The He-Man AR Haters Club... Part Two

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here we go again. M-16 verus the world.

Let me state my experience with a M-16.

Vietnam 68-69, 173rd Abn Bdge Sep)M-60 gunner, Squad Leader, Hawk Team Leader (Ambush Team) and Infantry Plt. Sarg.

When ever I pulled the trigger of my 16 it fired when I held the trigger back in full auto it fired. I never had my weapon jam or anyone in my Platoon jam. And never heard of any in the company jamming.

I've seen the 16 in water, covered with mud and dust also used it a couple weeks in sand dunes in the Bon Song costal area. They always fired.

Concerning one of the posts that the SKS is a better rifle for a real battle field. All I can say about that is "what part of the galaxy do you live on?" because I never seen anyone standing in line to trade their 16 for a SKS. It doesn't even come close.

Also about the 5.56 NATO being a minor caliber. True smaller that a 7.62 NATO but I would bet if you've seen a chest exit wound from a M193 ball round it's a little meaning less if you're the one that's been hit.

If you take care of your rifle (cleaning) it will take care of you.

Failures of the 16's early use was the Powders fault not the rifles fault.

It would be interesting to know how may soldiers this really impacted. Even while in Vietnam all I ever heard was this happened to my buddy in the Cav. or what ever unit. No first hand experience.

My Plt. Sarg (my mentor) and who I took his place was with the 1st. Cav. for his 1st tour and was in the battle of the I Drang. The Cav's butt was in a real sling during this battle and bad enough for the commander to give the Broken Arrow call sign. He never said anything bad about the 16 being a problem and failing them. He was finest soldier I've ever known. Would you believe his basic ammo load. One magazine in the rifle and one in his pocket. As he stated to me one time his job was to supervise the firefight not fight it and this he did well.

You guys can discuss this subject forever but in my experience give me the 16 any day.

Turk
 
Wow real military experience... Your not unique there.

Never heard of an jam in your entire company?
I find that hard to believe. Possible - it is. But I just cant see it actually happening.

Of course no one will trade a 1,000 rifle for a 125 dollar rifle... The rifle might suck - but it still holds a value.
 
You have to wet nurse the damn thing!

CLEAN IT in the morning! CLEAN IT at LUNCH! CLEAN IT at DINNERTIME! CLEAN IT in the MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT because you had a nightmare it wasn't clean enough!!!

Then make sure you got some of "The Good" magazines AND make sure they do take a hard blow of get some dirt in them or some water or sand!

M-16 when you have a lot of things to worry about it adds about 50 more!
 
my uncle was a U.S. Navy CB in Vietnam and he use the M16. and then he was in Panama and he did Covert Ops with the Rangers and the Green Berets and he use the M16 ther to. and when i told him that i had got an AR15 he said good it's one of the best Military Rifles in the World today :D

------------------
Technical Sergeant Andrew Robert Smith
CO LRRP Team
of the Second Ranger Battalion Charlie Company in WW2 Online.
 
Been in battle lately, huh?
Been in battle EVER?


Since this is an Infantry weapon let's hear a bit more from former Infantrymen.


1)The M16 is so accurate!
Answer. Accuracy isn't the number one requirement of an assault rifle.

2)It works fine if you clean it!
Answer. A service rifle should still work fine even when you don't have the time to clean it. Like when people are shooting at you.

3)It's very light!
Answer. And breaks.

4)I've fired blah, blah number of rounds through MY AR, and it works fine.
Answer. Not while on your belly in the dirt crawling through God knows what.

Education. Only the "educated" know enough to like the AR.
Now what course teaches you about assault rifles? None.

Like the AR? Fine. Then enlist and try it out where it is supposed to be used.
 
Yeah the M16 is such a sorry rifle that people are paying seven or eight thousand dollars for a transferable one. Heh Heh Heh. Say what you want but I'm glad I bought a couple of them several years ago. I could sell them for a healthy profit but I think I'll wait until to go for at least 20 grand or so. On second thought I wouldn't even sell them at that amount.
 
The M16 is a great rifle!


...when it's manufactured correctly. The sorry truth is the majority of the ones the Military uses are not Colt...they are made by some obscure companies with questionable quality control. The M16A2 (converted from an A1) I had in boot camp worked well enough, so long as you didn't let sand get in it anywhere. It only failed me once on the range, as I recall. Many others had better luck, many more had worse luck.

The M16A1s we carry in my guard unit, however, are older than I am, I think. They'e been through a lot. Now while I prefer the A1 to the A2, the rifles we have ae a pain to keep operational, especially when the only range we have is a 25 meter indoor one, requiring the use of special bolts and plastic (barrel-f***er) bullets. We never get to fire them with live rounds, so I can't comment on the weapon's reliaibility. However, if it performs anything like it does with plastic rounds or blanks, I'd rather carry my FAL, heavier ammo and all...

