Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

M-16 Rifle May Be on Way Out of U.S. Army
AP, Yahoo! ^ | 11-22-03 | Slobodan Lekic

Posted on 11/22/2003 1:50:36 PM PST by Ex-Dem

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-175 next last
To: Iris7
Quite true, but you can fire 7.62 NATO out of rifles chambered for the 7.62x54R cartridge. I had to clear a stuck cartridge out of my nephews Moisin Nagant after he had done just that. It was fire formed to a new and interesting shape.
101 posted on 11/22/2003 6:57:51 PM PST by elmer fudd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: archy
Fired a magazine through an FG 42 once. Needs a trained trigger finger. Easy to spray, something of a recoil heave.

The following paragraph is not aimed at you, but at the non-expert reader.

War weapons end up heavy and simple. Peacetime weapons end up lightweight, expensive, and unreliable in war. Peacetime tanks usually end up underamoured, though not much since the Chieftain. Leopard II looks very good. Abrams is OK. That Army eight wheeler Stryker looks like a real abortion, everything but a kitchen sink, with lots of video games. The Marine eight wheeler is much better. The M16 is deeply flawed. The M60 is a copy of the MG42 made by folks who didn't understand what they were doing. The Russians make the best body armor per dollar by far. The list goes on.
102 posted on 11/22/2003 7:05:31 PM PST by Iris7 ( "Duty, Honor, Country". The first of these is Duty, and is known only through His Grace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: PoorMuttly
Just heard a report about this M16 replacement issue on AM radio news...so I guess the ball is really in play about this issue.
103 posted on 11/22/2003 7:06:56 PM PST by PoorMuttly (DO, or DO NOT. There is no TRY - Yoda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Ex-Dem
If length is the main issue then a bullpup design is the answer. There are already a couple in service, the Sterling with the Brits and the AUG with a few other countries. Before designing a new bullpup we should procure a few thousand of the existing designs and put them to use. It would make sense to try out the bullpups first before actually commiting to change over completely to a new weapons system.

I don't know if the Sterling uses M16 mags but a bullpup that has magazine compatiblity with the M16 that would make it easier to retain the M16 for non-mechanized troops. The M16A2 is still the best in the business for aimed slow fire.
104 posted on 11/22/2003 7:12:59 PM PST by SBprone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SBprone
Isn't the real issue with bullpup designs, that you need to have glass to get hits at any distance, due to the short sight radius of the configuration? Glass longivity and handling by mass number of troops is a real issue, and you end up with a short range weapon when the glass breaks and you have to fall back to iron sights.
105 posted on 11/22/2003 7:43:41 PM PST by FreedomPoster (this space intentionally blank)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Morgan's Raider
That's when I found out Mosin-Nagant was Russian for "big muzzle flash".

Especially if you use the heavy bullet loads meant for use in the DP *Emma*, PK, and Russian Maxim machineguns. Meant to rach out and scratch away at formations of troops as much as 2000 meters away, they offer a bad enough kick in a 30-inch barrelled *3-line* MosinNagant. Just as bad a mismatch: Norma 7,62x54r marked soft point hunting bullets actually loaded with .308 bullets that offer fairly minimal accuracy results in the rifles' .311 bores. The suoerb Finnish M28-30 rifles used .3082 bore diameters, and deliver excellent results with this ammo, just as they did in every international riflery competition they entered from 1927 on, though they won't shoot for beans in the average Russian bore. Find a guy with an m/28-30 pytstykorvaa and offer 'em as trade goods to ther specialists who can make use of 'em.


106 posted on 11/22/2003 8:01:14 PM PST by archy (Angiloj! Mia kusenveturilo estas plena da angiloj!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: elmer fudd; Ex-Dem
Well, if the M16A2 is considered too big, what about the OICW? That thing's a bohemoth with the ergonomics of a 4x4 fencepost.

