Micro Galil Utility & Purposes

[RSR]

Okay, I've done a bunch of research, but have a few questions about the microgalil, primarily in regards to it's operational use -- purpose, history, reliability, effectiveness. I'm thinking about the CNC MAR kit option, looks like a great deal all things considered, but am trying to wrap my head around it's use, purpose, utility, etc, other than collecting (I treat my firearms ultimately as tools, and accordingly try to have a specific use in mind when telling my wife why I'm spending buying something new)...

Comparison facts I have from IMI ( http://www.israel-weapon.com/default.asp?catid={813E02F8-D6E3-48B1-A0D4-171BBDD46E28} ):
EDIT: Velocities look to be 62gr SS109 based upon the chart here: http://counterstrikefox.freeservers.com/mv.htm

Micro Galil: (yes, IMI's current barrel length is a little longer than CNC 7.78" kits)
6.57 lb, 8.35" barrel w/ muzzle velocity @ 2329 ft/second & muzzle energy of 662.3 ft-lbs, 27.80" stock extended, 18.31" stock folded

SAR:
7.98 lb, 13.07" barrel w/ MV @ 2789 (+19.8% vs MAR) ft/second & ME of 949.8 ft-lbs (+43.4% vs MAR), 33.50 stock extended, 24.17" stock folded

AR:
8.38 lb, 18.11" barrel w/ MV @ 3002 (+28.9% vs MAR, +7.6% vs SAR) ft/second & ME of 1100.4 ft-lbs (+66.1% vs MAR, +15.9% vs SAR), 38.54" stock extended, 29.21" stock folded

I definitely see the need for/value of the shorter barrel length, but on the merits the SAR appears to be the better option, just wondering how much add'l advantage is seen if any w/ the shorter Micro Galil throughout its use scenarios -- basically looking at whether the SAR or microgalil makes more sense for me. With the CNC receivers being ready to go, i need to make some decisions about what I want in the way of parts/receivers.

First, purpose. What was the intended purpose of the Micro Galil? Best I can find it was intended as a replacement for the UZI? So CQB? Vehicle defense? A replacement for pistol PDWs? CQB body armor defeat? Etc?
It appears to be a flamethrower, so I'm assuming offensive use?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTtk-4Bt9GY

History. This goes with purpose -- trying to wrap my head around what specifically it was designed for. Vehicle based operations are the first thing that comes to mind. Clearing houses and whatnot too makes sense. Think in one of the Bourne's they showed US Marines using it to clear the embassy (first one maybe?; regardless, unlikely to be used by the US Military I'd think)... What was the primary role/need for this weapon?
I did find this article: http://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/detail.asp?smallarms_id=603
1995 introduction, special operations, compact close in fighting action. Unfortunately, I have a hard time wrapping my head around what scenarios that entails.

Reliability
AR 15's -- which I'm not a huge fan of but understand their appeal and problems -- have substantial reliability issues the shorter they go due to chamber pressures and failure to extract. Is this an issue on the micro galil? An issue only if running better expanding brass case ammo over steel? Extractor separating case base from body due to pressures? Etc?
Any other reliability issues w/ this micro platform? Any components have faster wear? Etc?

Effectiveness -- 2 fold: operator and weapon
Operator -- since this is an SBR, it will definitely have the aformentioned flame. Adding a muzzle brake for controllability seems like it would be awful for a home defense scenario, the round is also well past supersonic, and I've heard that the 223 out of a SBR has terrible concussions. Basically, for multi role function you'd have to get a suppressor for it?
Operator advantages being primarily just the compactness of the system, according weight reduction, and easier pointing?

Insofar as the length/operational use is concerned, I'm wondering if such a short barrel weapon is really ideal insofar as ballistic effectiveness is concerned...
Jim Fuller over at Rifle Dynamics doesn't recommend 7.62x39 in less than 10" barrel, but does like an 8" in 5.45x39: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9y964FnMwc&feature=youtu.be&t=2m35s
Point being, I'd imagine that the 77 grain OTM would fall slower and less effective, though folks are reporting that the 75 to 77 grain 223 bullets work best in SBRs... However, none of these reach the 2700 feet/second required for SS109 bullets to fragment and 2900 fps for the m855 out of the micro. The SAR achieves the 2700 but only the AR achieves the 2900.

