Aha! The gauntlet has been thrown down :)

For me its an issue of practicality. I simply can't shoot accurately
offhand at distances greater than 50-60 yards. Prone or sitting...no
problem, but I can't help but wonder how many opportunities I'd have to
assume stable firing positions whilst fleeing the zombie hoardes.

So, since your typical VEPR or Arsenal AK can shoot 3 inch groups at 100
yards, which is more than likely the practical limit for someone like
myself shooting on the run, I think I'd be inclined to take reliability
over accuracy. If you can shoot accurately at 100+ yards offhand,
however, take the AR....I'd be glad to have you on my team.

One last word on the SKS. I've done quite a bit of work on mine, and
I've modified it to accept Tapco 20 round detachable mags, which work
very well. I'm not sure how much not having a chrome lined chamber
affects reliablity, but as I stated in my last email, I've gone 1250
rounds with no failures and only one field stripping/cleaning. It'll
shoot 3.5 inch groups at 100 yards with a red dot scope, and it would
make one hell of a club if all else failed...

Of course, what I REALLY want is one of those new 416s with the gas
piston system, but that's waaaaay more than I ever plan on spending on a
single firearm.

Thanks for the fun debate!

Brandon


McGinnes wrote:

> AR-15/M-16 reliability is the age old debate, isn't it? (I have to
> confess, that is part of the reason I brought it up.) I do have an
> AR-15, and I have not had any problems with reliability. I don't
> recall ever having a jam that was not caused by my mistake (not
> seating the magazine properly or the like). Then again, I'm not sure
> I've fired more than 200-300 rounds at a sitting, and I always clean
> the AR when I get home. The good news is that reliability is fairly
> easy to test. I just have to fire a thousand rounds without cleaning
> the AR and see what happens. The bad news is that .223 has gotten
> expensive and I'm not sure I can afford to shoot up a thousand rounds
> to check reliability.
> I will grant that the AK is much more reliable, but it is also less
> accurate, and accuracy is a critical requirement when fighting the
> undead hoards because of the necessity of making head-shots. I would
> even go so far as to bet that one could get more shots into the zombie
> kill spot at 100+ yards before a malfunction with an AR than one could
> with an AK. I will say that the AK is a virtually zero maintenance
> rifle, so it would be better for fighting 24/7/365, but I still think
> accuracy is critical for zombies. I think an AK would be a great
> (maybe even required) back-up gun, but the AR is a perfect primary
> zombie rifle.
> I would not choose an SKS (even though I own one). The SKS has about
> the same level of accuracy as the AK, but it does not have a chrome
> lined chamber, which diminishes reliability. Also, the SKS only holds
> 10 rounds and one cannot reload until it is empty.
>
> I can see it now, the Zombie challenge shooting match. The targets are
> 5" to 8" steel plates on stands that lurch and shamble toward the
> shooter starting at 200 yards along with paper targets that pop out
> from closer cover. As time passes more and more zombies are released.
> The winner is the one who can protect his perimeter the longest. No
> stopping for stoppages.
>
> --- In guntotingliberals@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:guntotingliberals%40yahoogroups.com>, Brandon.Chase@... wrote:
> >
> > I'm afraid I've gotta disagree with you there (slightly). If cleaned
> > regularly and properly maintained, the AR15 is a reliable rifle. The
> > direct gas impingement system makes regular maintenance much more
> > difficult than what it takes to keep an AK-47 running, which is why HK
> > designed a gas piston system for the M16 for their 416 rifle.
> >
> > I've never owned an AR-15, but my friends who have universally report
> > that if they don't clean up the carbon deposits in the receiver every
> > 200 rounds or so, reliability can suffer. They also report that
> > cleaning the deposits (which supposedly have a diamond-like
> hardness) is
> > very difficult and time consuming.
> >
> > Now, in normal circumstances, this doesn't seem like it'd be a big
> deal,
> > but when you're fighting zombies, this changes the circumstances a
> bit.
> > As anyone who's seen a zombie movie knows, you can't just stay in one
> > place. You've gotta stay on the run and keep moving, which can make
> > regular and thorough rifle maintenance problematic (if not
> impossible).
> >
> > Don't get me wrong, the AR has some really good attributes (light,
> > accurate, good ergonomics), and its a great range/target rifle,
> which is
> > probably why so many civilians love it. It doesn't seem to do well
> > unless you pamper it, however, which is probably why so many soldiers
> > hate it.
> >
> > So yeah, if the zombies were coming, I'd grab my SKS with 20 round
> > detachable mags. Approximately 1250 rounds and counting with no
> > failures of any kind (and only one full dissasembly/cleaning).
> >
> > cheers,
> >
> > brandon
> >
> >
> > McGinnes wrote:
> >
> > > I was digging through my email and I found this:
> > >
> > > http://zombiehunters.org/ <http://zombiehunters.org/>
> <http://zombiehunters.org/ <http://zombiehunters.org/>>
> > >
> > > I love the idea of combining humor and preparedness.
> > >
> > > BTW: The Zombie Survival Guide by Max Brooks is a must read. I do have
> > > one bone of contention with it though. Mr. Brooks says the AR-15 is
> > > unreliable and therefore not a good zombie rifle. I couldn't disagree
> > > more. Yes, there were some reliability problems with the M-16 at the
> > > start of the Vietnam war, but the cause of those problems was
> > > identified and fixed. The rifle is light, reliable and accurate (a
> > > must when fighting zombies) and the ammunition is light, flat
> > > shooting, low recoil, and has enough power for zombie debrainification
> > > out to several hundred yards. It was cheap and readily available up
> > > until a couple of years ago, but that is another story.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Brandon Chase
> > US Channel Finance
> >
> > Sun Microsystems, Inc.
> > 500 Eldorado Blvd.
> > Broomfield, CO 80021
> >
> > phone: 303.547.3535
> > internal extension: 41862
> > brandon.chase@...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>


--

------------------------------------------------------------

Brandon Chase
US Channel Finance

Sun Microsystems, Inc.
500 Eldorado Blvd.
Broomfield, CO 80021

phone: 303.547.3535
internal extension: 41862
brandon.chase@...




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]