Maybe it's time for a complete redesign using established technology and not a lot of Buck Rogers stuff like on the OICW. The new rifle should be modular and ergonomic like the M16, reliable like the AK, and fire a cartridge larger than the 5.56x45 but smaller than the 7.62x51. The Korean K1/K2, Swiss STGW90, German G36 and Swedish AK5 are all excellent designs to build on.

See #85. See gentlemen; Ordnance HAS been listening....

107 posted on 11/22/2003 8:59:54 PM PST by archy (Angiloj! Mia kusenveturilo estas plena da angiloj!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Iris7
I am simply repeating what I was told. The Corps was really down on experiments involving captured weapons, so I cannot vouch for the truth of everything they told me. I never had an M-14 In Country, and I was a little shy about trying to feed M-60 ammo thru an SKS. Too many things can go wrong.
Hey, they didn't call it "Scuttlebut" for nothing...
108 posted on 11/22/2003 9:53:34 PM PST by jonascord (Don't bother to run, you'll only die tired...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: SBprone
If length is the main issue then a bullpup design is the answer. There are already a couple in service, the Sterling with the Brits and the AUG with a few other countries. Before designing a new bullpup we should procure a few thousand of the existing designs and put them to use. It would make sense to try out the bullpups first before actually commiting to change over completely to a new weapons system.

I don't know if the Sterling uses M16 mags but a bullpup that has magazine compatiblity with the M16 that would make it easier to retain the M16 for non-mechanized troops. The M16A2 is still the best in the business for aimed slow fire.

Only the very first of the British L85/SA80 Rifles were built by Sterling, easily identifiable by their SA serial numbers. They proved unsuitable and the L86A1 version replaced them, made by RSAF Enfield, serial numbers beginning with UE, mot much better, though I used them a couple of times and they worked for me just fine. The latest versions are the L86A2, identifiable by the wider cocking handle knob, meant to allow closing the action more quickly with a slap to the bolt. The L85, L85A1 and L85A2 all used with standard M16 magazines, tho the Brits issued steel magazines otherwise identical to the US 30-round magazine.


109 posted on 11/22/2003 9:58:10 PM PST by archy (Angiloj! Mia kusenveturilo estas plena da angiloj!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster
Optical sights are the coming thing. If they aren't yet robust enough for general use they soon will be. I think bullpups have been having various teething problems involving gas systems leaking and blowing off fingers, etc. Personally I wouldn't want to shoot a Sterling or an AUG for that reason, but it would be a handy weapon for an armored vehicle crew and it would hit a lot harder than an M4 with its 12" barrel.
110 posted on 11/22/2003 10:01:57 PM PST by SBprone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: archy
Is there any reason we shouldn't just procure the British service rifle for vehicle crews and keep the M16 for everybody else? I don't have anything against HK, but why go to the trouble of building a whole new system around a 40 year old cartridge?
111 posted on 11/22/2003 10:13:52 PM PST by SBprone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: archy
Wow, and they complained that the M-16 looked like a toy gun...
Does indeed look like a smoother, sleeker version of the HK G36.

Oh, but I've got lots of questions for you.
What material is it made out of? Some sort of plastic composite? Does it take a grenade launcher? They aren't going to keep that ridiculous color scheme, are they?
112 posted on 11/22/2003 10:14:40 PM PST by Ex-Dem (not just another brick in the wall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Ex-Dem
Sorry to hear this. My last qualification at Bragg was 38 for 40 with the M-16 (even though I was assigned the M-203).

Don't laugh. It wasn't everyday that a Signal soldier was made to feel, ummm, powerful.


113 posted on 11/22/2003 10:20:51 PM PST by rdb3 (The Left does indeed have principles. You won't agree with them because they're evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rdb3
38 out of 40 = Expert marksman, doesn't it?

