A question for the 5.56 people

[jblomenberg16]

If you have an AR that shoots 2-3 MOA with good ammo, you need to check your barrel nut, because something is seriously wrong with it.

I have an SDMR 20" AR that will do MOA just fine with my hand loads, and factory match ammo. My others will do < 2MOA with my reloads, and good factory ammo as well.

My point was that right out of the box, shooting surplus military ball ammo, or other commercial "non-match" ammunition, a typical 16" AR is going to be capable of 2-3MOA, which is about the expected capability of typical M193 or M855 ammo.


To the OP's question, I've built my cheapest for about $670. That does not include magazines, sling etc., but does include a basic M4 "Clone" 16" upper, standard lower parts, and standard grip and stock, + carry handle rear sight.

My most expensive are well north of $1k, with a suppressed SBR at the $2k mark (including suppressor, and $400 worth of tax stamps).


The AR is going to cost you more just about anyway you cut it. The mini-14 is a perfectly good rifle, but for the money, I think you get more value out of the AR platform in terms of accuracy, capability, customization-ability(not a word, but go with it), and at least for the near future - resale value.

 

[jblomenberg16]

there are so many i dont know what is good and what is not

Lots of people have asked that question.


Good thread about it here.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/long_guns/221516-ar_15_noob.html

 

[bob609891]

My first AR (Smith and Wesson M&P15) was right at about $900 when everything was said and done. Sometimes you'll be paying for the brand, or for options, or for part if you piece on together. Research exactly what you want out of your weapon before you get poking around into price. Remember you want be happy at a 500 yard line with the bare minimums... but it you never plan to go past 200 yards then just about anything will do... at least I've never seen an AR15 (in good working order) that would struggle at 200.

 

[figley]

:: Ammo Oracle

This should probably be an INGO sticky.

 

[sgreen3]

Im an AR guy so that would be my choice. Just alot more option when dealing with that platform.

 

[ravenwoodranch]

Ar hands down. I would be carfule with Wich one you get. The last thing u need is an ar that's got play between the upper and lower

 

[sepe]

i would take an AR over a Mini-14 every time. Way more options and available parts. Don't like a 16 inch carbine? Sell the upper and buy a middy/20 inch rifle/etc.

You can build a great AR for around $600 if you're patient. Watching for PSA sales is a great way to do it.

$50 PSA lower + $270 PSA upper + $90 PSA Lower kit + $130 PSA BCG + $10 CH + $15 FFL fee plus maybe $25 shipping = $590

Add the iron sight of your choice for a bit more.

+1 for PSA...if they do their regular lowers on a sale again, I'm buying 3 or 4 of them. Very happy with my PSA rifle built from a stripped lower and a rifle kit. Got about $1100 in it with the Aimpoint sitting on it.

 

[LPMan59]

Ar hands down. I would be carfule with Wich one you get. The last thing u need is an ar that's got play between the upper and lower

 

[1forguns]

AR platforms are almost infinately upgradable. Start off now with a low budget build and later upgrade for very low money.

 

[1911ly]

I have both. the My mini is stainless steel and really pretty but in a SHTF situation I will grab my AR15 Better yet grab my Remington 700 30-06 but that's another story. The Mini isn't a POS It's a good looking gun. It's fun to shoot but the AR will out shoot it. I have around $800 in my AR15 (doesn't include optics).

 

[sloughfoot]

:: Ammo Oracle

This should probably be an INGO sticky.

The only problem with it, is that the author just mushes everything together.

The 55 grain FMJ loads before the M16A2 was issued was NEVER adopted by NATO. Therefore it was called the 5.56X45 Mil-Spec. It was and is, the same as every commercial 55 grain FMJ cartridge.

Along with the M16A2 came the 1X7 twist barrel and the M855 family of cartridges, including the 62 grain penetrator round which adopted by NATO because of the helmet penetration tests and other reasons.

The M855 cartridge is the 5.56X45 NATO Mil-Spec. It is a totally different chamber with a longer leade to accomodate this very high pressure cartridge. Pretty much the same velocity with a 62 grain as they were getting with the 55 FMJ cartridges.

One more time, if the cartridge is 55 grain, no worries. Shoot it out of any 5.56/223 chambered rifle.

If it is green tip, only shoot it in the M16A2 chamber or commercial equivelant.

 

[mvician]

The Gun Zone -- SAAMI on 5.56 v. .223 Remington


http://le.atk.com/pdf/223VS556.pdf

 

[sloughfoot]

The Gun Zone -- SAAMI on 5.56 v. .223 Remington

An excerpt from cited article....

"The .223 Remington and the 5.56mm NATO, when checked with a chamber ream from a reliable manufacturer of each, also have discernable differences in the areas of freebore diameter, freebore length (leade) and angle of the throat."

As I said, if you look closely at these articles about the differences, they are talking about 5.56 NATO. And I agree with them. 5.56 NATO is totally different from 5.56 Mil-Spec (non or Pre-NATO) 55 grain FMJ cartridges.

Farther on it talks about the Q3131 and Q3131A which are 55 grain Mil-Spec and are no higher pressure than any commercial .223 ammo. So I'm not sure why they bring this up. You can prove that to your self with a chronograph. The early M16 chambers had a longer leade than 223 chambers but that was only for reliability when used in full automatic firing. It had nothing to do with pressure concerns except maybe for a dirty chamber.

In fact early M16"s could indeed shoot the M855 ammo because of the long leade. You just could not stabilize the bullet and hit anything with it. Therefore, the 1X7 was put into service. The military doesn't adopt a new cartridge that is not safe to fire in older rifles.... Accuracy as an aside. But at least if the inevitable screw up happens, and the wrong ammo is issued, at least it is safe to fire....

One other thing, early .223, M16, and Mini14's also had slow twist rates. They would only shoot 55 grain and lighter bullets in their 1X12 twist barrels. No way they could accurately shoot 62 grain and heavier bullets accurately. The 1X9 twist barrels are a relatively new thing too, certainly since the 1X7 twist barrels came on the scene to handle the heavier bullets.

Imagine yourself buying a Mini 14 or M16A1 in 1980. The only 5.56 available at that time was the Q3131. It is what we all shot out of all of our Military equivelant and civilain .223 chambered rifles. There were not a lot of choices then.

There is some history here and I have lived it. Many others on this forum have also. I have books published that are very clear on this when the revolutionary M16A2 and M855 cartridge were introduced. It changed everything and made the M16A2 and its civilian variants suitable for High power competition.