The video opens at TakeM Training and Range with a full table of battle rifles laid out mostly in chronological order by service date. The hosts explain that every gun on the line is a civilian, semi-auto version, even when they use military designations. The lineup starts with the M1 Garand in .30-06, then moves through the FAL (Fusil Automatique Léger), M14, G3/PTR91, BM59, Galil, M77, SR-25, FN SCAR, HK MR762/417, SR-308 Tavor, B&T APC 308, and finally the SIG Spear. They note historical details like the FAL’s original .280 British chambering and how institutions often resist changing platforms. The focus is primarily on 7.62 NATO rifles, with the Garand as the lone .30-06 outlier. The hosts set ground rules: all rifles will be shot in factory configuration with iron sights only, no optics or muzzle device swaps, to keep the comparison as fair and consistent as possible across generations.
Before shooting, the panel shares predictions about which rifles they will like or dislike. Some gravitate toward classic wood-stocked guns, while others expect to favor modern designs like the APC 308, G3, or M77. There is early skepticism about the BM59 based purely on its looks and grip design. The group reiterates that every rifle will be run with iron sights and factory muzzle devices to avoid bias from accessories. Attention then turns to the M1 Garand, treated as a benchmark classic rather than a modern contender. One host demonstrates loading the Garand with its iconic eight-round en bloc clip, joking about protecting thumbs from the famous “Garand thumb.” They begin evaluating how this 1930s design stacks up as a 2024 battle rifle, acknowledging its limitations while appreciating its historical significance and charm.
The discussion deepens around the M1 Garand’s handling and reliability. The shooters praise it as one of the most enjoyable rifles on the table, highlighting its smooth manipulation and the satisfying ping of the en bloc clip. They stress the importance of using correct ammunition, such as M2 ball or 150-grain loads, to avoid damaging the operating rod. Properly greased and fed, the Garand is described as extremely reliable. When forced to rate it as a modern battle rifle, scores land roughly between 4 and 6 out of 10, reflecting a balance between nostalgia and the reality that newer platforms offer more capacity, modularity, and optics options. The conversation then shifts to the FAL, specifically a DSA SA58 paratrooper in 7.62x51 with 20-round magazines. The FAL is praised for reliability, controllability, and solid 100-yard accuracy, with comments about its full-auto behavior and a Hypertap-style device that actually drives the muzzle down.
The panel rates the FAL in the 3–6 range, calling it roughly a 4 MOA gun that still hits steel reliably at 100 yards. Some shooters find it antiquated and uncomfortable, criticizing its manipulation compared to more modern rifles. The conversation moves to the M14, which earns higher scores around 5 to 7. The M14’s magazine-fed design, comfort, and accuracy are praised, and there is a spirited debate over whether the United States was right to adopt the M14 over the FAL. One participant strongly defends the M14 choice, then slightly adjusts scores after reconsidering accuracy differences. Focus then shifts to the G3/PTR91, which becomes a standout favorite for at least one shooter. The roller-delayed action, soft recoil, and high accuracy earn it scores from 6.5 to 8. The G3 is described as still battlefield-viable, a rifle they would confidently take into combat with extra magazines, despite some ergonomic quirks.
The hosts discuss how modern C-clamp or thumb-over-bore grips can block iron sights on certain rifles, comparing this issue to AK ergonomics and noting an awkward index-finger magazine release reminiscent of the MP5. They then introduce the Paratrooper BM59, an Italian evolution of the M1/M14 concept, featuring a removable rifle grenade launcher and a winter trigger. The grenade launcher assembly can be detached using a pocket knife, guided by Italian markings on the muzzle device. Safety concerns arise around the winter trigger, which can still fire the rifle if manipulated with the safety off and a loaded magazine, leading to comments that it should only function when the safety is engaged. A sponsor segment for Sonoran Desert Institute follows, highlighting online gunsmithing and armorer programs that ship tools and materials for hands-on firearms education. Returning to the BM59, one host bluntly rates it a 2 and calls it his least favorite rifle on the table.
The BM59’s muzzle device is demonstrated in detail, showing a two-lug system with a very tight spring and rotation direction marked in Italian. The hosts reassemble the grenade launcher mount and revisit the winter trigger, reiterating concerns that it can fire when moved with the safety off. Despite earlier criticism, the heavy Italian battle rifle receives relatively solid scores: two shooters give it a 5 and another a 4, praising its shootability, manageable recoil, bipod, folding stock, grenade launcher capability, and winter trigger as an interesting feature. They still admit they would choose a different rifle for modern combat. The testing methodology is restated: iron sights only, factory muzzle attachments left in place. The focus then shifts to the IWI Galil in 7.62, which earns consistent sevens. The Galil is commended for its accuracy and pleasant felt recoil, though the muzzle brake is criticized for being extremely loud and producing an unpleasant blast for both shooter and bystanders.
