Military vs. Civilian Guns

[mr hanky]

There is a thread right now about how some gun owners are not very knowledgeable ( I would include myself in this category) about guns and it made me think of this.

First of all, I have the highest level of respect and love for our armed forces and am in no way trying to imply anything contrary, that being said my question is:

Has anynoe noticed that once in a while when you talk about an AR15 vs. M16 that either certain military personel or someone who has talked to someone in the military about their M16 says (besides 'da switch') "they are completely DIFFERENT weapons."

I'll ask them how? Besides da switch or a cosmetic difference like a bayonet lug from the AWB etc. I have heard; "The rifling is completely different so the bullet spins LOTS faster and will do MUCH more damage than just an AR." I can't think all the others but I am just wondering if any of you guys have had this conversation and besides what I mentioned, are there any other major differences? Besides material the weapon is actually made of, maybe as well?

 

[Regolith]

One guy who was a vet told me his M16 was a bolt action.


Anyway...

I'm not an expert on M16's or AR15's. Never shot one, don't own one. But from what I've read here and what I've read elsewhere, it is quite easy (though not cheap) to get a mil-spec AR-15. Everything is the same except for the absence of Da Switch on the civy version.

Also, from what little I know about rates of spin, the guy who told you that was full of crap. A faster rate of spin helps stabilize larger bullets, which does help with the overall effectiveness of the round, but those same rates of spin are available in civilian versions.

Edit: or was it faster rates of spin help stabilize smaller bullets? Crap, can't remember. Either way I know that a civilian can own a barrel with the same rifling as the military version.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Well, I'm in the military, and I can say that the M4 I use there, and the AR-15 I own are only different in 3 ways. The M4 has a 14.5 in barrel, my AR has a 16 in. The M4 only has a 4 position telescoping stock, and my AR has a 6 position, though you can put a 6 position on an M4, my unit just hasn't done it. And lastly, the M4 has "safe" "semi" and "burst". And my AR only has "safe" and "fire." Other than that, they are exactly the same. My AR even has the bayonet lug.

 

[BlackBearME]

As far as I know, and for what it's worth (which admittedly is not much) there's no real difference. Of course, different companies produce different products, so to expect them to be entirely the same would be absurd.

Now, .223 vs. 5.56, on the other hand, there will you find a difference.

 

[birdbustr]

The civilian Colt M-4 match competition I bought had a fake collapsible stock, 16 inch barrel and the flash suppressor was big and gawdy and held on by 2 pins. No bayonet lug, but I never thought I would need that anyway.

I had to change the stock for one that really is collapsible, had the barrel threaded and a phantom flash suppressor put on. Trigger kit reduced the trigger from 8.5 lbs to 4.5 lbs. Really good shooter now.

 

[sacp81170a]

The only functional differences between my AR's (3) and an M-16 or an M-4 is the absence of "da switch" or "da burst" (silly thing, if you ask me) and the 1 in 9 twist of the barrel as opposed to the 1 in 7 twist on current issue weapons. I could have had the 1 in 7 twist, but I'm not gonna be shooting too much 77 gr. ammo, so I opted for the 1 in 9.

Oh, and the fact that my AR's are much tighter and less worn out than the ones I carried in the service.

 

[inherentical]

Has anynoe noticed that once in a while when you talk about an AR15 vs. M16 that either certain military personel or someone who has talked to someone in the military about their M16 says (besides 'da switch') "they are completely DIFFERENT weapons."

As a former USMC armorer, I'll tell you that the RRA Entry Tactical I own now is in much better shape than the majority of issued M16A2s I saw during my time in the service. Fit and finish is better, although the chrome lining looks different than what I remember. Past that, civilian versions are every bit as good as what I worked on back then.

"Mil-spec" is a great marketing ploy, rapidly gaining ground on "tactical."

 

[Zach S]

My favorite is the tumbling bullet that comes out of the shoulder when you shoot someone in the foot.

Regolith, its faster twist for heavier bullets.

 

[El Tejon]

The early AR/M16s had a much looser twist (1:12, even 1:14), not tight like today for the heavier bullet that Big Army was obessed with in the early '80s.

Mr. hanky, do not worry about GSCs. This is the gun culture, get used to people droning on about subjects that they have little understaning of or little experience in. It's O.K., just smile and nod, do your business at the gun shop and leave.

