Pick a significant battle of WWII or Korea. Suppose that the M-16 had been developed 20 years earlier. Would the outcome of the battle have been any different, if the U.S. troops had been armed with the M-16 instead of the M-1?
I'd choose the landing @ Iwo Jima. I predict that we would have had far more weapons malfunctions with the M16 than we did (which we DID have) with M1.
Another intersting tid bit to keep in mind, this being from the Korean war.
During the Chosin campain in Korea a Marine from the 1st Marine Div during one of the mass human wave attacks killed 52 Chinese troops with 8 Garand clips,64 rounds, from the standing position as fast as he could load. He assumed he was going to die anyway so he stuffed some clips in his parka pockets stood up and give them hell.
Ranges was from about 125 yards to powder burn distance.
The temprature was about 30 below.
He lived to tell about it.
The M-16 most likely would not have even worked in this temprature. If it did how many that he hit with the .223 round would have stoped in their tracks like they did when hit with the 06 round?
I'd choose the landing @ Iwo Jima. I predict that we would have had far more weapons malfunctions with the M16 than we did (which we DID have) with M1.
Another intersting tid bit to keep in mind, this being from the Korean war.
During the Chosin campain in Korea a Marine from the 1st Marine Div during one of the mass human wave attacks killed 52 Chinese troops with 8 Garand clips,64 rounds, from the standing position as fast as he could load. He assumed he was going to die anyway so he stuffed some clips in his parka pockets stood up and give them hell.
Ranges was from about 125 yards to powder burn distance.
The temprature was about 30 below.
He lived to tell about it.
The M-16 most likely would not have even worked in this temprature. If it did how many that he hit with the .223 round would have stoped in their tracks like they did when hit with the 06 round?