Top 10 Battle Rifles

In My Humble Opinion
21

Just wanted to chime in here…

In every board I post on, when a gun thread comes up, it always comes down to AK vs. AR.

So I’ll give my bit on it.

Comparing the AK and the AR is kind of like comparing cats and dogs… similar, but different. From what I understand, a modern battle rifle is trying to be two weapons in one… a machine gun, and a rifle.

The AR is a better rifle… it’s more accurate, at longer distances.
The AK is a better machine gun. Heavier round, less accurate.

They are both eccelent in their own ways, but I get very burned out on trying to put down this fight. Both weapons are symbolic of the doctrines in which they were designed to be deployed… the US favors open field combat, at a decent distance, while the Russians have always been in favor of closing up and fighting closer in.

22

This is completely incorrect. The MP5 is an obsolete weapon still used only by some under-funded police departments and third world militaries. It has no place on the modern battlefield.

  • For the amount of firepower the weapon is simply too big. An M16 derivative of the same size will bring much more firepower to the table.

  • The 9mm round is useless for anything other than pistols. Any situation you can think of, there will be a better 5.56mm/M16 combo than a pistol cartridge/SMG combo. This includes fighting inside buildings, ships and airplanes.

  • The original stamped metal MP5 was far too fragile for any kind of rough use. H&K sells a handy set of tools, including a rubber mallet, used for pounding dents out of the receiver body for both the MP5 and G3. A dent in the receiver will likely render the weapon useless. Compared to modern machined receivers, these things might as well be made out of paper towels.

  • The original MP5 of course had no rail attachment points that would be essential on any modern infantry weapon.

  • The one saving grace of the delayed blowback system is that it requires very little cleaning. However it is also heavy.

There’s a reason no one important uses these things anymore.

23

kawaiitentaclebeast, I was unaware. What has the US Navy Seal teams moved on to, if they’re not using MP5’s anymore?

24

[My roommate’s opinion-he’s the resident gun nut in this household]

I tend to disagree with some the aforementioned statements. Please bear with me, as I will try and deal with each of these statements.

First, the firepower issue. If you are referring to standard 9mm 115gr FMJ listed at a velocity of 1150 fps, you are right. However, these rounds do not generate enough force to reliably cycle the action. US Special Forces, and many law enforcement agencies, use 124 gr +P+ pressure rounds (the US military using FMJ as required by Geneva Accords and LE depts using JHPs). The HK MP5, especially the Navy and SD variants, are preferred for MOUT applications. This weapon does have a place on the modern battlefield, and it does not appear to be leaving the battlefield anytime soon.

Secondly, it has been stated that the 9mm is useless for anything other than pistols. The 9mm is a versatile round when loaded with a quality dependable bullet that offers depth of penetration. The 124 grain and 147 grain Federal Hydra-Shok JHPs come to mind, as do Remington Golden Saber bullets (my personal fave). The 115 gr bullet at 1150 fps is a bit anemic as it generally does not offer adequate penetration. The 9mm is considered the quintessential SMG round, as there have been many weapons chambered for this round. To name a few, the Sterling series of SMG, the German Wehrmacht MP38 and MP40, as well as the Valmet SMG and S/W Model 76. The catch with the 9mm SMG round is that it must reliably cycle the action. The 5.56mm cartridge is a very versatile round, but it must utilize a full-length rifle barrel to make full use of velocity for downrange performance and penetration. The 14.5 inch M4 barrel reduces the M16-platform to little more than a 22 WMR in terms of ballistic performance. The M16A1 and M16A2 rifles offer better performance with the 5.56mm round, especially in the loadings of M855 bal and Mk 262 Mod 0 and Mod 1 loadings. Otherwise, to compare the 9mm Luger and 5.56mm NATO cartridges is to compare apples and oranges.

The MP5 weapon itself is reliable and utilitarian, which is why it appeals to LE and military operatives. A dent in a receiver will render any weapon useless, even an M16 variant. As for rifle receivers, I prefer mine to be made from beer cans as opposed to paper towels.

