Best rifle for the Wasteland?

[Sn1p3r187]

There are at least two different types of rifle here that would be great for combat in say a place like the Mojave Wasteland or the Capital Wasteland. A good old Battle rifle which is a weapon that fires a full caliber round like 7.62x51 NATO or 30-06 Springfield. Weapons like these would include the FN FAL, M14, M1 Garand, or the Gewehr 43 in 7.92x57. A weapon like this is perfect for battles beyond say the 400 meter range since most battles occur within 0-400 meters. A caliber of this type has the perfect killing power but knowing the modern rules of engagement, a 30-06 battle rifle being used in a 200 meter engagement would be seen as overkill. So to counteract the overkill idea, intermediate caliber weapons came into play. The intermediate caliber would be weapons like 5.56x45, 5.45x39, 6.8x43, and 7.92x33. Weapons like these would be the notable M16, Ak-47, StG-44, AK-74, and Steyr AUG. They're perfect for engagments between 0-400 meters, 400 meters being the max. At closer ranges they're perfect, manageable recoil, power, and the like. But they lack stopping power in comparison to full powered rifle calibers along with accuracy at longer ranges exceeding past 400 meters. So what do you think is the best type of to carry in the wasteland?

FN FAL- http://pre06.deviantart.net/7858/th/pre/f/2012/034/d/a/fn_fal_7_62_by_fuloljk-d4okh9p.jpg

M16- https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/M16a1m16a2m4m16a45wi.jpg

M1 Garand- http://sailorcurt.com/wp-content/up...tI/AAAAAAAADag/vUJF1I6_9Lk/s1600/IMG_1210.JPG

AK-47- https://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/filepicker/OBtA3XbSQRmxnS3tRIjG_AK47.jpg

 

[T51b]

The M4 or civilian AR-15 carbine would be a good all-around weapon system; it's light, short and handy. It's one of the most common rifles in the country by both military and civilian ownership making replacement parts for it easy to find, and most current versions of the rifle are modular with a removable carry handle to easily mount optics. 5.56/.223 ammunition is also very common in the US, and is lighter per round than larger calibers. The AR's magazines have large capacity are easily available meaning you can carry more ammunition for it with surplus US military gear made specifically to carry M16 mags.

 

[Sn1p3r187]

The M4 or civilian AR-15 carbine would be a good all-around weapon system; it's light, short and handy. It's one of the most common rifles in the country by both military and civilian ownership making replacement parts for it easy to find, and most current versions of the rifle are modular with a removable carry handle to easily mount optics. 5.56/.223 ammunition is also very common in the US, and is lighter per round than larger calibers. The AR's magazines have large capacity are easily available meaning you can carry more ammunition for it with surplus US military gear made specifically to carry M16 mags.

Point. But M1 Garand and FN FALs from what I know are also commonly spoken about or found as well.

 

[T51b]

M1 Garands are made available for the public by the Civilian Marksmanship Program where you can have them shipped straight to your door, but there hasn't been any made new since 1957 -- there are a lot of them out there, but many are more collector piece condition with replacement parts more uncommon than a commonly used firearm -- relying on a 60 year old weapon with no spare parts might be a bit risky. One plus to the Garand, however, is the 30-06 round is more capable at hunting wildlife than the 5.56mm/.223 cal round of the AR. The M1A was the evolution of the M1, which included a detachable magazine and the more common, less expensive .308 round. Parts are still available as it is a current production weapon -- given a choice between an M1A or an M1 Garand, I'd easily choose the M1A.

The FN FAL is available for civilian ownership, but not necessarily that common in the US (it was used a lot by the NATO allies, but the US adopted the M1A instead) -- necessary equipment like spare parts and magazines might not be easily available. It uses the .308 round like the M1A, which is a good, versatile battle rifle round, but the FAL itself is long, heavy, and clunky with poor ergonomics.

 

[Sn1p3r187]

M1 Garands are made available for the public by the Civilian Marksmanship Program where you can have them shipped straight to your door, but there hasn't been any made new since 1957 -- there are a lot of them out there, but many are more collector piece condition with replacement parts more uncommon than a commonly used firearm -- relying on a 60 year old weapon with no spare parts might be a bit risky. One plus to the Garand, however, is the 30-06 round is more capable at hunting wildlife than the 5.56mm/.223 cal round of the AR. The M1A was the evolution of the M1, which included a detachable magazine and the more common, less expensive .308 round. Parts are still available as it is a current production weapon -- given a choice between an M1A or an M1 Garand, I'd easily choose the M1A.

The FN FAL is available for civilian ownership, but not necessarily that common in the US (it was used a lot by the NATO allies, but the US adopted the M1A instead) -- necessary equipment like spare parts and magazines might not be easily available. It uses the .308 round like the M1A, which is a good, versatile battle rifle round, but the FAL itself is long, heavy, and clunky with poor ergonomics.

So I guess the .223 is more capable for hunting varmint and dropping people than a round like the 30-06 made for hunting and making big holes through human targets?

 

[T51b]

No, the 30-06 is very effective at shooting humans as well, the downside being that it is heavier, and the magazine size is much smaller.

In actual combat, however, longevity is often the key to winning -- most rounds don't hit anywhere near the intended target, especially at ranges where 30-06 would have a distinct advantage over 5.56mm, so having more ammunition is just as critical as the size of the hole you make (though studies show people tend to die when any bullets hit vital areas).

 

[Swastakowey]

Too much focus on killing I think. Personally wounding or scaring my target is more than enough for me to get from a rifle.

I think in the wasteland the primary concern is reliability. The gun needs to be cheap, simple and robust. After all nobody is making parts or replacements anymore and nor can you readily store it somewhere clean and safe. Personally I would go for the AK. It's renown for the above qualities and anyone can use them pretty simply. Most child soldiers are probably armed with an AK variant.

At the end of the day getting hit by a round with little to no medical aid around is probably more than enough to put most targets down. The issue is having something you can reliably continue to use in harsh environments.

My 2 cents.

 

[Hassknecht]

I'd say the best bet would be an AK-47 variant, preferably in 7.62 x 39 mm. Robust, easy to use, higher stopping power than the lighter 5.56 mm NATO round. Something like the AK-104.

 

[Sn1p3r187]

I'd say the best bet would be an AK-47 variant, preferably in 7.62 x 39 mm. Robust, easy to use, higher stopping power than the lighter 5.56 mm NATO round. Something like the AK-104.

I wouldn't use the 5.56 at a range past 150 yards. Under that range it's pretty deadly. But further out it becomes more or less a glorified rock and is less likely to fragment at those ranges and insurgents get right back up and start shooting again. I say at longer ranges take the 5.45x39 Soviet used in the AK-74. It's a heavier bullet with a rimmed and bottlenecked cartridge. And it tumbles and yaws upon impact giving it possibly more wounding potential. It also offers better penetration at longer ranges.

 

[cronicler]

Depends depends depends...
First off, determine what your capabilities are. Even if your (hypothetical) gun can shoot 1 moa at 2 klicks, it wont do you much good if you are unable to use those capabilities without a prebuilt nest, a benchrest, a spotter and a kdt range...

then, you need to determine what is your funds and weight budgets are. Will you will need to hoof it or will you fortify in place or will you move to a rural location by vehicle or what?

Then you need to determine how much firepower you will need to deal with native wildlife in your chosen AO. Forex, a .454 casull is a weird and mostly useless curio below 60* north but if you are up there, then you may need to pack something in that power range as your sidearm. Similarly, in most places, I would say that .308 / 7.62 Nato is an overkill for a primary firearm but if you are stuck in the middle of a savannah / plains geography, then you will (not may, will. Info from African bushwars.) need that extra range.

After all these, you can at last begin thinking about the human predators.


For example, yes, at the moment AR platform is probably the nicest choice to base your main rifle on, but and this is a big BUT, if you don't have at least 2500 to spend on it (parts, spares, optics, ammo, training ammo... and so on) as well as a decent choice of transportation (if you are going to be on the move that is); you might be better off with going the backpacker route (heavy pistol, light rifle).


From the funds perspective; for the cost of a "brand new" intermediate caliber rifle package, you can probably budget the 4 basics (a .22, a Pump Shotgun, a basic pistol and a SKS or Nagant equivalent rifle) with a lot bigger allotment of ammunition and spares.
Other less flashy but niche and efficient choices include the relatively new (modern) guns that can be dual used with both smokeless and black powder loads and Girandoni's descendants (hunting air rifles.)

 

[Sn1p3r187]

Depends depends depends...
First off, determine what your capabilities are. Even if your (hypothetical) gun can shoot 1 moa at 2 klicks, it wont do you much good if you are unable to use those capabilities without a prebuilt nest, a benchrest, a spotter and a kdt range...

then, you need to determine what is your funds and weight budgets are. Will you will need to hoof it or will you fortify in place or will you move to a rural location by vehicle or what?

Then you need to determine how much firepower you will need to deal with native wildlife in your chosen AO. Forex, a .454 casull is a weird and mostly useless curio below 60* north but if you are up there, then you may need to pack something in that power range as your sidearm. Similarly, in most places, I would say that .308 / 7.62 Nato is an overkill for a primary firearm but if you are stuck in the middle of a savannah / plains geography, then you will (not may, will. Info from African bushwars.) need that extra range.

After all these, you can at last begin thinking about the human predators.


For example, yes, at the moment AR platform is probably the nicest choice to base your main rifle on, but and this is a big BUT, if you don't have at least 2500 to spend on it (parts, spares, optics, ammo, training ammo... and so on) as well as a decent choice of transportation (if you are going to be on the move that is); you might be better off with going the backpacker route (heavy pistol, light rifle).


