Civilian arms vs military arms

[General Geoff]

The M16 is more lethal than the AR15. It's indisputable. In all honesty, it is. Furthermore, the AR15 is not the same thing as an M16. That is also indisputable.

I'm disputing it.

The AR15 is a largely-standardized, modular rifle design and platform.

The M16 is a specific model series of AR-15 as adopted by the US Military. Every M16 is an AR15, not every AR15 is an M16.

 

[redcon1]

not every AR15 is an M16.

No AR15 is an M16. They are the same thing the way a lever action is the same thing as a percussion cap muzzle loader but who would argue that the lever action wasn't a more effective weapon of war than the percussion cap muzzle loader? Nobody. Why was it more effective? Because it had a higher rate of fire. Why was the percussion cap muzzle loader more effective as a weapon of war than the flintlock? Because it had a higher rate of fire. The M16 series of rifles all have a higher rate of fire and are, therefore, more effective weapons of war.

 

[rust collector]

The M16 and its military variants were designed and re-designed for use by troops. AR15 is now an unofficial designation for a firearm that resembles and shares many parts with the M16. There are, however, no fully functional civilian counterparts to M203, M240, M249, M2 BMG, GAU 8, 20mm Oerlikon, 40mm Bofors, 16" 75 cal naval rifles, 105 and 155 field pieces, Javelins and a host of other armament so yes, the OP's friend's assertion was accurate. Military armament is dramatically better at destruction.

The belief that an AR15 is easily converted to select fire ignores the generally higher spec for GI guns, and the high shelf in many lower receivers that require milling before a rare registered drop-in auto sear can be installed. The question was confusing but by now has been hashed and rehashed.

 

[bdickens]

I told you I went to Fort Benning. I'm freaking infantry, 11M. What branch did you serve in? What was your MOS?

Big deal.

That makes your bovine excrement all the more inexcusable because you should know better, but you don't.

Owning a guitar don't make you a musician....

 

[General Geoff]

No AR15 is an M16. They are the same thing the way a lever action is the same thing as a percussion cap muzzle loader but who would argue that the lever action wasn't a more effective weapon of war than the percussion cap muzzle loader? Nobody. Why was it more effective? Because it had a higher rate of fire. Why was the percussion cap muzzle loader more effective as a weapon of war than the flintlock? Because it had a higher rate of fire. The M16 series of rifles all have a higher rate of fire and are, therefore, more effective weapons of war.

Say for the sake of argument you have an AR-15 with a forced-reset trigger. Is that equivalent to an M16 in your mind, because it has a similar firing rate?

 

[Zak Smith]

So, really how far behind are we?

Over the last 30 years, they haven't been behind at all (on average) for the basic daytime sub-.50 cal firearms.

Go look at the GWOT Rifle Picture thread on AR15.com and compare that to what 3Gun shooters were using in 2003-2009.

Optics on pistols? USPSA/IPSC Open lead that.

Two optics on rifles (ie, RMR on top of ACOG)? 3Gun Open division lead that.

LPVO's? Same.

Sniper rifles? 20 years ago issued sniper rifle systems were still using Leupold M1/M3 scopes with mil reticles and MOA knobs. The LR precision rifle comp guys figured out it made more sense to have them match. Soon after the S&B mil/mil started to be issued. We were also shooting 6.5/260's and 7mm's in that timeframe, .mil was still shooting 308's.

6.8 SPC was military designed, but kind of fizzled. Now 6.5 Creedmoor, a competition round (reinvented from .260), is getting military attention.

Really, some of the new SIG stuff (the super high pressure .277 Sig round) and their new not-quite-AR small and large block rifles, have the potential to lead, but we don't know if they'll actually be adopted or fizzle out. We also don't know if they're really any better than a good AR-15 or AR-10 pattern rifle.

 

[Brian Williams]

Hey @Zak Smith good to see you around.

The M16 series of rifles all have a higher rate of fire and are, therefore, more effective weapons of war.

This I can agree with but not necessarily more deadly, particularly not 3x more. In the same caliber, shot for shot they are the same but the M16 can be more effective as a weapon of war.

 

[Walkalong]

I think we're done here, we've covered it well enough again, yes, this one is an oldie but a goodie.