Destructo6
Member
I thought it was patently obvious that this was a cut and paste from another forum. The followup link was a sure clue.
The Mighty Mattel
- Thread starter Blain
- Start date
- Status
Byron,
It has been a while since I posted here too many irons in the fire.
I told my self months ago I won't get into another thread about the 16 but then to set back and say nothing would be progessing the notation that the 16 is a piece of junk. I had to laugh when I read your post. In my squad one man also carried a three prong rifle for the same reason to break the wire on the C-rat cartons.
If I remember right weren't you with the 4th?
Well better go.
Turk
It has been a while since I posted here too many irons in the fire.
I told my self months ago I won't get into another thread about the 16 but then to set back and say nothing would be progessing the notation that the 16 is a piece of junk. I had to laugh when I read your post. In my squad one man also carried a three prong rifle for the same reason to break the wire on the C-rat cartons.
If I remember right weren't you with the 4th?
Well better go.
Turk
Last edited:
voilsb
Member
I don't recall offhand if that picture is a photoshop or a home-made receiver stamp, but it is most assuredly not made by Mattell.
Someone above posted the snopes link. Just in case it got missed, though, here it is again: http://www.snopes.com/military/m16.htm
Also, from the same thread when it popped up on http://AR15.com a couple weeks ago, I will quote those who know much more than I:
As for the functional reliability of the rifle, I've never had a problem with it (I've never been in combat, either). My dad carried one in Vietnam and has no complaints about it. He says it's a fine rifle. There are tons of people who used them without problems in combat and love the platform. There are also a lot who had problems with them and hated them. What?!? You mean it's not a perfect super-rifle?
Someone above posted the snopes link. Just in case it got missed, though, here it is again: http://www.snopes.com/military/m16.htm
Also, from the same thread when it popped up on http://AR15.com a couple weeks ago, I will quote those who know much more than I:
and
As for the functional reliability of the rifle, I've never had a problem with it (I've never been in combat, either). My dad carried one in Vietnam and has no complaints about it. He says it's a fine rifle. There are tons of people who used them without problems in combat and love the platform. There are also a lot who had problems with them and hated them. What?!? You mean it's not a perfect super-rifle?
10mmshooter
Member
Can't we all just get along? I love my AK....But, I would be lying if I told you I didn't want an AR to go with it. I had the same type of experience when I bought my car. I wanted a sports car,so I test drove a Camaro. I didn't like it very much at the time. I wound up buying a Mustang, and I love it. Everyone gave me a bunch of crap about driving a Ford....But, none of them get the compliments that I do from people who like my car. Now, after driving the stang for a while....I would like to get a Camaro to go with it. IMHO...They would compliment one another, and add some diversity to the driveway.
I see no reason to bash the other guy, simply because he doesn't own what you own. That is one of the greatest things about our hobby. You can teach others about the strengths/weaknesses of what you have.
I bought my AK first, because my budget is limited, and reliability had to come first. I believe that there must be some truth to the reports of failures with the AR-15 rifles. I also believe that the AR is a better long range accuracy rifle, and it is for that purpose that I wish to aquire one.
Nothing is perfect, and to suggest that it is would be pure ignorance. Celebrate the strengths. But, admit to the weaknesses...and move on!
I see no reason to bash the other guy, simply because he doesn't own what you own. That is one of the greatest things about our hobby. You can teach others about the strengths/weaknesses of what you have.
I bought my AK first, because my budget is limited, and reliability had to come first. I believe that there must be some truth to the reports of failures with the AR-15 rifles. I also believe that the AR is a better long range accuracy rifle, and it is for that purpose that I wish to aquire one.
Nothing is perfect, and to suggest that it is would be pure ignorance. Celebrate the strengths. But, admit to the weaknesses...and move on!
Turk, I was in the 3/8TH Inf, 4TH Inf Div 68-69. I too said I would not get into another topic as this but it is amazing at the wannabees experiences or lack of.Its a good rifle and the M193 round we carried worked.
Take those irons out of the fire. I have not set an alarm clock in about 8 years. Byron
Take those irons out of the fire. I have not set an alarm clock in about 8 years. Byron
OEF_VET
Member
Byron,
I was with D / 3-8 Inf. in '91, when it was part of 8th ID(M) in Mainz, Germany. In fact, I helped deactivate it as part of the Reduction In Forces / Conventional Forces In Europe drawdown. I think our -113's were the same ones ya'll had in 'Nam.
