Firearm Forums - Arms Locker banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
rifle,tho. Scope has some use, both for foraging and sniping, but mostly belongs in a hard belt case, for use as a substitute for binocs, because you should AVOID being in the open, in daylight. I favor used Leupolds, at no more than 25%of retail cost, usually found at gunshows and stripped off of a rifle there. The 2x7 Compact is the choice for the shtf CAR-15. Normally, when on the rifle, it's left on 2x, for the wide field of view and speed of hitting. I favor a simple Duplex x hair, with its potential for use as a rangefinder. If such a simple "ranging" method doesn't suffice, it's a shot you probably shouldn't be taking, as a civilian survivalist, with ANY rifle,much less an 11" CAR-15 223.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts
Get with the program JD

223 fan said:
I favor a simple Duplex x hair, with its potential for use as a rangefinder. If such a simple "ranging" method doesn't suffice, it's a shot you probably shouldn't be taking, as a civilian survivalist, with ANY rifle,much less an 11" CAR-15 223.
Oh, I don't know about that, both of these rifles get the job done well past the effective range of an 11" CAR :p LOL





Teuf,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
only if the guy holds STILL, in daylight

in open country, and if he's that stupid, he's no threat to you anyway. I'm safer to shoot at somebody at 300m with a CAN on the CAR, than you are at 600m with a noisy 308, even the M1A, and I'm a LOT more likely to get the HIT, too. If you dont HAVE to hit, why shoot, hmm? Especially when the noise is likely to just create MORE problems.

Also, dummy, neither one of those sights is ELECTRONIC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts
How "safe" you are at any range has to do with many factors

600 yards is pretty damm far and shots from that range are very hard to detect if the rifleman knows what he's about. At 300 yards you are far more apt to be seen and far more apt to be hit by any bozo with a 100 yard zero and a bit of luck. I've been around suppresed weapons they aren't that damm quiet, especially one not using subsonic ammo or a bolt closure device.

It's all about a doctrine refered to as "ballistic advantage".

My comment still stands that it's ludicrous you think no other rifle can reliably hit any farther out than a 11" CAR 15.

Teuf,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
I do much better with scopes.

My 45yo eyes have a hard time with iron sights. While I have read that aperture sights are supposed to be much easier on old eyes, I especially have a hard time with the sights on my CAR for some reason. I have a hard time getting the front post in focus. I don't have this problem with Garand or M1A sights. I can shoot open sights easier and better than the CAR sights.

Hey Teuf,

Been wonderin' where you been. I sent you a PM over at PN a while back but haven't seen you around there. PN is becoming a ghost town lately. Anyway, what the PM was about ... you recommended the ACOG to me a while back, and I had an opportunity to trade on a TAO1b and was wondering if that would work on an AR using heavy bullets or would the ranges be off real bad.

Good to see you again.

Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
u aint been around a GOOD one, cause

it's VERYT hard to tell where a shot from a GOOD can came from. I never said other guns can't outreach an 11' CAR. I said the surivalist doesn't HAVE to reach any further, so why LIMIT yourself to the guns that can do so? they CAN'T do other things that DO need doing, like concealing,and being handy with a good can attached. Regardless of what the GUNS can do, simply staying staying in either thick cover or darkness means you don't HAVE to shoot at more range than the CAR offers, and the can means that the "shootees' have no CLUE where you are. Sonic crack is as likely to point them 90 degrees to one side or the other as it is to point them at the suppressed shooter. I'm TELLING you, man, a GOOD can on an 11" 223 makes less than HALF the noise of a .22 rifle using subsonics. It has about the noise of a CB Cap from .22 pistol, but "flatter" sounding, less of a "carrying", location-determining sort of a sound. Guys TRY to blow a LOT of smoke up everyone's ass about how their "k" baffles, etc are "so efficient. I'm TELLING you, annealed bronze screen wire "donuts, in the rear half of the can, aluminum screen in the front, a "sleeved" can, rear half of inner tube vented into the "sleeve" area, and washers interspersed with the donuts, makes a VERY effective can, and the baffles and washers are SIMPLE to make.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
A good .308 means never having to say sorry. If Your enemy is in range so are You(Murphys Rules Of Combat). Why would you want a woodchuck rifle cartridge as the "EndallbeatallBuckRodgers'ssupernuclearplanetbuster", and not feel undergunned is beyond me. I was in SWA Feb-Sep91, and carried the M-203, but kept a M-60 on my recovery vehicle as backup, because if I can see them they can see me. .223 is a decent round but not the best, and .308 really can turn concealment into cover under certain circumstances. In hte real world a mutant cannibal like youself would only succeed in causing a breif fear wave followed by a manhunt and weiner roast by the locals. Have A Nice day, Inspite Of It All
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
yeah, sure, all the local men will ABANDON

