AR Build

[Emc209i]

.308 AR SBR...It wants you to own it.

Later in life, when I've gotten other aspirations out of the way and can afford to waste money on highly unlikely apocalypse gun. I live in the city. A compact carry for mobile, shotty for home. No body armor to penetrate.

Thanks for the idea though, I figured it existed, just hadn't looked.

1.The .223/5.56 is one of the greatest rounds created.
2. ...I will guarantee you will shoot tighter, faster groups with a 9mm Glock than a 10mm Glock.
3. The Hornady TAP ammo

1. That of course is an opinion. Every army on planet earth is fielding switching to a larger caliber round. FMJ 5.56's aren't cutting it. Some say the EM-2 .280/7mm NATO was the perfect round, being a compromise between the two.
2. Volume or precision. One 7.62 round is all it takes. You'll probably need more than one with the smaller if you aren't a marksman.
3. Expensive and hard to find. When the zombie apocalypse comes, you're going to run out of your $2 per round ammo quickly. Then you're only going to be able to find military and target grade ammo which is undersized and ineffective at stopping large angry targets in a firefight.

[The Dark Side of Will]

The apocalypse scenario is going to one of minimalist survival, anyway. It won't be pitched battles and will favor a basic bolt-action .30 caliber over an automatic or even semi-automatic rifle anyway.


The *ZOMBIE* apocalypse scenario is something completely different.

[Emc209i]

Yeah, forget the zombie part. I'm really talking about the bad end of a World War III situation. In which case I'd make for the forested hills, barring I hadn't already skipped the country looking for neutrality and avoiding the draft.

I think I would like the FNAR with a muzzle brake or silencer over a converted AR platform.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwGFhThFOBE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kzRLPV_ypU

[Aaron]

1. That of course is an opinion. Every army on planet earth is fielding switching to a larger caliber round. FMJ 5.56's aren't cutting it. Some say the EM-2 .280/7mm NATO was the perfect round, being a compromise between the two.
2. Volume or precision. One 7.62 round is all it takes. You'll probably need more than one with the smaller if you aren't a marksman.
3. Expensive and hard to find. When the zombie apocalypse comes, you're going to run out of your $2 per round ammo quickly. Then you're only going to be able to find military and target grade ammo which is undersized and ineffective at stopping large angry targets in a firefight.

I'm not in an army, I'm in a position where I'm not limited to FMJs. A FMJ 5.56 is small and extremely dangerous, that's why I use the TAP ammo. One 7.62 round to the foot is much less effective than a properly-placed .22 round. Shot placement is more important than size, and the smaller more-controlled round will be easier to place good shots. I'm not preparing for that, I'm preparing for defending myself and my home, in which case my 4 magazines are plenty.

[Emc209i]

Sigh.

I'm not in an army, I'm in a position where I'm not limited to FMJs.

That's great. Your reference to the round being one of the best rounds ever created is a holistic reference, that encompasses a greater scope than just you.

A FMJ 5.56 is small and extremely dangerous, that's why I use the TAP ammo.

Your professional jibe is spilling over. You sound like a cop. It's small and dangerous in the same sense that the 4.6x30mm MP7 round is small and dangerous; it penetrates, but it has very little knock down power. You're using a special chambered round because you don't want over penetration in urban environments, and you need a larger impact diameter to stop what you're shooting.

One 7.62 round to the foot is much less effective than a properly-placed .22 round.

One 7.62 round to the foot is more effective than one 5.56 round to the foot. One 7.62 round to the chest is more effective than one 5.56 round to the chest. One 7.62 round to the head is more effective than one 5.56 round to the head.

Shot placement is more important than size, and the smaller more-controlled round will be easier to place good shots.

That isn't true. A 12.7x99mm round to the torso will put someone on the ground faster than a well placed 5.56 round to the head. Hydrostatic shock. I agree that shot placement is important, but it does not supersede the importance of size. You're right, the smaller round will more accurately place fast consecutive shots (plural), which is required with a normal small caliber round. The larger round is more effective in a single shot scenario, which normally gets the job done.

I'm not preparing for that, I'm preparing for defending myself and my home, in which case my 4 magazines are plenty.

That's a lot of money for a home defense gun (assault rifle). ACP rounds work well for home defense.

[Aaron]

Typical bigger is better mentality. But remember that just because it leaves a big hole doesn't mean the inflicted trauma is greater, because energy is also transmitted in the form of velocity. And if the projectile fragments upon impact and can effectively transmit the energy contained in its velocity, it can be much more effective. Which is why a good 5.56 round is a great anti-personel round whereas a FMJ 5.56 is terrible.

[The Dark Side of Will]

E = mv^2
p = mv

Energy is penetration, momentum is knockdown power. A 5.56 that goes all the way through a person uses some of its energy, but transfers very little momentum. A heavier slower round might have lower energy than the very fast 5.56, but will have more momentum transfer due to its greater momentum, especially if it stops in the body.

However, the impulse of a bullet impact is always equal to or less than the impulse from the kick of the weapon.

[Aaron]

While the military may have to use rounds that go through a human body, we do not. The last autopsy I saw of a 5.56 to the chest no fragments went through, they all stayed within the body. And I know this doesn't mean much in scientific terms, but that single 55gr TAP round fucked that guy up.

[crzyone]

I'm a fan of heavier calibers, and I think the .308 is a great round. Tons of knockdown power and moderate armor piercing ability. For those times when you have to get a guy through a couple of car doors.

It's hard to choose just one round. .223 is a fun round to shoot, and a mag can generally hold a lot more of them then a heavier caliber.

What would you want for the Zombie apocalypse?