I have VZ2008s that are 35" open, my golani at 39", and plan to get a KelTec Sub2000 or two once it's no longer made of unobtainium that comes in at 29.5", less than 2" longer than the micro. In 9mm, I can run in the Sub2000k's longer 16" barrel either subsonic 147gr at (1086 fps) 384 ft-lbs (58% of MAR energy) or supersonic 115gr +P (1524 fps) at 593 ft-lbs (90% of MAR energy) with less muzzle flash, likely less concussion, and much cheaper (premium 223 bullets are $1 per round vs +P 9mm HPs at ~50 cents) . With +P+ 9mm, I should be able to exceed the ballistics of the MicroGalil in a +1.7" longer platform w/ 8" barrel or +2.27" with the old standard 7.78 barrel in the CNC kits. MAR will definitely be more reliable than the Keltec but if it's not ideally effective, it becomes a hard sell to justify the cost of the platform plus SBR stamp plus Can stamp, again above collection only value (which I frankly don't have enough spare $ for right now)...

So this is what I'm thinking of in the way of facts.

Please let me know what I'm missing. What's wrong. What's right.

And any personal insight you all might have with the SAR vs the MAR would be appreciated too.

Thanks!

 

[dtom29]

What I think is you are WAY over thinking this...You are like everyone else on this or any other forum, you're a recreational shooter. You're not going to war, you're going to the range. Make what looks good to you and what you'll get the most pleasure from. For me that's the shortest most compact, while still reliable weapon I can get. That's what turns me on and makes me smile. Add a suppressor and I'm giddy. For others it's different. Make yourself happy...

 

[RSR]

And since part of my concern/interest in microgalil is in regards to bullet performance, here's 223 out of 14.5 inch barrel for all Federal loadings w/ a few different barriers present as well:
http://le.atk.com/downloads/catalogs/223RifleDataBook_vol-1.pdf

Federal 223 out of 16 inch and 308 out of 20 inch:
http://le.atk.com/downloads/catalogs/223RifleDataBook.pdf

I'm really impressed w/ the ballistic gelatin performance of the 64 gr soft point. The 77gr MatchKing and the 55gr Barnes Triple X did not perform as well as their hype led me to believe they would...
Through glass and steel, the federal tactical bonded soft point line really outperformed, but in all other scenarios they leaned towards overpenetration...

And then here is a very interesting study on barrel length noise, pressures, velocity, etc: http://sadefensejournal.com/wp/?p=1093

"To satisfy the curiosity of the authors about the effects of barrel length in the 5.56×45 NATO weapons, an experiment was crafted to measure actual bore pressure in the barrel at the moment of projectile exit, velocity, and sound pressure level with a barrel length varying between 24 and 5 inches. This has practicality on multiple levels.

When considering sound suppression of this cartridge, a suppressor has to be designed to handle the pressure of the gases presented at the instant of bullet exit, and higher uncorking pressures necessitate a larger suppressor to handle the gas load presented. In separate studies, the authors have noted that the pressure gradient is not uniform throughout the entrance chamber of a suppressor due to the forward motion of the gases. This indicates that a larger volume entrance chamber needs to rely on increased length rather than diameter. With higher uncorking pressures, there is also increased erosion of the suppressor’s blast baffle from the superheated, partially burned powder particles functioning like a plasma torch. Further, increasing diameter necessitates heavier walls to keep from increasing hoop stress (and decreasing safety factor) with the additional result of a physically heavier suppressor. To attempt to preserve sound reduction performance, a suppressor will need to be longer (and heavier) with a shorter barrel, negating most of the compactness gained by barrel shortening.

Secondly, with shorter barrels, tuning of the gas port for weapon cycling becomes far more critical. Adding a suppressor, which does slightly increase bore pressure, will result in more erratic and forceful cycling of the weapon leading to earlier weapon failure. It is necessary to remember that the 5.56×45 NATO cartridge was designed specifically for a 20-inch barrel on a gas operated weapon with 7 inches of dwell time after the gas port. The 14.5-inch M4 barrel retains the 7 inch dwell length after the gas port.

