MAF abandon Steyr after 15-year service
-
This is what the MAF were using. They are known by many names and CAR-15 is one of them. Some call them Israeli-pattern carbine. IDF uses them a lot.
1970's vintage.
Not an M4.
SAF had been using them for a long time, too. Mostly for armour. Around the 90's I saw some SAF scouts carrying these carbines but brand new.
These were NOT USED by US Armed forces as far as I know.
...
This is the M4.
...
THis is another carbine of the 70's carbine that WAS USED by the US Armed Forces in Vietnam. Known by many names: Colt Commando, XM177E2. Has a shorter barrel than the CAR-15 but they had to put a big flash suppresor on it to reduce the blast. LPPL. -
Being Spec Ops they can pick any weapon but they chose the M16 family. So it is no surprise that the whole MAF is now switching back to this old workhorse.Originally posted by ferryman2393:those aren't M4s. they're M16 Commando. only the MAF special forces or selected guys in some infantry unit use it.
those men in black helmets are special forces. -
Spoken like a true foot soldier.Originally posted by Phaze:Allow me to share the experience of how combat equipment helps you.
You're sweating and a mixture of sweat and camo paint keeps getting into your eyes. The fact that your helmet is lopsided doesn't help... you have this night vision equipment hanging off it. The weight of the NVG unbalances your helmet. You have it because it is estab equipment and you are supposed to use it. However, most of the time, you try to push it to one side and keep it out of your way - you only wayang and use it when there are observers.
One big problem with the NVG is that it has a very limited field of view. You lose peripheral vision. It's sometimes easier to detect movement if you just stare into the darkness and turn your head and see if you can catch a flicker in the corner of your eye.
During the day, it's hard to see the screen of a PDA. The sunlight washes out the screen. At night, the glow of your screen can be seen from far far away. You need to find ways to conceal the light. Most of the time, you just leave it off.
You need to carry batteries to power all the electronics you are carrying and you silently curse every gram. You have your signal set... or maybe your runner carries it for you. But you carry backup comms (sms) or walkie talkie.
You can't prone down because you've got a map bag, bino and all sort of stuff hanging off your chest. If you have to get down. You gingerly kneel and lie down. First of all, it hurts like hell when all the stuff digs into your chest. Secondly, you don't want to sign 1206 if something falls off and you lose it.
Sometimes, you try out toys that attach cameras on your rifle and supposedly let's your shoot around corners without exposing yourself. Yup it works. But it still weighs a ton and the case in comes in weighs a ton as well.
And we are not even talking about the full 'Land Warrior" suite yet.
Our SAF soldier of the future will be about as agile as a Christmas tree. -
I read this before else where. The joker stunned it from elsewhere & passed it off as his own.Originally posted by tankfanatic:boys...war is dangerous...its good to have technological advantages...but nature and chaos always have way to destroy that advantages...
murphy law of combat..(i got this from a malaysian soldier blog)
-If it's stupid but works, it's not stupid.
-Don't look conspicuous, it draws fire.
-When in doubt, empty your magazine.
-Never share a foxhole with anyone braver than you are.
-Remember: Your weapon was made by the lowest bidder.
-If your attack is going really well, it's an ambush.
-No plan survives the first contact intact.
-All 5-second grenade fuses will burn out in 3.
-Try to look unimportant. The enemy may be low on ammo.
-If you are forward of your position the artillery will always fall short.
-The important things are always hard.
-The simple things are always simple.
-The easy way is always hard.
-If you are short of everything except enemy, you're in combat.
-When you have secured an objective, don't forget to let the enemy know about it.
-Incoming fire has the right of way.
-If the enemy is in range, SO ARE YOU.
-No combat ready unit ever passed inspection.
-Beer math: two beers times 37 men equals 49 cases.
-Body count math: two guerillas plus one portable plus two pigs equals 37 enemy KIA.
-Things that must be together to work usually can't be shipped together.
-Radios will fail as soon as you need fire support desperately.
-Anything you do can get you shot, including doing nothing.
-Tracers work both ways.
-The only thing more accurate than incoming enemy fire is incoming friendly fire.
-Make it tough for the enemy to get in and you can't get out.
-If you more than your fair share of objectives, you will have more than your fair share of objectives to take.
-When both sides are convinced that they are about to lose, they are both right.
-Professional soldier are predictable, but the world is full of amateurs.
Murphy was a Green Beret.
