Been off this thread for a few days, but Fred (Chieftain) totally bond with
your thoughts. Trained with WW2 and Korea weapons with a new issue
Garand in June of 58. M 14s were sighted on the trip over and M16s were
the replacement of the day! Like you, don't have a dog in THIS fight, with
some loving the new modification rifle, and some still wouldn't bet the farm
on it. Everyone needs to read the Culver's Shooting Page that you submitted
with response #101 of this thread. My rememberance of 62 to 65 also. I
would have a hard time to develop trust in this system even thought I bought
the latest Bushy LEO version recently because I could. Would still choose a
30 caliber for a go for it!
Pony Soldier, don't really care what your beliefs are, you are entitled to them
Those four ARs had shooters who were being instructed with, minimal training.
Two separate families, that one had a straight from the factory Bushys (2)
and the other family, both ARs were builds. I really think that extreame wet
was the problem no matter who was running the rifles. Never studied the
causes, but at least one appeared on the edge of slam fires. Primers backed
out some what to one leaving the primer pocket. Tapper taken out of
the case body indicating it fired before fully chambered. Failures to feed
and extract. Chamber cleaning and a bolt wipe down restored them for
awhile. Total cleaning and firing without the wet, pretty well restored the
running at a latter date. I don't think experience was an option under
the circumstances. THEY DO NOT LIKE WET and probably powder build ups.
I'm sure that wear could also maybe a factor in the love/hate, work and fail.
No clue other than having those you know loose life due any kind a weapon
failure causes one to look at things suspect.