Lastly, decreased velocity with barrels much shorter than 14.5 inches have a number of unwanted effects. Lowered linear velocity produces lower rotational velocity, which will result in diminished gyroscopic stability of the bullet. It will also result in significantly decreased projectile kinetic energy, decreased ability to generate a sig nificant would channel, and will reach a point of diminishing returns where lethality of the projectile definitely comes into question.

Thus, it is the opinion of the authors that barrel lengths less than 14.5” in this caliber introduce effectiveness issues that may be detrimental to the user."

And they also compare the level of blast to SBR 5.56s (they go down to 5") to a flash-bang equivalent...

 

[RSR]

What I think is you are WAY over thinking this...You are like everyone else on this or any other forum, you're a recreational shooter. You're not going to war, you're going to the range. Make what looks good to you and what you'll get the most pleasure from. For me that's the shortest most compact, while still reliable weapon I can get. That's what turns me on and makes me smile. Add a suppressor and I'm giddy. For others it's different. Make yourself happy...

I agree with that, but again, back to the tool with a definite purpose and maximum utility point. For me the purpose of my firearms is foremost self defense (I hope I never have a need) and secondly recreation. Galils are sexy rifles, but it's their reliability and caliber combo that ultimately sold me on my first rifle. I like them and want to add to the stable, but am unsure as to which route to take on the "short" option -- specifically looking for feedback between the SAR and MAR.

Sounds like you have Micro Galil? Or is it an SAR? And how does it compare suppressed and unsuppressed to shooting/handling the Galil AR? For instance, I've seen some folks say they won't shoot their SBRs 223 in indoor ranges b/c it makes them feel like they're going to vomit.

Trying to separate the hearsay from all SBRs to the reality of these two platforms.

Thanks!

 

[Dee]

I always thought the MAR's purpose was crowd control

 

[Mr Folgers]

I can see what OP means when he mentions 'purpose' of the MAR.

Way I see it, why create a Micro Galil when you can just update and shorten the SAR?
The even bigger question is what will happen to Micro Galil production when the ACE 21 entering production? Aren't they relatively the same?

 

[RSR]

Thanks for humoring me all. I realize I'm overthinking it, but it's what I do...

Mr. Folgers -- the only major design difference best as I can tell other than barrel and piston length is the internal hinge mechanism, which shortens by an inch or so.

From a compactness standpoint, the Keltec Sub2000k with pistol grip mag is just an inch or two longer w/ a 16" barrel due to a further to the rear action position. It's a matter of action and barrel placement... Even the utility-first Russians recognize the benefits of further to the rear action w/ their PP2000 (22.9" open) and SR-2 Veresk (23.7" open) -- both effective to 100 meters and shooting both armor piercing and standard ball ammo:
http://world.guns.ru/smg/rus/cp-2-ling-e.html
http://world.guns.ru/smg/rus/pp-2000-e.html

Looking at bullpups with actions even further to the rear (Vs the ~27.3" of the 7" barrel MAR or the 27.8" of the 8" barrrel MAR),
the full length Tavor with 18" barrel runs 28.5".

The compact Tavor w/ 15" barrel runs 25.2".

With new production Tavor's being shorter, running $1,600 to $1,800 ($100 or $200 more than just the price for parts of the MAR -- and completely negated when considering SBR stamp and costs associated w/ acquiring and running a suppressor), having none of the short barrel issues in regards to terminal ballistics performance as does the MAR, and also being an ambidextrous platform, I find myself wondering if the MAR is an outdated platform when compactness is key -- in fact whether all compact platforms w/ magazine in front of grips are outdated with the proven effectiveness of these modern bullpups and the inherent ballistic advantages of running a 223/5.56 round through a longer barrel.

The only advantages I see remaining to the MAR are battery of arms and compactness of platform when stock is folded -- neither of which a bullpup can replicate...

To be clear -- for standard carbines and rifles, I do think there is a significant advantage in operator speed (as well as safety) to the mag and action in front of users head instead of behind/beside.

But when compactness is key, I find myself wondering...
Is this fair? Correct? Wrong?