-
its murphy's law..Originally posted by sgf:I read this before else where. The joker stunned it from elsewhere & passed it off as his own.
wat can go wrong..will go wrong -
Till now, I still have no idea how am I supposed to carry 2.5X contact rate of 5.56, 18 HEDP, 2 Frags, 2 Phos, 1 Claymore, 1 Tripflare, other gadgets, and maybe the new SAF body armour that hopefully can stop 12.7 SLAP rounds...Originally posted by chino65:Spoken like a true foot soldier.
Our SAF soldier of the future will be about as agile as a Christmas tree.
Our SAF soldier of the future will put the Christmas tree at Taka to shame...
Well, I have completed my reservist ATEC and now waiting for my last ICT... -
The future infantry will carry more but with a vehicle.Originally posted by Cro-Magnon:Till now, I still have no idea how am I supposed to carry 2.5X contact rate of 5.56, 18 HEDP, 2 Frags, 2 Phos, 1 Claymore, 1 Tripflare, other gadgets, and maybe the new SAF body armour that hopefully can stop 12.7 SLAP rounds...
Our SAF soldier of the future will put the Christmas tree at Taka to shame...
Well, I have completed my reservist ATEC and now waiting for my last ICT...
COA already said that most infantry units will be mechanised, likely to be in a 8x8 wheeled IFV, the first batch of these IFV will start delivery from the end of 2008. -
Yes, all signs points to a mechanised SAF.
Good and bad.
Bad in that SAF will be increasingly roadbound. -
Originally posted by tankee1981:
There was a news item reported in the Straits Times in 2006, when a Singaporean hobbyist accidentally discovered 'Liquid Armor' while toying around with chemicals.
Quote: Originally posted by Atobe:
Great news for any potential adversary to the MAF.
Singapore's 'liquid armor' will have less problem in withstanding the impact of a 5.56 round fired from this Malaysian manufactured M4 carbine.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Care to elaborate?
The Mindef DSTA guys were excited, and the matter hushed up after a week of proud publicity.
While trying to 'google' for this news item, the following was found about a similar development in the USA.
Army scientists, engineers develop liquid body armor
Army News Service
Release Date: 4/21/2004
By Tonya Johnson
ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, Md. (Army News Service, April 21, 2004) -- Liquid armor for Kevlar vests is one of the newest technologies being developed at the U.S. Army Research Laboratory to save Soldiers' lives.
This type of body armor is light and flexible, which allows soldiers to be more mobile and won't hinder an individual from running or aiming his or her weapon.
The key component of liquid armor is a shear thickening fluid. STF is composed of hard particles suspended in a liquid. The liquid, polyethylene glycol, is non-toxic, and can withstand a wide range of temperatures. Hard, nano-particles of silica are the other components of STF. This combination of flowable and hard components results in a material with unusual properties.
"During normal handling, the STF is very deformable and flows like a liquid. However, once a bullet or frag hits the vest, it transitions to a rigid material, which prevents the projectile from penetrating the Soldier's body," said Dr. Eric Wetzel, a mechanical engineer from the Weapons and Materials Research Directorate who heads the project team.
To make liquid armor, STF is soaked into all layers of the Kevlar vest. The Kevlar fabric holds the STF in place, and also helps to stop the bullet. The saturated fabric can be soaked, draped, and sewn just like any other fabric.
Wetzel and his team have been working on this technology with Dr. Norman J. Wagner and his students from the University of Delaware for three years.
"The goal of the technology is to create a new material that is low cost and lightweight which offers equivalent or superior ballistic properties as compared to current Kevlar fabric, but has more flexibility and less thickness," said Wetzel. "This technology has a lot of potential."
Liquid armor is still undergoing laboratory tests, but Wetzel is enthusiastic about other applications that the technology might be applied to.
"The sky's the limit," said Wetzel. "We would first like to put this material in a soldier's sleeves and pants, areas that aren't protected by ballistic vests but need to remain flexible. We could also use this material for bomb blankets, to cover suspicious packages or unexploded ordnance. Liquid armor could even be applied to jump boots, so that they would stiffen during impact to support Soldiers' ankles."
In addition to saving Soldiers' lives, Wetzel said liquid armor in Kevlar vests could help those who work in law enforcement.
"Prison guards and police officers could also benefit from this technology," said Wetzel. "Liquid armor is much more stab resistant than conventional body armor. This capability is especially important for prison guards, who are most often attacked with handmade sharp weapons."
