2ndChapterofActs
Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2005
- Messages
- 27
Greetings and Salutations!
For those of you who remember the fun we had a few months ago with a smashing debate spawning from the classic struggle between the M16A2, M4 Rifle/Carbine and the AK47 and all its variants here is some more relivent information about weaponry.
The whole debate spawned when a fellow posted something his brother aledgidly said from Iraq. The brother made mention in an email of how much better the AK was then the M16. This of course meant that I had to do some follow up questioning of buddies of mine serving in the Iraq and what I found was that the claims made in the persumed email were needless to say less then accurate (the inaccuracies were not all technical but rather dealing with the technical nature of the rifles but rather what our [US] soldiers were doing on the battlefield). I posted a new thread to correct the inaccuracies and low and behold I had a full fledged fight on my hands <snicker, snicker>!
Where very little was resolved in the way of opinions changing and thus I do not expect a whole lot from this thread I would like to put up some new information not mentioned in the M16/AK Bit.
First of all, the major beef with the M16 was the same as it has been from the beginning before the M16A2 was around, that issue being cleaning and jamming. There have been claims that M16 users spit more curses then bullets as their weapons are always jamming. This argument is always countered by those vets who have fired the weapon and say that the M16s used in the military are a lot better then the crappy AR's that are there for fun shoot-outs and therefore the weapons do not jam.
That being said here is some fun stuff...
1) On a military shooting range jamming is sometimes an issue with people (this was mentioned by a few AK lovers to no end) but not too long ago wile talking with a friend of mine who was just discharged (he served with the 75th Rangers) he mentioned while in basic making the mistake of while shooting prone resting his mag on the ground. This caused a double feed which jammed the weapon. Now that is human error not any malfunction of the weapon.
2) I read a book entitled From Out of Nowhere: A History of the Military Sniper. This book mentioned something that I didn't think of. The AK47 in Vietnam and in humid environments ran into a serious problem. Because it was made of wood it would expand and contract destroying not only accuracy but rifle handling as well. This of course was something the M16 didn't have to deal with. This brings into question the AK's durability (this was also a problem with the wood M14's). The modern shift of weapons has shown that such weapons like the AK are becoming obsolete. The M16 marked a new era of weapons. No longer were people trying to make the old wood rifles but plastic composites. The precision of the AR15 models were adopted by most nations as the new kind of infantry weapon. This was done for good reason. The AK was and is an old weapon. The M16 was the weapon of the future.
3) The 5.56 NATO round has proven over the years (many years) to be very effective in use. It doesn’t always knock down the target but it does kill. A target doesn’t have to fall to be considered dead. The target is dead when it is dead. 5.56 ammo rips through the body leaving a shock wave behind that is more damaging then the entry and exit. The bullet can pass through a person without bouncing around it is so fast. 5.56 has plenty of penetration power when it is fired at nearly the speed of sound. There have been plenty of stories of people running on though hit with 5.56 ammo but being found dead not long after. They were not knocked down but they were killed. It is also important to note that the size of the round does not detract from power at a long range shot. M16’s can kill over a mile. Effective range is based upon sightlines.
4) The cleaning of the M16 is not a difficult process. In fact it is one of the easiest things that most vets remember about basic training. It requires little special maintenance only a rag run through the parts used to fire. It has also been brought to my attention that there have been reports during the Iraqi conflict of soldiers having to strip down their weapons during a fight however every soldier I talk too laughs at this as it isn’t true. The M16A2 rifle is performing remarkably.
For those of you who remember the fun we had a few months ago with a smashing debate spawning from the classic struggle between the M16A2, M4 Rifle/Carbine and the AK47 and all its variants here is some more relivent information about weaponry.
The whole debate spawned when a fellow posted something his brother aledgidly said from Iraq. The brother made mention in an email of how much better the AK was then the M16. This of course meant that I had to do some follow up questioning of buddies of mine serving in the Iraq and what I found was that the claims made in the persumed email were needless to say less then accurate (the inaccuracies were not all technical but rather dealing with the technical nature of the rifles but rather what our [US] soldiers were doing on the battlefield). I posted a new thread to correct the inaccuracies and low and behold I had a full fledged fight on my hands <snicker, snicker>!
Where very little was resolved in the way of opinions changing and thus I do not expect a whole lot from this thread I would like to put up some new information not mentioned in the M16/AK Bit.
First of all, the major beef with the M16 was the same as it has been from the beginning before the M16A2 was around, that issue being cleaning and jamming. There have been claims that M16 users spit more curses then bullets as their weapons are always jamming. This argument is always countered by those vets who have fired the weapon and say that the M16s used in the military are a lot better then the crappy AR's that are there for fun shoot-outs and therefore the weapons do not jam.
That being said here is some fun stuff...
1) On a military shooting range jamming is sometimes an issue with people (this was mentioned by a few AK lovers to no end) but not too long ago wile talking with a friend of mine who was just discharged (he served with the 75th Rangers) he mentioned while in basic making the mistake of while shooting prone resting his mag on the ground. This caused a double feed which jammed the weapon. Now that is human error not any malfunction of the weapon.
2) I read a book entitled From Out of Nowhere: A History of the Military Sniper. This book mentioned something that I didn't think of. The AK47 in Vietnam and in humid environments ran into a serious problem. Because it was made of wood it would expand and contract destroying not only accuracy but rifle handling as well. This of course was something the M16 didn't have to deal with. This brings into question the AK's durability (this was also a problem with the wood M14's). The modern shift of weapons has shown that such weapons like the AK are becoming obsolete. The M16 marked a new era of weapons. No longer were people trying to make the old wood rifles but plastic composites. The precision of the AR15 models were adopted by most nations as the new kind of infantry weapon. This was done for good reason. The AK was and is an old weapon. The M16 was the weapon of the future.
3) The 5.56 NATO round has proven over the years (many years) to be very effective in use. It doesn’t always knock down the target but it does kill. A target doesn’t have to fall to be considered dead. The target is dead when it is dead. 5.56 ammo rips through the body leaving a shock wave behind that is more damaging then the entry and exit. The bullet can pass through a person without bouncing around it is so fast. 5.56 has plenty of penetration power when it is fired at nearly the speed of sound. There have been plenty of stories of people running on though hit with 5.56 ammo but being found dead not long after. They were not knocked down but they were killed. It is also important to note that the size of the round does not detract from power at a long range shot. M16’s can kill over a mile. Effective range is based upon sightlines.
4) The cleaning of the M16 is not a difficult process. In fact it is one of the easiest things that most vets remember about basic training. It requires little special maintenance only a rag run through the parts used to fire. It has also been brought to my attention that there have been reports during the Iraqi conflict of soldiers having to strip down their weapons during a fight however every soldier I talk too laughs at this as it isn’t true. The M16A2 rifle is performing remarkably.
Last edited: