Hi Bart,
I don't really hang out in gunshops, wish I had the time to do that. I do however hang with a bunch of vets in my free time. But you are correct in that I mistakenly said the M16 A2 had a 1-9 twist barrel, I should have said the AR 15 A2 did. I concede that. However a number of European armies use 1-9 twist barrels on their weapons. We use a 1-7. However at the risk of the ire of the boys at Ammo Oracle I still stick to what I said about stability and lethality and bullet weight. If I am wrong then I am in good company, as a number of firearm authorities have written on the subject. I include Blake Stevens the late Edward Ezell. If memory serve I think read the same from Chuck Taylor and Ken Hackathorn as well as some other authorities, whom I respect.
As to the fellows that put ammo oracle together I read some things I agreed with and some that I did not. They rely on a lot of Gelatin and Fackler's theories in their arguments....I will agree that they did a lot of work. But I don't agree with all the conclusions. Just because Dr.Martin Fackler says it does not make it true, don't get me wrong. I respect him, I just don't always agree with him. There are also folks that don't agree with Ed Sanow and Evan Marshall or the conclusions of the Strasburg Goat tests...And they all have quite a bit of documentation too.
On the other hand I know some of Vets from Vietnam, Grenada the first and second Gulf Wars....Collectively they shot quite a few folks, who were shooting back. Not jello. I find thier conclusions more germaine to the real world situation we find ourselves in. Some of them used the 14 in Vietnam, most used the M-16 in its various guises right up to the M4. When my Marine Corps buddies who just got back from Iraq and Afghanistan are pining for the 7.62NATO round....I have to conclude there is a good reason. The 5.56 no matter its weight or platform launching it, is generally inadequate for service use.
I don't really hang out in gunshops, wish I had the time to do that. I do however hang with a bunch of vets in my free time. But you are correct in that I mistakenly said the M16 A2 had a 1-9 twist barrel, I should have said the AR 15 A2 did. I concede that. However a number of European armies use 1-9 twist barrels on their weapons. We use a 1-7. However at the risk of the ire of the boys at Ammo Oracle I still stick to what I said about stability and lethality and bullet weight. If I am wrong then I am in good company, as a number of firearm authorities have written on the subject. I include Blake Stevens the late Edward Ezell. If memory serve I think read the same from Chuck Taylor and Ken Hackathorn as well as some other authorities, whom I respect.
As to the fellows that put ammo oracle together I read some things I agreed with and some that I did not. They rely on a lot of Gelatin and Fackler's theories in their arguments....I will agree that they did a lot of work. But I don't agree with all the conclusions. Just because Dr.Martin Fackler says it does not make it true, don't get me wrong. I respect him, I just don't always agree with him. There are also folks that don't agree with Ed Sanow and Evan Marshall or the conclusions of the Strasburg Goat tests...And they all have quite a bit of documentation too.
On the other hand I know some of Vets from Vietnam, Grenada the first and second Gulf Wars....Collectively they shot quite a few folks, who were shooting back. Not jello. I find thier conclusions more germaine to the real world situation we find ourselves in. Some of them used the 14 in Vietnam, most used the M-16 in its various guises right up to the M4. When my Marine Corps buddies who just got back from Iraq and Afghanistan are pining for the 7.62NATO round....I have to conclude there is a good reason. The 5.56 no matter its weight or platform launching it, is generally inadequate for service use.