For their work on liquid armor, Wetzel and his team were awarded the 2002 Paul A. Siple Award, the Army's highest award for scientific achievement, at the Army Science Conference.
(Editor's note: Tonya Johnson is a member of the Army Research Laboratory Public Affairs Office.)
If the penetrating power of a 5.56 round from a M4 is degraded by its short barrel length, the liquid armor maybe able to hold up.
This will surely help to lighten the overloaded Future Combatant.
. -
I have first hand experience of the M-16, M-16 Carbine (SAF version; technically similar to M4), and the SAR-21.
Let me say that the carbine cannot make it as a primary infantry weapon.
Its effective and max range is supposed to be 400m/2500m respecitively, just a little lower than M-16's 600/2800m.
However accuracy is another story, I've shot all 3 weapons in ranges and the carbine is inaccurate at anything more than 200m, even for extremely well-trained personnel (eg. an experienced SOF 2WO whom I served with), could barely hit 1-2 outta 4 shots from a carbine, while most of us miss all 4 shots.
The only advantage of the carbine is lightweight and ease of use.
The M-16 is far more accurate than carbine and of course our own SAR-21 is more accurate than both of them with effective/max range at 600/2800m also.
MAF's replacement to carbine for as its primary infantry weapon is quite a laughing stock, when all major armed forces are quickly looking for replacements to overcome limitations and minor problems of the M-16 family.
They're really going backwards, while paying more...its quite funny. -
the MAF infantry doctrine calls for 'close in' combat. in a way, the M4 'encourages' them to 'close in' and see the eye balls of the enemy before pulling the trigger. if the need arises for longer range, they can just turn to the RPG gunners (2 per squad) or the MGL gunner to lob a few grenades and settle the issue.
-
You can't hit anything with your carbine because it is not zeroed to you, simple.Originally posted by specialOps:MAF's replacement to carbine for as its primary infantry weapon is quite a laughing stock, when all major armed forces are quickly looking for replacements to overcome limitations and minor problems of the M-16 family.
They're really going backwards, while paying more...its quite funny.
Besides, the m16 carbine and the M4 have differences. For one, the M4 barrel is heavier.
DaveC who owns an M4 said he can hit stuff out to incredible distances. Read his posts.
It is little early to laugh at anyone based on your own narrow experience.
...
In most SE Asian scenarios of jungle, plantation or urban, EFFECTIVE rifle fire beyond 200m is wishful thinking.
Last I heard - in war your enemy WON'T be as co-operative as the No. 11 target at the range.
So if you want to take aimed shots at someone trying very hard not to get shot at, you better close the distance instead of trying to shoot someone from the safety of 300m, 400m or 2.5km etc...
Let's not even talk about low light or smoky conditions.
And besides, eveyone here is telling you that the M4 will not be the only weapon they use in the section. they do have sharpshooters, snipers, SAW, LAW GPMG, M203 etc - just like us. -
M-16 has some advantage like fast reloading , ergonomic etc but with modern AR coming online , it is not the best.
Piston vs gas blowback
M-16 gas blowback where carbon build up in bolt carrier area need constant cleanup after every contact, the longer you delay, carbon will harden and start to cause jamming. 2ndly, cleaning take longer as compare to piston driven AR
Piston driven AR only has carbon build up in the piston area, there is less jamming and much easier to clean as there no carbon build up in the bolt area.
Therefore I will chose piston driven any time, ease of maintenance, less jamming as long as the other attributes is similar.
Bullpup vs conventional
Bullpup advantage is always shorter weapon but with the same efffectiveness as compare to the longer conventional weapon.
The loading and reloading is different as compare to say M-16, but it is matter of getting used to it,I must admit that M-16 unloading and reloading seem easier than SAR-21, but difference is not significant with one who use to the SAR-21.
A lot of new AR are of the Bullpup design becos of it's shorter design, becos shorter weapon is better suited for close terrain like urban or forested terrain.
That is also why some US SF unit prefer the M4( M-16A2 carbine), especially when they airdropped ,the reason is their role, for example LRRP team operations is for recon, their main objective is to collect intel w/o being detected, they always move in stealthy and if the terrain permit, in deep forested area and always avoid contact.
Similarly, to the strike operation, stealth infiltration, quick attack and quick extraction.That is why they prefer the M4.
Anyway, I found that MAF selection and implementation is full of co
Then the Austrian company wanted to shift their entire small arms production to MY eventhough there is some objection in Austria.
