Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Gravel Belly or otherwise?

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Redlg155, Mar 18, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Redlg155

    Redlg155 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,724
    Location:
    NW Florida
    It seems that for a while shooters, mainly the military, had gotten away from accurate sustained fire to volume fire using high capacity weapons. We went from the M14, even though mags were considered high capacity -the weight of rounds limited the amount of ammo carried, to the small calibrer M16. The 1911 went to the high capacity 9mm.

    Just curious, would you go to battle with the M14 and have the limited number of rounds, or choose the M16? How about the 1911 and lower capacity or the M9 and higher capacity?

    Are you confident with fewer,but more effective rounds? I seem to be stuck in-between the two. At my side is a Glock 34 with 17rds of 9mm JHP. My bedside rifle is a M1a Scout. Go figure.
     
  2. jeepnik

    jeepnik Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,511
    Location:
    SoCal
    Hmm, well I know the 1911 works. I've had an AR fail. I really like my Scout/Squad (heck it's what we should have had instead of the M-16). So, I'm, a 1911/M-14 man.
     
  3. MutinousDoug

    MutinousDoug Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Messages:
    860
    Location:
    Colorado
    Pick your scenario:
    Desert, prairie, tundra, mountains?
    Urban, forest, canyon breaks?
    Non-combatants, free fire zone?
    Makes a difference.
     
  4. Robbins290

    Robbins290 Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,254
    Location:
    Limerick, maine
    M14/1911 all the way!!!
     
  5. Robert

    Robert Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    10,166
    Location:
    Texan by birth, in Colorado cause I hate humidity
    Ar/ 1911
     
  6. rcmodel

    rcmodel Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Messages:
    59,082
    Location:
    Eastern KS
    I think there is no good answer to the question.

    I am an old school, died in the wool M1 30-06, M14 .308, and 45 ACP guy, trained in the old school US Army.

    However, if I still had to hump my own ammo supply for days or weeks on end, in addition to todays sandbox heavy body armor & water load?
    And depend on aircraft resupply halfway around the world?

    I'd opt for more, lighter ammo in both cases.
    The aircraft resupply ammo cases, and my body armor mag cases.

    I'd rather be armed with a smaller caliber rifle & pistol with plenty of ammo for them, then a larger caliber rifle and pistol with no ammo for them.

    rc
     
  7. Ranger30-06

    Ranger30-06 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    762
    Location:
    The better part of Jersey
    I really wouldn't want either; I'd rather something in the middle, like 6.8 SPC or .300 BLK. I like having plenty of ammo, but deep in my heart I'm not keen on having a hyper velocity .22 as my primary caliber...

    As far as handguns go, my only purpose for a handgun would be to get to a rifle, in which my .40 S&W or soon to be 9x18 Mak will do just fine.
     
  8. jeepnik

    jeepnik Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,511
    Location:
    SoCal
    My eldest found out that in Iraq, his M-16 was okay. It was a total failure in Afghanistan as the enemy learned to lengthen the engagement range. Some how he "located" an M-14. For him, Afghanistan wasn't the same type of high volume of fire situation that Iraq was.
     
  9. Redlg155

    Redlg155 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,724
    Location:
    NW Florida
    I agree that enemy/situation/terrain would somewhat dictate the weapon choice. Our guys shooting 14.5" M4s at a bad guy weighing 130lbs and high on khat found out that it probably wasn't a good choice.

    However, I would think that the right caliber would suffice in the majority of situations if you tailor the ammo choice to the situation..
     
  10. Nushif

    Nushif Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    Messages:
    3,082
    Location:
    Corvallis, OR
    Please tell me you're not really a Redleg. Because when they trained me to be a Redleg they beat into our heads that no situation is ever alike and that MET-TC is *always* your first consideration.

    My answer to the notion of an "ideal weapon" for the Armed Forces of the US is an ICBM. Along with twelve satellites so we know where to put the ICBM and the Artillery, ten Paladins, five Artillery batteries (staffed by people with no desire to get up and close) and a BN of Infantry in case anything remains.

    This notion of a soldier's worth on battlefield being measured in their ability to deliver a one inch group at 100 yards as if they're on the range is simply unrealistic.

    Sorry. I'll stop venting. But I am thoroughly tired of people wanting me to carry thirty pounds more on my fractured shins because of better "terminal ballistics" in my handheld weapons.
     
  11. Driftertank

    Driftertank Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    617
    Location:
    Yakima WA
    I'll take the bigger bullets, please.

    But then, my view is tempered by being a civvie, and a big one with a rather physical job. Lugging a ten-pound rifle and 20 pounds of ammo, with a pack weighing 50 pounds or so ain't so bad when i've spent the last ten years wrestling with engines, stuck bolts and big, stupid-heavy chrome wheels for 8-10 hours a day. Still not my idea of a good time, but were i in a situation where i run the risk of being shot at, i think i'd bear it happily.

    But like i said, i'm a civvie, i've never shot full auto at someone trying to kill me, worn body armor, or gotten an airdrop resupply. I'm used to paying for my ammo, and making every round count.

    Maybe if i was in the military, i'd learn to love volume fire and lighter ammo.
     
  12. Redlg155

    Redlg155 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,724
    Location:
    NW Florida
    To put it on Arty terms...would you rather have DPICM rounds or standard HE?:D

    Copperhead or Fire for effect?
     
  13. JTHunter

    JTHunter Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,385
    Location:
    Southwestern Illinois
    Quality over Quantity, every time!
     
  14. maskedman504

    maskedman504 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2009
    Messages:
    913
    Location:
    State Line Road KS/MO
    AR / 1911

    Clip someone with an AR @ 200 yards and they aren't going to bother you anymore.

    Up close and personal I would prefer a 1911 (actually would prefer my CZ 97B-wasn't an option though). I kinda like a 'dropkicks' over 'jabs' in wrestling/boxing/mma. :D
     
  15. doc2rn

    doc2rn Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,495
    Location:
    SW Florida
    When you are out of beans, bullets, bandaids and surrounded by bad guys you are in combat! Marines will tell ya there is no such thing as enuff ammo! However, long distance engagement is ideal! Unless you are clearing rooms doing MOUNT, you want a heavier bullet!
     
  16. camar

    camar Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    Messages:
    106
    I am also old school. I never heard of "double tap" when we had the 30- 06,
    .308 or the .45. You really don't expend that many rounds in a fire fight. I feel every comfortable carrying a M-1 Garand, M-14, or a 1911.

    The M-16 brought us the spray and pray. With this you would need a lot of ammo. The 5.56 round could not compare with the 30-06 or .308 in one shot kills. And we were up against LBF's (Little Bitty F&&kers) with out heavy clothing on. We had single shot and full auto. I did not allow my Marines to use full auto because it was a waste of ammo. I could go into more detail but its late and I am tired.
     
  17. Dr.Rob

    Dr.Rob Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2002
    Messages:
    14,651
    Location:
    Centennial, CO
    As much as I like the 1911 I shoot a BHP better.

    If the real deal Colt M-4 is as good as the 6920, sign me up for one.

    I didn't have much interest in AR's til I bought one. I grew up shooting buckhorn sights and later scoped hunting rifles. "Military' sights were kind of a mystery to me. Now that I 'get' it to some extent I see why people praise the rifle--if not the cartridge.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2012
  18. Averageman

    Averageman Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,439
    Location:
    Texas
    If you look at things then M1 and now M4 one of the biggest differences is we had a great group of civilian marksmen to choose from.
    More rural and farm boys who hunted in the 30',40's and 50's than in 90's '00's and '10.
    Hunters have an eye for movement that is more detail oriented and experianced putting meat on the table that leads to quicker center mass shots.
    For the most part the tacitics of fix the enemy with machinegun fire and manuver to the flanks and envelop have changed to Fix them enemy with everybody firing , call in air support and take out the grid square.
    This may not be in the books as the proper tactic, but it is what I see happening.
    As a retired professional soldier I find this a bit disconcerting to say the least.
     
  19. X-Rap

    X-Rap Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,651
    JMO but I will take the M4 and the extra ammo. If the fight is distant 300/500+ then throw on an ACOG. My guess is the guy with that set up will be making pretty solid hits compared to iron sights on a stock M1 or M14. Take the fight in close with an EOtec on the M4 and with its ergonomics it will run circles around the full size rifles.
    As far as pistols, I'll leave them in lieu of optics for the M4;)
     
  20. Black Duck Charlie

    Black Duck Charlie Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    76
    Location:
    East-Central Minnesota
    Accuracy over quantity, every time. A miss is a miss, no matter how many times you miss or how "close" the miss is.
     
  21. Averageman

    Averageman Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,439
    Location:
    Texas
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2012
  22. Averageman

    Averageman Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,439
    Location:
    Texas
    All in all you can see although we have the technical edge, we dont seem to be making use of it in the above two video's.
    As we speak about larger caliber rounds the ability to lay in accurate fire with 30 cal or better would have significantly hurt that second patrol. 3 to five riflemen could have really ate their lunch.
    Thank goodness the Afghani's hadn't laid in their mortars and IED's and created a true killing zone.

    But I'm an old Soldier and at 50+ with my last trip 2 years ago, I sit here in safety with a ham sandwich and a double hernia healing.
     
  23. CoRoMo

    CoRoMo Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Messages:
    8,940
    Location:
    Californicated Colorado
    ...
     
  24. dprice3844444

    dprice3844444 member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,264
    Location:
    se fla i love claymores 01/sot
    well,during vietnam,they had a different mindset during training than korea and ww2.since they had a light fast firing full auto weapon with a light cartridge,the basic training rules went out the window.just spray and pray.ww2/korea had the garand,which they improved to a bigger magazine capacity with the 14.the previous could not do that,no full auto weapons to every man,so they basically spent more time at the range teaching them to shoot,and as one pointed out,the farmers and midwest folks grew up shooting.the only branches that were beating into the soldiers heads aimed fire single shot only was s/f.they had to make their supplies last because of where they operated,resupply may not have been an option.

    and as to the point,m4,extra ammo,acog.m9,extra ammo.with the armour etc,more food and water can be carried untill resupply.semi auto aimed fire only
    other note,as far as rifles out of the box accuracy,m4 is more accurate.
     
  25. B!ngo

    B!ngo Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2011
    Messages:
    781
    So this is probably old news to the informed here on THR, but I find this number astonishing (actually I had heard an even higher number but at some point, it's just amazing):
    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread173251/pg1
    Assuming this is at all accurate, one has to wonder if it's this high because our folks have the resources and equipment to deliver it? Or do the circumstances require it?
    B
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page