 

[lcastillo]

RSR,

I admire your research on your weapons selection choice. Also thanks for sharing. The Micro Galil is a "Straight up" PDW when you try to classify it.

If you look it at it this way the Micro Galil was ahead of its time. When this platform was created the concept of PDW weapons was in its infancy. Basically the Micro Galil was a bridge between pistol and rifle. The pistol calibers and pistol barrel lengths do not make a very good stand off weapon when confronted with opponents with rifles. On the flip side full side battle rifles are not as handy as the pistol in confined areas. So the creation of the PDW brought the compactness of handguns together with the high power rifle ammunition. Of course since the Micro Galil was created there have been many more advancements in PDW weapons since then.

Many security operators around the world depend an stake their lives by their micro/compact rifles for vehicle use. I saw this first hand in Honduras in 2007 while travelling with a VIP in the valley of Comayagua. In the vehicle I rode in the security team carried 2 Colt Model 635 9MM SMG's. I was allowed a chance to handle one (pictured) and the compactness of the 10.5" barreled rifle was quite amazing. I could see why it was a obvious choice for the job.

Last but not least I leave you with Clive Owen finding good use of a Micro Galil out of a car window I hope this helps. Lou

 

[RSR]

I always thought the MAR's purpose was crowd control

The more I'm learning about SBRs, the more that makes sense...

 

[Ruddiger]

Don't forget the South African R6 and Micro Galil Model B with 11" barrels for comparison.

 

[RSR]

Thank you. That does make sense from a timeline of development perspective I suppose. I guess the MAR doesn't make complete sense to me, and I feel like I'm overlooking something...

I've been looking into the Keltec Sub2ks for awhile now. While I don't love the polymer, pistol rounds out of a carbine length barrel look formidable.
Pistol rounds are designed to fragment/expand/perform at lower velocities (meaning extended range with desired terminal performance -- not velocity dependent like 223 rifle rounds), yet newer polymer tip and pre-scored hollow points open consistently at very high velocities as well. The Sub2k keeps 115gr standard ball at 357 magnum equivalent speeds/energy to 50 yards and at 200 yards it's still performing the same as a 380 does at the muzzle. The Sub2k can run +P and +P+ rounds -- lighter loadings in the 90 gr range should push nearly 2000 fps vs the MAR's 2300.

Over at Ballistics by the inch, they show the 90gr Corbon at 1751 fps out of the Sub2k, which is 613 ft lbs of energy versus the 55gr FMJ 223 at 8" MAR's barrel advertised at 2329 fps, which is 662 ft lbs of energy. If the 2329 IMI advertised velocity is in fact for 62 gr 223, then its 747 ft lbs energy. The 7" MAR builds will perform less, but the Sub2k has 93% of 55gr 223 or 82% of 62gr 223's energy out of the 8" MAR barrel, with very few of the previously discussed SBR deficits.
http://ballisticsbytheinch.com/9luger.html

Unless I've missed something, I think I'm convincing myself, haha.

Please do let me know if I'm missing something, or if it's just one of those "in historical context" great weapons...

Thanks!

EDIT: Should add that both that Colt and Keltec are blowback-actions firing from a closed bolt; very similar internals. With the pistol grip magazine feed, the Keltec just has a longer barrel, which also keeps it non-NFA. Oh, and length to illustrate action/barrel feed location's importance, the Colt 635 is 28.9" extended and 25.6" collapsed. The Keltec is 29.5" open and with an equivalent 10.5" barrel would drop 5.6", for a length of 23.9 -- KelTec opened would be 1.7" shorter than Colt fully collapsed and 5" shorter than Colt fully extended... And w/ glock extended 33 round mags, you get +1 round with the KelTec over the Colt as well. Obviously, the Keltec isn't FA, but unless there are zombie hordes, I personally cannot think of any remotely likely defensive situation where I'd need it (so the whole full auto versus semi is a non-issue for me).
Also the standard UZI has a barrel length of 10.2" and an open stock length of 25.6", closed stock length of 18.5" -- w/ same barrel length, Keltec would be equivalently a little shorter due to its stock incorporating the bolt/buffer tube...