Suddenly , there was breakdown in the negotiation with MY, Austrian scrapped the idea of transfering small arms production to MY and MY stop licensed production of Steyr AUG ( license withdraw?) and suddenly wanted to buy M4 to replace the Steyr AUG without a proper selection and evaluation process for the next generation rifle!?!
This kind of thing can only be found in MY!!!
-
What makes you think our carbines are not zeroed?Originally posted by chino65:You can't hit anything with your carbine because it is not zeroed to you, simple.
Are you saying that 100+ trained and experienced soldiers who zeroed their rifles before the shoot, and can hardly hit anything at 300m is a coincidence or because they didn't zero?
You don't know what you're talking about dude.
Yes, you can probably still aim and hit something with a carbine at 300m, but I'm saying the accuracy and chances of hit is slimmer compared to a M-16 and SAR-21.
That is quite simple to understand, isn't it? You mean carbine as good as M-16? What are you trying to argue? -
Quoting your previous post:Originally posted by specialOps:What makes you think our carbines are not zeroed?
Are you saying that 100+ trained and experienced soldiers who zeroed their rifles before the shoot, and can hardly hit anything at 300m is a coincidence or because they didn't zero?
You don't know what you're talking about dude.
Yes, you can probably still aim and hit something with a carbine at 300m, but I'm saying the accuracy and chances of hit is slimmer compared to a M-16 and SAR-21.
That is quite simple to understand, isn't it? You mean carbine as good as M-16? What are you trying to argue?
"(eg. an experienced SOF 2WO whom I served with), could barely hit 1-2 outta 4 shots from a carbine, while most of us miss all 4 shots".
You trying to tell me you zeroed the rifle and than just got to fire 4 shots each?
C'mon...
Anyway, if you calm down you will realise that i am not comparing carbine to rifle.
I am saying that the carbine is GOOD ENOUGH for MAF's needs. If you don't understand that, there's no point arguing with you.
And I don't know how many thousand times I have to say this, the M4 is only one of the weapon in the section. There are other weapons in the section that can kill you effectively at 300m, 400m etc. -
bullpup vs carbine debate been going on for quite some time..
it is really a love hate relationship..i really think that the m4 is a good move by malaysia...hope they really use this weapon to the utmost.....
a rifle is onli as good as the user....i honestly think that action happens less than 200m....most of the time 100m.... -
I dunno abt DaveC, but tankee in SAF were using M-16 carbine as their personal weapon,and they has always complained abt the disadvantages of using a carbine during CTSS(or whatever they called today) at 300m.Originally posted by chino65:You can't hit anything with your carbine because it is not zeroed to you, simple.
Besides, the m16 carbine and the M4 have differences. For one, the M4 barrel is heavier.
DaveC who owns an M4 said he can hit stuff out to incredible distances. Read his posts.
It is little early to laugh at anyone based on your own narrow experience.
....
And those weapon are zeroed.
Regardless, shorter barrel mean lower muzzle velocity which means less penetration and accuracy at long range, that is a fact.
It is possible to have higher muzzle velocity when using a better rds( i.e. more expensive rds?) but the effectiveness will always be better when it is used in longer barrel weapon.
It is alway better to have more accurate weapon at longer range, becos it useful when you need it.Originally posted by chino65:In most SE Asian scenarios of jungle, plantation or urban, EFFECTIVE rifle fire beyond 200m is wishful thinking.
Last I heard - in war your enemy WON'T be as co-operative as the No. 11 target at the range.
So if you want to take aimed shots at someone trying very hard not to get shot at, you better close the distance instead of trying to shoot someone from the safety of 300m, 400m or 2.5km etc...
Let's not even talk about low light or smoky conditions.
And besides, eveyone here is telling you that the M4 will not be the only weapon they use in the section. they do have sharpshooters and snipers - just like us.
For example let say that your enemy setup an ambush at 250m for your arrival becos they have detected your unit via UAV., or when they are in high ground detected you via binocular etc.
So just becos in closed terrain, the LOS is limited, there is always a possibility that you need a effective longer range weapon, so why does one want to limit themselves using a shorter range weapon whereby a longer range weapon is available? -
Funny... As I remember it, everyone including the SAW gunners, GPMG and M203 all revert to M16 for CTSS.Originally posted by gary1910:I dunno abt DaveC, but tankee in SAF were using M-16 carbine as their personal weapon,and they has always complained abt the disadvantages of using a carbine during CTSS(or whatever they called today) at 300m.Originally posted by gary1910:
I said the M4 meets the MAF's needs. Didn't say it is better than this or that...