Frank
I was with D / 3-8 Inf. in '91, when it was part of 8th ID(M) in Mainz, Germany. In fact, I helped deactivate it as part of the Reduction In Forces / Conventional Forces In Europe drawdown. I think our -113's were the same ones ya'll had in 'Nam.
Frank
MicroBalrog
member
It is interesting that my conversations with the armourers of Duvdevan and S'13 has yielded the fact that while M4 is their official "long"arm, most fighters prefer captured AK's.
Cosmoline
Member
Check out the threads on the Apache gunship footage and you may discover that the fight HAS NOT typically been AR vs. AK. It's more like AK vs. 30mm from a mile away. If we were stripped of our heavy weapons, gunships, tanks and forced to fight eye-to-eye in every engagement, our people would be dying by the bushel. There have already been many, many reports of M-16's jamming in the desert conditions.
The cynical fact is the DOD knows perfectly well that the AR platfom is terrible. But they also believe that the days of slogging it out nose-to-nose with small arms are gone. And they don't want to pull the plug on Colt.
I think we need to systematically eliminate every M-16 in the military and replace it with something--anything--that has good reliability and more power. Old Mausers would be an improvement. Any weapon which needs to be cleaned every day during wartime in order to FUNCTION is per se defective and should be returned to Colt, FN, or whoever else made it.
These threads just wont die:banghead: I was on another Forum, which has absolutly nothing to do with any firearm, the other day and an Australian kid was telling all who'd listen that the M-16 is the worlds worst battle implement!!! He had never even fired a gun, let alone an M-16! I have had/do have several AR's over the years, some have had issues, some worked like a dream. But I cant even fathom the argument that the desighn is pure crap; it's downers allway's seem to exult the AK. Ever talk to anyone that served in the Old Soviet army????? I have, they hated their issue gun's too. Read the latest Shotgun New's Article by the Ex spetnaz guy. Pay special attention to what he say's about marksmanship.
Cosmoline
Member
I happen to think our guys deserve more. MUCH MORE. Than a rifle with such a mixed track record. For combat, we have a right and an obligation as taxpayers to insist that our guys are armed with weapons which don't fail "sometimes, when not cleaned every day" but which NEVER FAIL. Post a thread asking AK owners how many times the weapon has jamed. You'll hear crickets chirp. ANd other platforms are also highly reliable.
Our guys also deserve something better than a gopher round to fight with. There is no excuse for the M-16's trackrecord of failure. It is a disgrace that we have continued to allow cynical politicians and generals force this piece of plastic airplane engineering on our troops.
But I digress
Blackhawk 6
Member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2003
- Messages
- 439
Cosmoline,
I appreciate your passion with regard to equipping our soldiers with a better rifle and/or ammunition. I think that a single Soldier/Marine would welcome a more lethal/reliable weapon system.
I also think the point that most people who have shared the positive experiences, myself included, are making is that the weapon system is not as bad as some would have everyone believe. In short, while there is certainly room for improvement, the weapon system is fulfilling its intended role adequately.
Again, your insistance that we deserve better is appreciated.
I appreciate your passion with regard to equipping our soldiers with a better rifle and/or ammunition. I think that a single Soldier/Marine would welcome a more lethal/reliable weapon system.
I also think the point that most people who have shared the positive experiences, myself included, are making is that the weapon system is not as bad as some would have everyone believe. In short, while there is certainly room for improvement, the weapon system is fulfilling its intended role adequately.
Again, your insistance that we deserve better is appreciated.
OEF_VET
Member
Cosmoline,
I'm one of those AK owners who will attest to the fact that they do jam. Granted, it doesn't happen often, but it does happen. I had one round that did a 180 instead of ejecting properly. It ended up pointing towards the ground, stuck behind the fire control group, blocking the bolt. I had to remove the reciever cover and bolt in order to clear it.
Does that mean I hate my SAR-1 now? Not hardly. I'm actually one of the few. I like the AK and AR designs equally.
Frank
I'm one of those AK owners who will attest to the fact that they do jam. Granted, it doesn't happen often, but it does happen. I had one round that did a 180 instead of ejecting properly. It ended up pointing towards the ground, stuck behind the fire control group, blocking the bolt. I had to remove the reciever cover and bolt in order to clear it.
Does that mean I hate my SAR-1 now? Not hardly. I'm actually one of the few. I like the AK and AR designs equally.
Frank
How much ya wanta bet if they do replace the m16 there will be threads
posted within hours about how the new gun is a POS and we need the m1 or m14 back? Times change some of us adapt some don't. Maybe if they replace the m16 I can buy parts for my ar at the armysurplus that would be
cool.
posted within hours about how the new gun is a POS and we need the m1 or m14 back? Times change some of us adapt some don't. Maybe if they replace the m16 I can buy parts for my ar at the armysurplus that would be
cool.
