Which would you pick Accuracy or Reliability for your weapon?

in my view i would pick reliability over accuracy. it seems that in modern wars we seem to be fighting only a few hundred yards like about 300 yards or less. In Iraq for example we be fighting 100 yards of less because of buildings, even in Vietnam where u cant shoot at the enemy for the trees were in yer line of sight and have to get closer. so its best to have a weapon that dont jam or break down than to have a weapon thats very accurate but is prone to jamming and pretty much a useless heavy weapon to carry with ya. in the 19th century we could fight enemies about a thousand yards in clear fields like Europe. but now its in jungles and cities and we have to get close to clear enemy fighters out. so reliability it is. im sure most of u agree with me.

[edit on 27-9-2005 by deltaboy]

dam i wrote a long title which ended Reliability to Reliabi . maybe next time i should get a better title or change it now....

[edit on 27-9-2005 by deltaboy]

[edit on 27-9-2005 by deltaboy]

If I had my choice between either:

A) a sniper rifle with excellent accuracy, that may jam lets say...... 1 in 50 shots.

or

B) a machine gun with great reliability, but is highly inaccurate



I would have to say I would rather have the sniper rifle. I feel being able to hit what I am aiming at higher on the priority scale. Don't get me wrong, having solid weaponry is very important to our infantry, but if they aren't able to neutralize attacks efficiently this is what leads to loss of life in my opinion.

I would take one of the many highly accurate, extremely reliable weapons that are available: M4, AK47, SKS to name a few. These weapons mean you can have both, not be forced to choose one or the other.

Yes I wanted to mention that, the fact that we don't have to choose .

All I know is I definitely want my weapon to have a silenced option

Which would you pick Accuracy or Reliability for your weapon?
Isn't this the very question that revolves around the issue of the early M16 vs. AK47?





seekerof

Well I bought a AK-47 over a AR-15 so I guess I picked reliability over accuracy. I also saved a few hundred bucks while I was at it going with the AK.

Its highly accurate at 100 yards the range I shoot at most. My brother owns a AK-74 and its just as realiable as my AK-47 but far more accurate. Infact Ive been as good with the AK-74 as I have with any AR-15.

But Ive never tried shooting them at 300+ yards

When you are talking about the differences between reliability and accuracy you are almost talking about the same thing. Your gun isn't reliable if you can't hit anything no matter if it never breaks down or not. On the other face of things, if you could hit everything you shoot at, when your weapon feels like working, you still don't have a reliable weapon. A reliable weapon in my definition is going to be rust proof, warp proof, jam proof, accurate, light weight, and inhibate single shot bursts and 3 round bursts, now that is reliability. But for the sake of the thread i'm going to have to vote for accuracy. Its doesn't matter what your shooting at if you can't hit it anyway.

Most Modern Assault rifles are accurate enough out to 300m (exept norinco, and some 3rd world cheapshots) and most ppl can't shoot too well to distances over 300m. And all modern assault rifles are reliable when user remembers to clean them up and maintains them properly (amount of time used to cleaning may vary a lot)

So the choise is mainly about which gun suits your body and style...

as for bolt action rifles, modern ones are extremely reliable and accuracy is better than most users can achieve (ie. shooter causes so much more problems than gun, so guns accuracy is nonissue at those levels)

When it comes to MGs the variance becomes larger some are accurate (like PKM) some are not (RPD), some are reliable (PKM, FN Minimi), some are not (KvKK62), it's a hard deal to get the balance, best i've come around is Russian PKM, accurate, reliable, Powerful, Controllable rate of fire is slightly low compared to some guns but adequate.

I'm a big fan ok AKs since recently, I don't know why or how, I always say them as the "Terrorist" weapon that was icky, I always loved M4's and such, but then something changed, I truly started loving the AK.

I've been looking at SKS took, they are more accurate than AKs, shoot at longer range too, sure they have 5 round internal mags, but you can buy those 30 round mags for them too, IMO an ellegant solution, they make nice Dragunov style stocks for them, have nice scopes, and they cost alot less, they are more ugly though, that's the one thing that deters me from SKS's, I even like Mosin Nagants better than SKS.

On a side note, I think I bought the AK of air rifles, it's a Gamo Shadowmatic, it's not really that accurate, it's adequat, but don't take it to a range, your shots will easilly ricochet back at ya...it's extremely reliable though since it's a break barrel, sorry to stray a little here.