 

[RSR]

Don't forget the South African R6 and Micro Galil Model B with 11" barrels for comparison.

Yes, that article I referenced (us M855 ball) found that between 9 & 10" was where the velocity hit 2500 fps, and between 14 & 15" was where it hit 2700 fps. 2900 fps was hit between 18" an 19", w/ 20" achieving a maximum velocity of 2,979 fps. From a velocity standpoint, a minimum barrel length that makes sense is 9.5" with 14.5" having much greater utility. So those barrel longer MAR barrel lengths and the 13" SAR make A LOT more sense than the 7" MAR.

Also, they note that the uncorking pressures of a 7" barrel are 50" higher than a 10.5" barrel. And then uncorking pressures of that 10.5" barrel are 50% higher than those of a 14.5" barrel. These percentages also reflecting suppressor chamber pressures -- you'd need a suppressor that was sufficiently reinforced and of extended length to be effective on the shorter barrel weapons, ultimately defeating a lot of the benefits of the shorter barrel...

For instance in 9mm pistol rounds, velocity begins to decrease at 17" of barrel length, which means bore pressures/uncorking pressures, flash, and noise have likely decreased to 1/3rd of what they'd be out of an actual pistol. Same goes for 7" versus 20" 223 barrel... You can decrease pressures further with longer barrels but velocity suffers. 20" is ideal for 223 and and 16" for 9mm. And just fwiw, some folks have compared shooting the noise when shooting the Keltec 16" barrel (1.5" longer weapon length than the MAR) to be equivalent to what they hear when shooting a 22lr rifle. IMHO, that's impressive and makes a further sell for a pistol carbine's utility in a home defense or inside automotive self defense use over any SBR... Obviously, military needs are different than domestic, but those were the conclusions I'm drawing as I've researched this.

 

[RSR]

Should add, I decided to do an SAR build here. Now debating between a 16" US barrel and the new IMI 13" barrel that came with the killer kit deal I scored on gunbroker. I think the new barrel seals it, but I like to consider my options, haha.

 

[RSR]

Related to the weapon roles, etc, discussion.

An interesting video released last week or so: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wXFf34bB34

 

[riderboy]

Why Lou, you handsome devil you!

 

[RM308]

Wow, I just re-read the entire thread. Lots of lengths, muzzle velocities, discussions about penetration, percentages, ammo information, hollow points and on and on.

That is just too much for me. When I'm worried that I "did not kill them enough" I just go ahead and shoot them again. Bullets are cheap.

YMMV
RM308

 

[RSR]

Wow, I just re-read the entire thread. Lots of lengths, muzzle velocities, discussions about penetration, percentages, ammo information, hollow points and on and on.

That is just too much for me. When I'm worried that I "did not kill them enough" I just go ahead and shoot them again. Bullets are cheap.

YMMV
RM308

Ha. I've never really explored SBRs before and so figured I would document here as I was debating between a micro-galil and SAR build, or something else. I'm still at a stage in firearms ownership where utility comes before collection. YMMV.

I agree bullets are cheap, but typically good weapons are expensive. So I like to get it "right" for my needs...

Quickly, what I learned is that both 5.56 and 9mm rounds weigh about the same, with 223 rounds taking up slightly more space due to powder weighing less than lead. However 9mm is designed for pistols so works better out of SBRs from a achieving its full potential and minimized muzzle blast/flash. Why this matters is that SBRs in 5.56 in sub 10-12" are equivalent to a flash bang going off indoors. And 5.56 also losesmuch of its distance effectiveness at range too. Where 5.56 beats 9mm is that nearly all commercially available rounds will defeat soft armor. For military, they can use armor piercing pistol rounds so it matters less...

And from the figures above, the main thing that struck me was the overall weapon length rather than just looking barrel length and then considering how that affected things both ballistically and from a shooter's experience/followup speed/etc... I ultimately decided to run the Keltec Glock Sub2000 as my home defense rig from this discussion, and my wife is way more comfortable shooting that than a shotgun. Again, YMMV.

