Sisco

Getting back to thread; As the four pages of on and off topic responses have illustrated, every one has an opinion. 1. You are going to have more bullet and cartridge choices with a 30-06 no doubt. 2. You are going to have less bullet drop and more velocity generally with a .270. 3. Both can do what you want to do, and more importantly is the amount of shooting you do with either one to get to know the cartridge and the individual rifle. If buying a 30-06 lets you shoot more ammo because of good ammo prices, you would be better with a 30-06. 4. If ammo cost is unimportant, The 270 will have a small advantage at distance because of the cartridges performance values. 5 there are several other cartridges that will do as well or better than either one based on your performance criteria of 500-700 yards in bolt guns. There is no right answer by the way.

Check the AR10 section for a thread on YHM gas block adapters as a possible alternative for low profile gas blocks.I just installed one on my AR10 T carbine. Havent used it yet however. Oops! Just looked at the picture won't work.

Finally got my YHM adapters after being rerouted all over the country by the UPSP and UPS. To be honest, partly my fault. The adapters go onto the rail of the low profile gas block quite easily and tighten with a hex key. My offset BUIS slipped on quite easily as well. The sight ends up sitting ahead of the gas block. Good news: A slightly longer sighting plane. Bad News: Under real world use, I can see webbing, straps, branches, etc. slipping into th gap between the front of the sight and the barrel and causing all sorts of hang ups. May not be a problem, we will see. But for $45 dollars versus the price of a new free floating front rail, it gives me a set of easily usable BUIS. Will report more after I get a range visit with it. The addition of the 45 degree offset BUIS definitely makes this rifle take up more safe space.

Sig Sauer SP2022 for her, P227 for him. Remington ammo fine for whitetails, critters Bison size do your research as to what is preferred. Friend had a Winchester ammo primer failure this year in 30-06 missed out on a big buck. So bad ammo can come from a lot of sources.

One small dump for man, one giant dump for mankind.

Yep the Gen II's and the M14 mags they are based on are a throw back to another era.heavy tough steel that is built to take abuse. Only other I put in their class are the original steel AK47 mags.

PV just sent you a private message with some info on this.

Armalite used to sell a modification kit for M14 mags, you might ask in your email to them if they still do. Also google it, There may be some info on line how to do that.

Welcome from Wisconsin.

Just to standardize your mag type it might be worth looking into. Contact Armalite and see what they charge. I have two B models and plenty of mags so I don't see a need to do something like that. The B Gen II is an excellent mag. It is very well built and rliable. I can't think of any other reason to do it, except perhaps the weight of the P Mag is a bit less. Glad you like your AR10 they are definitely shooters.

Look for Geissele GS2 on sale. I got one for $129.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/massive-785-million-recall-for-popular-us-gun/ar-BBgoPPI My Dad hunted with a Remington 700 from 1950 on. Never once metioned anything like this. 7.85 million guns!

Welcome from next door in Wisconsin Dan. Great state Minnesota, just not enough shooting ranges.

Good point. Hope Queen Obama starts giving the Ukaraine some military aid.

I was waiting for the beverage truck to show up so everyone could take a break and get some hot coffee and donuts, so many of them were milling around. Imagine if the Chechens had one 60 mm mortar and the knowledge to use it. That crew would have been in a world of hurt. I especially liked their fire and manuever, especially when that guy trips on a crack in the street. And that other guy firing the RPG and kicking up the back blast from that wall behind him. Not to mention the tag team mag dump. The Chechens left that building an hour and a half ago, by the way. A lot of analysts think the Russian Army is a paper tiger. Their Spec Ops are fairly decent, but their line units are underfunded and using Obsolescent equipment. Putin is working on a $700 billion dollar upgrade to the military, but the drop in oil prices will most likely put that on hold. Put it this way: one B1B sortie by the US Air Force to bomb ISIL is most likely beyond the abilities of the Russian Military today. When the Russians run into a decent opponenet ( the Poles maybe), We will find out how good (or bad) they are.

Welcome from next door Tony. (Wisconsin)

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/10/23/armalite-308-pistol/ An article on Armalites new pistol.

What? This thread has another two to four weeks left, and about ten more directions to go before its done. Might even get three or four relevant comments made in that time. Then again?......

The Sheridan was another idea that didn't quite make it. That 152 mm cannon, when fired supposedly the recoil would break the fire control system. Then the Shilaleigh missle system would be useless. My friend said he felt like cannon fodder in it.

Interesting stuff Blue, thanks for sharing it. What I read of your Opfors guys is interesting. Didn't you guys run the old Sheidan for a while, modified to look like Com Bloc? Interested to hear your perspective on that. A fellow I know was stationed on one in the Fulda gap in the 1970's.

The big problem with the Brads was what the Army wrote in their requirements. It was a knee jerk reaction to the Soviet introduction of the BMP, before they had an accurate assessmentof the capabilities of the BMP, which turned out to be not very good. The Army wanted a troop carrier/On the move fighting vehicle/ Tank Destroyer/ that was light enough to ford rivers, could substitute for a tank in a pinch, chop, slice, dice, and make wonderful Julienne frys, etc., etc., etc.. Then they insisted on putting in a Hughes Thermosight that in 1977 dollars cost as much as the rest of the vehicle. So you ended up with things like aluminum armor ( thank goodness for the Kevlar liner). A vehicle that was too high in silhouette, A ridiculous inflatable fording skirt, gun ports that didnt work because they filled the bradley with gun smoke, so they had to put in permanent modified M16's with outside venting exhaust tubes, etc. etc. Like you said, they adapted to the role, but they should never have been used as a vehicle to substitute for the tank. Blue one thing you could clarify, Friends who served on the Bradley really did like the 25 mm Chain Gun what was your impression. I did not know about the diesel retrofit, but that makes sense, just from a fuel economy/operating range perspective. As far as the Leopard II, that came very close to being the standard American Battle Tank instad of the Abrams. Thankfully, the Abrams borrowed the 120 mm Rheinmetal cannon of the LeopardII. That is one heck of a cannon.

Welcome from next door in Wisconsin.

My father, may he rest in peace, worked as a production line engineer on one of your armored partners, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the first three years it was introduced. He also knew quite a bit about the Abrams and was very impressed by it. He was puzzled about some of the decisions made about the Bradley, but thought they turned out a pretty good vehicle given all the requirements they jammed into it. Half of which were unnecessary.

Back in the late 60's, a friend of my Dad who was a General in Ordnance sent him a thousand once fired National Match 30-06 brass. My Dad reloaded maybe 40, and when I got into reloading in the 70's gave 500 to me. I loaded them all with 165 grain Sierra Boat tail soft point and IMR 4770 powder. When he passed away I got the other 460 cases plus 500 old herter 150 grain soft points he had as well. I also loaded those. I have maybe 70 of the 165's left and almost all of the 150's. I havent bought any 30-06 since 1977. I will be long gone before my son uses them all up and needs to buy more.

Good point, when I first tried it, I liked Montreal Seasoning, but I use it less and less. Dried garlic is one of the ingredients, and I have gotten into using fresh instead, and rubbing the meat down with it with a little olive oil.