The AR-15 is a nice gun, with M4 style stock it looks great, but I don't like the peep sights, I prefer open sights, I think the AR-15 is just too generic for me (even though it has a more excentric design) and IMO, an AK with black stock and handguard is also quite pleasing to the eye, they even have AR-15/Galil style stocks for it!

crap! hard choice! I'll give an example of a real life problem 4 me:

I own a Tippmann Custom Pro. As many paintball veterans know, most guns do not shot at a Flat Trojectory, but at an arc, so I've been buying every little thing 4 it 2 increase range and accuracy. Well....I can hit a tree from 270+ ft, so I guess it's working. Problem? Yes. With all that stuff on it, it takes time 2 care for them. Every once and a while, I'll have a round jam, and I'll fire again, and the jammed 1 will "explode". Really, it's like a shotgun then. I can't really tell when it jams up. No signs that I can tell.

The point of the story is that if I have a gun that jams "1 out of 50 shots", but I can just point, click, and I know he's down, I guess, just barely, I would prefer accuracy.

Now, u do have a point. We're not really fighting 2day at long distances. That's y it's hard 2 choose. I guess if I was going in2 a building 2 clear it out, obviously reliabilty, but that's what my pistol is 4.

[edit on 28-9-2005 by SEAL Trident]

Reliability is first with me..reliability and dependability.
However...with todays options it is possible, with careful study of the products available, to get both reliability and accuracy within reasonable parameters. I personally like the M1 and M1A for accuracy and reliability.
I am thinking about investing in a SKS also as they are inexpensive and ammunition is readily available at a very good price for volumes of the stuff. No question about the reliability of the Rifle. Not a issue. Most I've seen have lousy trigger pulls compared to western weapons designs but this can be taken care of by a competent gunsmith.
In simplicity and accuracy I like my 1903 Springfield bolt action..no doubt it is a accurate shooter. Shotguns..I like my Ithaca Model 37 pump. It will handle the lousyest reloads and shuck them no problem. Also it is bottom feeding and ejecting. Very well liked by left handers. Pump action..keep it simple stupid. KISS.
Handguns ...I stick with my 45 auto though I also am a wheelgun person. Wheelguns..simple dependable/reliable and I have several that are very accurate. There are lots of accurate dependable handguns out there just like rifles. Do your homework.
Also agree with several of the posters. No matter what firearm you choose be it handgun or rifle/shotgun...there is no substitute for maintnance. Keep it clean stupid!!!! Dont be a bumb..especially with a tool one uses for survivability or gathering food. Take care of ..maintain..and respect your tools. This is a religious belief among the devout. Do I hear a Amen!!????
Do your homework before buying. Ask..read...research. With most of us our moneys come dearly so it is important to have some concept of what values we want for our moneys. Know what your requirements are ..ask around and do your research. Lots of informations and gun rooms on the web to help you.
Most all of my firearms have been chosen with this concept in mind...reliability and accuracy. Only my Thompson Contender was bought outside this pattern. I fell in love with it at first sight. To me Contender/Encores are beautiful pieces of art and workmanship. Sort of a class of their own. Everything else...I look for reliability and accuracy.
By the way ..this also means the ammunition for which they are calibrated....common ammunition,dependable , and readily available coast to coast. I dont buy any caliber which is so exotic it is difficult to get.
My one exception to this is my 7.7 Japanese Arisaka. Ammunition is not available everywhere though I have learned to make the cases from 30.06 brass of which I have plenty. The rifle is simple and rugged..fairly accurate too. This one a early model with the emperors seal/crysanthemum still intact near the reciever. One of the main reason I bought it from a friend. Surprisingly it shoots very well. It even has the rattely olde dirt cover over the bolt. My friend sold it to me for $25.00 so I couldnt turn down a piece of history at this price. Grateful to the olde timers for teaching me to make my own brass and reload for it.
Good hunting to you folks within whatever parameters you choose in acquiring your tools.

Thanks,
Orangetom

1. Reliability

2. Reliability

3. Reliability


In that order.

Depends on the situation. Most people here are going for reliability, citing the fact that alot of our two-way ranges are in built up areas. What must be remembered is that there are alot of friendly or neutral individuals in these areas. I would suggest that it is important that every shot counts in these situations, therefore my tendancy would be towards accuracy. Also, built up areas are a snipers wet dream, thereby creating a very real threat. I would offer that it is important to remove this threat quickly and efficiently, with the least possible chance of stiffing any civvies (looks bad in the papers, don't you know). A decent sniper shouldnt be fazed by sporadic, inaccurate fire. Still, it's all a bit academic if the 'effin thing won't fire when you squeeze the trigger.

In a "conventional" firefight (if there is such a thing), a combination of weapons is called for; accurate weapons to take out individual targets and less accurate automatic weapons to saturate an area with fire to keep the enemys heads down, allowing the good guys to close in and kill the enemy. Like I said, horses for courses.