Back to facts: a 9mm round leaves a .35 caliber hole, and at higher velocities out of longer barrels, defensive loads like hollowpoints should more consistently expand/fragment/shed jackets for wounding trama than at lower velocities. And energy is also velocity squared, so any velocity gains are outsized in that respect -- why the 5.56 almost always has more energy; the question of 5.56 barrel lengths is home much propellant energy do you want waste in blast/flash rather than propelling down a longer barrel.

The video I just shared pleasantly surprised me at the 9mm's potential -- more than I had imagined, and I had a pretty good opinion anyways. (If you're really interested in pistol rounds, check out the psuedo science involved in the US Military's selection of 45 ACP over 9mm back in the early 1900s -- recently read this in "The Gun" book about the AK47's adoption, history, legacy, etc).

One last thing I wanted to share, is that I've done some more research and while I'm definitely doing a SAR build in the next few years (3rd on my list currently -- still haven't decided on 16" or 13" barrel -- if I have the cash and patience probably 13", maybe split at 14.5", who knows!), the 7.62x39 definitely seems to make the most sense in that regard. High level is 5.56 rounds were designed for 20" M16 barrels. AK47/47M (7.62x39) were designed for 16" barrels (and so for that matter was 5.45x39; however, it's ammo -- especially 7n6 -- relied on bullet design, not velocity, to incapacitate -- specifically to tumble; now with 7n6 no longer imported, 5.45x39 ammo is for all intents a reduced velocity 5.56 round, which isn't ideal...). Now granted, modern powders are helping 5.56 to perform better out of shorter barrels, but performance and reliability issues do remain when running shorter barrels, especially in AR15 platforms.

In regards to 7.62x39 (a lot of what is said here reflects the arguments in favor of 300BLK in ARs for CQB and SBR applications):

http://demigodllc.com/articles/7.62x39-improving-the-military-standard/?p=3

Here are potential untapped strengths of the 7.62x39. First, because of the relatively small powder volume versus bore size, relatively little performance is lost as barrel length is reduced. This makes the 7.62x39 a perfect candidate for very short carbines. For example, a load that replicates M43 using Accurate #1680 powder will lose only about 70 fps when barrel length is reduced from 16 inches to 14 inches. Going down to a 12-inch barrel only loses another 83 fps, while a 10.5 inch barrel will still fire the 123-grain bullet at just over 2100 fps. The 7.62x39 is an ideal cartridge for a short-barreled rifle, provided a bullet that produces good terminal ballistics is used.
The second untapped strength of 7.62x39 is the use of heavier bullets. Although the vast majority of loads use a 120 to 125-grain bullet, a 150-grain bullet - the mainstay of .308 Winchester loads - can be fired at 2100 to 2200 fps from a 16-inch barrel. Going further, a 175 to 180-grain bullet can be fired at 1900 to 2000 fps. As bullet mass is increased, the ability for impressive penetration and terminal effects improves. These heavy bullets will lose even less velocity as barrel length is reduced. For example, a 180 grain load may lose only 100 fps as the barrel length is reduced from 16 to 12 inches.
Another untapped application of 7.62x39 is use to shoot medium and heavy bullets at subsonic velocity for silenced use. The best US equivalent of this application is SSK Industries' 300 Whisper, also The Barnes TSX-BT bullet, made entirely of copper, has a solid shank and hollow-point. It offers near ideal terminal ballistics for hunting. known by the non-proprietary near-identical equivalent .300 Fireball. Both of these are essentially shortened .223 Remington cases, necked up to .30 caliber. Slow pistol powders such as Hodgdon's H110 are typically used for these subsonic rifle loads. It is desirable to have limited case capacity: when there's just a little powder rattling around in a big case, ignition consistency suffers. Instead of all the work required for a wildcat like 300 Whisper or .300 Fireball, the regular 7.62x39 case can be used. It has a little more case capacity, but subsonic loads with fill ratios as high as 75% are certainly possible. With a 10-inch barrel and a short sound suppressor, a semi-automatic rifle in 7.62x39 could be more compact than a regular 16-inch AK-47 but able to quietly thump 180 to 220 grain projectiles into anything within about 125 yards.
The accuracy of 7.62x39 has been criticized. The primary reason is that neither the SKS nor the AK-47 rifles were designed for accuracy; they were designed for cheap manufacture, simplicity, and reliability. Further, mil-spec 7.62x39 is typically has two to three MOA accuracy. With a good bolt action from CZ or another maker, MOA or sub-MOA results should be possible from hand-loads or Lapua factory ammunition.
The 7.62x39 cartridge's reputation is in some sense held hostage by the mil-spec ammunition that has flooded the market for years. Its terminal effects can be dramatically improved today by simply choosing a better bullet, such as the Barnes TSX-BT or other JHP. Although having a limited powder capacity compared to its bore size is usually thought of as a problem, 7.62x39 is a good choice for SBRs and dedicated suppressed carbines. With modern technology applied to the 7.62x39 as it has been to other cartridges, its capabilities and those of the AK platform can be transformed.