The panel continues discussing a rifle with a notoriously harsh muzzle brake that produces a large fireball, excessive blast, and teeth-chattering recoil. They agree that a silencer or simple flash hider would dramatically improve its shootability. Attention then turns to the Zastava M77, the only AK-based rifle on the table, chambered in .308. Shooters give it around 6 to 6.5, praising the robust AK platform, adjustable gas system, and reliability, while criticizing the cheek weld and some ergonomics compared to AR-style rifles. A brief debate breaks out over scoring philosophy, with one participant insisting that a true middle-of-the-road score should be a 5, while another bumps the M77 slightly higher because it is a .308 AK. The Knights SR-25 enters the discussion next. One shooter rates it a 4 solely due to its roughly $6,500 price tag relative to performance, while others score it around 7 to 7.5, citing its longer rail, good trigger, ambidextrous controls, and strong AR-10/SR-25 ergonomics.
The SR-25 and AR-10 style platform continues to receive praise for its consistent, well-tuned gas system and manageable handling when run without accessories, reinforcing scores around 7 to 7.5. The conversation then shifts to the FN SCAR 17, a very light 7.62x51 rifle with a non-reciprocating charging handle and proven accuracy. Shooters rate it between 6 and 8, acknowledging its effectiveness but raising several criticisms. They dislike the limited rail space, the fragile and unpopular “Ugg boot” stock, and what they see as dated ergonomics. The SCAR’s brake is described as extremely harsh, making it one of the most violent shooters on the line, even compared to the loud Galil. There is frustration that the SCAR 17 does not use AR-10 magazines and that its SOCOM service life was relatively short. The HK MR762A1 / HK417 then takes the stage, earning scores from 7 to 9 for its very soft recoil, accuracy, familiar AR-10-style controls, and full-length top rail.
The panel evaluates the SR bullpup battle rifle, noting its long-stroke piston system similar to an AK, compact bullpup layout, and somewhat bouncy recoil. Controls feel unusual, but overall ratings land around 6 to 7, reflecting mixed yet generally positive impressions. They then move to the Tavor-style bullpup, where shooters admit unfamiliarity with its controls and bolt lock-back but praise its balance, soft recoil comparable to the HK, and surprisingly good trigger for a bullpup. Scores again fall around 6 to 7. Attention shifts to the B&T APC 308, which quickly runs into reliability problems with steel-cased BarnauL-type ammunition. Despite trying different magazines and cranking the gas system to the adverse 1.4 setting, the rifle will not cycle steel reliably. The group issues a DNF verdict and states a firm philosophy: a rifle that will not run steel does not deserve brass. One shooter insists it is a “nine” with brass, but others question that rating and criticize its bounce and recoil for a DMR-style configuration.
The discussion returns to a bullpup DMR model that was expected to be soft and flat shooting but instead proved difficult to manage. Its recoil impulse is described as bouncy and less controllable than anticipated, and it fails to complete the course, so the reviewers decline to assign it a score. They then revisit a B&T .308 rifle, criticizing its very small charging handles that are hard to grab under stress and a hydraulic buffer system that contributes to a bouncy feel. The inability to run steel-cased ammunition remains a major strike against it, especially in a video focused on practical battle rifle performance. These shortcomings contrast sharply with the expectations for a premium European .308 platform. This segment sets the stage for the final modern contender, highlighting how even expensive, feature-rich rifles can fall short when reliability and controllability with varied ammunition are prioritized over pure refinement or niche configuration.
The SIG Spear is introduced as a top-tier, piston-driven battle rifle and immediately earns praise. Shooters highlight its excellent furniture, adjustable gas system, and dual charging options, including a side charger in addition to the traditional rear charging handle. Ambidextrous controls, reinforced components, and a side-folding stock that can be fired while folded are all cited as standout features. The rifle runs steel-cased ammo reliably, further boosting its credibility as a modern combat platform. The main criticism is its factory muzzle device, which is seen as overly optimized to drive silencer sales rather than provide ideal bare-muzzle performance. Despite this, the Spear receives ratings between 8 and 9, with one shooter settling on an 8 out of 10 and noting that a perfect 10 is essentially unattainable. The hosts also mention the absent LMT MARS-H, suggesting it might be the closest thing to a 10 and could have seriously challenged for the win if present.
In the closing segment, the panel reflects on the entire lineup, from the M1 Garand and FAL to the latest piston-driven designs. They reiterate praise for the rifle that earned an 8 out of 10, emphasizing its reversible charging handle reminiscent of a SCAR, side-folding stock that can be fired while folded, and reliable function with steel-cased ammunition. Several shooters name the SIG Spear and a B&T rifle as their personal favorites, especially when the B&T is fed brass-cased ammo, leading to a tie in terms of enjoyment. A lighthearted argument breaks out over bias and what should actually win: the most fun gun to shoot, the most historically significant, or the most practical modern battle rifle. They distinguish between personal favorites and objective performance, acknowledging that any rifle on the table would still be desirable. The video ends with the understanding that while scores matter, context, mission, and shooter preference ultimately decide which battle rifle is “best.”
Loading...