Remember folks. "MIL-SPEC" is a euphemism for LOWEST BIDDER GOVERNMENT CONTRACT....
 
M16, you forget that people pay thousands for a transferable StEn gun or Mac. We're not talking about desire, we're talking about design.
 
The last rifle shoot I was at, the only rifles that I saw fire the entire course without a problem were the with the AR's.
As far as the the carbon build up on the bolt is concerned, by the time there is any build up to affect anything it gets blown out.{fact} The only reason the the AR failed in it's early service was because a guy {Macminara}who knew nothing about weapons, made the manufacture produce the weapon without a crome chamber, then the military changed the powder. This was NOT how Stoner had designed the weapon. I really quess the AR is a bad piece of equipment, thats why everyone uses them in 3 gun matches. You know, when the timer is running and a check awaits for the top couple of spots. :)

[This message has been edited by markmcj (edited November 08, 2000).]
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by George Hill:
Rik, I too was a Light Fighter. Light I taught me to make the best of what I had at hand... Namely the AR series in different forms.
Being out of the service - and able to objectivly evaluate everything and bein gout long enough to forget my mental conditioning about the M16 series... I woke up to realize that almost everyone else has a better gun for battle. Even an SKS is better suited to fighting on a real battlefield.[/quote]

That's your opinion based on your experiences, George. Mine have been different, and until I find a rifle that is more ergonomic and accurate for me than an AR, or until I have a factory AR that has reliability problems for me, I will stick with the AR. Neither one has happened so far, and I doubt either will.
IMHO there is no more versatile, accurate, ergonomic and reliable gun for the money.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by krept:
I think some of the BGs in Somalia were saying "Thank Allah that wasn't a .308" from what I heard...


You heard wrong. Everyone likes to quote that "quote" (I suspect it was more of an invented quote) by the SEAL in Blackhawk Down about the 223 not affecting the Somalis that were shot with it. But they don't seem to read the parts where Somalis were shot with M60s and still didn't go down. The facts are, the Somalis were very thin and wearing loose clothes and the shots by the Rangers et al probably didn't hit center mass.



I also heard that some in Desert Storm traded in their M16A2s for M14s for the longer ranged shots...


Some SEALs carried M14s in Desert Storm (as they do in other environments where there is a possibility of 600-1000 yard shots) but it was not a reliability or stopping power issue, it was simply for the range. For general issue, range is not that big a thing. Most firefights happen at absurd distances like under 20 yards.


My personal preference of the two is the AK in the caliber Kalashnikov designed it for. For the time being if it's past 50 yards or so, I'll think a looong while before engaging. Until I get my favorite, the M1A, that is... [/quote]

Actually the 7.62x39 is not as good a manstopper as the 223 and has much less range.
 
One thing to think about. The AR was designed back in the 1960s. Since that time there have been dozens of different military guns designed all over the world. The designers of these weapons had the advantage of being able to look at what else was out there and pick what they liked the best.

So my question is, over the last thirty some odd years, how many new military rifles have come out using the AR gas system? How many have come out using a piston? How many have a spring loaded ejector vs. a fixed ejector?

With some form of gas piston or op rod since the AR: K2, G36, SAR, Valmet, Sako M90, Sig 550, FNC, Galil, Tavor, AN 94, FARA 98, Aug, INSAS, AR 70/90, AR 18, Stoner 63. I'm not sure if it is Singipore or Taiwan who has built a copy of the M16 and it even has a gas piston! I've probably forgotten a few as well.

Who else has used direct gas impingement in their designs? I can't think of any right now. My copy of Small Arms of the World is packed away. The FA MAS might, but I'm not sure.

The people who like the AR say that it is more accurate than the AK, yes granted, and that if you keep it well cleaned and maintained it will function great. The only thing is, from a design perspective, there are guns out there that can be just as accurate as the AR, only they can be abused more.

Is the AR a good gun, probably, but shouldn't we be able to have the BEST gun that we can get our hands on? We should be able to learn from our past, and take the best of everything thats out there and roll it up into the best dang piece of hardcore killing machine that we possibly can.

I'm not even going to attempt to argue .223 vs. .308. I'm sticking to apples to apples here. The FAL and the M16 are different beasts with a different way of going about the same mission.

Yes there are lots of people here who love their ARs and there are lots who hate them. We have combat Veterans in both camps as well. And I do not intend to insult anybodys opinion, so please do not take personal offense. I'm just glad to have something other than the election to read about for a little while. :)
 
Thanks for the heads up Rik. I'll beg to differ on the x39(not the steel core that Fackler quoted but the lead core) vs the 5.56 . I think we can both agree that being shot in a critical zone with either = lights out.


I do, however, prefer the AK design for what it was built for. For longer ranges I would prefer the M1A over say fifty yards out to 200 w/open sights and some good optics after that to maximize the .308s potential. The AR design is a good and versatile one, as has been shown. If handed either one of the three, I would adapt my strategy to maximize the pluses of the individual weapon.
 