From the funds perspective; for the cost of a "brand new" intermediate caliber rifle package, you can probably budget the 4 basics (a .22, a Pump Shotgun, a basic pistol and a SKS or Nagant equivalent rifle) with a lot bigger allotment of ammunition and spares.
Other less flashy but niche and efficient choices include the relatively new (modern) guns that can be dual used with both smokeless and black powder loads and Girandoni's descendants (hunting air rifles.)

Also, if we're talking about the Mojave desert/wasteland. Would 7.62 battle rifles be good for that range?

 

[Akratus]

This doesn't exist in fallout's retrofuturism, nor does it fit, nor do I know much about weaponry, but I'd pick this, if I had to pick something off the top of my head:

 

[cronicler]

187;
If you are talking about 7.62x51 Nato;
Technically, yes but with multiple cravats; the rifle itself will be heavier than a intermediate cartridge setup, you will only have 2/3s (number of) rounds, it will be much costlier to stockpile ammo and get proficient with it, suppressors will be less effective and there will be a host of minor differences.


If it was about 7.62x54r (Mosin Nagant);
Cheap, probably reliable (now and then some duds turn up among the bulk sales), robust rifle; relatively cheap ammo at pallet sized packages.
The main issue with this rifle is you. This rifle depends heavily on your proficiency; it is a very heavy kicker with a complexity of "as basic as it gets" and shooting aids consisting of "this is an ironsight".
Can you shoot well with ironsights? Can you stand up to the punishment it deals while training? Avoid developing a flinch?

*Btw, Archangel stocks are an option but if you consider that route, remember that those cost almost as much as the rifle (or 3 if you buy them by crate load ). Same goes for the optics...


In the end, the best gun is the one you know how to use well.

 

[Sn1p3r187]

187;
If you are talking about 7.62x51 Nato;
Technically, yes but with multiple cravats; the rifle itself will be heavier than a intermediate cartridge setup, you will only have 2/3s (number of) rounds, it will be much costlier to stockpile ammo and get proficient with it, suppressors will be less effective and there will be a host of minor differences.


If it was about 7.62x54r (Mosin Nagant);
Cheap, probably reliable (now and then some duds turn up among the bulk sales), robust rifle; relatively cheap ammo at pallet sized packages.
The main issue with this rifle is you. This rifle depends heavily on your proficiency; it is a very heavy kicker with a complexity of "as basic as it gets" and shooting aids consisting of "this is an ironsight".
Can you shoot well with ironsights? Can you stand up to the punishment it deals while training? Avoid developing a flinch?

*Btw, Archangel stocks are an option but if you consider that route, remember that those cost almost as much as the rifle (or 3 if you buy them by crate load ). Same goes for the optics...


In the end, the best gun is the one you know how to use well.

Point taken. Though since my Grandfather grew up in the WWII days he always had the idea of conserving ammo stuck in his head since back then they only had Semi autos and Bolt actions. My Great Uncle was the same way too since his unit got issued M14s during Vietnam in 1968.

 

[Sn1p3r187]

My other issue with using an M16 at like 600 meters in the Mojave would definitely be the power issues. It'll lose a big majority of its effectiveness past 300. I think having an M1 Garand with only 6 clips could be worth it since it'll be effective at that range and have the perfect power to still take out a target. Ammo is an issue but if they made M1 Garands with box magzines it'd be less of an issue. I made this topic going off the modern rules of engagement. In places like Afghanistan, battle rifles/DMRs are finding a lot of use there since engagements are usually a lot further than 300 or 400 meters. Intermediate rifles like an M16 or M4 are perfect for forest and urban combat. But for further I would go at least with a 6.8x43 SPC or a 6.5 Grendel in terms of intermediates.

 

[fenrir1536]

If I had to chose one primary weapon it would have to be something in a DMR role or Battle rifle class, full rifle cartridge and 20 inches on the barrel at least.

The majority of your time in the wasteland would be spend in these long open fields of desolate terrain with little cover. I'ed rather have something that could reach out and touch the enemy in those conditions before they had a change to hit me with the more common intermediate cartridges. The full rifle cartridge while heavier and more expensive would be more accurate at range and have better punching power through any cover they might find. The flatter trajectory at range and again penetrating power would make up for a comparable reduced round count vs something similar in an intermediate round, at least how I imagine it.

There are real world countries who continue to largely use 7.62x51 or the more popular intermediate rounds because of similar real world conditions. I think Turkey's new infantry rifle is largely in 7.62 for this very reason.

I'm partial to something like the PSL or the Vepr fitting these specifications since I like the AK platform but an AR-10 or M1/14 would also be fantastic choices.

