Defensive Carry banner

Why I hate the Ar-15/ M-16!

17K views 113 replies 51 participants last post by  garn 
#1 ·
Sorry if this is the wrong forum, please move if need be.

Anyway, it seems a lot of people really like the M-16 and it's variants. I wouldn't have the time to count all the threads about them on this forum. But my question is why?

I used different one's for a while in the Army, but eventually moved on to better weapons. If there is one rifle I HATE, it would have to be the M-16. Even if you have a reliable one, you can't get past the ineffective round. Great for killing groundhogs, but not people.

Just can't understand the love for this rifle.
 
#2 ·
The less than effective round is why I chose an AR-10. The lager round will do so much more, and most all parts are interchangeable with the 15, and 16 platform.

It is not a bad idea to have a .223, so when it hits the fan you have the ability to defend your self if .223 is all you can get your hands on. With the number of ARs out their you could get parts when needed.
 
#3 ·
Lots of dead poeple around the world with testify to the 5.56's killing ability.

Put the round where it belongs and people go down. Works with every firearm.

If there is one weapon I would take when TSHTF, it would be my M4gery. And I do have a couple of 30 caliber battle rifles lying around.
 
#5 ·
Occasionally the round would kill with one shot, but without getting too gruesome, it was rarely effective. To me the AK47 works much better. Jams less, and always seemed to be one lying around when needed one (or at least they used to be).

For me it was an epiphany of sorts. Kind of like how I will never use 9mm ever again; .45 only. If I have to shoot I would rather go with what I know works, not what everyone else says is supposed to work.
 
#4 ·
Ineffective round as far as military ball goes, but with some decent civilian or LEO ammo, not as much. I don't own one, yet, but I certainly intend to buy one since the weapon itself is as adaptable and configurable a weapons system as there is out there right now. Not to say that others are not, but the AR-15 as a platform is just the ticket for someone like me.
 
#11 ·
Ineffective round as far as military ball goes
It depends which ball you are talking about.

M855, not so much. M193, however, is devastating within its fragmentation velocity envelope.
 
#6 ·
As i recall

There are two primary goals met with the M16. The round is smaller round means you can carry more and they are less expensive. The second is it's better to injure than kill. Every man wounded takes two more to carry him off the field. This does ignore the guy behind the wall or wearing the vest of course but then we are talking a decision made my government employees.

Guess that was actually three reasons? Guess I should be working for the government too LOL.
 
#7 ·
The second is it's better to injure than kill.
Funny how no one can substantiate that argument with facts. In fact the former commander of the Army Marksmanship Unit has stated to me and others in a Highpower forum discussion that such "reason" for the 5.56 is pure urban legend and that NOWHERE in US Army doctrine is that found or taught.
 
#8 ·
Sold mine after numerous jam problems. Got a Mini-30. (7.62 X 39) Cheaper ammo - no problems except occasional misfires on Russian surplus ammo with Berdan primers. Totally reliable with good ammo. I am amazed at all the people that question the reliability of 1911 pistols but like AR15's. Lots of soldiers in Vietnam went back to M14's due to reliability / performance issues.
 
#9 ·
Hey Terry, we'll start a support group.

I'm of the opinion that both the AR15 and the .223 are most overrated. Of course overrated never stopped "conventional wisdom" before and the AR is the hottest thing going right now. I'm just biding my time until the AR fad dies down, and it will die down.

I've got a Colt SP-1 but don't take it too seriously. The M1 (and M1A) does my talking.
 
#14 ·
I'm just biding my time until the AR fad dies down, and it will die down.
:stups:

Seeing how it is the longest serving infantry rifle in the last 100 years or so, I think you will be waiting for quite a while.
 
#10 ·
This thread would be more effective if it was in the right place...


I've never had an issue with a quality AR/M16 platform jamming or other wise ineffective. It like blaming the bat for not hitting a homerun.
 
#16 ·
I've moved this thread to the Rifle/Shotgun forum...

I like my Rock River with an EoTech Holosight...it has performed flawlessly right out of the box. It's getting harder to find reasonably priced ammo for it now, though.

I wouldn't want to get in a long-range rifle fight (200 yards or more) with it, though...CQB is more it's utility.
 
#17 ·
"Seeing how it is the longest serving infantry rifle in the last 100 years or so, I think you will be waiting for quite a while."

Strangely the AR15/M16 didn't really catch on during its first 30 years of use until this current generation of shooters came up. It also is worshiped in a far different way than was the venerated Model 1903 Springfield with which the AR15/M16 is only now passing as the longest serving rifle. Match shooters have always been interested in the current issue rifle but we appear to have a generation of AR fans who mostly want to play "dress up" with their rifles. Festoon it with all sorts of tacti-cool gadgetry and call it done. It may be observed, at least locally, how many don't really do anything with the rifle after they kit it out. They just have it. Guess that's good as it perpetuates guns and shooting.
 
#18 ·
The beginning of the AR-15's history was plagued with Colt screwing up Stoner's design, very poor marketing and management by both Colt and the US armed forces (not shipping out cleaning kits, etc.), and the same caliber argument people pissed and moaned about when the M1 went from 30-06 to .308.

For those debating its range, keep in mind what ranges armed forces personnel are trained at. If you do your part, it'll do the job plenty fine (especially the heavier loads).

I'm not advocating it as the end-all-be-all of current issue fighting rifles, but I keep being surprised by the poor logic expressed by people for hating a tool, and why they claim to hate the tool.


-B
 
#19 ·
I've got an 03A3, M1 Garand and a M1A and a Bushmaster Varminter. If I was limited to only one it would be the Bushmaster. I just plain enjoy shooting it more. With a Black Hills 75 gr HP or my handloads it performs great and I'd trust my life to it. I do have to admit the M1A is a prime contender for second place though.
 
#32 ·
I will list some of the weapons I used, that I think of fondly.

My favorite for CQ an automatic 12 g shotgun. AK47, an H&K 9mm auto (even though I don't like 9mm, the amount that it shoots per minute, makes the 9mm auto very effective). 50 cal, but way too cumbersome, and whatever the "long distance" rifle was, I think it was a Remington 700, but I am not positive.

For pistols I started with the Beretta 9mm, then went to the older Colt 45's when the 9mm wasn't doing the trick, then to a Sig Sauer 220, H&K .45, then back to Sig, which is still my personal favorite.

Also liked the H&K .45, but just didn't like having a safety.
 
#24 ·
I t looks to me that you are really not looking to be convinced otherwise regarding the AR or 9mm so why are you asking the question? Just be confident in your choice of weapon and leave the poodle shooter lovers alone. This is a discussion forum to exchange ideas and knowledge, not bash weapons you don't like that other people do. :hand36:
 
#29 ·
Your right, I am not trying to convince myself otherwise, just seeing if I was the only one of this opinion.

Also, I am not bashing anyone, especially for their choice of weapon, or personally. I am just politely expressing an opinion.

I know I don't post a lot, nor do I visit the site a bunch. But I understand that us pro 2 amend/gun owners are a great group of people and we need to stick together. There are no attacks coming from me, so please don't take it as so.
 
#28 ·
"Was talking to Larry Vickers (ex Delta if you don't know), and he believes that the AK (in 5.45) is a good idea for infantry."

I certainly could live with the AK as the more robust choice but no, not in 5.45. The 7.62X39 makes a lot more sense as an intermediate round than do the .22 bores.
 
#31 ·
The 7.62X39 (AKA flying bus) is inaccurate and has a short range. Fragmentation is also non existent . This is why the 5.45 is a better round. Same goes with the 556. It is a better round than the 7.62X39 as well.

7.62X51 is a very good for its intended roll (battle rifle at long distances), but as a CQB/Urban round this is not the best choice. Different rounds/weapons for different rolls. There is no magic round/weapon that does everything well.


