Your Thoughts M-16

[thewookie]

I've noticed that a lot of people on this site are comparing the old with the new and not realizing that not only are the environs and political situations different but the technology as well. The M-16 was crap because they didn't plan ahead and there was no oversight on the development of that weapon, since then too many people who have gone through the same thing as you have risen to the ranks of general and are forcing a "always move forward" approach to military weapons.

All the weapons the troops are getting their hands on are for specialized use, or they are in the army and think they know what will work better for them... I hate the army.... so when you hear about Marines getting different weapons, remember that they are searching for a better weapon for the job they are expected to do. One example is EOD, they use the .50 cal to blow up mines, now they want the M-14 with scope to more easily take care of it. It's lighter and easier to move when under fire, it's really that simple.

I respect your opinion about crap weapons, I feel the same way about a 9mm handgun but at the same time, field striping that 9 is easier than the .45 because you can do it in the dark, blindfolded with no tools and can slide it back together in a matter of seconds... those reasons make it a better weapon. Semper Fi and keep the great topics coming!!!!

Right on SSgt., you can't compare.

Like PI or Thailand

Very few people liked the A-1's when they came out, and for very good reasons. I had to practically beg Gunny Hathcock to sign my AR-15. But what evolved out of that basic system is pretty darn good, if not one of the best weapon system platforms in the world (pound for pound.)

[RLeon]

That is not fair, and that is a nasty peice of machinery right there.

It goes to show you that any good weapon can be modified to fit the mission.

Makes me drool a little...

lol, me too.

In all honesty it's not really practical to hump around a full grown M-14. Pete makes a good point about clearing small spaces.

So far a few modified M1A/M-14 have been made that cam accomplish long range and CQB missions; Springfield SOCOM, Smith Enterprise Crazy Horse, and various colapsible stocks from McMillan, VLTOR(seen in my previous post), SAGE EBR and Troy SOPMOD.

Some would consider going back to this platform a step back in weaponry evolution, I don't see anything wrong with equipping the infantry with them.
Of course I'm an M-14 freak so my opinion is clouded.


Pete, what your opinion about changing existing upper receivers with the H&K 416?

[FistFu68]

YOU GO TOO WAR WITH THE RIFLE OR WEAPON THEY ISSUE YOU,WE ALL HAVE OUR DREAM RIFLE;BUT THE GRUNTS HAVE BEEN KILLING A'LOT OF MF'ERS FOR A VERY LONG TIME W/THE M-16.I WAS LUCKY,I FELT VERY SAFE IN THE BUSH HUMPING MY 12GAUGE @ .45ACP.

[Quinbo]

When I was a Cpl checking into barracks duty I was issued 4 weapons. I was issued the M-16A2, M-14, mossburg 590, and .45. There is some irony here... the only time we carried M-14's was at burial ceremonies.

[Pete0331]

Pete, what your opinion about changing existing upper receivers with the H&K 416?

It would be a great addition, but there is no way it would be wide spread, it is to expesive for that.
If the USMC wants to keep the M4/M16 around it would be a nessesary addition.

[SkilletsUSMC]

On the M14...

Its a ****ing bad ass rifle, but ergonomicly its VASTLY inferior to the AR line of weapons.

If I could have my way the USMC would use the Robinson XCR.

Its has the ability to change CALIBERS in 1 minute, a gas piston, the charging handle is on the left side, ambidextrious bolt release, a folding stock for storage in vehicles, and a monolithic upper that is tougher than the baddest M1/M14...

Its the best of the M16/FAL/AK

Feast you eyes on her!!!

[SkilletsUSMC]

I might add that its as reliable as the AK series of rifles

[Petz]

I might add that its as reliable as the AK series of rifles

the mechanical operated ones... that I could believe, but gas operated is tech that should get thrown out... no carbon going into the bolt anymore, no excess heat being routed back into the chamber... mechanical is the way to go, check out LWRC's setups... I'm sold.

[RLeon]

I think they featured that on "Future Weapons". It looks similar to the SIG 5.56.
Sweet.

[FistFu68]

IT LOOKS LIKE A COPY CAT OF THE ISRAELI"GALIL"BUT THE GALIL HAS A BOTTLE OPENER ON HER NO CHIT!!!

[SkilletsUSMC]

the mechanical operated ones... that I could believe, but gas operated is tech that should get thrown out... no carbon going into the bolt anymore, no excess heat being routed back into the chamber... mechanical is the way to go, check out LWRC's setups... I'm sold.

This is a gas piston rifle. Similar to the FAL/AK/M249 but with less mass as to decrease recoil.

[Old Marine]

My weapon of choice is the M1.

[FistFu68]

MY WEAPON OF CHOICE "MK.54-S.A.D.M."

[CBS]

No, your message about cleaning was COLT BS. When your life depends on a weapon to surpress fire or return fire...you clean it. It was initially set up for a rate of fire, that with a magazine, it could not support. 750 R/Minute...can you believe that ? Most of our problems were with the extrator jamming by NOT grabbing the spent round and then ejector NOT ejecting anything. So there you wetre punching the bore while the NVA just kept firing at you. Quite a thrill !! Of course an ole TRUSTY 1911A1 and some grenades sure help !! By the way, they'll always be MATELL..the toys from the Army testing grounds.....!

SF........>Chuck

[Zulu 36]

No, your message about cleaning was COLT BS. When your life depends on a weapon to surpress fire or return fire...you clean it. It was initially set up for a rate of fire, that with a magazine, it could not support. 750 R/Minute...can you believe that ? Most of our problems were with the extrator jamming by NOT grabbing the spent round and then ejector NOT ejecting anything. So there you wetre punching the bore while the NVA just kept firing at you. Quite a thrill !! Of course an ole TRUSTY 1911A1 and some grenades sure help !! By the way, they'll always be MATELL..the toys from the Army testing grounds.....!

SF........>Chuck

It wasn't so much Colt BS, as it was DoD BS. McNamara's wonder boys had a lot to do with forcing the M16 onto the Army, thence to the Marine Corps. The Air Force was an early and willing adopter of the precursor AR15, so that didn't help matters.

The Army wanted a bolt forward assist on the M16 from the beginning, but McNamara and his whiz kids thought the Army was just stonewalling (which the Army was, but they were trying to improve the rifle before bowing to the inevitible). DoD felt if a bolt forward assist was needed, Eugene Stoner would have put one on to start with.

The Army also wanted the chamber chrome plated to aid extraction. But again, DoD refused claiming it wasn't a necessary expense.

Third, and probably the worst, the gunpowder was formulated wrong for the type of gas-action used by the M16. This created much more crud and with an un-chromed chamber, led to the major malfunctions seen in the field (failure to extract and/or eject). This was the fault of the Army ordinance people as they ignored Stoner on the subject.

Added to the mix was the way the Army and Marines initially dumped the rifles onto the troops. Little training in maintenance led to poorly done maintenance. However, this was actually the minor part of the problem since it didn't take long for even a wonderfully cleaned M16 to screw up with dirty powder and un-chromed chamber.

Finally someone woke up at DoD. The M16A1 came out with the chromed chamber and a forward assist. The gunpowder was changed to a better formulation and along with more training on the weapon, reliability improved markedly. I can't recall having any problems with my M16A1s while in the Corps, except when using blanks.

The Air Force never went to the M16A1 as a general issue weapon. They retrofitted their AR15s and M16s with chromed barrels and carried on. I used an AR15 as my issue rifle for a number of years in the Air Guard and I had no problems with it, except when using blanks. I eventually went over to a CAR that did have a forward assist, but I never remember having to use it, except when using blanks.