[The Dark Side of Will]

While the military may have to use rounds that go through a human body, we do not. The last autopsy I saw of a 5.56 to the chest no fragments went through, they all stayed within the body. And I know this doesn't mean much in scientific terms, but that single 55gr TAP round fucked that guy up.

Got the youtube link?

[Indy]

I finished milling the 6AL-4V end cap for my suppressor:





I also had the center hole of the core EDM'd, so machining out the core will be next. Should be tricky!

As far as 5.56 vs .308...5.56 is a great round. Very little recoil on most platforms, very accurate. But trying to argue lethality over .308 is quite the uphill battle, especially when it's .308 loaded with a modern bullet. For a home/self defense scenario, if you can make good hits quickly with a larger caliber, that's what you should be using. If not, then stick with something smaller. Where 5.56 does make sense is a situation where I will likely never find myself, i.e. as a modern warfighter. Studies show that in general soldiers expend about the same amount of ammunition regardless of the caliber they're using. If you have a fixed loadout of 30lbs of ammunition, it makes sense to use that number to double the round count.

Of course, I can't afford to shoot .308 in any kind of quantity at all, so 5.56 it is

As for the zombie apocalypse, or even the regular ol' survival apocalypse, I think it would be hard to beat a simple AR-15. It is exceedingly accurate, light, requires little maintainence, and requires no tools to replace 90% of parts that can break. It can easily kill deer or other decent sized game. I love a good bolt gun (there's been an Accuracy International AW .300 Win Mag with a US Optics SN-3 kicking around in my head for about 5 years now), but I struggle to think of what it can do better(other than being slightly more accurate) than a modern AR pattern rifle.

[crzyone]

In close they are both perfectly lethal. The larger bullets carry their energy farther down range. Making letal accurate shots from 400+ yards is where the larger caliber will shine over the 5.56.

Not sure what the laws are like in the States, but we can't hunt with a .22 caliber bullet which is a downside of having a 5.56 gun. Good for varmit shooting but that's about it.

I'm actually not a huge fan of the .308, and I always wondered why a lot of sharp shooters use that particular round. The .30-06 or .300 are more powerful and have a wider range of bullet weights. One of my favorite guns to shoot is an M1 Garand. When you fire it feels like a mans gun, and feel sorry for whatever you would be shooting it at.

After reading the Wiki on the 5.56, I'm actually less fond of it. At 200m it's lethality isn't that great, and that's not a very lengthy shot with a rifle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56x45mm_NATO

I would hate to hit a guy once or twice and have him still in the fight.

[Indy]

The main body of the core as well as the step that retains the tube is turned down except for some rough stock on either end.





Nothing too exciting yet...

[Aaron]

crzyone, you are right, distance is not the 5.56's friend. For what I needed though, distance is not a consideration. My gun was built for close-quarters, and realistically I wouldn't even take a shot past 100 yards (Nor will I ever need to). That's why I've got a short barrel, a non-magnifying optic, a big-hole rear sight, etc. And at 100 yards and under, you really can't beat the 5.56. With good ammo you don't risk over-penetration, it is a very lethal round (Again with good ammo), follow-up shots can be placed accurately as fast as you can pull the trigger, you can run 31 rounds before needing a reload (28 how I have it prepared), and practice ammo is cheap(ish).

My only worry is how well the round will perform after penetrating glass window (Car or house). I've been meaning to go out to the range and give it a shot, but at $1 per round the TAP ammo is not for target practice haha.

[Indy]

The new hole-poker, a Heckler & Koch HK45:

[Emc209i]

I read on piffle that money was tight. Now I know why.

Those two look perfect together. Pretty gun. And definitely full sized. What was your reason for choosing it over the USP?

[Indy]

Hah, yes, I had been saving up for this thing for about the last year.

For me, the ergonomics and trigger were better enough on the HK45 to justify a -2 round capacity hit. Before I made this decision I tried to get trigger time with pretty much every modern/major .45 pistol currently in production. I put rounds downrange with a Sig P220 Combat, Glock 21, 21 SF, XD, XDM, XD Compact, M&P .45, FNP-45 Tactical, and several 1911's, and a couple others I'm probably forgetting. For me, the HK45 felt like a natural extension of myself in a way that only the P220 came close to matching. After examining it and seeing how bombproof it is intended to be, I was pretty much sold on it. Modularity of the trigger and controls is also a nice feature over the non-HK pistols. The price was a big hit, but I'm planning on keeping it for quite some time, so I wasn't too worried about it. The sights are bad.

In all honesty, I think it is one of the finest pistols that has been made (except for the sights). There have been alot of guns that have been made to do a few things very well, but I think the HK45 is able to check so many boxes at once that it is really fantastic. Longevity, reliability, accuracy, ease of manipulation, and great ergonomics are all there, all the time. /soapbox

[Indy]

Been working on the suppressor some more:

[Indy]

Other end done. First pic looks kinda funny, oil/coolant in the threads.

[Indy]

0.1" Thick blast baffle followed by .050" secondary baffles:


Mount end with a 45º taper on the bottom for a gas seal. There's also a locating bore above the threads.


This pic shows the wave-wrench pattern in the ID. There's also a short a short free-bore area that goes straight into a 45º thread start on the OD.


It's a little hard to notice, but the cap actually has a lip on it that covers part of the core on the end. This area will retain a very thin O-ring that will keep dirt and carbon from entering the threads from the outside. Another slightly thicker O-ring will be retained in the bottom of the cap and will seal the joint between the tube and cap (as well as the threads) from any gas leakage from the propellant load.


A preview of the adapter coming up next: