Army Won't Field Rifle Deemed Superior to M4 - Page 6

Wolverine · 04-20-2007, 10:48 PM

I think that some M16's work for people, and they may never see a failure but the chances are you will. Yes, it is true the M16 is more accurate than the AKM but of course how accurate does a battle rifle need to be? The .223 round isn't too great for up close with the 14.5 inch barrel on the M4 and the 62 grners they use now. I actually think the 20 inch 55 grners had a lot more going for it as far as the bullets lethal force goes. If you practice with your AK and do some tests with it I bet you will find you can actually hit man sized objects at 300-400 yards/meters fairly consistently which by me is just fine. If you need to go out further than that you shouldn't have an M16 either, you should have something like a M14. If I was in a bad situation with an M16 I would feel a sense of security that is missing, a security to know that I can defend myself if I have to in any situation because my gun might not work. The AK is proven to basically never fail under hardly any circumstance, and if it does fail it is usually the user at fault and is no problem. If people are talking about some sort of disaster on U.S. grounds then the M16 IMO would be even a more horrible choice because there wouldn't be as much of a chance to clean your weapon as regularly and there is a lot of terrain that is different. A gun that can go for years and never HAVE to be cleaned is a better weapon by far, even if it is less accurate. I know some guys have great respects for the M16 and have a lot of experience with them and no problems, you will find this occasionally but with the number of failures it is just crazy... why would anyone want a gun that fails so much?

Rew · 04-21-2007, 01:21 AM

Well let me explain this to ya. To begin with AK's do jam. I came across a few dead Iraqis with jammed AK's. The rifles were filthy. I also (and this is going to sound like bragging)dropped an Iraqi soldier at over 500 yards with an iron sighted M16A2. He was peppering us with his AK at the time. I think I was surprised as he was, but I won. It is important far a rifle to be accurate, at time's all you have is half a face to aim at and you need to be fast. You need to be able to put that bullet in a small space if need be. The M16 can do that the AK is a glorified SMG and can't.

gunnysmith · 04-21-2007, 01:47 AM

Accuracy is the key.
The M16 platform has vastly superior sights to that of the AK.
Barrel harmonics are minimized with The AR platform, not so in the AK.
The Drawback of the AR has always been the gas impinging system, once the Chrome linings were installed to eliminate chamber problems.
Venting combustion gasses to atmosphere would be vastly superior to allowing combustion gas to create carbon deposits within the receiver and more so allowing them within the body of the bolt and carrier.
The specific way in which the bolt gas rings must be install should have created question marks within the accepting Services.
The primary question should have been, why were the needed in the first place.
A short stroke piston upper will eliminate the final defect of the platform.
And should take us well through the next 3 decades.

Pogo · 04-21-2007, 07:35 AM

This one has been beat to death enough in this thread and other similar threads. The original subject of the thread was something new. Now it's just dead horse beating. It's time to close it.

04-21-2007, 01:47 AM	#78
gunnysmith Fear what you cannot see Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 6,730	Accuracy is the key. The M16 platform has vastly superior sights to that of the AK. Barrel harmonics are minimized with The AR platform, not so in the AK. The Drawback of the AR has always been the gas impinging system, once the Chrome linings were installed to eliminate chamber problems. Venting combustion gasses to atmosphere would be vastly superior to allowing combustion gas to create carbon deposits within the receiver and more so allowing them within the body of the bolt and carrier. The specific way in which the bolt gas rings must be install should have created question marks within the accepting Services. The primary question should have been, why were the needed in the first place. A short stroke piston upper will eliminate the final defect of the platform. And should take us well through the next 3 decades. __________________ Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. H. L. Mencken

04-21-2007, 07:35 AM	#79
Pogo Mystic Knight of the Sea Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: The Great Swamp Posts: 81,980	This one has been beat to death enough in this thread and other similar threads. The original subject of the thread was something new. Now it's just dead horse beating. It's time to close it. __________________ .................................................. ....................................… *We have met the enemy, and he is us!*

04-20-2007, 10:48 PM	#76
Wolverine Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: West Virginia Posts: 369	I think that some M16's work for people, and they may never see a failure but the chances are you will. Yes, it is true the M16 is more accurate than the AKM but of course how accurate does a battle rifle need to be? The .223 round isn't too great for up close with the 14.5 inch barrel on the M4 and the 62 grners they use now. I actually think the 20 inch 55 grners had a lot more going for it as far as the bullets lethal force goes. If you practice with your AK and do some tests with it I bet you will find you can actually hit man sized objects at 300-400 yards/meters fairly consistently which by me is just fine. If you need to go out further than that you shouldn't have an M16 either, you should have something like a M14. If I was in a bad situation with an M16 I would feel a sense of security that is missing, a security to know that I can defend myself if I have to in any situation because my gun might not work. The AK is proven to basically never fail under hardly any circumstance, and if it does fail it is usually the user at fault and is no problem. If people are talking about some sort of disaster on U.S. grounds then the M16 IMO would be even a more horrible choice because there wouldn't be as much of a chance to clean your weapon as regularly and there is a lot of terrain that is different. A gun that can go for years and never HAVE to be cleaned is a better weapon by far, even if it is less accurate. I know some guys have great respects for the M16 and have a lot of experience with them and no problems, you will find this occasionally but with the number of failures it is just crazy... why would anyone want a gun that fails so much?

04-21-2007, 01:21 AM	#77
Rew Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Colorado Posts: 9,710	Well let me explain this to ya. To begin with AK's do jam. I came across a few dead Iraqis with jammed AK's. The rifles were filthy. I also (and this is going to sound like bragging)dropped an Iraqi soldier at over 500 yards with an iron sighted M16A2. He was peppering us with his AK at the time. I think I was surprised as he was, but I won. It is important far a rifle to be accurate, at time's all you have is half a face to aim at and you need to be fast. You need to be able to put that bullet in a small space if need be. The M16 can do that the AK is a glorified SMG and can't.