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
.

I've been looking at SKS took, they are more accurate than AKs, shoot at longer range too, sure they have 5 round internal mags, but you can buy those 30 round mags for them too, IMO an ellegant solution, they make nice Dragunov style stocks for them, have nice scopes, and they cost alot less, they are more ugly though, that's the one thing that deters me from SKS's, I even like Mosin Nagants better than SKS.

I am a proud SKS owner. The SKS is one of the sturdiest rifles ever created. I bought the 30 round detachable magazine to replace the 10 round fixed magazine, and guess what? It needs to be machined before it will fit. Grrr.....

Being a HK fan, reliability nor accuracy matters, just aim a 91 in the general direction, it will do the rest.
proud NRA member..

I'm really starting to love the new Xm8 assualt rifle. I held an airsoft replica and it beats the M16, etc

Just handles great

As for myself, I would have to define what is meant by "Accurate" and "Reliable"

... as it has already been stated, any of the major manufacturers and models are refined enough to be a good balance of accuracy and reliablility.

I would perfer "volume" over either one, meaning large clips and high cycling.

Of course, you need a reliable gun to fire in volume.

Alright..someone made a excellent point about relibility and accurcay being dependent on one definitions. I agree so I am going to define my requirements.

Accuracy: This one is pretty simple. Put the bullet where you aim. I am accustomed to shooting rifles which can group within one inch at 100 yards. Bench rest type rifles. So 2 to 5 inchs at 100 yards is acceptable for general accuracy. Also If I can help it I dont like necessarily to shoot standing or kneeling though I know how to do it. I will if possible shoot of a rest..be it a tree trunk a rock or sticks. No doubt one needs to know how to shoot standing , kneeling, prone etc etc..no problem with this. I just know that shooting from a rest is inherantly more accurate. I keep this in mind when judging accuracy from my weapons..rifles and handguns. Even handguns I will shoot from a rest if possible. Two handed if not.

Reliability: Now here we will come into differences between individuals.

The average sports hunter ...does not think of reliability as does a soldier in the field. Facts are that in hunting one does not often meet the conditions found in field/combat conditions. The weapons of my choosing all have requirements for field/combat conditions. This eliminates the bulk of sporting weapons. Especially sporting automatics. Most will not survive in the field continuous daily exposure conditions. Most sporting automatics do not have dirt covers over the ejection ports.
Bolt actions are alright...and generally accurate too. Common calibers are needed to keep in mind..not some exotic sporting caliber found at only a handful of gun shops or by mail order.
I like a .22 bolt action though some automatics look fairly rugged. The Ruger 10/22 appears to be a fairly rugged automatic. The Marlin series apppears somewhat frail for heavy field use. I own a Marlin Glenfield Model 60 as one of my first .22 buys. I dont use it much anymore as I have switched to bolt actions.
I also have a pump .22 by Rossi. It will shoot and feed shorts, longs, and long rifles..though I dont think it is as rugged as my bolt actions. It has one other feature in that it can be taken down into two pieces like a olde saddle gun. One built in large screw and it comes apart.
I own a combination gun .22 long rifle over the top of a 20 gauge shotgun. Simple reliable and rugged. This is why I purchased this tool.
M1 Garand and .30 GI issue carbine. Proven technology in the field and under combat conditions. Accurate too. Reliable.
1903 Springfield..bolt action..proven accurate..reliable..common caliber of ammunition..shoots the same ammo as the M1 Garand. This is my sweetheart and she is a shooter.
I also own a 1903 Springfield modified with a heavy accurate bench rest barrel. This one is really a shooter Very Very accuarte.but not for heavy field use. The set up is to frail for heavy field use. Hence this rifle is very accurate but not for reliability in the field..way to frail. That is the difference in reliability and accuracy..this is the definition to me.

Thanks,
Orangetom

I personally like the 38/357 caliber ammunition for ease of reloading and accuracy of the ammunition within the ballistic parameters of the charts for this caliber. I own several handguns in 38/357 caliber. Mostly I reload 38s for practice at the range. I have been considering getting a rifle in this same caliber.
For simplicity and reliability ..also I know these rifles are inherantly accurate ..I am looking at one of these single shot rifles that break open like a shotgun. New England firearms makes them. They are the ultimate in simplicity..meaning reliability. Having a rifle and a pistol in the same caliber is a plus. I prefer to stay away from lever actions for reliability reasons..KISS ..keep it simple stupid.
I hope some of you can understand the reasoning behind this.

Thanks,
Orangetom