This is also based on the assumption that your mostly wandering the wasteland or a caravan guard or something. If whatever you do to survive puts you in urban combat environments more frequently then a SBR would definitely be a better choice.

 

[The-Artist-64]

I always loved the shotgun that Tycho used. There isn't necessarily one rifle to rule them all, though. The truth is that each one works better under a specific set of circumstances.

Also, on an unrelated note, I love the connection between Wasteland's AK-97 and Fallout's AK-112.

 

[Sn1p3r187]

If I had to chose one primary weapon it would have to be something in a DMR role or Battle rifle class, full rifle cartridge and 20 inches on the barrel at least.

The majority of your time in the wasteland would be spend in these long open fields of desolate terrain with little cover. I'ed rather have something that could reach out and touch the enemy in those conditions before they had a change to hit me with the more common intermediate cartridges. The full rifle cartridge while heavier and more expensive would be more accurate at range and have better punching power through any cover they might find. The flatter trajectory at range and again penetrating power would make up for a comparable reduced round count vs something similar in an intermediate round, at least how I imagine it.

There are real world countries who continue to largely use 7.62x51 or the more popular intermediate rounds because of similar real world conditions. I think Turkey's new infantry rifle is largely in 7.62 for this very reason.

I'm partial to something like the PSL or the Vepr fitting these specifications since I like the AK platform but an AR-10 or M1/14 would also be fantastic choices.

This is also based on the assumption that your mostly wandering the wasteland or a caravan guard or something. If whatever you do to survive puts you in urban combat environments more frequently then a SBR would definitely be a better choice.

SBR is small battle rifle correct? Also what do you think of what they say that modern battle conditions are fought in? The 300-400 meter thing was made around WWI and the whole theory made modern armies evolve to use intermediate rounds with more in the magazine's that are lighter. While I do like the idea of battle rifles and maybe a scar h carbine for jungle warfare. A lot of people say its overkill.

 

[fenrir1536]

SBR is small battle rifle correct? Also what do you think of what they say that modern battle conditions are fought in? The 300-400 meter thing was made around WWI and the whole theory made modern armies evolve to use intermediate rounds with more in the magazine's that are lighter. While I do like the idea of battle rifles and maybe a scar h carbine for jungle warfare. A lot of people say its overkill.

SBR refers to Short-Barreled Rifle which in my context refers to something like a 14 inch or less AR or AK. I prefer them in theory as opposed to a SMG or PDW because you generally get the maneuverability of the smaller caliber guns while mostly retaining the range and power of a intermediate cartridge.

I understand the evolution of intermediate cartridges but the idea arose because of combat conditions and analysis in WW2. I just don't think that most of your combat in fallout is going to be at those relatively close ranges. The wasteland is usually protrayed as generally flat and open terrain with little cover outside of dead trees and hills. I'ed rather have a rifle and round that can reliably take down that silhouette on the horizon 800 meters away then have to hope a 5.56 can do the same. I think generally staying alert and out ranging targets without totally pigeon holing yourself with a dedicated sniper rifle would be idea way to keep yourself alive. Also within closer quarters Battle Rifles/DMR are still very effective, I just wouldn't want to clear a room with one.

Its undeniable though that for the same weight you can carry twice as many 5.56 vs 7.62 so again it all goes back to what your doing and where you are in the wasteland.

 

[Sn1p3r187]

SBR refers to Short-Barreled Rifle which in my context refers to something like a 14 inch or less AR or AK. I prefer them in theory as opposed to a SMG or PDW because you generally get the maneuverability of the smaller caliber guns while mostly retaining the range and power of a intermediate cartridge.

I understand the evolution of intermediate cartridges but the idea arose because of combat conditions and analysis in WW2. I just don't think that most of your combat in fallout is going to be at those relatively close ranges. The wasteland is usually protrayed as generally flat and open terrain with little cover outside of dead trees and hills. I'ed rather have a rifle and round that can reliably take down that silhouette on the horizon 800 meters away then have to hope a 5.56 can do the same. I think generally staying alert and out ranging targets without totally pigeon holing yourself with a dedicated sniper rifle would be idea way to keep yourself alive. Also within closer quarters Battle Rifles/DMR are still very effective, I just wouldn't want to clear a room with one.

Its undeniable though that for the same weight you can carry twice as many 5.56 vs 7.62 so again it all goes back to what your doing and where you are in the wasteland.

You have a really good point. But, if we're going by west coast and southwest standards there are a lot of flat desert plains. But if we're going by east coast standards with the exception of D.C. You're going to find a lot of forests and mountains in the Carolinas, Georgia, Florida, New York, New Hampshire so on so forth. I think at that point range would matter a lot less when you're running into crazy tribals or raiders in the Appalachian mountains or in the Everglades. I will say though, a good bullet to reach out and touch that silhouette would be the the 6.5x39 Grendel since its effective range is within 800 meters.