Author Topic: M16 (Read 1639 times)

Krusher · « **Reply #75 on:** July 08, 2002, 03:19:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by midnight Target

I say we register the 2nd Amendment, then ban it.

Just for that I am going to start a religion thread !!!

midnight Target · « **Reply #76 on:** July 08, 2002, 03:25:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusher

Just for that I am going to start a religion thread !!!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooo! I was kidding I swear to God! oops!

Wlfgng · « **Reply #77 on:** July 08, 2002, 04:18:41 PM »

M16 is deadly accurate... never can tell what kind of damage it'll do though since the bullet tumbles. sometimes passes 'cleanly' through.. sometimes blows out the back.. sometimes re-directs.

it's why the Coast Guard issues them for boarding parties.. that and a 45 automatic for the up-close stuff.

I sure miss those fine weapons...

MrBill · « **Reply #78 on:** July 08, 2002, 05:02:06 PM »

Ok I need to ask a question. I have seen two posts here that reference 7.62 x 51. Darned if I can find this ammo anywhere else. My ammo boxes all say 7.62 x 54. I have also seen x45 and x39, is the x51 a typo or is there something out there that I can't get?

Wlfgng · « **Reply #79 on:** July 08, 2002, 05:14:29 PM »

Quote

but I'd have to change my ID to towd.

lol DejaVu

easymo · « **Reply #80 on:** July 08, 2002, 05:23:55 PM »

I have seen a lot of "this, and that, happened on the range". That would be great if wars were fought on rifle ranges. I have carried both the M14, and the M16 in combat operations. In fairness, I should mention, I used the M16 only one time. It jammed on the third round, firing in semi auto mode. I never tried it again. In answer to the, just keep it clean, argument. Let me ask. Have you ever tried to do this in the field, in the middle of a jungle? In Vietnam you could literally, pour gun oil over the thing, and the next morning there would be a thin coat of rust on all metal parts. We went so far as to put Turtle wax on the external parts to slow this process. It only slowed it a little.

Also I see a lot of concern about wind. I don't remember once being concerned about the wind. What I did have reason to think about, was bullet deflection caused by hitting a twig, or some elephant grass. Being heavier, and "hotter", The 7.62 was less prone to deflection.

Mostly, combat came down to, you see a bunch of muzzle flash's in the bushes over there. You shoot at them. If you hit something, you want him out of the fight. Not bleeding, and firing back.

Gman · « **Reply #81 on:** July 08, 2002, 05:37:25 PM »

I agree Easymo, however the M16 and primarily it's ammunition are much different than what is used today, and I say this not for your benefit, as I know you know this. Everbody now know how you guys got screwed over with the M16a1 and its ammo in vietnam, and I'm not going to get into that, as you have far more reason to be PO'd about it than anyone else on this board.

I've never had the pleasure of SE asia, but I've shot a lot of rounds in conditions that are similar, and the modern day AR rifles work just as bad/poorly as do M14's. In fact, in the -40 weather I've shot in the AR's work better. Yes, this is on the range, and not combat, but I've shot a lot of courses of fire that don't let you clean your rifle while firing hundreds of rounds, and the AR's let me down no more or less often than any other rifle.

I agree with Easymo regarding the M14/M1A, and as I said before, it would be my first pick for any situation.

As for the 7.62x54 question above, that is Russian/Soviet block 7.62 ammo, used in various lmg's and rifles, the Draganov being an example. Do NOT try to chamber and fire that stuff in any .308 rifles, as they are the 7.62x51mm caliber.

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #82 on:** July 08, 2002, 06:43:34 PM »

Easymo... I agree with everything you said...

But that was then and this is now.

Part of the reason people like towd say the things they do is from talking to people like you and thinking it still applies today.

We'd all look like love muffines telling you it was something you did wrong with your M-16 back there and pretending like we know better. Others do the same thinking that is all there is to the M-16 and there aint no more to say about it.

AKDejaVu

lord dolf vader · « **Reply #83 on:** July 09, 2002, 02:09:29 AM »

Part of the reason people like towd say the things they do is from talking to people like you and thinking it still applies today.

ak cop

ok here is the translation. towd was right all along easymo and i respect you (unlike towd who hast the pomposity to dissagre with me and not back down)and realize you just said the exact same thing towd did but i dont like towd so i will try to assasinate his charachter and call him a instagating liar becaues i dont like him or the bad things he says about my endless posting of meanhearted drivil on these boards. so i will make a post insinuating vaguely the redesigned m16a2 is much better than the 1970 one it has a 40 grain heavier .22 slug than that one you had that was a piece of junk. makes a huge difference really it does really im not kiddin.

i appologise for the harsh tone to samm in the beggining you are obviously a gun enthousaiast who loves the sport . and i dont dought every thing you said is trur . but i heartly dissagree with the results of the tests on m16 vs m14 but the circumstaces of tests are all important and we havent discussed those at all. without details there is nothing to argue about

as far as ak deja vu read above to determine my oppinion of you

and toad your right i do seem angry but ak de ja vu is no stranger to flamin he came in here lookin for troubleand hes found it. my discription of his bbs persona was not vulgar and in my oppinion was totaly accurate. ( more vulgarity acctualy i beleive would have been more accurate to my feelings but what can you do? rules and all)

mayby hes a nice guy in real life stranger stuff has happened but here he aint.

TOWD

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #84 on:** July 09, 2002, 07:55:36 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lord dolf vader
Part of the reason people like towd say the things they do is from talking to people like you and thinking it still applies today. ak cop

ok here is the translation. towd was right all along easymo and i respect you (unlike towd who hast the pomposity to dissagre with me and not back down)and realize you just said the exact same thing towd did but i dont like towd so i will try to assasinate his charachter and call him a instagating liar becaues i dont like him or the bad things he says about my endless posting of meanhearted drivil on these boards. so i will make a post insinuating vaguely the redesigned m16a2 is much better than the 1970 one it has a 40 grain heavier .22 slug than that one you had that was a piece of junk. makes a huge difference really it does really im not kiddin.

