M16 misinformation, all over the net..


PDA






brentn
March 6, 2008, 05:40 PM
This is annoing.

I love reading about the AR series of firearms, and have recently tried reading up on the M16 series that the military uses.

This is what I initially read from wiki

M16A1
Burst fire/semi/safe
A1 upper reciever (no windage knob for fingers, only can be adjusted by bullet tip or other pointy tool)
No shell deflector
forward assist present

M16A2
All the same as above except
shell deflector added
windage knob added

M16A3
Changed burst to full auto

M16A4
same as A3 but with picatinny rail instead of carry handle

Now when I read the following page
http://www.biggerhammer.net/ar15/uppers/
they describe the A3 with the picatinny rail, when wiki says that the rail was not added until the A4

I know that wiki is usually not a credible source, but if thats the case why hasn't someone corrected it?
On top of that, who is right and who is wrong?
If you have any information, please post a reference if possible.

If you enjoyed reading about "M16 misinformation, all over the net.." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Zundfolge
March 6, 2008, 05:42 PM
Thats nothing, I've read that the M16 is the weapon of choice for gang members, that its a "high powered" rifle, that the bullets "tumble through the air", and that guns that happen to look like them (AR15s) must be banned for the sake of the children.

41magsnub
March 6, 2008, 05:43 PM
I guess somebody edited it, it was pretty much spot on a while back on the differences between the M16 models.

cracked butt
March 6, 2008, 06:13 PM
I've read that M16s will jam up if you even look at them funny while an AK-47 that's been buried in the muck of a salt marsh for 20 years will realiably kill capitalists if you just pee on it to clean it off first.

Yes, the internet is a wonderful place.

rcmodel
March 6, 2008, 06:16 PM
It's amazing to me how many M16 experts there are who haven't ever fired one!

Or even served in the military, where they could have fired one.

rcmodel

deth502
March 6, 2008, 06:34 PM
while an AK-47 that's been buried in the muck of a salt marsh for 20 years will realiably kill capitalists if you just pee on it to clean it off first.

yeah, but that part is true!! :D

RedLion
March 6, 2008, 06:41 PM
The M-16A1 had full auto whereas the M-16A2 had 3 shot burst because of ammo wastage.

The M-16A1 had an elevation adjustable front sight and windage adjustable rear sight, both needed tools to change. The M-16A2 had a finger adjustable windage and elevation rear sight.

I wouldn't really trust Wikipedia because it might be correct one day, but someone with infinite knowledge will come and 're-correct' the answer. Do some searching at the library or book store.

Bartholomew Roberts
March 6, 2008, 06:53 PM
The distinction between the M16A2 and M16A3 in Wiki is correct. The M16A3 is just an A2 with full-auto instead of burst (used by the Navy). Biggerhammer is wrong as far as the technical military designations (although many manufacturers call flattops "A3")

As others already noted, the M16A1 is full auto and not burst.

Omaha-BeenGlockin
March 6, 2008, 06:54 PM
Didn't the A2 bring on the round handguards and heavier barrel too??

ArmedBear
March 6, 2008, 06:55 PM
yeah, but that part is true!!

...provided said capitalists are within slingshot range...

slzy
March 6, 2008, 06:57 PM
hey,i corrected wiki on rate of fire of the paris gun and the airplane patsy cline died in.

better to edit than curse the source.

Victor Romen
March 6, 2008, 07:08 PM
I see Bartholomew Roberts beat me to it, but here is what I had to say with some links.

Wiki is actually correct in regards to the A4 being the first with the Picatinny/1913 rail. Commercial manufactures use the A3 designation to describe the upper with the Picatinny/1913 rail.

http://www.pica.army.mil/PicatinnyPublic/products_services/products08.asp
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usas-m-16-rifle-purchases-04517/
http://tri.army.mil/LC/cs/csi/satoc.htm#M16A2

ATAShooter
March 6, 2008, 07:14 PM
Shoot, back when the D.C. sniper was arrested, a Richmond news station reported that " They used a rifle called an AR-15, "AR" is the military designation for " Assault Rifle". I 'bout peed my pants laughing.

brentn
March 6, 2008, 08:02 PM
Well I appreciate all the input, thank you, thanks for the links as well.

I ask this because I'm in the thought process for building an A3 replica from an AR.

Theres a guy who can do custom recievers in BC in which I can have my own serial number and an "auto" on both sides of the AR. Perfectly legal in canada as long as it doesn't fire full auto, burst or anything like that, semi only.

I thought it would be fun, but I really want to get my homework done so that when someone asks about it I can say:

Thats exactly the same as the M16A3 except for the reciever being semi auto and there is no auto sear.

One day, maybe later this year :)

ants
March 6, 2008, 08:32 PM
The differences are more than an 'auto sear'. The disconnector, hammer, bolt, carrier, and selector are also different. And the receiver is machined differently to accept them. Not to mention the extra pin hole, and the selector stops on the left side are at 180 degrees from one another. And will your replica have large or small hammer/trigger pins? What about the takedown and pivot pins?

In any case, brentn, I love the idea of a replica. Go for it. It's fun to own and shoot.

elmerfudd
March 6, 2008, 09:23 PM
The M-16A1 had full auto whereas the M-16A2 had 3 shot burst because of ammo wastage.

In general the M16A2 was a much better rifle than it's predecessor, but that three shot burst feature was just an attempt at idiot proofing and a poor one at that. If you give someone a few magazines and about 15 minutes of practice firing three shot bursts on full auto they'll soon master the skill.

As it is with the three shot burst, if you take your finger off the trigger prematurely and fire less than three shots, on your next burst you just get the remainder of the last one and in those rare circumstances where full auto is the best option you just don't have it.

brentn
March 6, 2008, 09:41 PM
Ants

After mine is done what I mentioned will be the only difference I hope..

The recievers I'm using use the standard smaller sized takedown pins, the larger ones aren't in production from what I've read and I have no idea what size the ones that colt uses for the m16 are...

Hammer, disconnector, trigger, selector and bolt carrier I can get from gunaccessories.com for m16 parts, again, they are perfectly legal in canada. The bolt is identical for the ar15 as it is with the m16

For the hammer and trigger pins, I don't know what the military uses, but I assume they are the standard sized ones and not the oversized ones.

Let me know if I'm wrong on any of this, or if you have any other differences that I should be aware of.

I had "heard" that the front sight assembly is different... any truth to this?

Onmilo
March 6, 2008, 11:04 PM
Just so everyone can argue about it,
The Canadian C7A1 M16 type rifle was the first general issue weapon in the M16 family to incorporate a 'picatinney' type rail on top of the receiver.
Colt M4 carbines, Model number R0920 were the first US issue to feature the flat top.

M4A1 does not designate a flat top carbine it designates a carbine with a full auto selector option instead of the usual Burst selector.
These can also be had with a fixed carry handle or a flat top upper receiver.

M16A4s are the 20" rifle flat top versions. HTH

Gingerbreadman
March 7, 2008, 12:47 AM
For more M-16 misinformation, read here: http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/M-16

Its a spoof, I know. I just had to post it.

GunTech
March 7, 2008, 01:32 AM
"The Black Rifle I & II" are the comprehensive and definitive M16 references.

mattsb2000
March 7, 2008, 07:22 AM
For more M-16 misinformation, read here: http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/M-16

Its a spoof, I know. I just had to post it.

This is funny.

I have another version of this if you want it. It's not suitable for thr though. PM me if you want a link

DMK
March 7, 2008, 07:28 AM
I wouldn't really trust Wikipedia because it might be correct one day, but someone with infinite knowledge will come and 're-correct' the answer. Do some searching at the library or book store.Books aren't always correct either. I've seen many mistakes in them also. At least a Wiki can be corrected.

DMK
March 7, 2008, 07:34 AM
I had "heard" that the front sight assembly is different... any truth to this?M16A4s and M4s have a taller "F" height front sight tower. This is due to the taller removable carry handle.

M16A1, A2 and A3 (and XM-177 carbines) have a standard height front sight tower. This is due to the fixed carry handle.

I've seen some pics of GI M4s with fixed (no-detachable) carry handles. Anyone know how many of these were made and when they started with removable carry handles?

Neo-Luddite
March 7, 2008, 10:43 AM
The biggest and most notable difference between the m-16a1 and m-16a2 is the rate of twist and the weight of the barrel. This dramatically increased the types of ammo the rifle could utilize and (to a lesser degree) maximum effective range and ability to disipate heat during rapid or sustained fire.

The 'burst' parts could (iirc) be removed and thus return the rifle to full-auto capability. The rear elevation knob was added (pretty weak design and often a problem--they liked to rotate on their own sometimes) and the deflector nub was added. The handguards became rounded and universal (no 'left' or 'right').

But as said, the BIG diff was the barrel from what I recall.

MarcusWendt
March 7, 2008, 01:08 PM
hey,i corrected wiki on rate of fire of the paris gun and the airplane patsy cline died in.

Patsy Cline is dead?

pdowg881
March 7, 2008, 02:20 PM
I think uncyclopedia is my second new favorite website.

If you enjoyed reading about "M16 misinformation, all over the net.." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!