where is that point? That is the question. If you have any rifle that pukes at 500 rounds id agree but who is the guy carrying around 2000 rounds? If Im in some fight that I expend 1000 rounds Im looking for the camera crew and my costar!