It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

RFB vs. M1A. Thoughts?

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2016 @ 03:56 AM
link   
I've got a hankering for some .308 firepower. The kind that'll reach out and touch somebody. The kind of rifle that you'll look at and if you know what you're looking at, you'll say "damn that's some firepower right there". Accuracy at a distance while maintaining knock down power and the added punch that a heavier round like the .308 will carry to a fight.

Sure, you've got the trade off with weight to consider: a (heavy) combat load of 200 rounds of 7.62 NATO is probably heavier than 300 rounds of 5.56. It's a heavier gun surely, at least comparing an AR-15 or Mini-14 to an M1A. .308 NATO will bring more range, armor piercing potential, and downrange power along with that extra weight though.

As a .308 fan, I'm most enamored with the M1A(of course), and this new RFB from Kel-Tec. I thought then that I'd open this discussion with the forum on these guns. The M1A is undoubtedly one of the most accurate autoloading battle ready rifles manufactured today. What do you guys think of the Kel-Tec RFB Hunter? It looks like it could be a pretty accurate gun without much work. I like the compact package, the fact that they make a CA compliant model(damn you and your archaic gun laws Cali!), and the Ambidextrous controls and ejection system. I know there are plenty of members who are much more educated than I on the design and construction of these rifles, so I'd like to hear what everyone thinks.

I'll throw the TAVOR in here to close my OP. Another ambi- bullpup. IWI has said they are working on a .308 chambered model, so I thought we might discuss that as well. I'll try to add links with photos and specs of the guns over the next few days, sorry to not have them in the OP but time. Discuss.




posted on Aug, 17 2016 @ 05:33 AM
link   
Hands down the M1A! Stable platform, quick (enough) action, less felt recoil due to its heavier weight and accuracy. The gas system handles just about all loads and bullet weights.

Ask a Marine who was in the early years of Viet Nam and see what he thought of the M-14. They did not want the change...

You know, America has not won a war since going to the .223/5.56 M-16 platform...



posted on Aug, 17 2016 @ 06:19 AM
link   
a reply to: TheBadCabbie

from memory - 5.56 = 12gram / round [ loose ] , 7.62 = 23 gram / loose round

both NATO

as for a battle rifle - i has to say FN/FAL // L1A1 SLR

but i would say that


if i HAD TO pic sometjing else - H&K G3 just for the engineering of the mech.



posted on Aug, 17 2016 @ 06:23 AM
link   
lugged m 14 too many miles in too much jungle...you know not what you preach...

Cheers



posted on Aug, 17 2016 @ 06:33 AM
link   
a reply to: TheBadCabbie
A friend of mine has the RFB and I must say it is beautiful. Quite well balanced as well, and very light (3.5kg roughly). It has a reciprocating charging handle which is annoying, and it doesn't cycle lesser ammunition so well.

M14s are a lot heavier (5kg) and extremely unbalanced (too much weight on the support hand). But they are well designed and reliable. A genuine one will be expensive. The Chinese ones are common here and cost roughly $600.

The Tavor, by the way, is NOT ambidextrous. You can modify it to eject left but it requires time.

Personally I would recommend an SVT-40, which is cheap, invincible, and very accurate with good ammunition. An SKS is another option as they are quite accurate, customizable, and their rounds are more powerful than a 5.56 yet weigh less than a 308. Browning and Benelli also make semi-automatic hunting style rifles which are wonderful.



posted on Aug, 17 2016 @ 08:20 AM
link   
RFB availability should make this decision for you. At least around here, they are extremely difficult to get.



posted on Aug, 19 2016 @ 06:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: NightFlight
Hands down the M1A! Stable platform, quick (enough) action, less felt recoil due to its heavier weight and accuracy. The gas system handles just about all loads and bullet weights.

Ask a Marine who was in the early years of Viet Nam and see what he thought of the M-14. They did not want the change...

You know, America has not won a war since going to the .223/5.56 M-16 platform...


The M1A is a superb gun for sure. Super reliable, essentially ambidextrous, highly accurate. The RFB has the advantage of a shorter overall length. An RFB Hunter with a 24 inch barrel has an overall length of just over 30 inches, versus the M1A's overall length of 44.33 inches with a 22 inch barrel. That can make a huge difference in tight spaces. Anyone who doesn't see what I mean should try to lean out of a car window with their battle rifle shouldered at the ready and you'll begin to understand.

