AR-15

Has anyone ever had any problems with the Bushmaster mags? The Bushmaster rifles are one of the best AR's, but how about the mags?

Originally posted by runetang
Infoholic & others..

For someone who doesnt have a whole lot to spend and is really fond of the ak-47 for the look and make of the weapon, but is new to shooting guns and is fairly lightweight himself so doesnt want too much recoil, would an AK-47 made to fire .223 NATO rounds (very common, these run for $350-750 in price depending on quality) be a decent choice? Or should I go wih the 7.62x larger ammo like the original AK's use if im going to go for an AK?

Would getting a .223 AK be gimping it for me or just giving me less recoil?

I like the ones that have the black grip and black removable back piece that goes to your shoulder .. pretty sweet.

IMO... I'm not sure if the ballistics capability of the .223 round would be compromised by using it in the .223 version AK, since the barreling is what would be changed in the gun. However, the functionality of the rifle may be adversely effected since the AR is specifically designed to work with the .223 gas pressures (action).

IMO... If an AK is on your list of options, I would stick with the 7.62 x 39mm version, since the idea you are using is of "savings" since the 7.62 is considerably cheaper. The 7.62 doesn't have much a different kick than the .223... but then again, I'm not sure what the difference is between you and I. I, myself, am 6' and 200lbs.

Either route you take, I'm willing to bet you'll get the bang for your buck regardless of which rifle you choose. The AR is an awesome gun, and as well the AK is highly regarded.


Happy shooting!

[edit on 11/25/2006 by Infoholic]

Originally posted by Zhenyghi
One of the hallmarks of the .223 is its accuracy and flat trajectory. If you got a .223 in an AK-type weapon, you won't get the best out of the round as you would in an AR-type weapon. I know AR's are more pricey. A cheaper alternative (more accurate than the AKs, but not as much as the ARs) would be the Ruger Mini-14.

The recoil is not that great in either the .223 or 7.62x39, even less so with the action taking some of the recoil to cycle the next round.

My opinion: if you want a .223, get an AR-type, or a Mini-14; if you want the Soviet round, get the AK-type.

FYI--

As I said, I have a BWK-92--an AK in .223. I have no problem with the accuracy I get from it, and it is comparable to the AR in that respect. Understand that a LOT of accuracy with any firearm of any calibre has more to do with the shooter than the weapon. Off a bench with a Millett Red Dot--which is a non magnifying optical instinct sight--my BWK will shoot a ragged hole at 300yds. On any firearm I have, sighting is always Point-of-Aim, and not ball on a stick (iron sights). This lends loads to accuracy. I cannot say that a Mini-14 is comparable in accuracy with either the AR or the AK, and I do have a lot of experience with all 3. Both the AR and the AK will outshoot a Mini-14. Recoil on all 3 is nearly nil, as it is for about any gas-operated automatic in .223.

Accuracy, and so shooting accuratley, is dependant on a number of factors regards the shooter. Some of those are Breathing, Touch-point, Hold, squeeze, and body position. That being said, here is a tip for those with ARs and Iron sights.
For the max accuracy, always make sure the rifle butt is in the "pit" of your shoulder. My own Touch-point with the M-16 was the operating rod, (bolt operating rod), which locks into the receiver. The left lobe of that layed on my face below my cheek-bone and in contact with the right side of my nose. It's comfortable, and there is so little recoil from the AR, that there is no risk of hurting yourself. What this did fo me was insure that my right eye --the master--was in exactly the same place relative to the sights for every shot. On the BWK, the Touch-point is on the stock, and marked with a piece of medical adhesive tape so I can feel it. Just a little info to help you if you need it. It's just me, but I view shooting as both a sport and an Art form.

