FSGuide said:

---

AR's from PSA

I have 2 AR15 and 1 AR10 from them.

The AR10 doesn't have a lot of rounds through it. Bought it, put glass on it and zeroed it. Took it to a different range once after that for some 200 yard shooting. Other than that it just lives in my safe. I thought I'd hunt with it more, but just after I bought it we lost our lease and I haven't been on another lease since then.

My first PSA AR15 on the other hand has seen a ton of use. Countless trips to the deer blind when I was guiding hunters on the MLD ranch because we had a ton of hogs. It was also my weapon of choice when we did our "doe days" at the end of every season. A lot of trips to the range for therapy back when I had some free time to myself. After a few trips to the range I did put a Gisselle SSA trigger in it. Noticeable difference from the factory trigger. And it's been on 4 helicopter hog hunts. I dot recall a single problem with it.

My 2nd AR15 from them I built from the ground up with all PSA parts. Put a red dot on it. Did a rattle can paint job on it and it's been in my safe since then. Never fired it. I did take it out of the safe and put a Gisselle trigger in it like I did with my well used AR.

---

People that crap on PSA are just trying to justify how much they've spent on their 3k "builds" Ive killed probably 400 pigs in the last 2 years with my PSA rig. Just added an adjustable gas block to help with the suppressor back pressure.

schmellba99 said:

---

Damn, guess we should have quit any development at the .30-30 then, huh?

---

Wouldn't say that. I said new rounds were superfluous, not irrelevant.

Innovation is great especially if it eventually leads to real progress. But widespread deployment and embracing of fractional improvements is not a plan for real progress.

DiskoTroop said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Damn, guess we should have quit any development at the .30-30 then, huh?

---

Wouldn't say that. I said new rounds were superfluous, not irrelevant.

Innovation is great especially if it eventually leads to real progress. But widespread deployment and embracing of fractional improvements is not a plan for real progress.

---

I get what you are saying, but at the same time I think you are disregarding most of the development of firearms historically by thinking that if an innovation isn't something massive then it's not worth it.

There really have only been a handful of major innovations throughout the history of firearm development going all the way back to when the first chinaman discovered an explosive black powder and tied it to an arrow. 99% of the advancement of firearms came about through fractional improvements. But those fractional improvements stack on one another to eventually lead to major changes.

And honestly, there isn't much you can't do with a .30-30 that you can do with any other chambering in 95% (or higher) of the hunting or shooting scenarios, which is why I made that comment. It's all damn near superfluous.

Baikal O/U Shotgun

Reputation: Ugly, heavy, Soviet-era aesthetic

Reality: Ugly, heavy tank of a work-horse that takes 1000 shells and a beating in stride. 30 years in and still my favorite dove gun.

schmellba99 said:

---

DiskoTroop said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Damn, guess we should have quit any development at the .30-30 then, huh?

---

Wouldn't say that. I said new rounds were superfluous, not irrelevant.

Innovation is great especially if it eventually leads to real progress. But widespread deployment and embracing of fractional improvements is not a plan for real progress.

---

I get what you are saying, but at the same time I think you are disregarding most of the development of firearms historically by thinking that if an innovation isn't something massive then it's not worth it.

There really have only been a handful of major innovations throughout the history of firearm development going all the way back to when the first chinaman discovered an explosive black powder and tied it to an arrow. 99% of the advancement of firearms came about through fractional improvements. But those fractional improvements stack on one another to eventually lead to major changes.

And honestly, there isn't much you can't do with a .30-30 that you can do with any other chambering in 95% (or higher) of the hunting or shooting scenarios, which is why I made that comment. It's all damn near superfluous.

---

I don't disagree. My intention here though was to the original question of over/under rated. Marginal increases and innovation can and absolutely do stack into something greater.

Metallic cartridges never would have come about without breach loaders like the Hall rifle driving the way.

theJonatron said:

---

Overrated: Springfield M1A

I bought a Socom and changed just about everything on the gun. I put an EBR stock, Sadlak mount, changed the gas system to make it suppressed, put a Vortex Razor HD, etc.

Extremely heavy, ergonomics aren't great, magazines can be tough to load in the gun, not an accurate gun (I can't get under 3" MOA), and it's a complicated gun to clean. If you do clean it, guess what? You'll need to rezero.

I ordered a bunch of rounds that the gun supposedly likes, so we will see. The factory barrel on these are not great, and I'm considering replacing do a match 18".

Does it look cool? Hell yes it does.
Do I get compliments? Absolutely,
Would I want to use this rifle for anything else than prone or sit down range or 100 yard hunting? No way Jose.

I could have bought a match AR10 for significantly less.

https://imgur.com/a/udUAVjr

---

I have no idea what Springfield was trying to accomplish with the SOCOM. I have the Scout Squad and love it. .308/7.62x51 was meant to be shot out of a 22 inch barrel. 18 inches is workable. 16 is pointless, unless you like giant muzzle flash and pissing off anyone standing within 5 yards of you when you shoot it. And a lot of the parts for the SOCOM are not interchangeable with the other models. Totally pointless gun that doesn't do anything the Scout can't while doing less than what the Scout can.

Have a PX4 in .40. Enjoy shooting it, but will keep carrying my P365 XMacro. PX4 stays in the truck as a backup.

Exactly.

BlueSmoke said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

BlueSmoke said:

---

BenderRodriguez said:

---

Referring back to the WHY again, if your local range goes to 100/200 max and your deer stand is 75 yards from the feeder, I agree with you completely that there is zero reason to use a modern whizbang cartridge over a .308.

Just depends on your why.

---

*Raises hand slowly....

---

I agree with both posters really. I think new cartridge development, barrel development, etc is totally badass. It's really cool what some of these guns can do and do consistently. I spend a lot of time listening to podcasts and reading about them. It's awesome. Accurately shooting 130gr. Ullets past 1000 yards consistently is definitely not overrated.

But for the vast majority of hunters, especially in Texas, the gains all of this new tech provides from a hunting application is non existent. So in that sense it's a bit overrated. There are plenty of good reasons to buy a new rifle with a new modern cartridge to hunt with. But killing better than your current rifle isn't one of them unless you are in the very tiny minority that shoots very long distances.

---

My .270 puts them in the dirt just fine.

---

Underrated

I may need to reconsider my position… I've seen the antithesis and I don't like it.

DiskoTroop said:

---

I may need to reconsider my position… I've seen the antithesis and I don't like it.

---

But....why?

schmellba99 said:

---

But....why?

---

I have this question as well.

Fellas, your guess is as good as mine... Flat nosed, soft point, rimmed cartridge? ... Yeah, cause that'll cycle well from a box mag.

Bear Creek Arsenal is widely regarded as a really low quality manufacturer.

And has even been busted for hiring illegals.

So this is on par with their reputation.

If we want to go back - underrated cartridges like the old .257 Roberts are near the top.

BlueSmoke said:

---

If we want to go back - underrated cartridges like the old .257 Roberts are near the top.

---

Yep, There are a handful of them that I can think of that just never seemed to get really mainstream:

.222 Remington
.250-3000 Savage
.257 Roberts
6.5x55 (at least here in the US)
.280 Remington
.284 Winchester
.264 Winchester Mag
.300 Savage
.41 Magnum
6mm Remington

Guess you could throw pretty much all of the Lazzeroni chamberings in as well.

Probably a couple of dozen others that could be on that list that I can't think of right now.

schmellba99 said:

---

BlueSmoke said:

---

If we want to go back - underrated cartridges like the old .257 Roberts are near the top.

---

Yep, There are a handful of them that I can think of that just never seemed to get really mainstream:

.222 Remington
.250-3000 Savage
.257 Roberts
6.5x55 (at least here in the US)
.280 Remington
.284 Winchester
.264 Winchester Mag
.300 Savage
.41 Magnum
6mm Remington

Guess you could throw pretty much all of the Lazzeroni chamberings in as well.

Probably a couple of dozen others that could be on that list that I can't think of right now.

---

25-06. Poor mans 6.5CM....

And I had a chance to get a .220 Swift. That is such a screaming round.

Those are some great performing cartridges on that list. I would argue that several of there were pretty mainstream at one time but have fallen off over the years.

BlueSmoke said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

BlueSmoke said:

---

If we want to go back - underrated cartridges like the old .257 Roberts are near the top.

---

Yep, There are a handful of them that I can think of that just never seemed to get really mainstream:

.222 Remington
.250-3000 Savage
.257 Roberts
6.5x55 (at least here in the US)
.280 Remington
.284 Winchester
.264 Winchester Mag
.300 Savage
.41 Magnum
6mm Remington

Guess you could throw pretty much all of the Lazzeroni chamberings in as well.

Probably a couple of dozen others that could be on that list that I can't think of right now.

---

25-06. Poor mans 6.5CM....

And I had a chance to get a .220 Swift. That is such a screaming round.

---

25-06 is my primary deer rifle. When you put the quarterbore where it needs to go, it's deadly. Great rifle, flat shooting, still hits hard enough for most game in North America. Maybe not moose or large bear… but many an elk fell to the .25-06.

BlueSmoke said:

---

If we want to go back - underrated cartridges like the old .257 Roberts are near the top.

---

In the last ten years we have killed 10-15 deer with a Riger No 1 in .257 Roberts using 110gr Accubonds. Factory loads.

It is a really funny gun though. It groups when it wants to and doesn't like a lot of different loads. But its nails with that one.

And I think I have three bullets left. Going to order 100gr TTSX from Hendershots at 3100fps. It will be a lightning bolt if it shoots it.

Has a Zeiss Conquest scope on it that I bought in about 2005 at a pawn shop in Houston.