This is a discussion on Why I hate the Ar-15/ M-16! within the Defensive Rifles & Shotgun Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by peacefuljeffrey I have a Colt Match Target HBAR (essentially an AR-15 made after the clinton ban) and it's always been a sweet ...
Remington 700 can be long range if you want it to be and have enough cash, but that depends on your definition of long range I guess. To some, the outward bounds of the AR15 223 is long range enough :D
I am sworn to protect the Constitution of the U.S.A. from all threats both foreign and domestic.
The AR15 I traded off because of jamming was a Tier 1 Colt. Maybe I just got a bad one. I won't carry a handgun that misfires occasionally, and I think a self defense rifle should be just as reliable. Once I lost that warm fuzzy feeling it just had to go. Besides, the caliber is banned in CO for deer hunting. You can hunt deer with 7.62 X 39 and hunting ammo is available with the same approximate ME as a 30/30. So I switched.
I am continually amazed at the wide variety of opinions and the passion people have for their firearms preferences. This thread has been a good read.
"...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..."
Nope, I will not have a bunch of stuff hanging off of my rifle, be it the AR15 or the Winchester Model 1907. I can use the rifle and a Pelican light to good effect and anyone who comes around my place with evil intent can depend on a RUDE awakening.
When used on an enemy soldier at ranges of 175 yards or less, the 5.56mm bullet fired from the M16 rifle (not the short barreled M4) is one of the most effective military bullets ever made. No it will not shoot throught concrete blocks. That is what the squad M60 machine gun is for: Oops forgot, they took that away and replaced it with the SAW.
i've killed a few hundred coyotes with the M193 NATO round. It just tears them apart at ranges of 100 yards or less.
The manuals and lesson plans I mentioned were used by all trainers. Our DIs used them, range personnel used them and I used them. These manuals and lesson plans stated that the US Army had the best equipment in the world. They specifically stated the M-16 was the best rifle in use by any military in the world. We repeated these statements to young men 18, 19, and 20 years old. Then we sent them off to AIT and from there to Southeast Asia. Every week we would receive notices of young men who when through training with us who would not be coming back or who would not be coming back whole. This was not always the result of the equipment they used, but a lot of it was.
In 18 months as a Training Officer I went to rifle ranges with trainees more than 60 times. When they came back to the barracks the DIs would have them clean their weapons. The weapon was not turned in to the arms room until it was passed by the DI. When they went to the arms room they were as clean as they could be. These rifles were properly maintained. In my more than 60 trips to rifle ranges I never went a single time where we did not have 5 or more malfunctions or stoppages. If these problems had occurred in the same rifles I could have attributed it to a problem with that firearm, but it was random. Over 5 or 6 trips there might be some that had problems more than once, but they were the exception. Cleaning and maintenance were not the problems.
In the final analysis I decided that the problem had to be in the design itself. Later I discovered that this was not the sole reason for the problems. The ammo specifications from the manufacturer were not followed and for quite a few years the ammo caused some of the problems. Learning that did not change my opinion of the M-16. The ones that were used by the trainees I trained seldom had 50 rounds fired between cleanings and with that few rounds the ammo problems shouldn't have manifested themselves in the range sessions very frequently.
I know that the platform has been improved over the past 40 years, but my opinion has not. Others have different opinions and that is fine by me. As I mentioned in a thread a few weeks ago, I don't have to answer to anyone about the firearms I buy and like. I give everyone else the same courtesy. If someone like the AR-15/M-16 platform and it works for them that is fine by me. It would be a dull and boring world if everyone was exactly alike.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. Albert Einstein
Thats why I have an AK, less expensive gun/ammo/parts, more firepower. Don't need a rifle to snipe. Just battle, without worrying about it getting too dirty to work.
That is one nice looking 1907 Winchester .351 you have there.
Least we forget that the AK went through many improvements and failures during its development and fielding. And manufacturing issues even so grave as to stop its production for a while and the SKS continued until they solved those. All sorts of things like this affect any weapon system over time. Most of Colts/Stoners occurred in an open society and in full view of the public. And of course some of those were politicized, and some would claim they continue long after the problem was solved. The debate there is, of course, each has its advantages and disadvantages. And all of them fail from time to time.
The separate debate about caliber will go on for ever. There is no one perfect thing for all situations. However the .223 has fit into the best compromise. Ability to carry more rounds and get the job done most of the time. It should be noted that even the old Com Bloc's saw this and so the 5.45 (about a .221 by the way). Not all the time will it be THE BEST for all situations. The employment of larger calibers when needed still must be augmented. And it is. I see many pictures of reworked M14's in .308 being deployed. And of course .50's as well. It should also be noted that the 5.45 lived a short life to be replaced with the .223! All things considered the idea of carrying more rounds for the same pounds and it doing the job is all a compromise. Not a perfection.
I have them both and love them each for their application. Both the AK and AR. I have had no problems with either of them. They all have worked flawlessly. To be honest with you I prefer to shoot an M1 Carbine over either of them!
I used the M16 in the Army, and became comfortable with it. I bought my Colt AR6721 twelve years after leaving the Army, and manipulating its controls was still second nature. There was no "re-learning curve" whatsoever. Same thing with disassembly/reassembly.
I've seen its terminal effects, and they are acceptable to me.
Other calibers are inarguably more powerful, and other platforms are inarguably better engineered.
....but the M16/AR15 is my "first love" in the "assault rifle" category, just as the 1911 is in the defensive pistol category, so I'll keep her. The "feel" of each one evokes memories, some good, some bad, but all very real and personal.
Not saying it's the best, just that it's the one for me, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, til death do us part, yada yada yada.
All handguns I have ever owned (Glock, Wilson Combat 1911's, S&W M&P's and even revolvers) have malfunctioned at one time or another. It is not realistic to think that malfunctions do not happen in ALL weapons platforms.
I would not base your opinion of an entire platform on owning just one.