Someone stated that they would not like the M1A because of its wood stock? Here is El Rojo's fiberglass stock from Fred's with El Rojo's custom camo paintjob. I painted my Rem 700 too. Mighty proud of the job I did.
m1acamo1.jpg


I think that the Dr. from Front Sight says it best, "Any gun will do, if you will do." And once again, screw the media for calling Florida so early. Run with your tail between your legs network news!

[This message has been edited by El Rojo (edited November 09, 2000).]
 
NICE paintjob Senor' Rojo!
VERY sweet looking rifle!

I love the bit about "It defecates where it eats" I got a good laugh out of it and I suppose it's true enough, but as I said earlier, if it works, it's not a "flaw."
As to accuracy of the AR, back in either 89 or 90, at the Gene Hill Invitational, Edson Range Camp Pendleton, using an out of the rack standard M16A2, I personally placed 20 of 20 in a 10 inch circle at 500 meters.
Yeah, I'm braggin on myself just a little, but how much more accuracy do you WANT?
This was a STOCK rifle, not handpicked, because I wanted to PROVE to certain shooters that the rifle was capable of it.
It was field gauged for barrel straightness, erosion, and headspace, and since the first one pulled passed the nogo gages, that's the one I used.
As someone else mentioned, VERY few firefights take place at 500 meters, most are of the "in yo face" variety.
Yes, the SEALS used M14s in Desert Storm, I know, I worked with them both when they were on their way, and when they came back, (I was stuck at "a Naval Base" at the time as NCOIC of the MCSF Armory there.)
I tend to discount any credibility the SEALS lend to the M14 on that count, as the teams I dealt with only took a couple M14s with them. They also carried several of the "90 Rounder" snail mags for their M16s.
I wouldn't for a minute say that the M16/AR15 can do all that the M14 can, but then there are times when you're better armed with an AR than an M14 also.
Different jobs, different tools.

BTW, when I get my scanner next week, I think I'll scan in some pics of some SERIOUSLY mud covered Marines shooting equally mud covered ARs to good effect. You can tell what kind of rifles they are by the front sight assembly, but not much else. That mud was like GLUE!
:D

------------------
Your mind is your primary weapon.
USE IT!
 
with out the M16 you don't have the bolt design for 60% to 70% of the new Assault Rifles Manufacturing in the World from the 1970s till today. now i like the M16A2 and the M4 Carbine, but if you don't like it MAD DOG then so be it for you. but I still like the M16 Series of Rifels. and if we are not going to use the .223 then lest go back to the .308, but lest not use the M14. we fond out with the M16A2 that a Soldier do's not need a Full-Automatic Rifle, lets use the M1A Rifle, but not the Standard one use the M1A-A1 BUSH Rifle so you git the Size of the M16A2, and use a Fiberglass Stock. so is that good MAD DOG you git your .308 and i git a Rifle that is the Size of the M16A2 :D

------------------
Technical Sergeant Andrew Robert Smith
CO LRRP Team
of the Second Ranger Battalion Charlie Company in WW2 Online.
 
but i will still carry my M16A2 :D

------------------
Technical Sergeant Andrew Robert Smith
CO LRRP Team
of the Second Ranger Battalion Charlie Company in WW2 Online.
 
I see a common trend here, the Marines, a few soldiers and civilians never had a problem with the M16 and to an extent like it. Than there is a large chunk of soldiers civilians and a few Marines that absolutely hate the rifle. I truly wonder why that is?

Night Crawler, since the weapon has been in the inventory for 30 plus years some unit, particularly NG and non-combat arms, will get some non-Colt or FN rifles. But the current manufactured for M16A2 is FN, the manufacture for the M4 is Colt. The Majority of weapons in the active side, both army and Marines, are either Colt or FNs. FN actually make s the majority of US weapons today, the M16A2, the M249 and the M240.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by krept:
Thanks for the heads up Rik. I'll beg to differ on the x39(not the steel core that Fackler quoted but the lead core) vs the 5.56 . I think we can both agree that being shot in a critical zone with either = lights out.
[/quote]

In an organ, sure. But you can't always count on hitting the bad guy in an organ. And it's a fact, a 7.62x39 hit to a bone will break the bone but a 223 hit to that bone will shatter it and turn it into a hand grenade blowing up inside the body.
 
what a bunch of whiners....you don't like the ar/m series, don't get one...stick with what you have or what you know...you want long range accuracy, get a barret.50....you want short range effectiveness, get a short 12ga....you want a bigger bullet, get a howitzer...you don't want to clean your rifle, get a maid....i'll take my ar...it's what i have, what i use, what i trust...until i have an oportunity to get something else (maybe that m-14 ya'll laove, the on that bends that gas rods all the time) my ar will do just fine...


------------------
speak now, or forever hold your peace
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top