Para308

I decided to go retro. Not sexy and tacticool but it will blow a sizeable hole in the target and contribute to an immense SCW. Here is the model I bought, this one is not mine but you get the idea. It is stainless steel and has a 3.75 inch barrel! This picture does not do justice to how well built this massive frame is even with the short barrel. You have to heft it to appreciate the balance and need to pull that hammer back and pull the trigger on a 240 grain Jacketed Hollow Point bullet travelling at 1300 to 1400 fps. Garrett makes some ammo with 310 grain bullets going at about 1300 fps. I am getting this knife to go with it.

I am torn between my 1960 Browning Hi Power and my SIG P210-6. Decisions! Decisions! Decisions! :)

The fit and finish of that 1960 Hi Power is unbelievable. The previous owner put it in his safe for 20 years. There are no flaws in the metal or the finish! I am very happy with that pistol.

[img width=810 height=607]http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af3/abnfoto/P1020519.jpg[img width=810 height=607]http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af3/abnfoto/P1020518.jpg[img width=810 height=607]http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af3/abnfoto/P1020517.jpg[img width=810 height=607]http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af3/abnfoto/P1020516.jpg Excuse the lousy pictures! The Belgian Hi Power is dated 1960 before many of the cost-cutting measures took place. It is the exact model I always wanted.

I have taken pictures (a lot better ones) and I was also ready to take more but there is a limit to how many you can post in this site. Maybe I should give all you guys a way to look at my albums on photobucket. It has all my firearms on there, rifles and pistols. I will have to figure that one out.

Here are some bad pictures of some of my battle rifles. ;)

If you visit SWFA and especially Sniper's Hide, some have stated that the SS-HD, glass and coating wise, is superior to the Night Force, and the mechanics are as competent as the Night Force. For the price point, the SS-HD line is great value for the money. If I were to "improve" on it I would go with the US Optics and not the NIght Force which to my mind is not an improvement but you pay more for it. IMHO. The glass is excellent. I have looked through the NF scopes and the US Optics - USO all the way. Most people who advocate the NF do so on the basis of the mechanics but really the USO is superior in that area as well.

Here are the pictures. My M25 before I added the PRS Stock, TPS TSR Medium height steel rings and SS-HD 5-25x50 FFP mil scope on the 20MOA extended rail. Total elevation approximately 120MOA. 1 in 10" twist 4 groove, 22 inch NM Criterion Chrome Moly barrel. I might go with a US Optics T-10 or T-17 with TPS TSR Low height rings. LRB Arms forged M25 receiver, bolt, Op rod (USGI or Korean one piece forged Op rod). Sage EBR Mod 1 chassis for heavy barrels. Note that the objective bell of the scope clears the front of the extended rail with medium height TPS rings. Instead of the Bobro designed GG&G bipod, I might go with an Atlas bipod. This is a Ted Brown build. It was built with the best commercial and USGI components.

Not yet, I am going to check their site but I don't think they have it any longer. Thanks for the information though.

I have been looking for this stock and wonder if anyone has seen it. It would be a nice addition to my build.

I thought so too. It has a 1:7 twist 16" pencil barrel, M16 BCG (full-auto), Troy 10" free-float quad rail; Magpul MBUS front and rear Gen 2 sights, forward handgrip, MOE pistol grip, 2 X 30 rd Pmag, 2 X QD sling swivels; and the Bill Rogers Super-stoc which Colt is now using on their M4s I think. It is an overall very nice package for the money.

My newest M4. I wanted one with the pencil barrel and I wanted one of the new Colts with the newer configurations. This one done by the TALO folks cinched it for me. It is the TALO Colt LT6720-R and I purchased mine from Gun Brokers in case anyone is interested. Moderators I hope I did not break any rules by stating where I purchased it!

H2O MAN thanks for help on the SAGE EBR stock Mod 1 information. I did not go with the newer version with the Magpul PRS II but I went with the Mod 1 with the option for the sliding stock. I am going to replace it with the regular A2 receiver extension and put a regular PRS stock on it. Ted Brown is building a rifle for me using the LRB M25 receiver and a heavy Criterion 1x10 twist, 22 inch barrel. I can't wait. I am havin him fit the LRB extended rail on the SAGE upper section.

Have you looked at the IOR Valdada 6X30 (35mm tube) Super M2 - with or without CQB reticule. It is illuminated and comes with rings. It has .308 168 grain BDC at $590. There are other choices as well: http://www.iorvaldada.com/tactical.html

I am in the process of purchasing a Bellevue, WA Detonics Scoremaster in .451 Det. Magnum and it has a second barrel in .45ACP. Both barrels are 6 inches long. It also comes with 500 new cases (specially produced for Detonics with the Detonics head stamp) in .451 Det. Mag. Midway sells an aftermarket version for $60+ per box of 50!

I just got the rifle. Also, it is more of a collector piece. For shooting and etc. I pretty much will go to my DPMS LR TAC 20 or my DSA FAL Tactical. (full length gas system, 16inch barrel. I have always wanted an HK 91 and not the clones, or the builds. This one is in great shape even though the date code shows 1982. Lastly, from what I have read some people have claimed 12 reloads from military brass. Also, according to the NRA book of auto-loading military rifles - the article on the HK 91 recommends certain loads that allow for the easier extraction of the cases from the fluted chamber.

I am about to pull the trigger on 25 brand new Aluminum magazines for $100. I may get a few of the steel. But I am in no hurry.

Here is my new acquisition of a new old HK 91 from (if I am reading the date code correctly - IC and not IG) 1982. Everything seems to be ok. Ignore the scope mount for now.

Thanks guys, I am going to add similar Magpul goodness to my other LR 308!

This is my DPMS LR308 TAC 20 I added a Magpul UBR stock with Clint Butler custom CAR 10 buffer and modified Armalite buffer spring. Clint is the man. I also added the MIAD grip for which I modified my LR 308 (actually both of them) lower receiver by tapping the spring and detente hole for the rear take down pin. I used a 4-40 set screw and loctite (thanks imschur and others for the information there). I will be getting a different foregrip, the GPS grip pod (GPS-02 military version) and a Geissele fixed two-stage, semi-auto trigger. That should do it for a while. Later on I will be getting a riflescope or other type of suitable optic.

Going piston with the HK416 and not upping the caliber is a mistake. Range is a problem. For an infantryman (I was Airborne Infantry) caliber must be balanced with the soldier's load especially if airborne which gets resupplied after 3 days (doctrine may have changed since I was in). Tolerances in the environment must also come into play. Oil the weapon a lot, run it wet seems to be the consensus but the military units are slow in changing SOP. I would go to the 6.5 bullet - it has a long history of usefulness. The .308 is heavy and the rifles that shoots it. I would have gone with a 6-6.5 caliber and kept the 20 inch barrel of the M16A3 or 4 for Afghanistan. The 6.5 Grendel has superior ballistics to the .308 and weighs much less along with the fact that you only need to change the upper and modify the magazine - 26 rounds in 30 round mags - I think. A soldier can carry a lot more ammo in 6.5 and the weight of the 18-20 inch M16 will not be that much different. Remember, the soldier's load is very important in mountainous terrain like Afghanistan! I have packed and humped 203s, M60s, M249 SAWs, and M240s in different terrains during the 1970s, 80s, and 90s. Ammo is usually distributed around - it is a bitch to carry. 9X19mm is useless in ball and handguns are not the primary weapons of infantrymen.

To understand range and accuracy, I have two observations. The first has to do with the 168 grn Sierra Match King bullets shot out of the M14 which has a 22inch barrel. The caliber is 7.62X51mm / .308 Win. The Marines were using this bullet like the Army Marksmanship teams (till they switched to the M16A2 shooting the 80 grn SMKs. Range was out to 1000 yards. The 168 grn were going sub-sonic before reaching 1000 yards. When they switched to the 175 grn bullets with a 1 in 10 twist the bullets remained supersonic at the 1000 yard range. So the lesson here is barrel length, muzzle velocity, rifle twist, weight of the bullet. A lot of money was spent on barrels for M14s from companies like Krieger. The second has to do with the requirements of the international Palma Match. The Palma match teams can only shoot 155 grn bullets (Sierra Match Kings once again). The barrels of the Palma rifles were 28-30 inches and the twist was 1 in 11.5 inches or thereabouts all in .308 Win or 7.62x51mm. This combination remains very competitive at a 1000 yards plus. Savage has a very nice intro Palma rifle at around $1000. Another bonus observation is the length of barrels on the Sharps rifles and the size and weight of their lead bullets. The "Quigley" Sharps rifle has a 34 inch barrel. Again, look at the variables, what determines effectiveness will depend on barrel length, bullet weight, rifle twist, and muzzle velocity. The right combination determines the end result for which you are making a selection based on your purpose.

No, I am not selling the tool whatsoever. This is a modification of the tool that Ned Christiansen had originally designed for staking the AR15/M16/m4 (5.56X45mm/.223) family of ARs. He also did some for the 7.62X51 (.308 Win) for military units like Special Forces etc. That way all you need is spare gas keys and hex bolts and you can do repairs etc in the field. He sells the tools for the different calibers separately. He did this as a favor to me once I came with the idea on how to do it. As far as I know, he is not going to market the combo tool (MOACKS III). If he decides to send some to the military or sell a few to them, it's fine by me.

Here is a sequence of pictures I took of a tool that I had a small hand in designing. The MOACKS (Mother Of All Carrier Key Stakers) III. My concept for a combined staking tool for both AR 15 and AR 10 platforms. Why? The Gas Key of a Bolt Carrier should be secured with two Allen head bolts and then properly staked so that the bolts don't come loose causing a gas leakage which in turn causes all sorts of problems with the AR type rifle or carbine. I came up with the idea that Ned Christiansen's AR15/M16/M4 platform MOACKS tool could be modified to stake the Bolt Carrier Gas Key of the AR-10 / DPMS LR .308 as well. My idea was to use a "Collar" or a "Sleeve". Somewhat like the way a set of 30 mm scope rings could be adapted to work with a 1 inch or 26 mm tubed rifle telescope by using a "collar" or "sleeve". I have the "prototype" (came in the mail today - July 30th, 2009) and I will use it to stake my improperly (or haphazardly) staked Rock River Arms Bolt Carrier Gas Key which came in my RRA NM AR15 A4. I will also use it to stake the half-heartedly staked Gas Key on the Bolt Carrier of my DPMS LR .308 TAC 20. [i will try to post pictures of the staking process before and after. But here is the picture of the MOACKS III itself. - earlier post on different site.] It was Ned Christiansen's superb engineering design and machining skills that brought my concept to life - all I did was to suggest the use of a collar to enable the staking of Bolt Carrier Gas Keys from the bolt carriers of both caliber platforms. The beginning of the sequence is A - B.

Here are the rest of the sequence of pictures from C-G.