Kudos to you!
114 posted on 11/22/2003 10:25:13 PM PST by Ex-Dem (not just another brick in the wall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: elmer fudd
Wasn't that the G-12? I have a solid brass model of one of the rounds and a white paper on it from the 80's. Neat concept would be cool if it worked...
115 posted on 11/22/2003 10:43:51 PM PST by Axenolith (There are two types of men in this world, those with loaded guns, and those who dig...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Ex-Dem
A militerized mini-14 in a bull-pup configeration might be a solution. Same ammo, rugged, reliable and less expensive.
116 posted on 11/22/2003 10:46:32 PM PST by fella
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thane_Banquo
Bring back the M14!

What do you bet HK gets the new Army contract?

117 posted on 11/22/2003 11:03:47 PM PST by Euro-American Scum (A poverty-stricken middle class must be a disarmed middle class)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
Get your hands on an M-14. It's an improved Garand...you will appreciate the improvements.

I have a Springfield Armory M1A. Awesome weapon.

118 posted on 11/22/2003 11:06:16 PM PST by Euro-American Scum (A poverty-stricken middle class must be a disarmed middle class)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SBprone
Optical sights are the coming thing. If they aren't yet robust enough for general use they soon will be. I think bullpups have been having various teething problems involving gas systems leaking and blowing off fingers, etc. Personally I wouldn't want to shoot a Sterling or an AUG for that reason, but it would be a handy weapon for an armored vehicle crew and it would hit a lot harder than an M4 with its 12" barrel.

That, and that bullpups are difficult for lefthanders to use, or difficult for use when available cover makes lefthand use necessary even for a rightpaw. The real answer may be a weapon that ejects downward or out the front of the foreens instead of to either side.

Note that Kalishnikov's new OC-14 *Groza* bullpup retains the rightside ejection of the parent design but still manages a 16-inch barrel as per the original AK47 for ballistic effectiveness.


119 posted on 11/23/2003 2:08:03 AM PST by archy (Angiloj! Mia kusenveturilo estas plena da angiloj!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: fella
A militerized mini-14 in a bull-pup configeration might be a solution. Same ammo, rugged, reliable and less expensive

The French tested the Mini-14 extensively, the reason the 3-shot burst versions of the Ruger GB military and police versions were fielded; that was one of the French requirements. They found the Ruger barrel too light, warping severely after prolonged full-auto fire and that the rifle was too lightly constructed for armored vehicle troops.

But there is a bullpup accessory stock available for the mini-14, or better, the mini 30. The trigger pull is pretty awful but might be reworked, and a better sighting arrangement, perhaps an EO tech holographic unit, is required. But until a proper downward-ejecting bullpup can be fielded, perhaps one that feeds from the top so as to make magazine changes fast and allows both a large magazine capacity and a proper prone position, your mini might do.


120 posted on 11/23/2003 2:18:20 AM PST by archy (Angiloj! Mia kusenveturilo estas plena da angiloj!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Euro-American Scum
Bring back the M14!

What do you bet HK gets the new Army contract?

When we come up with a design that's produced by several contractors, as Winchester, TRW and H&R did alongside Springfield Armory in the case of the M14, and as Colt, General Motors/ [Hydramatic] and FN International have done with the M16, we'll likely have a real winner again. Single-sourced small arms procurement has got to go.

121 posted on 11/23/2003 2:22:48 AM PST by archy (Angiloj! Mia kusenveturilo estas plena da angiloj!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Ex-Dem
Wow, and they complained that the M-16 looked like a toy gun...
Does indeed look like a smoother, sleeker version of the HK G36.

Oh, but I've got lots of questions for you.
What material is it made out of?

Polymer and steel for the most part. I'm told it's a modified Zytel 6, with a composite carbon/graphite/boron content, similar to the stuff space shuttle tiles are made of. I'll reserve judgement on that until I've tried it.

Some sort of plastic composite?

Yep. also like the new Israeli Tavor. But note that as the Russian *Grozny* proves, stamped sheet metal is still a viable choice.