their families, to chase a will o the wisp for weeks on end, HALF of them being silently shot, while their famiilies fall victims to OTHER predator types. You are so fos that I can smell you from here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts
JD

As a civvy in a SHTF situation there is no way to know how the tactical engagments could play out. Saying that folks will never need any more range and peneration than offered by a 11" CAR is silly.

Shooting from 600 yards with a 7.62 from a prepared position, those recieving the fire are going to have a hell of a time figuring out where the shot came from if the rifleman knows what he's doing. There is a whole bunch of things a rifleman can do make sure of that.

You grossly over play the issue.

Teuf,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts
Mike

Mike in NC said:
Hey Teuf,

Been wonderin' where you been. I sent you a PM over at PN a while back but haven't seen you around there. PN is becoming a ghost town lately. Anyway, what the PM was about ... you recommended the ACOG to me a while back, and I had an opportunity to trade on a TAO1b and was wondering if that would work on an AR using heavy bullets or would the ranges be off real bad.

Good to see you again.

Mike
My ACOGs have 5.56 reticles and require a touch of hold-over at ranges past BSZ with 75's, but not much we are talking a high chest vs. point of aim point of impact. I bought 5.56 reticles because I know when my 75's are gone, it's nato spec time.

The first ACOG I bought was to take to Desert Storm with me, M2's and ACOGs where not as common in that conflict as they are now. I knew I would be using NATO spec ball so thats the way I went. I know guys are using 7.62 nato reticles on thier 5.56 shorties with heavy bullets and they are a tad closer.

However, I don't think it's all that big a deal, the come-ups for 5.56 and 7.62 are pretty close out to 500 yards anyway. Past that, the BC of the 7.62 edges out the mag tolerant length 5.56's pretty fast. Thats of no real concern since 500 is way on the outside edge a CAR15 anyway.

Bottom line, I stick to the 5.56 reticles for my 5.56 rifles.

There are so many variations of ACOGs a guy can go silly picking the "best" one for his use. For AR's I like the 3X Compacts that mount right to the top of the carry handle. They are about the same size as the old Colt Realist scope.

Teuf,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,944 Posts
What I find interesting is this:

If JD lived in suburbia or an urban area, and was going to stay there, he might have a point with his sawed off AR - a glorified pistol.

BUT.....

He admits readily that he lives in Pagosa Springs, Colorado. He's already in prime .308 country.

He's in one of those areas where you can actually take advantage of the extra range that the .308 has - and may need to.

He's not near any major urban areas, and those that are the closest are not only quite a ways away, but there are mountain ranges and other harsh terrain features acting as barriers that would greatly help keep people out of the area.

He's in horse country to the max. He's almost as well located as Teuf, more so if that frigging volcano blows.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dorobuta

