About a year ago, I got myself a PSA16 which is pretty much like the M16A4, but without the metal rail system. It has rekindled my love for the M16 system, but is tempting me to buy a Harrington and Richardson M16A2 reproduction just so I can benefit from the battle proven iron sight/carrying handle setup. Anyways, this is what sparked this article.
The M16 has a special place in my heart. My military career revolved around two versions of the rifle. In bootcamp, I became familiar with the aging but rugged M16A2, becoming intimately familiar with its handling characteristics. In SOI and the fleet (Marine Corp infantry) I spent 99% of my time with an M16A4. The only difference between the A2 and A4, that I saw, was the A4 had a rail instead of a built-in carry handle that housed the rear sight. Other than that, there were no real functional differences.
About a year ago, I got myself a PSA16 which is pretty much like the M16A4, but without the metal rail system. It has rekindled my love for the M16 system, but is tempting me to buy a Harrington and Richardson M16A2 reproduction just so I can benefit from the battle proven iron sight/carrying handle setup. Anyways, this is what sparked this article. The M16A2 was the weapon I qualified with in Marine Boot Camp. It was rugged and easy to use. When I was in the Fleet, I mainly had an M16A4 which weighed as much as my Tavor7 after being all decked out with sight, light, laser system, sling, grip pod, and cleaning kit in the stock. Recently I bought the 20” PSA15 (Palmetto State Armory) with the old school sight system, handguards, and Mil-Spec everything. I wanted to take a few moments to look at the concept of the M16 platform (A1, A2, A3, A4) and why I even bothered going with this type of system over the venerable and much loved M4 style (16”) rifle.
The 5.56x45mm (5.56 NATO) and the 7.62x51mm (7.62 NATO) are both over half a century old, but are still popular. Both have qualities worthy of praise, but also have drawbacks that warrant critique. I have used both a good amount in various types of rifles, so I am going to compare the two based on my experience and certain considerations. Deciding on a caliber should not be as simple as what makes you look cooler.
ALICE is often labeled as old gear that is all but useless today. Perhaps ALICE is old and less convenient than the MOLLE system, but I have not found it to inhibit my ability to fight. Now throw on a plate carrier and a pouch for everything you think you need, and we have a problem. ALICE was not just created in a vacuum where people had no concept of the importance of comfort and speed reloads. In fact, the ALICE mag pouches were made to facilitate speed reloads in all climates and conditions without having to stare at the pouch.
I am not one for clinging to drills that are actually meant to be used as a test. I feel that it is much more reasonable and practical to conduct drills on skills that need to be rehearsed over and over again until they are second nature. Kneeling and presenting your rifle from the patrolling low ready is an important skill to develop. It is not as simple as taking a knee and aiming, but rather involves a few key steps that must be practiced often in combination. When done right, no matter the direction of the target, this technique will enable you to precisely engage in as little as 1 second. This requires speed, coordination, and good weapon handling skills. I personally use a 12lb rifle for this and every drill, so you don’t have an excuse.
The Tavor 7 may be pretty new to the American market, but the idea of getting a .308 rifle on/near the level of functionality as a 5.56 rifle has been around for decades. Many people who have used the 5.56 in combat, myself included, are not too impressed with some of its weaknesses. This leads to people looking for a rifle that gives them a good balance of controllability, reliability, capacity, ease of use, and the ability to accessorize. The Tavor 7 hit that fine balance for me, but it does need some help through aftermarket accessories in order to truly get it to the level of a 5.56 rifle. I have already covered/will cover these modifications and additions individually in separate articles, so I am not going to delve into nauseating detail here. Rather, I am going to focus on why and how these components optimize the performance of the Tavor 7.
One of the sexiest displays of tacticool is switching from your primary/carbine to your secondary/pistol with great speed. I know a lot of people find it to be a sexy maneuver, but it is actually a basic and necessary skill that requires a lot of practice. There are a few reasons why someone would switch from their rifle to their pistol. Much like conducting reloads, it will be because they HAVE TO or WANT TO. The HAVE TO scenario is the rifle no longer functions due to no ammunition or a stoppage, and the threat is still active. The WANT TO scenario is clearing a small space where a carbine/SMG is too big to maneuver around. Now let’s look into the fine science of this sexy maneuver.
In this article, I want to cover the subject of shooting fast enough to matter. I am sure that most people reading this article are only going to register the first part of the title, but my goal is to anecdotally and logically assert my position on what shooting fast enough to matter actually means. There are several parts of shooting that take up time, depending on how much you work on them. I want to dissect the parts and traits of shooting and analyze the merits of concentrating on them individually during training. Shooting fast doesn’t just mean working the trigger fast, despite what the industry tells you.
Within the last 19 years, companies have expanded and improved on our ability to fight at night, particularly in the white light realm. Many high-profile companies have made advances in lumen/candela output, runtime, durability, attachment options, etc. Then there are smaller companies like Olight that are small but making huge leaps in light capabilities. The Odin is their latest model that is designed for rifle mounting, and it is a shining example of what we can do technologically. With a length of 5 ¼”, various mounting and use options, magnetic recharge, and a 2,000 Lumen output at a price of $150 ($120 on sale), this light potentially gives other companies like Surefire a run for their money.
The PWS CQB 30 caught my attention after a good amount of deliberate research to resolve the issue my Tavor 7 stock compensator gave me. When I shot fast, it felt like all my teeth were getting tapped by a small hammer simultaneously. Of course, it was only noticeable after shooting the rifle with a good deal of speed, but that is my pace. I looked all over at blast forwarding devices and was not happy with what I was seeing. They would create a fireball but divert the blast away from me. In some cases, these blast forwarding devices actually increased the recoil. Then I found the CQB 30 and was quite impressed at what I found in reviews. I had to buy it (over $100), try it, and test it. This is my short-term review.
|
Do It RiteAlaska-Based Youtube Vlogger, Retired Marine, Firearm and Gear Tester. Archives
December 2023
Categories
All
|