Now, on calibre and ammo. As I have said, the 7.62 Russian calibres are superior. Having said that, the next important thing, and I alluded to it before for Full-Auto, is a matter of availability. Though some is loaded in the US, you need to understand that the 7.62 x 39 and x 54 loaded by US manufacturers is UNDRLOADED fromthe Russiian and Chinese spec. The idea is pretty simple--"assumed liability', and the reason for it is that there are thousands of AKs and SKSs loose that are in all kinds of condition ranging from excellant to darnd near disfunctional. This is the same thing that US manufacturers did with the 7mm and 8mm Mauser after they became available in quantity to the US public. It is that they underloaded rounds in the US by 10 grains, in hope of preventing bad accidents for idiots with guns in poor condition. If you wanted full loads,they were available only from Norma, or as German Surplus. The reason I am saying this is 2-fold. Fully loaded FP and HP Military 7.62 x 39 is rapidly becoming unavailabe in the US--meaning that if you have an AK in that calibre, you had best stock up while you still can, or get some American Brass and a reloader. Ummm-- we do definately have a right to "keep and bear arms"--foreign and otherwise. What we do not necessarily have a right to is the ammo. The current excuse is the numerous wars going on in whach AKs are involved. But, as my Grandpa used to say, "a man has 2 reasons for doing anything--a good one, and a REAL one." The same holds true of Governments. Do yourself a favor with new purchases, and stick with NATO calibres--always available here from a number of sources. Draw your own conclusions with this info.

Hope this helps somebody.

Originally posted by Full_Auto77
Has anyone ever had any problems with the Bushmaster mags? The Bushmaster rifles are one of the best AR's, but how about the mags?

I have a stock 30rnd Bushmaster magazine and an aftermarket 30rnd magazine (can't remember the brand name without looking)... but neither one has cause me grief. I believe the specs on the spring are about the same regardless of manufacturer, so feeding problems should be nil. I'm not a rocket scientist, but I don't think the specs on the magazine itself change either... it's got specific tolerances for fitting in the receiver. Remember, you get what you pay for, so the cheap guy selling them on a "save here" website might not always be the best option.

Has anyone ever had any problems with the Bushmaster mags? The Bushmaster rifles are one of the best AR's, but how about the mags?

Its because on all the games and movies thay use AKs and not AR-15s.

I love the m16. Shoot someone in the collarbone and it bounces around inside real nice before exiting your kneecap. Bigger is not always better. This effect is intended to wound an enemy combatant requireing the removal of more personnel from the battlefield, it usually take 2 or 3 other men to carry off one wounded. That is one reason the Military switched to it.

reply to post by Full_Auto77


Bushmaster isn't exactly 'top tier', but either way no one should swear loyalty to any brand.
Each company has their share of strengths & weaknesses and its the consumers responsibility to understand what they are and what it means in respect to their needs.

not that your swearing loyalty to any brand, but it's important to point that out given the numerous and dependable options a consumer has in the AR market.

With that said, there are ton's of reliable magazines from multitudes of companies just like them, bushmasters should do just fine. But like everything else, they can and will eventually fail you or someone else in the long run. So if you plan to buy some magazines, be sure to buy backup.

OP, I've got a Bushmaster too. The mags? Hell, I dunno. The 20 rnd mag that came with it was busted (gun show purchase) I've bought 4 "mil-spec" aluminum mags, 3 Magpul polymer mags and something called an "immortal magazine" that has a titanium spring and I'm not supposed to put more than 28 rounds in.

Do what the Army does. Consider your mags to be consumable items and throw them away the first time you confirm a problem with them.

Personally, I really like the Magpul P-Mags.

I have a old colt ar15 that i got back in 1974. over the years i have put around 5000 rounds through it with out any problem other then with some defective .223 ammo that the bullets would push back into the case when they chambered.
Fixed those rounds by running them through a seating die and crimping the casing hard in the bullets.
How the rounds made it out of the factory ?????

Over the years i have improved the old colt with more modern after market part and also have a CAR15 upper.