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,241 Posts
u aint been around a GOOD one, cause

it's VERYT hard to tell where a shot from a GOOD can came from. I never said other guns can't outreach an 11' CAR. I said the surivalist doesn't HAVE to reach any further, so why LIMIT yourself to the guns that can do so? they CAN'T do other things that DO need doing, like concealing,and being handy with a good can attached. Regardless of what the GUNS can do, simply staying staying in either thick cover or darkness means you don't HAVE to shoot at more range than the CAR offers, and the can means that the "shootees' have no CLUE where you are. Sonic crack is as likely to point them 90 degrees to one side or the other as it is to point them at the suppressed shooter. I'm TELLING you, man, a GOOD can on an 11" 223 makes less than HALF the noise of a .22 rifle using subsonics. It has about the noise of a CB Cap from .22 pistol, but "flatter" sounding, less of a "carrying", location-determining sort of a sound. Guys TRY to blow a LOT of smoke up everyone's ass about how their "k" baffles, etc are "so efficient. I'm TELLING you, annealed bronze screen wire "donuts, in the rear half of the can, aluminum screen in the front, a "sleeved" can, rear half of inner tube vented into the "sleeve" area, and washers interspersed with the donuts, makes a VERY effective can, and the baffles and washers are SIMPLE to make.
why limit yourself to the guns that can't? Nothing about a rifle that can do a long range shot prevents it from doing a shorter range shot. Claiming to use a rifle scope to replace binoculars is a bad choice, and suffers from a number of drawbacks. But given you've never actually tried it, you don't know what they are. I'd rather use a decent pair of binoculars as binoculars.

If the situation ever presents itself where you're either caught in the open, or you need to take a longer shot - you will be on the short end of the stick, where someone with a far more versatile rifle, one capable of shots at both close and distant ranges will not be. You're FOS about these guns not being handy with a suppressor attached - I know for a fact because I suppress all my ARs, including my AR-10. They carry and handle quite well. Maybe you need to hit a gym or something?

Thick cover and darkness do not guarantee you won't be detected. There's a lot of thermal and night vision out there. The better stuff allows for some pretty long range shooting too. I suggest you go watch a few hog hunting videos. You may need to engage someone well beyond your shorty pos 11" CAR can reliably reach.

you can trust your life to POS gear (wire screen suppressor), but I won't. I've been around very good suppressors - it's clear you haven't. We'll just leave it at that.

I also doubt very seriously you know how to range using a reticle. Why don't you describe the reticle in the leupold 2x7? I have one sitting in my safe I'm going to give the neighbor's kid for his 22. I took it off a rifle and I replaced it with a better Leupold (4.5-14) - it's on one of my bolt actions, so don't bother blathering about fighting rifles. I have either red dots, or LPVO on my ARs, though my sig 556 currently has a 4x prismatic mounted on it.

you post a lot of stuff that leads one to believe you have thought about a lot, but actually done very little. You have no actual experience with any of the things you tout.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,241 Posts
Mike



My ACOGs have 5.56 reticles and require a touch of hold-over at ranges past BSZ with 75's, but not much we are talking a high chest vs. point of aim point of impact. I bought 5.56 reticles because I know when my 75's are gone, it's nato spec time.

The first ACOG I bought was to take to Desert Storm with me, M2's and ACOGs where not as common in that conflict as they are now. I knew I would be using NATO spec ball so thats the way I went. I know guys are using 7.62 nato reticles on thier 5.56 shorties with heavy bullets and they are a tad closer.

However, I don't think it's all that big a deal, the come-ups for 5.56 and 7.62 are pretty close out to 500 yards anyway. Past that, the BC of the 7.62 edges out the mag tolerant length 5.56's pretty fast. Thats of no real concern since 500 is way on the outside edge a CAR15 anyway.

Bottom line, I stick to the 5.56 reticles for my 5.56 rifles.

There are so many variations of ACOGs a guy can go silly picking the "best" one for his use. For AR's I like the 3X Compacts that mount right to the top of the carry handle. They are about the same size as the old Colt Realist scope.

Teuf,
it is patently clear he has zero actual experience with anything he posts about. He certainly doesn't understand shots beyond pistol range. He also cannot fathom that things don't follow his script. You would think he would have clued into this, given the number of times he has been arrested and sent to prison. He clearly wasn't expecting those outcomes, and his plans clearly didn't work out the way he wanted. His entire life has been all of his plans going sideways, yet he expects SHTF to suddenly work out in his favor the way he wants it to. This is the very definition of insanity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,277 Posts
Rejecting any kit out of hand is not good. They have a use, use it. Only if you do not have a backup, say iron sights who you be leaving yourself in a possible world of hurt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dorobuta

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,241 Posts
I have several scopes with illuminated reticles. Without power, they are still useable scopes, just not as useful in low-light. I also have a couple of the leupold fire-dot scopes, which feature a lighted dot at the center of the cross hairs. this gives you the speed of dot when needed and the accuracy of a longer range scope when needed. if the battery dies, it's still a very good scope and none of the performance suffers.

For someone that relies on gimmicks (special ammo, weird caliber hand guns) he sure is quick to dismiss any kit that isn't his choice.

ETA: Spell shell doesn't like Leupold for some reason
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,541 Posts
electronic sights have no place on shtf rifle,tho. Scope has some use, both for foraging and sniping, but mostly belongs in a hard belt case, for use as a substitute for binocs, because you should AVOID being in the open, in daylight. I favor used Leupolds, at no more than 25%of retail cost, usually found at gunshows and stripped off of a rifle there. The 2x7 Compact is the choice for the shtf CAR-15.
I'm also a fan of the low-power-variable compact Leupolds. For years, their 1-4X (really a 1.3-5.2X) shotgun scope with heavy duplex was my scope of choice for numerous guns, and it worked very well. I resisted red dot and other electronic sights for a lot of years, for the same reasons you don't like them. But when finally trying my first 'semi-serious' red dot - a Sparc AR - on timed drills, I found it was substantially faster than the 1X Leupold was. I didn't expect it and frankly wasn't happy about it, but the timer doesn't lie. I still like the little Leupolds and still have them on 3-4 guns, but not on my potential defensive-use gun or surrogate (cheaper caliber) 9mm training gun.

Durability-wise, there are a lot of electronic sight options that have literally decades of proven track record in very harsh-use environments, including war zones. Aimpoint, EoTech, Trijicon, and I'm sure others (Elcan maybe..?) as well. I only use one model of truly serious red dot, the Trijicon MRO. Only have three of them, all bought used after Trijicon came out with a new iteration and the "gotta have it first" crowd were selling off their previous-generation units to get the latest & greatest. I have absolutely as much confidence in them as I do in the little Leupold compact scope, plus they have the undeniable, measurable benefit of being faster to the first shot out to at least 50 yards. I've only had to change the battery in one of them that I recall; that was on the earliest-generation one and was after right at two years on setting 4 out of 7. There may or may not have been a second time I've replaced a battery in one; I honestly don't recall. Anymore I don't even turn them off, but leave them on setting 3 instead of four. Still waiting to have to change another battery, and just keep some batteries hanging on a screw on the wall nearby. (My main gun does have two spare batteries stored in it, as a 'just in case' kind of thing.)

Point being, I totally get why you don't like electronic sights. I put off trying them as well, for a lot of years. But when I finally bit the bullet and tried a good one on a timer, there was no disputing the advantages. For the same reasons that I finally (grudgingly) gave in and accepted the superiority of the .300BK cartridge for compact-gun use, I also gave in and accepted the close-range superiority of a good, modern red dot sight. You should try one sometime; they'll surprise you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,738 Posts
I like the SIG ROMEO-5 for what it is.

Not overly expensive and the battery is the same one so far.
Only a year set to constantly on, although motion activated at mid power range. The motion part I'm not sure of being "off" in a vehicle.
2-MOA dot and not bulky.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,241 Posts
I like the SIG ROMEO-5 for what it is.

Not overly expensive and the battery is the same one so far.
Only a year set to constantly on, although motion activated at mid power range. The motion part I'm not sure of being "off" in a vehicle.
2-MOA dot and not bulky.
The Sig optics are actually quite good. I know a few people running the Romeo 5. If I was looking for another RDS, I'd consider the Romeo 5.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,277 Posts
What worked 40 years ago, doesn't work as well as it did. I'm talking aging & iron sights. Back when I shot Service Rifle matches in the late '80's/ early '90's, I considered scopes redundant. Age has a way of changing your mind. The majority of my rifles are still iron sights but these days I'm willing to use a scope far more readily than I did years before.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigEd
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top