Podcast: Play in new window
In this episode I’m talking to Jeff Gurwitch again. He recently put up a video on his YouTube channel that caught my attention. Why? Well, because on the surface it contradicts my own advice of, “Let the mission dictate the configuration.”
As you get deeper into the interview, you’ll find that Jeff and I aren’t all that far off from one another. In fact, we both advocate for “general purpose” configuration for a rifle. As you make any particular weapon more specialized for a specific situation, you also tend to make it worse for others.
Jeff talks about special operations units who were optimally set up for close quarter battle (CQB) missions in Iraq, but regularly found themselves fighting their way all the way to the target and then all the way back home. In other words, their “optimal” weapons for CQB were only optimal for one third of the fight.
So what does Jeff’s all-around weapon look like? Well, it is akin to the classic recce rifle. Though Jeff’s personal iteration would be a little bit shorter.
We spent a good bit of time talking about optic configurations as well as training scars. Jeff explains why he thinks the new standard is an LPVO optic paired with an offset red dot sight. On that topic, Jeff also explained what he thinks the future of iron sights should be as well as other optical configurations like magnifiers and fixed power sights.
I hope you enjoy this episode, and be sure to check out Jeff’s channel and upcoming training offerings over at Modern Tactical Shooting.
Excellent content Matt! Jeff’s advice was as realistic as it gets from weapon set up to his instinctive training method. Would be a true privilege to train with a warrior like him! I have not seen his videos but will now seek them out – he seems to have a no nonsense approach. It makes sense to keep things simple on a general purpose rifle – a LPVO BDC optic (versus a busy MRAD reticle) and offset red dot or irons. MRAD/MOA scaled reticles have there place (sniper/DM and hunting rifles) but we’re talking reactive combat effectiveness here. Biggest take from interview for me is to vary the range/practice time – long, mid and short range targets and when possible include all distances to drill the transitions. If you can include movement – all the better. Great stuff!
I like this article alot but wonder about two points: Why discount .223/5.56 and why only bolt action?
Given that 22/250 and 30/30 are the most popular hunting cartridges in North America, 5.56, 7.62 Russian and 300blk all stand out as solid choices. A suppressed rifle running 200grain 300blk would be an amazing hunting platform. 5.56 will easily reach out to 500 yards and a 77grain BTHP match grade would be an excellent hunting round. And of course the 7.62 Russian is ballistically similar to the 30/30. Each can take most NA game short of elk and grizzly.
A non-AR platform akin to the M1 (like my accurized min-14) allows for top feed, is self cleaning owing to its piston design and with my Accuracy Systems tuned rifle, sub MOA.
Put either caliber together with that platform with a solid MPVO and solid red dot and a suppressor and you have a very, ery solid implementation of a GPR if not GPFR (General Puspose Fighting Rifle)
As an aside, I’m glad you covered LPVO vs MPVO. I have a 3x12x44 illuminated reticle compact MPVO on it now but had considered a Sig Tango 1×10 IR so I could put a thermal monocular in front. Now I’m thnking of keeping the current scope as I really like it and see if I can run the thermal with it at low magnification. Would love your thoughts on this.