 

[hagar]

Not too familiar with the micro, but I did spend a day shooting a full auto R6 one year when I went back to South Africa for a vacation somewhere around 1992. My friend was a fairly high ranked SAP police officer, and had access to some very impressive "toys". He would wear it over his shoulder with a jacket over it, the most awesome ccw piece ever in my opinion. We shot a whole crate (3000) rounds out of it with not a single malfunction. Also blew up some P4, Semtex and a russian mine, and played with Cordex (detcord you guys call it). He could see I loved this R6, and told me that he could make one "disappear" for me if I could leave the country with it. Was very tempting, but if I got caught, I probably would have been be due for release right around now..:boohoo

My thoughts on this, I'd have one if I could, but in semi auto there are better options. Kind of like the Uzi, I also shot a full auto one in the SADF, but as a semi I consider them pretty useless, nice toy but not very practical.

 

[sneakers1971]

Damn RSR, put the coffee down and step away.....slowly ! LOL

In concept the the MAR was built following the Soviet AKS74u and before that the Colt Commando. A small, light and maneuverable weapon bridging the gap between subgun and frontline rifle. The adopters for these weapons have always been Special Forces and rear echelon troops...tankers, artiliry etc.
Outside of the military the police use them for CQB......better than a pistol, more punch than a subgun but smaller than an AR.

The 5.56 makes a lousy SBR when using military ball ammo, the 5.56 is ment to fragment at velocitys over 2700 fps. Now that doesn't mean it's useless below that just not as good, still accurate to 300 yds.+ just no knockdown power or permanent wound cavity. When used with modern defensive ammo like the police are allowed to use then that changes, now you have something that will kill/wound un-armored people to 200 yds. Reliably and still punch through soft body armor within 100 yds.
A subgun can't do what a rifle round does without special ammo, almost all soft body armor is good for multiple 9mm or more without a plate. Now here is the sticker....over penetration, you wouldn't want to shoot a 5.56 SBR in an apartment building or you will have more casualties than you need so the mission will dictate what you use subgun/SBR or "just run what ya'brung!"
The 5.56 is nice because you can almost custom load/buy any bullet to suit your needs. Oh and yes a 5.56 SBR will make you bleed from the ears if shot inside a hallway/house, I have a 10" 5.56 Krink that I use muffs and plugs with Tula ammo.

The 7.62x39 is the king of SBR's hands down! I don't think anyone will ever top it...it was designed from the beginning to be a military cartridge, the tapered case rules. It doesn't suffer from low velocitys like 5.45 and the 5.56, reliable extraction because of the tapered case, 30 cal. Bullet will leave a mark and defeate barriers .....but it's not a long range winner, 300 yds and it's out of steam, and regardless what other people say it's more than accurate enough for Gov. work.
The 300 blk out/whisper is a US. attempt at duplicating 7.62x39.....still has a straight case...I guess it's ok if you like AR's but more important is that it can be suppressed .

SAR or MAR? Well if you follow what you outlined just stick with the AR, plenty of velocity to do the job, still a folding stock so it's transportable . The SAR is a cool variant but 3" isn't worth a tax stamp to me. If your going tax stamp make it worth your while and go small like all the other cool kids MAR.

Realisticly paper targets don't know the difference, and if you had to use it defensively then I guarantee they won't stand in front of you and if they do you may just set them on fire when you shoot!

 

[lcastillo]

Why Lou, you handsome devil you!

Awww shucks Riderboy.