Originally posted by ANNED
I have a old colt ar15 that i got back in 1974. over the years i have put around 5000 rounds through it with out any problem other then with some defective .223 ammo that the bullets would push back into the case when they chambered.
Fixed those rounds by running them through a seating die and crimping the casing hard in the bullets.
How the rounds made it out of the factory ?????

Over the years i have improved the old colt with more modern after market part and also have a CAR15 upper.

OOOOHHH , 1974 Colt AR, that would be worth some money to the right collectors......

As far as the MAGs for Bushmaster, I've used the standard bushmaster, a Brownells, and Magpuls...no problems with any. (Although some of the Magpuls REALLY have to be slapped home in the mag well on some bushmasters....and I've also heard the lips can wear out fast on Magpuls, with the tiny particles of the plastic stuff they are made of getting in the receivers ). I've also heard good things about HKs but they are pricey.

I've shot an AR and it's a good gun, no question there. However it is rather complicated, as opposed to a good ole' AK, and thus much more involved as far as maintenance goes. That for most people is a turn off, especially in the field (M16 and M4).

reply to post by Ed Littlefox

Did you miss your M14?

Its really a matter of personal choice, to each his own. However the AR 15/M 16's are good guns as long as they are cleaned regularly and have limited contact with dirt and mud. Personally for me I chose a mini 14 for my .223 weapon due to price, to me its just as accurate as an AR and I got mine in stainless synthetic for $500 several years ago and I consistently hit coyotes at 250 meters.

My weapon of choice for my assault rifle is a Sig 716 in 7.62x51 NATO. I'm not knocking the 5.56 rounds but you can't beat the range and energy of the .308 round albeit a more expensive round to shoot than the 5.56. However with my 716 I can hit yotes out past 600 meters, if I want to hit a target past 600 meters then I grab the Remington 700 in. 300 winmag built to L96 specs.

During my first deployment to Afghan we were constantly having issues with jamming and feeds on the M4's and M16A3's. Being that we had access to a wide variety of armament, I became fond of the FAL and H&K G3's and tended to stay away from the AR platforms.

I guess bottom line in MO is that the AR is a good platform if that is what floats your boat, just keep it cleaned and well maintained and its a good shooting small caliber gun.

Originally posted by Full_Auto77
How about mags? What are the best to use?


I guess as long as you keep the barrel and chamber clean, you wont have a problem with the AR(I guess it also helps if you have a high quailty one to.)


So anyone know of good mags to use or ones to stay away from?

I use the Magpul P-Mags a lot. You can find them on sale around the net for under 10.00 a mag if you watch and they are lightweight and nearly indestructible. I put a little graphite on mine and they've worked perfect for me so far in my Frankenstein AR,

People always whine about how expensive AR type rifles are... if you invest 150 bucks into a few tools: armorer's wrench, punches, bench vise, receiver blocks, a cheap torque wrench... and maybe some cheap files you can spend about 600-750 bucks extra to build a performance rifle (assuming you know how to not get ripped off on parts). It's not hard. a monkey could assemble an AR type rifle after watching a few youtube videos. It's daunting to the neophyte, but pretty simple if you put in a little time to learn how the weapon system works.

It gets expensive when you get into fancy optics and vanity parts... but a damned good, reliable, and lightweight rifle can be made very cheaply.


The bonus of building your own, is that you completely understand the function of every part of your weapon... something that I feel is a prerequisite of gun ownership. Also, You can get a stripped lower for about 80 bucks (or less) with a background check... the rest can be purchased privately with no paperwork at your convenience if you can't afford a 1000 bucks at once, just acquire the parts as you can afford them and build as you go (kind of like a hot rod!).

I recommend getting a fully assembled lower with stock and then building the upper from parts for your first build. The lower is a bit tricky... especially if you've never worked with pins, punches, and detents before.

Cleaning an AR is not hard. Get Birchwood casey gun-scrubber and a good barrel brush. If you clean after every use, you should never have an issue... if you clean after every 300 rounds you still should be ok... provided you don't use old-ass corrosive primed ammo.

Be safe and have fun!