The world's best assult rifle?

Man Target at 200 yards.
with a No.4 Mk.2 Lee-Enfield.
So the groupings are rather crap at the moment as the barrel needs to be "broken in" (for an Enfield usually takes 300-500 rounds till this happens)

 

still... to hit a man target at 200 yards 17 times in a minute with an enfeild is quite impressive ,how long did it take you to achieve this level of skill? its not something a trainee off the street can do....

 

H&K 416! woot...

 

Not too long, I've trained using .22 bolt actions of various types, and practice "dry fireing" for trigger pull on a De-Act SMLE and as a result I learnt to use the bolt at a profcient speed

 

I think my only complaint for that gun is the calibre....not too keen on the 5.56mm (heard something about an H&K 417 which would be 7.62mm)

 

How bout a Mid-way?
Enfield No.9 Mk.1 (aka EM-2) in .280

 

I did some looking around and I noticed that there were so many variants of the G36 rifle...and so many black market parts for the commercial version. One day I was watching the History channel and there was a show on about the MG 42. It's rate of fire is amazing...1,200 rounds a minute. The MG 36 variant of the G36 comes pretty close to that.

I also thought this animation I found on the internet was prettey funny

 

In the first Gulf War, there was an oil rig with an anti-aircraft gun on it keeping some U.S. planes from entering Iraq. We sent three or four navy seals and cleared out the oil rig full of 20-25 guys. The Soviets would have probably just blown it up instead of trying to keep the rig intact. :lol:

 

I don't really see how that supports your point, aside from the fact you cite no sources to confirm this event this is an example of a small number of Special forces overcoming a superior number of quite possibly conscripts. This kind of thing says everything about the soldiers themselves and practically nothing about their equipment.

To be honest though given the vague terms and numbers involved I have some misgivings over the accuracy of this example.

The Soviets I have no doubt would have captured the objective if they'd though the effort was worthwhile, NATO would have just bombed it if they didn't think it was worth the effort.

Even taking the extremely vague numbers you've posted, I find it very difficult to come up with as few as 2 US soldiers accomplishing something that would otherwise require 80 Soviet/CIS Special forces soldiers.

 

I would have to hang with the AK too. It is so reliable. under lousy conditions, it is what I would want.