Ok, I have been looking for a longer-range gun for plinking (clay pigeons at 200 yards, etc, but not much paper), and backup SHTF use, and have decided to go with some "black" rifle since I might not have the chance later on. It will be filling the same niche that would otherwise likely be filled by a bolt-action rifle, so I might shoot maybe 20-50 aimed shots, at most, per outing. I know neither of these are absolute beacons of reliability, so I won't argue that so much. However, with my shotgun being my primary weapon, my life isn't dependent on its utter reliability (not that reliability isn't important to me, though).
The K16 will cost about $650-$700, and the SU16 will cost about $550-$600, so about $100 difference. I am not really interested in getting a better AR. I've already let the scope of this purchase creep up, coming from $200 single-shots to $600 semi-auto rifles. I won't be able to spend the $1000+ for a truely better AR15. To go to a different brand in the same price range (well, $800-$900) would also mean I'd lose the bull barrel to gain reliability, which is kindof the opposite direction I want to go.
Here are the things I like about both of these options:
SU16CA:
1) Since it is designed as more of a backpacking rifle, it has many features that are direct advantages for me. Since most of my plans revolve around me potentially having to travel on foot, I REALLY like that the SU16 can fold up small, has the integral bipod (I know it isn't great, but it will work in a pinch), is very light weight for its type, and can hold ammo in the stock. The ability to keep it in a pack or duffle bag and easily carry it for extended lengths of time might mean the difference between taking it along and leaving it home or in the truck (in an emergency). Also, it might mean the difference between having it confiscated or walking by as if I have a backpack full of clothes.
2) Its reciprocating dust cover and gas piston design seem to do well for keeping it running smooth for longer. After reading dozens of reviews it sounds plenty reliable, at least for the number of rounds Ill probably shoot through it (Maybe, maybe 1000 a year, but very likely less). It also sounds like it should be a little easier to take down for a simple field cleaning.
And, the K16:
1) It seems the K16 is very very accurate, at least for the money. While the SU16 might do 1.5" groups, it sounds like the K16 should easily shoot subMOA with the same quality ammo. This isn't a HUGE deal for me since the SU16 is still accurate enough for what I'd want to do, and not to mention I don't expect to ever be in a position to shoot groups like this (the best rest I'd be using would be a cheap bipod or my elbow over the hood of my truck), but it is nice to know the bullet will always go where I put the crosshairs.
2) Well, it's an AR. It will always be the "infamous" AR, and will also be desirable for that reason. I'd imagine in 10 years if the feared bans come around, it will be worth quite a bit more than the SU16, just for being an AR. Not that I am planning on selling it later on, but just pointing out that with the SU16, I might later on still wish I had an AR, but never be able to get one.
There are other advantages to the AR, like parts and upgrades availibility, that don't really apply to me. I don't plan on adding more than a scope to whatever I get, so lots of accessories and upgrades and such don't mean much to me. Besides, if the bans come as soon as we are expecting, I wouldn't have time to get those things anyways.
So, while the SU16 does sound logistically better for me, there are still a few advantages to getting the K16. Which do you guys think?
I have no idea what kind of quality Olympic has. I just don't know enough about them to comment. Nevertheless, I would go with an AR over a proprietary design.
Me and my buddy had the pleasure of testing two of the Kel-Tecs prior to fielding them as a more affordable patrol rifle for our agency. Over the course of about 2 weeks we put them through ringer and literally beat the piss out of them. They functioned just fine without a single hiccup with either the cheap training ammunition or the good duty ammo. The bipods are a little flimsy and can be hard to get open when they are new but overall it isnt a bad rifle.
However it is not an AR. An AR is a great weapon that so much can be done with. The after market parts will still be available after any ban if one is put into place just like they were last time but probably at a little higher cost. That allows you to upgrade it when you get the chance and to say you won't is just fooling yourself. You will find something really cool and just have to have it. Hell thats part of the fun of an AR is tricking it out.
I have used and own several models and havent really found any that functioned any different than the others. They are all based off of the same design. And as for the ban they were banned the last time and it only took a couple of months for the gun industry to find a way around that. All they did was take off the bayonet lugs and flash suppressors and charge an extra 400 bucks for the same gun. I would guess and hope it will be the same way this time.
Thats my opinion take it for what its worth. Good luck with either one you decide to buy.