Does it take a grenade launcher?

Oh yes. It's meant to work with the Alliant OICW 20mm round. And it's a good bet an intirm 40mm version can be adapted; either the M203 as adapted to the M4 carbine; or possibly the new 40mm unit fitted to some British L85A2 rifles.

They aren't going to keep that ridiculous color scheme, are they?

What, you don't like the DeWalt Power Tools commemoritive version? The nice thing about polymers and plastic composites is that can come out any coplour that's desired. There are some fairly nice neutral grey offerings, but an olive drab version is the more likely bet.

See more details and speculation in the FReepthread *here*.

-archy-/-


122 posted on 11/23/2003 2:47:12 AM PST by archy (Angiloj! Mia kusenveturilo estas plena da angiloj!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: jonascord
I remember hearing that story myself in the old days. I knew enough about such things that I was very skeptical then. Then the Soviet cartridges were unknown here except for their caliber designations, to explain the situation to any readers unfamiliar with those times.

I remember the person telling me this story well enough to vouch for his complete belief in it's truth.
123 posted on 11/23/2003 3:10:02 AM PST by Iris7 ( "Duty, Honor, Country". The first of these is Duty, and is known only through His Grace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Eaker
as for accuracy i found them quite comparable(both my sks' are pre-ban W/ milled recievers, no stamped parts like some of the AK's. the AR-15 was more likely to jam up, cleaned or fired. i have raelly abused my one chinese SKS, dropped it, forgot to clean it, left it leaning against against my jeep overnight in the rain......and it still just keeps on working. thirty rounds as fast as i can squeeze WOOO HOOO. and ammo a fraction the price!(Just bought a 1000 round tin this summer and it half gone! 60 bucks+shipping)
124 posted on 11/23/2003 5:17:27 AM PST by gdc61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Ex-Dem; *bang_list
Thanks for posting this article. BANG
125 posted on 11/23/2003 9:01:54 AM PST by neverdem (Say a prayer for New York both for it's lefty statism and the probability the city will be hit again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iris7
My goodness, what an amazingly erroneous statement. The 7.62x39 in no way is interchangeable with the 7.62x54, nor the 5.56x39 with the 5.7(about)x44.

Correct, but ours is the 5.56x45, theirs is the 5.45x39. Theirs is basically a 7.62x39 case, necked down to take the smaller bullet. Muzzle velocity and bullet weight are comparable to 5.56X45.

126 posted on 11/23/2003 10:59:52 AM PST by El Gato (Federal Judges can twist the Constitution into anything.. Or so they think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: fourdeuce82d
BANG
127 posted on 11/23/2003 11:27:57 AM PST by neverdem (Say a prayer for New York both for it's lefty statism and the probability the city will be hit again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RANGERAIRBORNE
You wrote about your D.I. firing an M14 with its butt on his crotch.

I tried the grenade launcher of a M203 just to the side of my jewels. I din't do it a 2nd time. I Thank G-D I didn't put it on my jewels. Talk about young and dumb.
128 posted on 11/23/2003 1:11:52 PM PST by neverdem (Say a prayer for New York both for it's lefty statism and the probability the city will be hit again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Ex-Dem
Why don't we re-chamber the M-16, M-4, and M-249 (SAW) for 7.62, to give it a LOT more knock-down power; make them a little more durable, since we're trying to win a war, not a beauty pagent; give the M-16 full auto fire, to make it better for CQB; and make a sub-machine gun version in .45, also good for CQB.
129 posted on 11/23/2003 3:53:14 PM PST by Iron-sight Sniper (HOORAH!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gdc61
"prefer the SKS hands down"

Its a great gun!
130 posted on 11/23/2003 4:00:01 PM PST by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: elmer fudd
The Germans spent decades trying to perfect caseless cartridges and even had a working prototype rifle. They finally gave up on it in the early 90's.

