Anyone shooting a Non-AR or AK based rifle?

[jslaker]

I think if the US issued MP5s to most troops then you'd be seeing the same thing with it and not the M4, and 9mm would cost $1/round.

I'm not aware of another platform outside the AR that provides autofeeding an intermediate+ size round with the kind of accuracy and flexibility of the AR and at the price point that the AR hits that's readily available to civilians.

You can have an AR that's anything from a home-defense carbine tricked out with all the tactical gear to an AR set up for long distance shooting with a free floated barrel and appropriate optics. That's the reason ARs are so popular.

[Tamara]

My personal opinion actually, but it seems to me that the current explosion of AR rifles coincides with the current issues in the middle east and the many many men and women serving in that area of the world. I'm willing to bet that for a large majority of those in the service the M4 was the first rifle they'd ever held and fired.

The biggest jump in commercial popularity in the AR platform probably occurred in the late-80s and early-90s, and was caused by a combination of the gun going "open source" and the neutering of imports by the Bush Scary Imported Black Rifle Ban of '89. (Thank you, Bill Bennett, you meddlesome jerk!)

Also, remember that back before '94, EBRs were a tiny niche market. When they got popular due to the AWB, what were your choices on the market, really? Either an AR clone of some sort, or an awful AK parts gun that looked and ran like it had been assembled by angry monkeys.

[orionz06]

I just find it hard to believe an AR is still state of the art 50 years after the widespread use of the platform.

What would state of the art be?

[jbmilitary006]

I think if the US issued MP5s to most troops then you'd be seeing the same thing with it and not the M4, and 9mm would cost $1/round.

of course that's just my opinion and everyone knows what those are like....

I disagree, and even if the US did issue MP5s to "most troops" I can grantee you SOF would not go back to using them. Why would I want my primary weapon to be a small caliber such as 9mm or any pistol caliber.

[Jay Cunningham]

What would state of the art be?

I am wondering the same thing.

Neither the SCAR nor ACR (nor anything else I can think of readily) uses an operating principle that is remarkably different from what we saw in use 65 years ago.

[jslaker]

I am wondering the same thing.

Neither the SCAR nor ACR (nor anything else I can think of readily) uses an operating principle that is remarkably different from what we saw in use 65 years ago.

Most of the new "modern high tech" rifles are just AR-18 actions wrapped up in a fancy shell. Even that's not anything all that new, that's essentially what the UK's L85 weapons system is, after all, and it's what? 25 years old?

[Odin Bravo One]

I have spent a good number of years and sent more than several thousands of rounds down range with the SCAR family.

Rather than turn this into a silly "which is better" argument......I'll say this:

The SCAR has some advantages for institutional use. It has some advantages for lefties.

The AR has some advantages for institutional use. It has several advantages for individual use in the U.S. It has some disadvantages for lefties.

If there were a SCAR, or AK, or AR set up to my preferences, in an emergency situation, the one I would grab and go with would be the one that happened to be closest to me.

It honestly becomes a preference thing. Ergonomically, bore diameter, controls, etc., are all pretty equal for all practical intents and purposes. Rather than discuss which is better, it is probably more practical to discuss preferences.

It's the wizard, not the wand. And just because SOCOM chose it, does not mean it is good. Or preferred. Or even liked by the guys who have it forced on them.

[jlw]

I have ARs. I prefer a lever action .30-30.

[Kyle Reese]

I own an FS 2000 bullpup as a non AR 5.56mm weapon. It offers no discerable improvements over the DI AR system for me, and has many features that I don't find desirable or useful on a defensive carbine.

It's the perfect example of "carbine designed by guys who have never been to the range or shot a gun before".

[jbmilitary006]

Very well put sir... that is all.