People make these statements as "chaff" to others or to make themselves appear educated. Have you ever heard these three words in a gun shoppe, "I don't know"? Heck, just look at the threads here on THR!

If they shoot, they are our friend. We can bring them up to speed later.

 

[RyanM]

Some pin locations are slightly changed on AR-15 lowers vs. M-16, to prevent you from using M-16 parts to make the gun full-auto/burst. That's pretty much it.

 

[12Bravo20]

Like others have said, The only difference is the capability to shoot full-auto/burst. RyanM is also correct that most newer AR lowers are made so that the military FCG will not fit (without modifications). I might be wrong, but I believe that older (pre AWB) lowers are the same as military issue lowers and that parts are completely inter-changeable.

 

[alucard0822]

Different bolt carrier, trigger groups, da swich of course, and 1-7 mil twist compared to 1-8, 1-9, 1-12 for civilian models. And having M-16 parts in a post 86 reciever is not a felony in the military. M885 stabilizes just fine in a 1-9 twist, supposedly 1-7 was needed to stabilize the much longer M288 tracer, and now helps with the 70+gr bullets just issued for combat.

 

[ilbob]

I wouldn't get to worried about it. there are plenty of soldiers who are not all that interested in firearms. Same as cops.

I was flipping through the TV channels a few weeks ago and some cop spokesman was talking about assault weapons and showed some examples sitting on a bench. One of them was a bolt action rifle and one looked like a flare pistol (although i am not all that sure about the flare pistol because I only got a glimpse of it).

A few years ago, a local cop was quoted as saying a revolver they caught someone with was a "semi-automatic assault gun pistol". There was a picture in the paper of the revolver (it did appear to be DA at least).

 

[HardKnox]

1. there is a thrird hole for the sear pin in the reciever

2. FCG parts are different (hammer, sear, saftey/selector)

3. bolt carrier is shaped differently

things like bbl twist and matierial construction are actually better in the civvie world, because we have more of a choice, and there are some exotic recievers going around as well as say the carbon 15. bbl twist is also much more diverse, you can find twist rates from 7-14 and everything inbetween

 

[alucard0822]

A few years ago, a local cop was quoted as saying a revolver they caught someone with was a "semi-automatic assault gun pistol". There was a picture in the paper of the revolver (it did appear to be DA at least).

while many officers and military personnel do not have much of an interest in guns, this sounds more like the comment of a future candidate for mayor or former reporter.

 

[ilbob]

while many officers and military personnel do not have much of an interest in guns, this sounds more like the comment of a future candidate for mayor or former reporter.

IIRC, the article was quoting a local cop. I wish I had saved the article. It was a classic line.

 

[TEDDY]

ar15/m16/m4

the original gun was an AR15.then it was changed to full auto,now it has burst fire.the twist was 1/12? so the bullet was unstable.the originals were lacking the auto sear pin hole.civilian dont have hole and rear of reciever has solid block.they changed to faster twist to stablize 66/77gr bullets.

 

[DMK]

This rifle is identical in almost every way to a military M16A2, except that my rifle is semi-auto instead of three round burst (no big loss IMO). It has the same barrel profile, same 1/7 twist, same chrome lined bore and chamber, same flash hider, same bayonet, same magazines, same furniture, etc. Perhaps I use some better parts than Govt. lowest bidder, perhaps some of their parts are better. But this rifle will do anything an M16A2 will do except shoot three shots with one pull of the trigger.

 

[moxie]

The M16A2 employs a faster rate of twist rifling to better stabilize the heavier (and a tad longer) 62 gr. M855 NATO standard 5.56mm round. The older M193 round is 56 gr.
The M249 SAW is also optimized for the M855 round.

 

[Titan6]

Well let's see:
My military M4--
- IR Laser/ flood light
- M203 Gernade Launcher
- Aimpoint Scope with shoot through adjustable sites
- 3 point sling
- Streamlight flashlight with flip-up IR cap
- Select fire switch

My AR
- Bayonet lug (what on the civilian but not on the M4!!! yep no more bayonets... no more butt strokes to the head either...)
- 3-9X scope
- Visible light laser
- Stream light flashlight
- Front stock handle

The M4 is not in quite as nice of shape as my AR. But it still shoots hole in hole at 25 meters (open sites) and goes bang 99 times out of a hundred. I also don't carry my AR everywhere I go 24/7 either.

 

[CleverNickname]

But it still shoots hole in hole at 25 meters (open sites) and goes bang 99 times out of a hundred.

A rifle that has a failure once every 3 magazines or so has problems.

 

[KC&97TA]

1. there is a thrird hole for the sear pin in the reciever

2. FCG parts are different (hammer, sear, saftey/selector)

3. bolt carrier is shaped differently

Few quick things to add; On older AR-15s you may hear the reference "big pin" it's mostly on Colts & Armalights, it has to do with the size of the pins than hold the fire control group. The AR15 FCG is different looking than the M16, you have to either be a gunsmith or hold them side by side to tell the difference, but once they are side by side, they differences stick out. The location of the take down pins is slightly offset on the forward pin of the M16 vs the AR15, which only requires a front conversion part which is civilian legal to own. You can put a M16 upper on a AR15 lower, there are companys that do sell them.

For what it is worth: I came in the Marine Corps in Aug of 1999, up untill April of 2004 did I ever fire a M16 on Burst, I only remember fireing about 6 magazines on Burst in combat, I was laying supressive fire, so the 240G could be unjammed (one mag was an accident by the way). I've fired some burst drill/posstion checks in training, but I don't use it as a training tool anymore when I instruct. I have fun shooting the M16M41, but it's all just for fun and to get rid of 'grade 3 ammo', full auto is a blast on a M16, you can hold on target at ranges under 15m with success, but at 50m we're lucky to have 5 of 30 rounds full auto stay on target, we did it for 'test' purposes... with more training we'd probly have better results.

I'd take my RRA Entry Tactical, that is "pimped out" over to Iraq, over a worn M16A4 or M4 any day. Semi Auto and training is all you need.

-----

Next the Beretta.

The M9 and 92FS share the same slide, barrel and most of the fire controls. The military M9 has a metal trigger, metal lanyard/MSH loop, metal safety, metal mag release, metal guide rod, the M9 also has one small difference, the front of the reciever is a little thicker, up by the dust cover. I've seen Civilian Sale 'new' M9's with the plastic parts as well, 92FS models from some were around 2002 to present have plastic parts as listed above... the only plastic part that gave me trouble on my 92FS was the mag release, right after 28,600 rounds it popped out on the range floor, I remember this because I put a metal one in shot 200 more rounds through her and then went to Iraq, upon returning my range book for the 92FS had disappeard.

I've replace the mag release as said, the guide rod, and the trigger, I haven't replaced the safety or lanyard loop. The trigger was 'just because' and the guide rod was for weight, which I didn't see any reduction in recoil.

----

Now if you want exactly what we have, in a non-class III format.
Knights Armament sells the SR-25 just like the Marines have, if you have $5500, plus glass.

Springfield will sell you a M21 DMR just like the Marines have, if you have enough $$$ think they're a bit over $6k

Iron Brigade Armory will sell you a XM3 Sniper Weapons Package for $17,295, just like the Marines have, plus tax and dros of course

Remington also sells 700 bolt rifles similar to the M40A3, but remember that the Marine Corps M40A3 is "hand build by Marines".

 

[Still 2 Many Choices!?]

The last difference touched on earlier, is that the AR-15's receiver is cut so that military FCG parts required for auto and burst fire won't fit, even if you could find them, without modification... Namely the disconnector, selector, and autosear... I don't know if the triggers are the same or not, but I assume they are.

Still 2 Many Choices!?

 

[mp510]

But this rifle will do anything an M16A2 will do except shoot up to three shots with one pull of the trigger.

The ratcheting trigger system on the M-16A2 allows UP TO 3 round bursts. For example, if you set the weapon to burst, fire 1 round, and then pull the trigger again, you will not be able to fire up to 2 rounds depending on when you release the trigger.

Additionally, the bolt M-16 bolt carrier is slightly heavier (it lacks one of the AR-15 cutouts).

 

[taliv]

the list of differences between the military rifles and their corresponding civilian versions is almost endless.

you can argue that some AR15s are "as good as" or even better than their military "equivalents" and you can certainly make the case that 90%+ of the functionality is there, sans select fire, of course.

but you can only say they're identical in the way that fords and chevy's are identical. there are a ton of differences, but few if any that really alter the way you behave.


this conversation reminds me of the one i just had with someone who claimed:

I am using Hornady 55gr and when you reach 3250+ it's considered m193.