"I happen to think our guys deserve more. MUCH MORE. Than a rifle with such a mixed track record. "
Right. There are two track records.
The one on the internet.
And the real one.
You ever notice in these threads, when guys come on here who say they actually used them in combat, few comment on their posts. The same guys just resume their non-stop posts recounting something they read on-line. Afterall, what do combat vets know about how a rifle works in combat ? Let's ask the real experts.
Right. There are two track records.
The one on the internet.
And the real one.
You ever notice in these threads, when guys come on here who say they actually used them in combat, few comment on their posts. The same guys just resume their non-stop posts recounting something they read on-line. Afterall, what do combat vets know about how a rifle works in combat ? Let's ask the real experts.
"Post a thread asking AK owners how many times the weapon has jamed. "
Here is another beauty. Let's compare the results of the M16/M4 in combat in the desert during the time we watched the huge dust storms on TV; to civilian AK copies.
You know what I would like to see ? I would like to see the results of the study done for the Iraqi army after those dust storms during the early invasion. See how well their weapons functioned. The problem was that there was no study done. That doesn't stop the internet commandos however. The AK never jams. Really, so you used one in combat ? No. So you read studies of their reliability in combat ? No. So you are basing this on your civilian range gun ? Yes, that and stuff I read on line.
By the way, does anyone on here know the difference between a malfunction and a jam ?
Note before someone veers totally off course here: I didn't say the AK was unreliable. I didn't say the AK was reliable. I didn't make any comment at all about the reliability of the AK. NONE. If you start to argue that point, go back and re-read my post.
What I did say is that the VAST majority of what is repeated over and over and over on the internet is based on heresay, rumor, 16th hand stories from your cousins brothers next door neighbor who talked to a guy that got activated from the National Guard who said that ................................We never see any real first hand information, we never see any real after action studies that were done.
BUT, when we get first hand stories about the M16 in combat, or when we get real studies done after combat, it just goes in one ear and out the other.
Don't confuse me with the facts, I prefer errornet information.
Here is another beauty. Let's compare the results of the M16/M4 in combat in the desert during the time we watched the huge dust storms on TV; to civilian AK copies.
You know what I would like to see ? I would like to see the results of the study done for the Iraqi army after those dust storms during the early invasion. See how well their weapons functioned. The problem was that there was no study done. That doesn't stop the internet commandos however. The AK never jams. Really, so you used one in combat ? No. So you read studies of their reliability in combat ? No. So you are basing this on your civilian range gun ? Yes, that and stuff I read on line.
By the way, does anyone on here know the difference between a malfunction and a jam ?
Note before someone veers totally off course here: I didn't say the AK was unreliable. I didn't say the AK was reliable. I didn't make any comment at all about the reliability of the AK. NONE. If you start to argue that point, go back and re-read my post.
What I did say is that the VAST majority of what is repeated over and over and over on the internet is based on heresay, rumor, 16th hand stories from your cousins brothers next door neighbor who talked to a guy that got activated from the National Guard who said that ................................We never see any real first hand information, we never see any real after action studies that were done.
BUT, when we get first hand stories about the M16 in combat, or when we get real studies done after combat, it just goes in one ear and out the other.
Don't confuse me with the facts, I prefer errornet information.
A Jam is something that requires the use of tools or a gunsmith to fix. And example might be a stuck case that requires a cleaning rod to clear it from the chamber.
A malfunction is a condition that is cleared, on the fly, while firing.
There are three types of malfunctions:
Type 1: Failure to fire
Type 2: Failure to eject (also known as a stove pipe)
Type 3: Double feed.
Some people also recognize a type four malfunction and a type five malfunction. I have seen the type five malfunction described as a Catostrophic Failure or KaBoom, however this is incorrect because a Kaboom cannot be a malfunction by definition.
A malfunction is a condition that is cleared, on the fly, while firing.
There are three types of malfunctions:
Type 1: Failure to fire
Type 2: Failure to eject (also known as a stove pipe)
Type 3: Double feed.
Some people also recognize a type four malfunction and a type five malfunction. I have seen the type five malfunction described as a Catostrophic Failure or KaBoom, however this is incorrect because a Kaboom cannot be a malfunction by definition.
