The Black Rifle

[thewookie]

As long as the Marine Corps exists Marines will always agree or disagree about the effectiveness of the weapons we used, especially in relation to newer generations of service rifles. I myself prefer the M-16 series because I feel for one it's more suited to the current conflicts that we find ourselves in. I think the M-14 and M-1's are great rifles but I think today's warrior needs more firepower and a lighter more adaptable weapon. You'll almost never convince any Marine from the Vietnam era of this. I have a Colt AR-15 that was reluctantly signed by Carlos Hathcock. He used to be the guest speaker at our graduations at DM school and I was fortunate to get a chance to know him. The first time I asked him to sign it, he told me no flat out, later he would go on to say how too many Marines in Nam were killed by malfunctioning A-1's. Eventually my never ending persistence paid off and he signed it but he didn't do it without telling me that I was lucky, I was/am. RIP Gunny.

I trained Marines at DM school with modified scoped versions of the M-14's and I have many rounds personally out of a scoped M-14 and a non-scoped or iron sighted M-14. I was part of a team of instructors that tested the "new" M-14 DMR, and incidentally later when I went to CQB school I was involved in the testing of the new M-4's for that school. My point is I know an M-14 just as good as I know a M-16 series rifle. I taught both of them as a PMI, and also as a DM instructor and I've shot them both competitively.

The downfall for the M-14, especially as far as true accuracy is concerned is due to the gas system. The weight and size is also a concern for today's warrior. But I saw M-14's dead on one day and then with, or without cleaning, the next day they were in the birm. And we had good armorers to work on them so it wasn't like these guns were neglected. I'm sure not all M-14's are like that but for the ones we had, you just can't have that. The M-16 series used today has its downfalls but it's a very distant relative of the A-1's that originally came out. It's got more firepower, greater flexibility, it's lighter, smaller, and accurate as anything else out to 500yds. They might change someday to something else but I don't think they need to. The way they are able to modify this weapon system today means it can go on for countless more generations.

If I'm busting through a door in Iraq or Afghanistan, or patrolling down the streets I want a M-16, not a M-14. If I'm up on top of a building providing security I still want that M-16. Not the original A-1 but the new ones.

Just one man's opinion...

[ttracker65]

to thewookie thanx this is the point I have been trying to make!
Cpl B

[Motto Poolee]

I was certain the M-14 was replaced due to it being to good. The United States did a study in WWII, figuring out that the average infantryman only engages targets to a certain distance on average, that distance not being far at all. The M-14 could meet that requirement and very much exceed it. It was also harder to produce. So from what I know, it was better than what the US Military needed, to expensive, and used a round they didn't want to use. The smaller the ammo, the more you can carry, that is what the military wants. So Eugene Stoners design worked, the M-16. It almost did make it though, it was definitely almost turned down many times. I've been hearing the A-4 models are awesome?

[thewookie]

to thewookie thanx this is the point I have been trying to make!
Cpl B

Point made, but I'll still get some Old Salts who have been in the trenches tell that me I'm wrong, I'm ok with that. But I think what today's warrior, the Marine winning battles; what they are doing and saying about what they have says it all.

[ttracker65]

Please respect your elders. The M16 of Nam was nothing to brag about. It was known to Jamb, mis feed and fall apart. It is not the M16, M4 or M468 of today. Insted of worrying about a weapon you will not be useing I would be spending my time learning the weapons you will be useing. Furthermore the Creed at the beggining of this post would be a good start. You will be expected to be able to recite it flawlessly when Range time comes in Boot
Cpl B

[thewookie]

who you talking to willis?

[Nez46]

My dad a Sergeant said the black rifle shot great to him. However he was never in combat either.

[ttracker65]

Hey Nez46 wondered when you would show up! Do not worrie the M4 works just fine same with the beefed up M468 SPC
Cpl B

[crazymjb]

From what I understand the M16 more or less does work fine now, but that doesn't change the fact that the german equivalent are still significantly more reliable. The Marine Corps times has a run a few articles on the subject.

Mike

[ttracker65]

Check out the M468 on Barret.com and see if the issues you are talking about have been fixed. to include the .270 Cal slug it delivers.
Cpl B

[Nez46]

Of corse i was coming lol. Yeah you know tho the M4A1 is the only version i have seen it was great. I also have shot an M14 there are deadly accurate.

[ttracker65]

I can not complain about the accuracy of the M468 but there is more drop jjust like the M1A that is one of the advantages of the 5.56 is that it shoots very Flat. but when useing a Drop compensatoror or ART scope /site it is all the same.
Clp B

[Nez46]

yeah i heard ther 5.56 doesnt have the knock down power like the 7.62 that the M14 shoots.

[ttracker65]

Nez if you hit 'em between the eye's they are going down. But the M468 is a different animal the SPC cartridge is the same height as the 5.56 with a .270 slug and a hot powder to push it along.
Bottom line ya gotta hit them to kill em
Cpl B

[Nez46]

Yeah true. I have heard about the SCP cartridge. I heard it makes a big difference.