And you still don't get it.

Some (say towd) were arguing about the way the M-16 was. Using feeble experience with the weapon as some kind of off-handed justification for their arguments but mostly relying on the stories told from 30 years ago.

Others have a bit more recent experience with the weapon and know better.

Its called the having the ability to learn from past mistakes and take corrective action. Personally, I don't expect you to understand either towd.

Quote

i appologise for the harsh tone to samm in the beggining you are obviously a gun enthousaiast who loves the sport . and i dont dought every thing you said is trur . but i heartly dissagree with the results of the tests on m16 vs m14 but the circumstaces of tests are all important and we havent discussed those at all.

And how many people had to pile on board to illicit this apology towd? sheesh.

Quote

without details there is nothing to argue about

LOL! Its called backpedalling towd. Nicely done.

Quote

as far as ak deja vu read above to determine my oppinion of you

I did. And I think anyone else that does will take it for what it is worth just as I did. Of course... that oppinion of me says alot about you too.

Quote

and toad your right i do seem angry but ak de ja vu is no stranger to flamin he came in here lookin for troubleand hes found it. my discription of his bbs persona was not vulgar and in my oppinion was totaly accurate. ( more vulgarity acctualy i beleive would have been more accurate to my feelings but what can you do? rules and all)

Stop for one second towd... read your first post... then move to your second post... then to your third. Find one that wasn't attacking one or more people. I challenge you.

Don't sit here and say "but he did it too... after his 3rd post... after I'd pretty much called him and everyone else idiots".

My god towd... you have the inate ability to enter a thread, insult everyone, then fault people for responding. I've not seen you do anything else on this BBS.

Quote

mayby hes a nice guy in real life stranger stuff has happened but here he aint.

TOWD

And how do you view yourself here towd? Would you say you're a nice guy? Or are you throwing this out simply because you made your first apology on the bbs?

Sorry dude.... but you have a long way to go before you are deemed an unbiased critic on social behavior.

AKDejaVu

hblair · « **Reply #85 on:** July 09, 2002, 01:11:50 PM »

My momma says life is like a box of chocolates...

Wlfgng · « **Reply #86 on:** July 09, 2002, 03:51:16 PM »

cherries HB.. just waiting to be uh.. "plucked"

Samm · « **Reply #87 on:** July 09, 2002, 06:23:28 PM »

Thank you lord dolf vader, apology accepted . I think we agree on more things than we disagree on .

Durr · « **Reply #88 on:** July 09, 2002, 08:22:28 PM »

I am far from an expert on firearms although I grew up on a farm where handling firearms was an expected skill that we all had to learn. In the Air Force I have had occasion to fire both the M-16A1 and the M-16A2. I have never fired the M-14 but I know enough about it to know that all three of these rifles are excellent weapons. However, there is much truth to the statements about the M-16 being somewhat prone to jamming. On almost every occasion that I have fired an M-16 either myself or somebody on the range with me has had a serious jam. All the older Army veterens that I have ever talked to have assured me that the M-14 was not prone to this type of behaviour. To my mind the most important quality of a combat weapon above all others is reliability. Stopping power and accuracy are nice, but if it dont go bang when you pull the trigger, neither does you any good. That is what makes the AK-47 such a great weapon. It isnt terribly accurate, and it doesnt have all that powerful of a cartridge really. What it does have is absolute reliability under all conditions. The M-1 and M-14 had this as well, and because of that my personal choice in combat would be to carry an M-14. Note that the Navy SEALs and the US Army Special forces have both brought back the M-14 for limited usage in some situations.

There are many factors that go into the choice of a primary weapon other than accuracy and stopping power, although those are certainly very important. M-16 has many other advantages over the M-14. It is lighter, no small deal when you have to carry it all day. It has smaller ammunition, which means that all else being equal, you can carry more rounds. It is easier to strip down and care for in the field. The main advantage the M-14 has is reliability. The M-14 does have one drawback though, and I think only one person has mentioned it so far. Everybody I have talked to that used them, says that they are nearly uncontrollable under full auto fire. However, I believe that the M-14 is misused when fired on full-auto. It should be fired single shot to make all shots count. I would take the M-14 if it was my choice of a rifle to carry in a combat situation, but that is just my opinion.

I see that Israel is going to the M-16 in many cases now, instead of their own Galil. The Israelis have had quite a lot of experience in infantry type fighting, so they are experts in my book. If the M-16 is good enough for them, it is a pretty good weapon. The bottom line is both the M-16 and M-14 are fine weapons, and they each have their strengths and weaknesses. The M-16 is simply the more modern weapon, and now that many of the reliability issues have been worked out, it may be considered among the very best assault rifles ever.

Samm · « **Reply #89 on:** July 09, 2002, 10:57:10 PM »

Most malfuctions of the m16 can be corrected in a second or two . The m60 jams MUCH more frequently than any weapon I had ever used, add this to the fact that machine guns tend to suck up dirt by nature. You're combining an open feed mechanism as opposed to a magazine, with a muzzle blast kicking up much dirt and dust . And unlike the m16 the m60 design was never modified to expedite corrective measures . As one marine was quoted saying when the m240 began replacing the m60, "Unlike the m60, this one works" .

And don't even get me started on the accuracy . Hitting targets with the m60 in my experience was an exercise in indirect fire, with your assistant gunner correcting your aim, since the bullets were impacting out of your line of sight while aiming .