It is alway better to have more accurate weapon at longer range, becos it useful when you need it.[/b]
And please, your potential enemy is not that stupid they don't realise the M4's range is shorter. And besides, they have a huge stock of M16 in use/storage. if they decide to go back to the conventional M16 system, should they get yet more M16?
Of course not! The M4 is the logical choice.
...
They used bullpups way earlier than us. If they are not going back to bullpups, hey, maybe there's a lesson there? And they are not the only ones who are not going for bullpups inspite of the barrel length advantage.
...
Just because the M4 isn't good for 300m doesn't make the MAF a "laughing stock" for choosing it as "SpecOps" mentioned. That's just being simplistic.
The whole Russian army is still armed with AK weapons with a short barrel and combat effective range of around 200m. Are they all "laughing stock' also? -
Well, what are the options they should consider then, in your opinion?Originally posted by gary1910:....and suddenly wanted to buy M4 to replace the Steyr AUG without a proper selection and evaluation process for the next generation rifle!?!
Please tell us.
...
Their Specops actually preferred the CAR-15 over any other rifle they can choose, so it is no brainer that they would adopt the M4.
The M4 will not be a new system for them. Logistically they still have the M16 system in place as i have explained earlier.
...
Whatever other options you think they should consider, it may offer marginal advantages here and there, but not enough to overrule the M4. And probably at a huge investment.
If they get a third AR system, then they'd really be in trouble - logistically. -
No, you are remember wrong, SAW gunner used SAW and has their own standard for CTSS.Originally posted by chino65:Funny... As I remember it, everyone including the SAW gunners, GPMG and M203 all revert to M16 for CTSS
M203 , LAW use standard M-16 standard for CTSS and all of them use their own personal weapon.
GPMG , 84 etc all use M-16 for their CTSS as well.
And as for tankee, their personal weapon is the carbine.
M4 is not chosen after a proper selection and evaluation process , it was chosen after the deal broke down with Steyr-Mannlicher AG & Co KG to transfer their entire small arms production to MY whereby many of small arms will be produced solely in MY.Originally posted by chino65:Did I say it is useless to have a longer range weapon? I said the M4 meets the MAF's needs.
And please, for heaven's sake, your potential enemy is not that stupid they don't realise the M4's range is shorter, OK? And besides, they have a huge stock of M16 in storage. if they decide to go back to the conventional M16 system, should they get yet more M16?
Of course not! The M4 is the logical choice.
They used bullpups way earlier than us. If they are not going back to bullpups, hey, maybe there's a lesson there? ANd they are not the only ones who are not going for bullpups inspite of the barrel length advantage.
Just because the M4 isn't good for 300m doesn't make the MAF a "laughing stock" for choosing it. That's just being simplistic.
The whole Russian army is still armed with AK weapons with a short barrel and combat effective range of around 200m. Are they all "laughing stock' also?
In fact , the deal would include producing the latest Steyr AUG A3 which could very possible be the new AR for MAF.
Before that, MY was very happy abt having to produce all their small arms locally and even export all the arms under Steyr-Mannlicher , and there was no talk abt any AR to replace the Steyr AUG in MAF.
Then suddenly the deal is off and Najib annoucned to the world that they will be getting M4 to replace the Steyr AUG !!!!
WTF happen was not announced, but it look like there was some animosity between them and M4 was the result of that kneel jerk effect after the deal was off.
So tell me, how could it be the best choice for MAF when M4 is chosen w/o a proper selection and evaluation process???
And it seem to be more an emotional and political decision rather than objective and rational decision taken by MY.
2ndly, lot of armies already started to replace the M-16 and it's variant, Thailand is the latest, they ordered a large qty of Tavor-21.
Afterall, there are a lot of better AR than M-16 available now, chosing M4 is in fact going backward. -
Please forgive my ignorance as I am jumping into an already intense discussion. But my understanding was that the M4 is just for special forces but the regular infantry are still using Steyr, or am I wrong?
-
Shorties are never meant for full-scale implementation. Carbines and all, look cool, but practical? No...unless using in a largely CQB and limited outdoor function. Perhaps they can consider a Carbine lower, with a full-scale upper? (Just wondering, mebbe Dave can educate me on this, cuz i always see standard lowers with carbine uppers).That way you get a shorter weapon but regular barrel and higher accuracy etc.