It has also been said that the original MP5 “had no rail attachement points that would be essential on any modern infantry weapon”. Neither did the M16, especially the A1 and A2 models. These developments are a product of the post-Desert Storm military world.

However, on one point I will agree with KTB. The delayed blowback system requires very little cleaning. Thank God for roller-locking mechanisms.

As for “no one important” using these weapons anymore, I will politley refer you to the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office SWAT team, LAPD SWAT, The FBI, US SECret Sevice, and the United States Special Operations Command, commonly known as SOCOM.

I apologize for being a bit long-winded, but I felt it necessary to support my statements. Thank you for your patience.

25

Anything they want, and it will invariably be some AR-15 variant. In the case of tight quarters, MK18 Mod 0 Close Quarters Battle Rifle.

I’m comparing it to 5.56mm. Do a simple review of recent literature on the subject, from Iraq and Afghanistan. The MP5 and 9mm SMG in general has left the modern battle field decades ago.

shrug, I’m certain a simple inspection of the construction of both weapons will quickly persuade you otherwise.

No it does not.

A 10 inch barrel 5.56mm AR with the correct ammunition and gas system will far outshoot any 9mm SMG, in range, accuracy and power. I am quite certain that the afore mentioned CQBR, in widespread use by USSOF in the 10 inch barrel configuration, is significantly more powerful than a .22WMR. Such a weapon is more or less the same size as an MP5, thus to the operator they are perfectly comparable.

So not exactly the “future weapon of urban warfare”, then.

Go ahead, refer away. Find me any evidence that USSOCOM, the Secret Service, or LAPD SWAT making widespread use of 9mm SMGs in recent times. Look up some ballistic figures for Mk 262 out of a 10 inch barrel while you’re at it.

Bear_nenno, any input?

26

I’m curious as to why you’ve left the Lee-Enfield rifle off your list. I know my opinion on them is somewhat biased ;), but even taking an objective view the Lee-Enfield ranks as one of the great rifles of all time… they’re still in service, 117 years after first being introduced.

I hate to say it, but the Martini-Henry isn’t that great a battle rifle. They’re reasonably accurate, but they have a chronic jamming problem- as you fire more rounds, the barrel heats up, and the cartridge’s brass expands in the firing chamber, making extraction difficult (if not impossible), and leading to misfires, jams, and rounds cooking off before they’re actually fired.

Against poorly armed and trained Zulu warriors or Afghani tribesmen, the Martini-Henry was an excellent gun. Against trained, disciplined troops with contemporary firearms, it lost most of its advantages pretty quickly. The Martini-Henry was only in service for 15 years before the British switched over to the Lee-Metford and Lee-Enfield rifles, but they were still in use as reserve arms until the end of WWII. Even so, the British realised pretty quickly that having a .450/577 calibre Elephant Gun as a Standard Infantry Rifle really wasn’t especially practical in the long run.

The Martini-Henry was a huge improvement over the Snider-Enfield, but it must be remembered that the Snider-Enfield and Martini-Henry rifles fired a .577 and .450" slug respectively, and were actually better suited for use as Elephant Guns (or Big Game Rifles (which they were often used as!) instead of as a general issue infantry rifle.

27

I only left it off because it was already covered, very well, by yourself. Honestly I had a hard time reaching 10. The M14 and the SKS were the only two big omissions to me.

28

Heck, the only reason I threw the Martini-Henry in there was to try to bulk up the list. The top 5 were the important ones. As for the SKS and M14…I would call them transitional weapons. There was nothing really radically new about their designs, they just bridged the gap between WW2 era weaponry and today’s. Don’t get me wrong, I love my SKS. But it just didn’t play that influential a role in history.

29

I completely agree. I didn’t see the particular show that was mentioned in the OP so I made up my own standard for what constitued making it into the top ten. Legacy wise both are rather obsolete (except for the M14, still in limited use by the Army, Navy and USMC), but both are reliable rifles in decent calibers that saw some heavy action and performed well. If the proverbial shiat was coming down and I had to choose between a venerable bolt action long rifle, a tin can Romanian AK varient or a Springfield Armory M14, I’d be grabbing the M14.

30

Only that I sold those MP5s to Jacksonville SWAT.

While I can’t agree that “The MP5 is an obsolete weapon still used only by some under-funded police departments and third world militaries.” I will say that there are MUCH better choices for use in combat. And can go along with the second part of your statement that “It has no place on the modern battlefield”. It’s not a good choice for warfare.
SEALs died in Panama as a result of this poor choice for a mission. They were forced to close a distance of over 150+ meters in an open airfield under enemy fire before they were even in range to effectively engage with their MP5s. It’s really a poor choice.

For law enforcement? It’s not a bad choice, and the SD is still a great idea IMO. Police Departments, though, have the luxary of buying kick ass ammunition.
But even most departments–once you finally convince them that there is little threat over over penetration from 5.56–will opt for something bigger than 9mm. The G36C was fast becoming a popular replacement. I loved that thing. HK has since been putting out some shit I haven’t even played with yet. The HK PDW (not the MP5PDW) and their new AR Style HK416.

Anyway, there is a decent AR variant suitable for any type of mission, so it’s a reliable and versatile weapon platform. I couldn’t possibly imagine having to enter a warzone with an MP5. No person could ever convince me it’s a good idea.

If this was not a board where one has to back shit up with facts, I’d dare say that the MP5 has been over-rated and overused by US Special Operations simply because it was such a cool looking and elite weapon. It was successful in Operation Nimrod and they looked so damn cool, so we want to use it too.
People are starting to come around though. It’s limitation are pretty much understood now (I hope). Still, thank god there is better shit out there that also looks cool.

31

IANAEIF (I’m not an expert in firearms) but when I see the likes of documentaries like these, mostly on the Discovery channel, I wonder what criteria are used.

When you say “determined the outcomes of wars”, in what way did they do so? I’m sure the AK47’s reputation for reliability and ease of manufacture, if true, would have helped less-developed countries like North Vietnam. But what of others who talk about the M-16? Wouldn’t any rifle built in the US have the advantage of mass production and a lot of back up from the manufacturers? Wouldn’t a rifle have to be pretty bad for it to not work for the US Army?

32

A main battle rifle need only be a semi-auto rifle. We have other weapons to use in the Automatic Rifle mode and the Machine Gun role.

33

While I don’t completely agree with all of ktb’s criticisms, the HK MP5 is most assuredly NOT going to be the new battle weapon of urban conflict. If anything, it will be phased out of production soon, anyway.

34

They used a pretty loose set of standards in the show. The AK47 apparently was chosen as number one because of the number of deaths it’s caused. Compare the AK47 - “inflicted more lethal results than any other single weapon system ever produced. Accuracy is average, but the Kalashnikov compensates for this with its ability to unleash a lethal wall of lead” to the M16 - “outstanding performer with superb accuracy, handling, service length and combat effectiveness”. They also state that the AK is a modified StG (which I believed, to my great shame).

Well, the US Army tends towards some pretty well-tested weapon, although they’ve occasionally made some serious mistakes, IMHO. The Krag-Jorgenson that predated the 03 Springfield is on no list of greats that I’ve seen. And any rifle that isn’t combat tested just isn’t going to make my list, however good it might be on paper.
We’ve really only had 3 rifles for the past 100 years - the '03 Springfield, the M1/M14, and the M16. Sure, the Brits ran the Enfield for longer than any two of ours, which is why it’s so high on the list, but what are they carrying now? The SA80? (Martini will be along shortly and correct me, I’m sure) So an advanced, tested, proven rifle can still be left off if it doesn’t have something extra.
H&K had a shot at replacing the M16, but things aren’t looking good right now. The specs changed, the Army probably doesn’t know exactly what it’s looking for, and the program has been canceled last I heard. Looked like a typical bloated designed-by-committee hunk of theory XM8 with programmable 20mm explosive shells and a built-in shotgun and would rival the BR55 for gadgetness.
Also, I don’t trust things with fancy labels like “weapons system”.

35

First of all, the MP5 isn’t a battle rifle, nor is it an assault rifle. It’s a submachine gun, utilizing a pistol-caliber round for use in confined spaces and at short (<25 meter) ranges. It can’t compared with the rifles on this list because it isn’t in the same class of function. It’s a perfectly fine weapon for the purpose for which it is intended for, though it has been superceeded by newer designs, unsurprising as the basic design is more than 30 years old.

I’m surprised not to see the HK G3 on the list, that the M14 and the FN-FAL are listed so far down, and that such prominence is given to the M16 and the M1 Garand. (The Garand is a fine, surprisingly accurate rifle, but suffers from weight, limited ammo capacity, and difficulty in maintenance. It was essentially obsolescent even before it was fielded.) I think the Sig 510 or the Sig 540-550-type rifles should also be represented somewhere on the list, despite their limited deployment outside of Switzerland.

The AK-47/AKM/AK-74 is a wildly popular rifle and well-designed in that the sloppy tolerances permit high reliability even in conditions of extreme contamination, but frankly it’s not much of a rifle for accuracy, and the ergonomics, while advanced for their day, leave something to be desired. The SKS is just a cheaply built, inaccurate, poor reliability weapon whose only point in favor is that it is dirt cheap and uses the most popular chambering on the face of the planet. It’s not a particularly good rifle even by WWII standards.

The list cited by the OP looks more like a popularity measure than an estimation of the objective merits of the weapons in question. Based on functionality and how well it performed in service, I think the list would look much different.

Stranger

36

A 10inch barrel AR is superior to an MP5 in confined spaces and short ranges. The entire genre of pistol calibre SMGs is quite frankly obsolete.

37

Ahhhh. Yea, I can almost jump on board with this one. Except I still really like the SD. And, in a law-enforcement capacity, the larger pistol calibers or even decent 9mm ammo is still pretty sweet.
But you’re right that if you have unrestrained purchasing power, there is ALWAYS a better choice than 9mm–even if you need an SMG. Like I mentioned earlier, the biggest concern departments have with the rifle calibers is over penetration. But once you get them to agree to a demonstration and shoot up some drywall and cynder blocks, it doesn’t take long to convince them to trade in the 'ole 9mm. Overpenetration from 5.56 indoors is just not the risk people assume it is.
If I need a full-auto 9mm, I’ll keep a Glock 18 in a thigh holster.

38

Ever tried to suppress a .223 Rem rifle? Only recently has one company (Surefire) developed a compact suppressor for high velocity rifle rounds. And even a 10" barrel AR (especially with a silencer) is going to be significantly longer than a compact submachinegun. Submachineguns in “pistol calibers” still have application, at least for now, though as you note, they have no place on the battlefield, and are being supplanted in tactical law enforcement units by the compact carbines you advocate. For such a weapon, the 6.8mm SPC is a vastly superior alternative to the 5.56mm NATO.

That being said, I think in the next twenty years, the large handgun caliber pistols are going to become obsolescent in favor of high velocity small caliber pistols like the HK UCP and the FN Five-seveN owing to their low recoil, high penetration value, and high magazine capacity in a very compact package. The trick is going to be designing bullets that are stable in flight and penetrate sufficiently but then tumble or fragment to offer maximum stopping effecacy. As much as I like the martini-mixer JHPs of the .45 ACP, I think that big, heavy, high recoil calibers are on their way to the history bin.

Stranger

39

GemTech has actually been making them for a while. You’re right with all your points though, which is why I still had to mention the SD as a definite caveat to the “all pistol SMGs are teh suxxor” idea.
That said, I think that modern improvements in hearing protection/communication equipment will do far more for the popularity of higher caliber CQB weapon platforms than suppressors will.

40

It’s done ALL THE TIME.

Aside from the afore mentioned Gemtek, a simple Google search also turns up:

  • KAC QD NT4 Supressor, as seen in the most recent SOPMOD kit.

  • AAC With an entire range of suppressors for everthing from 5.56mm to .50cal. The 5.5.mm application is quite compact.

  • BR Reflex Supressors
    So it seems you’re a little behind in this particular subject.