If I were you, I wouldn't use the word 'Assault' when talking about a semi-auto rifle. It plays right into the hands of those that would take this type of rifle off the market and out of our hands.
I never grew to like the M-14 rifle, perhaps because the first time I jumped with one it broke at the small of the stock on landing. (It was jumped stock down, as the barrel wasn't supported like the M-1 Garand, which was jumped barrel down.) Nor do I think the M-14s made by Springfield for the civilian market are as good as those made for the military.
Actually, if I were buying a semi-auto rifle I would rather purchase an M-1 Garand in 30.06 caliber that was in good condition. There is also the ArmaLite AR-10 rifles in 308 caliber as well.
My choice in .308 is the HK 91 with both stocks. Mine is fitted with the HK sniper stock and the HK range finding sniper scope, just like the HK sniper model of the G-3 sniper rifle. I have the same rifle (Model 93) in 5.56 caliber as well. No sniper stock or HK scope on it though.
I don't think you can find these new now; however, one might find a used HK 91 on the market, or I think there is one look a like one made here in the USA.
Yeah, I miss my Garand. I sold it when I left Alaska. I like the 30-06 round okay, but I'm kinda leaning toward .308. Plus I really want something magazine fed. I've heard good things about the AR-10. But I also really like the operation of the M-1/M-14.
I wish they made a Ruger Mini-30 in .308 rather than 7.62x39!!! That would be my PERFECT answer dream-come-true!!
I guess I should add I'm kinda looking for something "carbine" size...maybe a little shorter than the old Garand was.
Yes, the semi-auto civilian model of the FN-FAL is a good choice as well. The only criticism I have noticed for this rifle was on the full auto assault rifle model, which when fired on full auto was uncontrollable. The M-14 shared this same fault, as do most all rifles in that caliber when fired on full auto.
Have you given any thought to acquiring an AK-47 or AR-15 rifle.carbine for CQC and a bolt action sniper rifle for 'other' situations? I would suspect that in your AO, there would be the need for a flat shooting rifle, that can reach out and 'touch' something or someone at a long distance. Also never sell the old 12 GA shotgun in pump or semi-auto short for CQC. The racking of the old Remington 870 usually strikes fear, in the hearts of 'evil doers.'
There are many flat shooting very accurate bolt action rifles on the market that fit that bill. Many police and military designed sniper rifles can be purchased and used by civilians. There are versions in 7.62, .300 Winchester Magnum and up to .50 Cal. I tend to favor the .300 Win. Mag. I'm sure that some of the military trained snipers can speak up on these types of rifles. There is even an Armalite AR-30 in .300 Win. Mag. :doh:
I don't think FA is a big factor, since it is for a civilian's use. As you point out most all FA rifles in 7.62 caliber, suck in FA mode.
Although as I recall there was a FA heavy barreled M-14 (With a different stock.) around at one point. I think the idea was to sort of make a replacement for the BAR in the Infantry Rifle Sqd. (IMO, this was a failed attempt, as the BAR was a better weapon in that role.) I used the BAR in combat in Korea. It was my favorite weapon there, next to the M-1 Garand. As a matter of fact, I think there is also a semi-auto version of the BAR sold on the civilian market in both 30.06 and 76.2. ;)
Yes the G-3 Battle rifle and the HK 91 do handle recoil a little better and your right, they both tend to put a crease in the brass when ejected. Many also complain about the short stocks on both the G-3/91. I also had the trigger worked over on my HK 91. It's more like the M-14 trigger now, which I did like, as it was like the M-1 Garand's trigger.
The other thing I liked about the HK91/G-3 was the HK clip on scope mount. I have both types the HK 91 has the military Zeiss Range finder variable sniper scope and the HK 93 has an Aimpoint Red Dot (Older version) mounted on the clip on. They both kept there 'zero' when taken off and put back on. (I also kept a Redfield wide view 3X9 mounted on a 3rd HK clip on mount for use on the HK 93.) I used the HK93 when I was leading the SWAT team, etc.
It is my understanding that finding a true HK91 or HK93 is difficult and expensive now. I thought they were both VERY good weapons for civilian usage. I preferred my HK-93 over the AR-15s, even though it was a bit heavier. (Note: At the time many of the currant M-4 type weapons and 'goodies' were not invented yet.)
When I did entries I used the HK collapsible stock and the regular fixed stock when on the security element or general use.
I agree with the scope mounts for both the M-1 Garand sniper riles and the M-14. The HK 91/G3 was high as well; however, one could use the 'iron' sights with the scope mounted.
I bought both these rifles when I was an active LEO. I fixed up the HK 91 for long range usage to supplement my snipers, etc. (Also since Carter was President at the time ... survival.)
The HK 93 was the rifle I carried on the SWAT team. I kept the Aimpoint mounted on it because for CQC, it worked better for me, than iron sights, especially at night or dark areas in a house.
The 3x9 Redfield scope was in my ready bag for quick switching for AO's and situations that called for better viewing and or better ID of the suspects, etc. My department covered King County, WA which is a large very diverse area, with contract cities, suburbs, rural areas heavily forested areas to large high mountains, etc. I found that a scoped rifle was better in some situations, where CQC wasn't a big factor.
I live about 4 hours South of you, West of Salem. There are lots of really great choices out there. I believe the shooter is more important than the rifle being used. It would be nice to see what he eventually decides on. I have been thinking of putting a scope on my AR 180. I took it off of the AR 10. Old habit of sighting over the barrel and not using the iron sights allows for a wider field of view. I have a halo sight, it seems pretty slick when I played with it. Great way of surveying the area while knowing what the rifle is targeted on. Sights/scopes generally seems to add to tunnel vision and can slow response time. I agree scopes are really beneficial under the right circumstance.
I probably need to play with some of the new stuff.
IMHO - This is a great weapon to own and the reliability, availability of parts and accessories and the fact that it is Made in the USA is why I have it! It is pretty darn accurate, especially for those dry Arizona long shots!!!
So I don't think can go wrong with a SpringField! I am with Cecil on this one!
FYI - the Springfield Scope mount (not the scout variant) is pretty darn solid. especially if you do the install correctly. I had Springfield do mine! Plus I have A.R.M.S. quick release rings (zero loss of accuracy) and they are medium height. I can still use the iron sights as well! Although field of view is a lot narrower. It is a solid setup and is damn near zero if not zeroed every time I fire it.
Matter of fact I have not had to adjust it but a click or two (at the most) the last 4 times I have been to the range from 100 - 400 meters. I do not have a range longer than 400M anywhere near me!
I also agree it is more about the shooter. My brother owns a SAKO in .308 that is tricked out and I regularly clean his clock. But then he never wore a uniform or had the privilege of learning from some scary accurate shooters!!!
But I am an amateur compared to most the folks here! I only shot competitively (long rifle) for the base team for 2 seasons!
Awsome responses guys! I knew I'd get good advice here.
I totally agree about the 12ga being the choice for most CQ stuff.
I guess I should clarify more about the need. What I want to find/figure out is a "carbine" sized semi-auto in .308 rather than .223. If they made the M1 or M14 in a carbine (like a ruger Mini-30 or SKS) that would be perfect. The AR-10 may fit this bill, if I can find a shorter barrel. I've got a .40SW (Browning HiPower), and will be getting a 12ga very soon, but I also want something carbine sized and magazine-fed that the wife can use...yet I still could use as a good "patrol" rifle for possible future (hazardous) desert search and rescue work along the Arizona Border, etc. I guess the .223 would be "okay" but prefer the whollop of the .308!
Thanks folks, in advance for the good advice!