-
i don't think the M4 is meant for MY special forces alone. the first order was for 14,000 units and apparently has received uncle sam congress approval recently. dear najib also announced that these rifles will come with a wide range of attachments. most probably scopes of various calibre.
as for which unit will get it first, i think it should be special forces, paratroopers and mechanised units will be among the first. that's what? equivalent of 8 battalions? i think we can do our maths here.... -
M16 -
they have tested and evaluate the m4...i saw the pic in tempur magz way back.....and their Spec ops have given their own evaluation too....
about ammo and the quality of malay handycraft...it is so dead wrong to say they were making crapy stuff... i mean if you really want to believe that their bullet wont kill you thats fine with me...please take one in the stomach.
this is some of the comment foreign army says about malaysian .308Deer HunterDecember 16th, 2006, 12:13 PM
I was at a local Army Navy store the other day looking for reloading supplies for my dad's Christmas present. I saw at the counter they had packs of 7.62x54R, 8mm, and .308 surplus. The 7.62x54R was Russian (I asked the old man at the counter, he said he didn't know and that the dealers didn't tell him. The young lady sitting at a computer to his right said "It's Russian."
), didn't ask what the 8mm was, but I saw that the .308 was marked Malaysian.
I havn't heard much about this ammo, so I didn't pick a pack of it up. Is this stuff worth it? It was being sold in packs of 50 for $15 each. A little high, especially if it was bad stuff.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jagdpanzer347December 16th, 2006, 12:28 PM
Deer Hunter, grab it! It has a very good reputation and is boxer-primed. Should be great thru your STG. If you don't want it, I sure would like a crack at it.
-jagd
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deer HunterDecember 16th, 2006, 12:57 PM
Sweet! I'll grab it up as a Christmas present to myself, then.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
rangerruckDecember 16th, 2006, 06:22 PM
the malays are much like singapore. old british empire stuff, they don't make crap.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
richardschennbergDecember 21st, 2006, 03:08 PM
I have not tried their .308, but Malaysian .223 worked great for me, even when my AR was almost new and somewhat finicky on ammo.
Richard
Schennberg.com (http://www.schennberg.com)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4fingermickDecember 21st, 2006, 08:00 PM
I had a thousand malay 7.62s given to me by a mate who was Afghanastan bound. They are to Nato F4 standard, shoot great and seem a bit warm, but it is MG ammo after all. I thought that they were berdan primed from memory. mick.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R.H. LeeDecember 21st, 2006, 08:10 PM
Where's the decent 7.62x51? The Lake City, the Radway Green, the NATO stuff???? Howcome that's not available?? I won't buy any third world crap.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10-RingDecember 22nd, 2006, 12:49 AM
The stuff I've bought & used has been top notch! I'd get more
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SvenDecember 22nd, 2006, 02:28 AM
308 surplus has dried up big time. Lake City sells for 35-40 cents ea. - where you can find it. Time to start reloading.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TexasRiflemanDecember 22nd, 2006, 08:37 PM
I won't buy any third world crap.
Then you won't be shooting any .308 surplus. Enjoy your dollar a round Federal ammo!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1911userDecember 22nd, 2006, 09:13 PM
Malaysian 308 is berdan primed and decent 308 FMJ. I recently sold the last 400 rounds I had of it for $100 shipped. I also sold my only case of 308 hirtenburger for nearly $400 shipped; we were both very happy with the deal.
If you need 308 FMJ, it's time to get the reloading press busy. Midway has new winchester 308 FMJ for 50 cents a round. It can be reloaded for cheaper than that.
I have a hunch the surplus ammo situation is going to stop much of the bump-fire nonsense and slow down the price inflation on machine guns that shoot rifle ammo. It's going to be a hard reality check.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pardini FanDecember 22nd, 2006, 10:10 PM
Midway is having a special $99 for 200 rounds of Winchester nato.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SvenDecember 22nd, 2006, 10:16 PM
I'm keeping my "stash" of 60s Lake City Match 118LR for... if the balloon goes up. For plinking, I just bought a case of the Paki 308:
link to Wideners (http://www.wideners.com/itemdetail.cfm?item_id=6990&dir=18|190|191)
It arrived quickly in a big spam can. Looks good, reports are that this is better than the Indian. Will be testing in my M1A and will report - wish I had a chrono to use.