C4
 
#34 ·
The idea of 12 center of mass and they are still coming is something I don't want to ever do again.-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I have no "war" experience but with all due respect I find it hard to believe that a human could sustain 12 rounds center mass and still pose a threat?
 
#37 ·
A few months back I took a 4 day rifle class and used an iron-sighted LRB M1A scout for the first 2 days and an eotech-sighted 14.7" ar15 for the last 2 days. I have never been a fan of the ar-platform before this but thought it would be a good comparison.

FYI, I'm 5'10", 190lbs, like beer but still work out 3x per week. After 2 days of firing, doing clearance drills and holding that M1A in the ready position, my arms would literally start shaking. Bottom line is that it was accurate and heavy. I still love the platform - great caliber, sights, and trigger but now realize my limitations with it. Tac reloads are a pain, it's heavy and its ammo is heavy too.

After switching to the ar15 for the last 2 days, it was a breath of fresh air. My rate of fire went up drastically (although there was a slight decrease in accuracy because I was probably rushing a bit much). It handles so much faster, is better for sustained fire. It's only downside is the caliber.

Overall, at the range I still prefer the m1a - it's just more fun for me to make big noise and put big holes in things at longer range. Still, I gained a lot of respect for the ar platform. I think the difference in caliber is lessened somewhat by the 75grain Hornady TAP and the higher volume of fire is hard to ignore. If I ever need to actually use the rifle to save a life, my selection would now be based on situation and not preference.

In any case, taking a training course was a HUGE eye-opener for me.
 
#38 · (Edited)
Hmmm... I don't know. I'd hate to have to rely on the .223's fragmentation to make it the more effective round. I'm not sure any military loadings of the .223/5.56 were ever designed around a projectile that fragments. Hague convention and all that. One is guaranteed a .224 diameter bullet of 55-70 grain weight when the round is fired. Any fragmentation or tumbling is a bit hocus pocus and not to be depended upon. The 123 grain .311 bullet looks more appealing to me at "intermediate" ranges and I'd rather have 7.62 NATO, even at intermediate ranges. A moot point since they aren't gonna stick me out in front of any of our enemies with any rifle.

Having shot high-power competition for some years with both the M1A and the AR15 I would rather have the bigger rifle. I just don't see the .22 centerfire military rounds as better rounds.
 
#39 ·
Hmmm... I don't know. I'd hate to have to rely on the .223's fragmentation to make it the more effective round. I'm not sure any military loadings of the .223/5.56 were ever designed around a projectile that fragments. Hague convention and all that. One is guaranteed a .224 diameter bullet of 55-70 grain weight when the round is fired. Any fragmentation or tumbling is a bit hocus pocus and not to be depended on. The 123 grain .311 bullet looks more appealing to me at "intermediate ranges and I'd rather have 7.62 NATO even at intermediate ranges. A moot point since they aren't gonna stick me out in front of any of our enemies with any rifle.

Having shot high-power competition for some years with both the M1A and the AR15 I would rather have the bigger rifle. I just don't see the .22 centerfire military rounds as better rounds.
Hate to tell you this, but SF and SEAL's are getting very good results (at long ranges) with the MK262. Again, there is no magic round. 7.62 does not gurantee that the bad guy is going down.

Another thing you always have to consider (especially if your LE or Civy) is over pentration. You don't want to kill someone in the next room or house because your ammo doesn't fragment.


C4
 
#41 ·
No, there aren't any magic rounds, least of all the .223 in any of it's guises. SF and Seals could get very good results with any of a host of rounds that could be considered to be better than the MK 262.

Things are really serious if one is compelled to begin shooting rifles in suburban areas and over penetration is just going to be a problem.

