What .308 should I get?

[Pablo]

Or should I get a bolt action.

I want a .308 rifle. Help me decide.

Thanks!

[RLH70]

FN FAL

[Tom]

FN FAL, you can even get it with wood furniture.

[BarryinIN]

I've had pretty much all the .308 military-based semiauto's and some sporters.

I like the FAL and .308 Garand best.

I'm gonna say some things here that will surely anger someone and make them call me crazy:

The HK91/G3 types recoil hardest of them all, and have a pretty crummy trigger. It also gets pretty filthy, but that doesn't seem to affect function. It does bother those who like really clean guns.

I don't like the ergonomics. Everything seems to be either in the wrong place, the wrong shape, or moves in the wrong direction for me. It handles well- balance is good, it carries ok, and the sights line up with the eye and target when shouldered- but all the controls could be better done.

Magazines were expensive when I had mine, but have come down to bargain prices after several countries parted out their G3s. I do have to wonder if they will get costlier once those mags dry up.

If you want to scope one, it can be done easy enough with claw mounts, but I thought it put the scope a bit high and clumsy. It was not easy for me to get a good cheek weld with the standard stock either.

Stock sights give a good picture, but are not the easiest to adjust. It can be done without special tools, but the sight tool makes things a lot easier. If you could set it once and leave it, it's not a big deal.

However: In spite of my complaints, I think it's the most durable and dependable of the bunch. If given the choice of any .308 and told I would never see a cleaning kit, spare parts, or even oil, I'd pick an HK91/G3.

The AR10s have the least recoil in my opinion, the best and most consistent accuracy, and at least tied for best trigger.

Magazines are not as cheap as some, but Magpul is making P-Mags for some companies' versions that aren't bad at all.

The controls are all sensibly placed and easy to use.

Scoping is easy with a flat top upper receiver. The factory stock could be a little higher for a scope, but is useable as-is for me. The standard sights are good too.

My biggest concern over AR10s is that they don't have the long term reputation to look at like the others do. The others have 50 years of service with some of the larger armies of the world. The AR10 was adopted by a couple of relatively small armies for a relatively short time, and the AR10s of today share little or no parts. Maybe the current ones are fine, but it's pretty easy to look at the reputations of the G3, FAL, etc. There do seem to be more complaints over AR10 malfunctions than with others.

I love the Garand, so you might think I'd feel the same about the M14/M1A. I like it, but don't love it. I thought they were the greatest thing from the first tine I saw one and had to have one. I shot one in Highpower for several years, starting in 1989. They are nice, but I don't think they are the Excalibur they are often made out to be.

My biggest gripe is the small bedding area. When changing the basic Garand design to accept a box magazine, the receiver "legs" were reduced until there isn't as much contact surface between the stock and receiver as an M1. In Highpower matches, zeroes would shift. It might not change much, but I had to make some adjustment each match. Heavily used match M1As needed re-glass-bedded in the off-season. A non- bedded rifle can do it too. The good news is that a fiberglass stock- even the GI one- usually eliminates this. Of course, those who choose the M1A out of love for "real wood and steel" won't want to replace the wood.

I'm not trying to make it sound like the zero wanders all over the place, but a change of 2 moa from one day to the next was not at all unusual.

But you have the good points, which are very good. The trigger is as good as any and better than most, the sights are great and easily adjusted. It's a good thing because scope mounting ends up being a choice among compromises.

Magazines are cheaper now than when I got mine in 1987. There are more manufacturers now.

I like the FAL. It works, recoil is not as gentle as an AR10-type, but pretty good. The trigger is not the best but far from the worst and generally OK. The sights are not as easy to adjust as an M1A but not bad at all, and give a good sight picture. In a way, it's a compromise rifle in that it's not necessarily the best at any one thing I can think of, but it is usually second best. I can't think of any serious negative factor to them. They do tend to make groups that are more vertical ovals than round, but it's not terrible and is at least consistent at it.

I like the DSAs, but like to talk about my cheap Century. They had trouble with some of those I guess, but mine has been just fine. I find that interesting because the parts in mine are downright worn out. Loose and every contact surface polished with wear. The fact it works in spite of that is a testament to the design, I think.

One more option most don't think about.

I really like the Garand in .308. It uses the same clips as .30-06. The only change is a .308-chambered barrel.

Some will ask why not an M1a? The .308 Garand, with around double the receiver leg contact area does not have the zero shift problem (at least no more than most wood stocked rifles), and I find it a lot handier to carry with no big box magazine sticking out. Spare loaded clips store easily, fitting in any pocket or cup holder.

I shoot one in 3-gun matches against ARs. I don't win (and don't when using an AR either) but don't get whipped to death either. I've used one in carbine classes and held my own. There arent many flies on a good Garand if one is willing to work with it a little bit.

I have not messed around with the newer ones like the FN SCAR, Magpul/Bushmaster Masada, or KelTec RFB. I have heard nothing either way on the Masada. The SCAR seems pretty good although some complain that the stock rattles. I know of one KelTec RFB bullpup owner. He is a serious rifleman, multiple Gunsite graduate, and independently well-off. He has tried everything and I mean he can afford to seriously try it out. He surprised me by telling me he keeps a KelTec RFB by the bed. I don't consider that small praise.

[BarryinIN]

Or should I get a bolt action.

My favorite .308 bolt action is my Steyr Scout. I take it to the range every trip.

It's accurate, the same size and weight as my Marlin pistol caliber lever action, and handles as fast or faster than an AR with Aimpoint. Perhaps the most impressive thing about it is that the point of impact is pretty much the same with bullets from 110-180 grains.

It's funny looking, and they aren't cheap (shop around and be patient, deals can be found on them) but the overall package is in a class of it's own.

[BarryinIN]

The second favorite bolt action .308 I've had was a Ruger 77. Just a plain stainless synthetic KM77MKII from the mid 90s. Not real lightweight, but pretty handy with a 22" barrel with a rather light contour. It shot the first half moa group I ever shot, and shot just about everything well.

I had the trigger worked, and muzzle recrowned, and besides mounting the scope those were the only changes. It was my windy day varmint rifle.

I traded it off when my gun club's rifle range closed down and I wanted something else worse that I could use more. I tried replacing it with another one just like it later, but it didn't shoot near as well. Truthfully, that's how it has been with Ruger rifles and me: really accurate or not so much. I had an older tang safety 77 International in .243 that "shouldn't" have shot well with it's Mannlicher stock, but it never got that word. Another Ruger 77 VT in the same caliber was sad. You never know. Guns do what they do.

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Pablo

Or should I get a bolt action.

My favorite .308 bolt action is my Steyr Scout. I take it to the range every trip.

LOL, thread title, that was going to be my statement, until I saw the board title and pulled my head in.