Which type does a short stroke fall into? I'm taking about where the bolt comes back far enough to eject the spent catridge but not far enough to strip the next round off the mag (usually stops halfway across the mag). Just rack the charging handle and you are ready to go again, so I imagine it would be considered a malfunction and not a jam. It didn't really fail to fire, and it ejected just fine, and didn't double feed.
I never heard of that happening, but what clasification it falls into isn't important, if you can run the slide or bolt again and it runs.
Both a type 1 and type 2 malfunction are cleared by tap, rack, and roll (or on an M16 it would be tug, rack, and roll) which is what you said cures the problem.
I agree that it wouldn't be a type 1 because in a type one you have an operable trigger. The hammer falls but you get a click instead of a bang. With a type 2 or type 3 malfunction you have a soft trigger, which you would have with a bolt or slide that isn't in battery.
I guess it would be a variation of a type 2: It did eject, but something besides a piece of brass is holding the bolt open which is the same situation you would have with a type 2 minus the empty case.
Both a type 1 and type 2 malfunction are cleared by tap, rack, and roll (or on an M16 it would be tug, rack, and roll) which is what you said cures the problem.
I agree that it wouldn't be a type 1 because in a type one you have an operable trigger. The hammer falls but you get a click instead of a bang. With a type 2 or type 3 malfunction you have a soft trigger, which you would have with a bolt or slide that isn't in battery.
I guess it would be a variation of a type 2: It did eject, but something besides a piece of brass is holding the bolt open which is the same situation you would have with a type 2 minus the empty case.
ny32182
Member
A 'short stroke' is caused by a gas problem of some sort. Rare, but it does happen...
The fact remains that the AR holds the all time record as the longest running standard issue weapon to the best troops in the world. Thats all that needs to be said. Its detractors will forever hate it, no matter what, but they simply don't have much of a leg to stand on. If the Garand and M14 were so great, they would still be the standard issue. But, they are not. The AR has prevailed for 40 years and will not soon be forgotten.
But, I suppose the cycle continues. Guys that grew up when the Garand and M14 were standard issue don't tend to have much respect for the Matty Mattel... by the same token, I'm a younger guy, and have known only the AR for my entire life. To me, the XM-8 looks like something out of Star Wars, and I can't help but laugh. My children will hold the XM-8 in the highest regard, and scoff at the first general issue 'energy weapon'.... so on, and so forth.
The AR is the weapon that has been carried by the most awesome military force of all time for the last four decades, and mine have never failed me. Until they do, forgive me if I don't give much credit to internet rumors of how terrible the AR is.
The fact remains that the AR holds the all time record as the longest running standard issue weapon to the best troops in the world. Thats all that needs to be said. Its detractors will forever hate it, no matter what, but they simply don't have much of a leg to stand on. If the Garand and M14 were so great, they would still be the standard issue. But, they are not. The AR has prevailed for 40 years and will not soon be forgotten.
But, I suppose the cycle continues. Guys that grew up when the Garand and M14 were standard issue don't tend to have much respect for the Matty Mattel... by the same token, I'm a younger guy, and have known only the AR for my entire life. To me, the XM-8 looks like something out of Star Wars, and I can't help but laugh. My children will hold the XM-8 in the highest regard, and scoff at the first general issue 'energy weapon'.... so on, and so forth.
The AR is the weapon that has been carried by the most awesome military force of all time for the last four decades, and mine have never failed me. Until they do, forgive me if I don't give much credit to internet rumors of how terrible the AR is.
Oleg Volk
Moderator Emeritus
Have you taken old Mausers through bad weather and grime? I found that an 8mm Mauser is very inferior to an AR15 in practical use (ability to hit, likelyhood of malfunctions) after some side-by-side use last winter. YMMV.
Mulliga
Member
AKs NEVER jam? Against ole Murphy's law...
Joe Demko
Member
444 has an excellent point regarding the Ak's reputation in America. It is entirely based on anecdotes. Have any of you (Oleg, perhaps?) ever seen anything resembling an after-action report on the AK from any nation? Any kind of systematic review of the AK by any nation or organization that uses a lot of them? If so, please step forward and tell us about it. Not about how great your personal AK is, please, we've heard oodles about personal ARs and AKs. Let's hear the straight poop on the AK from the people who chose it, issued it, and carried it into combat.
BTW, the US has a long history of believing that what the other guy was using was better in each and every war.
BTW, the US has a long history of believing that what the other guy was using was better in each and every war.
Last edited:
fix
Member
Cosmoline!!!
This is the kind of thing that makes me thank God that the AR haters club has no influence over our choice of weapons.
This is the kind of thing that makes me thank God that the AR haters club has no influence over our choice of weapons.
- Status