Great debate C4! I'm hopeless though. For my real world personal home defense rifle I intend reach past the AR15 and pick a Winchester Model 1907 .351 for repelling boarders. It's sturdy, compact, and reliable and I have plenty of ammo for it. The Winchester '07 and an M1 Carbine do guard duty in our home. For one of these hypothetical breakdown-of-society scenarios I'd use the M1.
 
#54 ·
The best weapon for home defense is the one that you are most comfortable with. With that said, you have to look at the ability to mount optics and lights onto said weapon. 70% of all crime happens at night. My suggestion to anyone that has picked a weapon that cannot mount a dot optic and a flashlight on, to take a low light/no light fighting course with said weapon! Prepare for a RUDE awakening.



C4
 
#45 ·
I suppose that reality is that it depends upon where one lives. I have voiced my opinion on the 5.45 ar platform before which was negative. I have had for my HD rifle a .30-.30 rifle since I was 15 and see no reason to change. 40+ years of using one rifle makes one very fimiliar with it. It is very dependable and it can be used even when very dirty. I bought an old .25-.35 model 94 Winchester that had dirt, powder and who knows what caked around the inards.
The action was stiff and sluggish but it still worked. Of course once I gave it a good cleaning it was butter slick, But I defy any regular AR platform rifle to work with that much crud.
 
#46 ·
I But I defy any regular AR platform rifle to work with that much crud.
I would prove you wrong, easily.

I went to a two-day defensive rifle course with 10-8 Consulting the first weekend of August. It was hot as hell the first day and raining the second. We shot about 600 - 700 rounds the first day and about 300 - 400 the second.

At the end of day one, with a little over 600 rounds of milsurp ammo, my rifle had not experienced a single malfunction except a couple of double feeds from one crappy mag. Once that mag was 86'd, the rifle ran just fine. I check the rifle at lunch break and the bolt was still wet with CLP. A few more drops of lube were added though not strictly necessary. At the end of the day the action was one oily mess of carbon, oil, and brass chips from cartridge rims (AR carbines are very hard on brass). I was had no idea the rifle was that filthy and even more impressed at the fact that I had not one single fauilre to feed (other than mag related) or to extract and eject.

ARs MUST be run wet with liberal amounts of OIL (not grease) at certain key points. Number one among them is the inside of the bolt carrier and the cam pin slot. Oil them heavily once a day or two and it will run for over a thousand rounds without a problem unless something breaks (usually hobby guns).
 
#47 ·
"I'm really not sure how one measures Lethality, however, I do know how one measures bad shooting.

Relying on a.10 inch difference as the answer to all gods questions regarding stopping human with lead projectile is absurd. Expecially since what you talking about has really no "Facts" to back up what your saying. .223 has been a very effective cartridge and has gone up in warfare agains the AK cartridge and has produced a much higher body count then the other side of the people carrying 7.62 ammuntion.

9mm diameter bullets have been working fine for almost over a 100 years and have been killing people just fine. .357 Mag, 9mm Markorov which won WWII in Blood, and 9mm kurz are very effective."



Bad shooting isn't effective for starters.

Dismissing a .10 inch difference is far too simplistic when comparing 9mm to .45. Using that line of reasoning one could make a case for the .25 ACP in comparison with the 9MM. After all, there is only about that same .10 inch difference between them. Of course there is a lot more to it than that.

The .223 is a very effective varmint cartridge and can be a stand-in for deer hunting but isn't a top choice there. It isn't pure, purple poison, and a more thoughtful cartridge could arm our troops. Are there any facts compiled from available data on the relative "body count" as filled by the .223 versus the AK round?

Certainly 9mm bullets have worked over the past century but so have larger bullets, and quite well too.


In years gone by I bought into the notion that heavier caliber handguns have a modicum of additional stopping effectiveness, partly because of the "conventional wisdom" of the day and partly because of my own observations when using various handgun rounds on varmints and critters. There is something to be said for this current line of reasoning that presumes that handgun caliber has little to do with relative effectiveness because the outcome of handgun hits to vitals is much the same whether the bullet is 9mm or .45. I'll buy into that, assuming precise shot placement. I am still of the opinion however that there is some merit to the larger, heavier handgun rounds. Perhaps there isn't much difference with perfectly placed shots to the vitals but what about less than perfect hits? I'm not prepared to say that a smaller caliber handgun round will be equally effective with non-vital hits. The large caliber, heavy bullet strikes a heavier blow and could contribute to causing an assailant to break off an attack even though he's not hit in a vital area or even immediately incapacitated. These "one-shot-stop" data bases that have been bandied about for the past 25 years or so just don't tell the complete story. Bringing an attack to a halt is what is desired whether or not a one-shot-stop is achieved. One could be said to be having a bad day no matter what he's plugged with, but he might be more persuaded to stop his attack through the application of heavy lead than he would with lighter, smaller bullets.

I carry a .38 Special most often and feel well armed with it. I'm fine with 9mm as viable, effective self-defensive cartridge. I do think that the .40 and over handgun self defense rounds offer a meaningful increase in effectiveness. That is to say they have more capability to effectively fulfill the task required of a self-defense handgun.

The fans of the under .40 caliber rounds are the ones who opine that "no handgun is truly effective", and dogmatize that "hits to vitals are all the same" and disparage that ".10 of an inch".
 
#48 ·
"

Dismissing a .10 inch difference is far too simplistic when comparing 9mm to .45. Using that line of reasoning one could make a case for the .25 ACP in comparison with the 9MM. After all, there is only about that same .10 inch difference between them. Of course there is a lot more to it than that. ".
Every credible pistol craft person, relies on accuracy as the primary consideration, Whether is Cooper, Suarez, Ayoob, etc....Pretty much all of them agree that shot placement is the Number one thing that is effective in a gunfight. What your comparing is Fractionable differences. Extremely small fractionable differences. Even medical personal have admitted they cannot tell the differences in wound channels from caliber to caliber. Suarez says "Theres IS NO comparable handgun for carry adequate for hunting MAN" Non off them belief in the Unicorn "One shot stop" You can play the heavier bullet theory all day long however in a nut shell heres reality.

9mm/ 22 LR has accomplished something in American History that even your beloved.45 ACP hasn't come close to topping. Its a horrible way of looking at things but those two cartridges wiped out 32 people in less than 3 minutes. Even the St. Valentines day masacre came to less then half the results with the beloved .45. I'm by no means saying its a bad cartridge, alot of people use .45 and bless their hearts it really doesn't bother me, a lot people use 9mm, both are equally as good. I'm just saying 9mm in the hands of a skilled operator is as lethal than any cartridge that holds terminal human balistics PERIOD.

Saying one is better then the other dosn't make any sense.
 
#51 ·
Can't really understand why someone 'hates' a weapon..just don't buy it! Use whatever you like..9mm v .45acp v .40 SW v .22..enough already... they will all kill an adversary..to quote an old saying.."if I put two in your chest and one in your head the caliber doesn't really matter" Same with .223 and 7.63x62 I have both AR and AK platforms both are accurate to 100 yds..I don't to engage anything over 100 yds...The AR is good to 200 yds and I cant really hit anything past 200 yds well anyway! As far as CQC / HD 15 -20 rds of 9mm JHP is better than 8 rds of 230gr .45 or 13 rds of .45 acp for you XD owners...I have 9mm and .45, I prefer the 9 but don't hate the 45
 
#53 ·
I'll tell you my experience with the AR15 platform. My unit (SWAT) uses fully automatic Colt M4s. I have performed numerous search warrants with this rifle. I have seen 5 separate dogs in the 90+ lb. range killed with our 55gr. hollowpoint 5.56mm ammo. The dogs died with one shot. According to all of the ballistic web sites the 5.56mm sings out of a 14" barrel at around 2800fps with a muzzle energy of around 1200ft. lbs. That's about triple that of any handgun out there. I completely believe in this round and my teammates have my life in their hands when employing it.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top