RFB has the disadvantage of being a newer gun which will mean less availability, and less availability of parts. The forward ejecting system is more complex, so potentially more likely to malfunction.

The M-14 has been brought back into service in line units in recent years as a Designated Marksman's Rifle, by the way. I believe most infantry units are issuing one per squad for those situations where a little more range, accuracy, and punch might provide a battlefield advantage.



posted on Aug, 19 2016 @ 06:03 AM
link   
a reply to: MisterSpock

You don't see them on the shelves much, sure, but the gun store guys that I talked to were able to order them. Magazine is a standard FAL type mag.



posted on Aug, 19 2016 @ 06:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: SargonThrall
a reply to: TheBadCabbie
A friend of mine has the RFB and I must say it is beautiful. Quite well balanced as well, and very light (3.5kg roughly). It has a reciprocating charging handle which is annoying, and it doesn't cycle lesser ammunition so well.

It does have an adjustable gas system though, doesn't it?


M14s are a lot heavier (5kg) and extremely unbalanced (too much weight on the support hand). But they are well designed and reliable. A genuine one will be expensive. The Chinese ones are common here and cost roughly $600.

That forward weightiness will keep your muzzle steadier on a closely aimed shot. The RFB is pricey too, so the M1A actually comes out cheaper on a standard model vs. standard model comparison. Loaded M1A vs. RFB Hunter, they're both about an $1800 price tag. Not cheap at all.


The Tavor, by the way, is NOT ambidextrous. You can modify it to eject left but it requires time.

Plus I've read that the off-hand ejection port cover usually leaks resulting in what as known as "Tavor face". Part of the reason I want a lefty gun is to avoid getting sprayed in the face by propellants, so I don't much care for that. I think there's an aftermarket fix for that though.


Personally I would recommend an SVT-40, which is cheap, invincible, and very accurate with good ammunition. An SKS is another option as they are quite accurate, customizable, and their rounds are more powerful than a 5.56 yet weigh less than a 308. Browning and Benelli also make semi-automatic hunting style rifles which are wonderful.

SVT-40?



posted on Aug, 19 2016 @ 06:23 AM
link   
a reply to: TheBadCabbie

I don't know anything about the Keltec rifle, but the M1A is on my list of "next purchases".

I've shot it many times as I have a couple of fellow shooting range friends who have tricked out versions that are just real pleasures to shoot.

A .308 version of the IWI Tavor, huh? That'll be a rather cool rifle...I'm guessing it'll cost a pretty penny or two though.



posted on Aug, 19 2016 @ 06:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: JaMeDoIt
lugged m 14 too many miles in too much jungle...you know not what you preach...

Cheers


I hear you buddy, and I agree that weight is something to consider carefully. One or two pounds might not seem like much, but carry that extra two pounds through the jungle in your arms all day for a week and you'll have lots of time to consider how much difference two pounds can make, while you are also thinking about how your arms feel like they're about to fall off.



posted on Aug, 19 2016 @ 06:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: TheBadCabbie

from memory - 5.56 = 12gram / round [ loose ] , 7.62 = 23 gram / loose round

both NATO

Wikipedia says 25.5g for a 7.62x51 vs. 11.9g for a 5.56x45. 7.62x39 are 18.2g each. A 10kg(22lb.) ammo load would be 280rounds of 7.62x51, 390 rounds of 7.62x39, vs. 660 rounds of 5.56x45! More than double the weight of a 5.56 then.
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

as for a battle rifle - i has to say FN/FAL // L1A1 SLR

but i would say that


if i HAD TO pic sometjing else - H&K G3 just for the engineering of the mech.

I think the controls on the M-14/M1A are more intuitive than the euro guns. Plus they're all side ejectors, aren't they? Not really much fun for a lefty. The M-16/AR-15 has the brass deflector, but you're still eating a lot of propellant. An upgraded gas block could reduce that, but even then I'd still be catching powder.
edit on 19-8-2016 by TheBadCabbie because: add extra link



posted on Aug, 19 2016 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: seagull

I like the "loaded" model on the M1A. A medium weight barrel, which doesn't really add to the weight much if you keep the original stock. I suppose it might be better to order a standard model with an upgraded barrel though. I know the headspacing is tighter on some of their higher end models, so that could be a possible concern to avoid in dirtier conditions. The socom models are nice, but I'd be afraid to take it to cali. Some of the NE states might get you for one of those too, not sure. Plus the extra barrel will make a difference on the report and your accuracy. It's a long gun either way, so if I were going to get one I'd get the longer one I'd guess.

A .308 Tavor...yeah that's what I'd read in an article while I was reading up on the gun. We'll see. Kel-Tec also has the RDB, so that's got a possible .308 variant in the future I think too.
edit on 19-8-2016 by TheBadCabbie because: grammar



posted on Aug, 19 2016 @ 07:23 AM
link   
I suppose another advantage of the RFB is the propellant ventilation. RFB vents gasses forward, whereas the M-1A vents them upward. Slightly higher risk of injury from a case rupture with the M1A then, though exhaust is not really directed at the shooter so it's still a pretty safe design. RFB's might be a little safer, though.



posted on Aug, 19 2016 @ 07:49 AM
link   
a reply to: seagull

FYI:

RFB stands for Rifle, Forward-ejecting Bullpup. Why forward-ejecting? Because it allows the RFB to be the first truly ambidextrous 7.62 NATO Bullpup ever developed. Upon firing, the patented, dual-extractor system pulls the fired case from the chamber and lifts them to push them into an ejection chute above the barrel, where they exit. The Bullpup configuration and tilting-block mechanism allow the 18" model to be only 26.1" long, or as much as 14" shorter in overall length than its competitors with equal barrel lengths. Furthermore, the stock and mechanism cross-section is similar to a conventional rifle, in stark contrast to existing Bullpup rifles. The RFB is also one of the safest Bullpup ever developed because the breech is separated from the shooters face by two layers of 1.6 mm steel. In the highly unlikely event of a case rupture, gas expansion is directed downwards through the magazine well to protect the shooters head and face.

www.keltecweapons.com...

The Hunter model doesn't have it's own listing, that's a standard model shown there.
edit on 19-8-2016 by TheBadCabbie because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2016 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: SargonThrall

You're saying the handle cycles back with the action? I could live with that I guess, I could see how it might be annoying though.



posted on Aug, 19 2016 @ 08:14 AM
link   
Some photos:
The RFB Standard Model:

The M1A:

The Tavor(CA compliant model):



posted on Aug, 19 2016 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: TheBadCabbie

never been a fan of the bullpup style, they just feel awkward to me for some reason.
i'm a big fan of the M1A/ M14. always have been ever scene the first one i fired in the Corps.

one member mentioned the FN/FAL // L1A1 and the HK91/ G3. i can't speak to much on the FAL, other than what i've been told by some people that love and hate them. their a beast. heavy, long, kicks like a mule and has adjustable gas system.
when i was at my last duty station, me and my roommates had a HK91 that we passed/sold between us until i was the last one to leave, then i sold it to another Marine and wished i hadn't the next time i went to the range when i was back at home, that was a sweet rifle imo.

all three M1A, Fn/FAl. and HK 91 have clones and variants. you can get them with have 16' barrels and shorter, weight between 8 to 9lbs. but you have to have a ffl for some of those. and depending on who and where you buy them they can be kinda pricey.


i checked Kal_Tec's web sight and saw a rifle i'd like to try.
SU-16A


and one all tricked out,







edit on 19-8-2016 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)
edit on 19-8-2016 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)
extra DIV



posted on Aug, 19 2016 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: TheBadCabbie
M1A SOCOM 16 CQB Springfield Armory


DSA SA58 fn/fal clone



HKG3K good luck finding one rare as hens teeth but they are out there



posted on Aug, 19 2016 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

i misspoke in saying that you have to have a FFl,you don't. you have to pay a $200 tax and register the rifle with ATF.
they call these SBR's ( Short Barrel Rifles).

legal barrel length is 16 inches, 26 inches over all length. there are some that make short barrels that are pinned in the upper instead of screwed in. and some have longer flash suppressor that are pinned instead of screwed on.

barrel length is checked from bolt face to the end of barrel with or without flash suppressor.


edit on 19-8-2016 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join