Actually, the G11-K2 was ready for issue in 1990. The budget got axed when German reunification hit--the need was less urgent, and money was needed elsewhere.

131 posted on 11/23/2003 4:04:06 PM PST by Poohbah ("Beware the fury of a patient man" -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Thane_Banquo
Bring back the M14!

That's the first thing I've heard in a week that makes any sense. I carried one in basic training. It's a heavy mother but will put out some lethal metal. I bought the civilian version about a month ago and stocked up on tracer ammo and hi-cap mags.

If the humvee soldiers need a reliable, compact weapon bring back the M3A1 Grease Gun.


132 posted on 11/23/2003 4:04:24 PM PST by CholeraJoe (Daddy, how many US soldiers have to die in defense of Freedom? Daughter, if necessary, all but 9.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ex-Dem; CWOJackson
Ditto on the M-14. When I transitioned from the M-14 to the M-16, the firearms instructor was careful to tell us the M-16 was not to be used with a bayonet the same way as the M-14 unless one wished to end up with two weapons. Both of them clubs.
133 posted on 11/23/2003 4:08:59 PM PST by CholeraJoe (Daddy, how many US soldiers have to die in defense of Freedom? Daughter, if necessary, all but 9.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: gdc61
***Just bought a 1000 round tin this summer and it half gone! 60 bucks+shipping***

Where did you get that?!?

My brother has a yugo sks, and gets wolf ammo at $75 for 1000 excluding S&H
134 posted on 11/23/2003 4:11:15 PM PST by Iron-sight Sniper (HOORAH!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Ex-Dem
Bttt.

5.56mm

135 posted on 11/23/2003 4:13:35 PM PST by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steppenwolffe
AK74 uses a 5.45mm round, the M16/AR15 uses a 5.56mm round
136 posted on 11/23/2003 4:24:23 PM PST by Fred Hayek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Ex-Dem

137 posted on 11/23/2003 4:39:11 PM PST by Momaw Nadon (The mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work unless it's open.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patton
Hey archy - I like the M16. Carried one for years.

But if I were in Iraq, I would aquire an AK74S.

Note that the Russian troops- vehicle drivers, radio operators, and those working crew-served weapons- issued the AKS74U *Krinkov* are frequently less than thrilled with it, and try to pick up a full 16-inch barrelled AK74S just like those you prefer. Accordingly, MikTim Kalishnikov and his elves at the Isvezh arms factory have come up with the OC-14 *Groza-1* bullpup version of the AK with a 16-inch barrel, yet still nicely compact, and suitable for use with the underbarrel-mounted GP30 grenade launcher.

I doubt that either is the *ultimate* AK, and that further developmental spinoffs will likely appear. But it's interesting to note that the Russians felt the return to the 7,62x39mmM43 cartridge was called for, and that the newer 5,45mm cartridge may not thought to be the answer in quite every situation. At least for their situation. I sort of prefer the RPK, myself. When I can't get my hands on a SVD.


138 posted on 11/23/2003 10:02:57 PM PST by archy (Angiloj! Mia kusenveturilo estas plena da angiloj!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: archy; NRA2BFree
When we come up with a design that's produced by several contractors. . . we'll likely have a real winner again. Single-sourced small arms procurement has got to go.

In an ideal world, perhaps. But the world is far from ideal. I only know HK moved an entire facility to Smyrna, GA -- manufacturing, sales, R&D from what I hear. And I'll bet they didn't go to such considerable effort and expense just to sell USP pistols to the public.

I just wonder if the deal wasn't already signed, sealed and delivered long before HK invested in their Georgia plant.

139 posted on 11/23/2003 10:06:02 PM PST by Euro-American Scum (A poverty-stricken middle class must be a disarmed middle class)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: FlyVet
The idea for a cartridge like this (the 6.5 Grendel) occurred to me independently years ago, but I didn't have the wherewithal to produce one...I've been wondering for a long time when such a cartridge would evolve.
140 posted on 11/24/2003 4:31:57 AM PST by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill
Same ammo + shorter barrel = higher pressure at the gas port
assuming the gas port is closer to the breech.

Regards

J.R.
141 posted on 11/24/2003 4:35:44 AM PST by NMC EXP (Choose one: [a] party [b] principle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jonascord
"...is chambered for the 5.56mm NATO. The AK-74, like all USSR leftovers, is chambered so it can either use Red Army issue ball, or captured NATO ammunition, same as the AK-47 could chamber and function with .308 Nato, and the USSR 82mm mortar could fire the NATO 81mm shell. While they could fire ours, we could not fire USSR issue...."

You are embarrassing youself here. The AK CANNOT chamber a 7.62 NATO round...it won't even fit into the magazine. And the cartridge head diamater of the Russian 5.45 round is larger than that of the NATO 5.56mm round (it's the same as the 7.62X39 round), so those rounds are not interchangeable either. Where do you come up with this nonsense?
142 posted on 11/24/2003 4:37:36 AM PST by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
"...Chamber the M4 into a .308 round ... perfect short range battle rifle....."

Well, if you did this, it would be difficult to determine which end of the rifle packed the bigger wallop. Modern selective fire carbines are chambered for reduced-power rounds to aid in controllability.


143 posted on 11/24/2003 4:44:28 AM PST by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: patton
Me, I'd take the venerable M-14. Good knockdown power (7.62 mm NATO or .308 Winchester) and good range (very effective out to 500 yards). Granted, it is heavier than the M-16 and is longer, and would not be my weapon of choice for close-in fighting (I'd reserve that for the trusty old Grand-daddy of self-defense weapons:
M-1911 .45 ACP; or a 12-gauge pump with 00-buck). But for a firefight, give me the M-14.
144 posted on 11/24/2003 4:45:58 AM PST by ought-six
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Thane_Banquo
"Bring back the M14!"

You bet!

145 posted on 11/24/2003 4:46:38 AM PST by ought-six
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill
Yup, the M-1 Garand was a wonderful weapon. That 173 grain, .30-06 bullet just destroyed an enemy. Talk about knock-down power. It was truly the weapon that won WWII.
146 posted on 11/24/2003 4:50:43 AM PST by ought-six
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster
The real issue with Bullpups is ergonomic failure. If you shoot left-handed (like I do) and you have to use one of the bullpup-style guns, you end up with a hot cartridge case imbedded in your left cheek. Even with designs like the French FAMAS and Austrian AUG, that are convertible from right-hand to left-hand action, this conversion takes 5 or 10 minutes...not something one can do in the heat of battle. Guns need to be designed so that one can pick up his fallen comrade's rifle in battle, and use it right away without worrying about ergonomic or safety problems.
147 posted on 11/24/2003 4:58:14 AM PST by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Eaker
"I don't think that the SKS has near the accuracy of a M16 /AR15. Also, the only jams that I have seen were with Wolf ammo."

I agree with you here. The M-16/AR-15 (military/civilian)are both more accurate than an SKS. And Wolf ammo is the worst! It is coated with a lacquer that gums up the action when heated. Terrible ammo (but cheap! cheap! cheap!) unless used in actions with very loose tolerances (like some of the bolt-action varmint rifles).
148 posted on 11/24/2003 5:02:17 AM PST by ought-six
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: SBprone
"...Is there any reason we shouldn't just procure the British service rifle for vehicle crews and keep the M16 for everybody else?.."

NOBODY wants the British service rifle, not even the Brits. There are persistent rumors the the UK will soon abandon their wretched bullpup rifle, and adopt a new HK-36, or some adapted variant.
149 posted on 11/24/2003 5:02:49 AM PST by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon; nuconvert; downer911; Cindy; Ragtime Cowgirl
U might like this~!
150 posted on 11/24/2003 5:04:13 AM PST by F14 Pilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-175 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson