Maybe what we need is an M15 that is a hybrid of the best features of each.
Lee Ermey M 14 vs M 16 - YouTube
Printable View
Maybe what we need is an M15 that is a hybrid of the best features of each.
Lee Ermey M 14 vs M 16 - YouTube
I prefer the FN-FAL
Another FN-FAL fan here!
Each weapon excels in different areas. When the M-16 was developed we needed a shorter more compact weapon because of the conditions of the war we were fighting at the time. We no longer needed a large rifle capable of taking down the enemy at the longer ranges encountered during previous wars. Now we are back out in the open and the smaller cartridge is showing its limitations at the increased distances encountered in out present wars.
We have to live with the fact that our soldiers generally fight with weapons designed for the previous wars.
EDIT: I can knock down steel with my M-1A at ranges my buddies with the mouse guns can hit, but not knock down. Mine can still penetrate light cover at extended ranges that theirs will not. However is that capability worth the trade off of them being able to carry more ammo than I can? Two hundred rounds of .308 is a whole lot heavier than the same amount of 5.56 ammo.
Michael
I remember when I was at Bunker Hill, my Brown Bess was all dirty and my powder and my balls were all wet. But we still kicked British butt!
Or maybe just go with an AK.Quote:
Originally Posted by ExactlyMyPoint
Like a gas piston rifle in 6.8?Quote:
Originally Posted by ExactlyMyPoint
I'd rather shoot the M-14 but carry the M-16.
I prefer my 1903 to either the 16 or 14
I was in the Corps when they were changing over from the M14 to the M16. I fired expert (200, 300, @ 500 meters) with both. When you have to schlepp through jungles or going hootch-to-hootch, you want the M16. Anything else, I love the M14.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExactlyMyPoint
It's called an AR 10 :smile:
http://oi42.tinypic.com/34hang2.jpg
There are two issues here:
5.56 vs .308
and
M14 design vs M16 design (or more appropriately AR15/M4)
As for design in my mind there is no question. Todays AR15/M4 design is far superior to M14 and everything else that came before. It has been continuously improved since its inception in civilian markets and those improvements are slowly making their way to military.
As for caliber each has its advantages and dis-advantages. The AR15 design has been extended and you can buy rifles chambered in 308 and the intermediate 6.8 cartridge to suit your needs/wants.
I have an AR-15, an AK47 and an FAL. I just figured that it made sense to cover all the bases.
I carried both the M-14A1 (with bipod and auto selector) AND the M-16 in Viet Nam. With the M-16, our basic load was 400 rounds, and with the M-14, it was only 200 rounds. For that reason alone, I preferred the M-16. However, there were times when having an automatic M-14 came in really handy, as in shooting into a bunker. I knew my rounds were penetrating. I sometimes loaded a couple tracers in each 20-round magazine for the M-14. Having it and an M-60 in the unit meant serious suppressive fire when we needed it, and a GREAT way to open an ambush!
I think the perfect "happy medium' is the 6.5 and 6.8 cartridges out there now. It's too bad that they are not economically viable. It would cost hundreds of millions of dollars to switch (maybe even billions) and they aren't that much better than the OTM 5.56 rounds.