User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/20/2024 10:37:17 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HeavyMetal: Most soldiers from the Vietnam era, the ones I know and some of the ones I served with early during my career, the ones who actually understood how weapons were employed, real experienced soldiers, loved the M-16 and the CAR-15 and find the idea of trading one for an SKS or an AK to be laughable. Absolutely with all the other crap you had to load out with and dealing with river crossings and landings with the tide out... then there's Monsoon season...weight was everything...not to mention 10lbs of mud on your boots... M-16 rules though a 12.5" 6.8 SPC loaded with XM68 might have been interesting. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2024 10:46:14 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 18B30: 18Z50….. may know something about carrying rifles in woods. And that's a big part of it right there. Key word Carrying. You have a lighter weapon. Or the same with light/optic/etc. Then factor in weight of ammo etc and modern tactics. I think the m14 makes sense in the evolution of arms. The m1 to the m14 to the m16. I think going from .30-06 to the 556 and enblocs to 20/30rd mags is just a hill to far for the 1950s minds. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2024 10:47:51 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dragynn:   That's the most hilarious nonsense i've read all day, thanks for the giggles! Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dragynn: Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Then there's the AK. This subject has been beat to death, it also doesn't have a LRBHO, but the sights are crap, the safety is crap, and disengaging the safety opens a huge hole in the side of the action where dirt and debris can and does enter and cause stoppages. This problem can be and has been easily demonstrated. The reliability stories of AKs in adverse condition are mythical BS. That's the most hilarious nonsense i've read all day, thanks for the giggles! lol Examples of this have been shown by Garand Thumb and InRange. If stuff enters the giant hole on the side of the AK action, it dies. The AR does not have this problem. The AK, like every other thing developed by the Russians, is substandard trash. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2024 10:48:06 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 9divdoc: Absolutely with all the other crap you had to load out with and dealing with river crossings and landings with the tide out... then there's Monsoon season...weight was everything...not to mention 10lbs of mud on your boots... M-16 rules though a 12.5" 6.8 SPC loaded with XM68 might have been interesting. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 9divdoc: Originally Posted By HeavyMetal: Most soldiers from the Vietnam era, the ones I know and some of the ones I served with early during my career, the ones who actually understood how weapons were employed, real experienced soldiers, loved the M-16 and the CAR-15 and find the idea of trading one for an SKS or an AK to be laughable. Absolutely with all the other crap you had to load out with and dealing with river crossings and landings with the tide out... then there's Monsoon season...weight was everything...not to mention 10lbs of mud on your boots... M-16 rules though a 12.5" 6.8 SPC loaded with XM68 might have been interesting. Spending time in jungles I have a lot of appreciation for the ability to take stuff apart without tools and not deal with wood. |
|
|
|
BC, CAN
|
Posted: 4/21/2024 10:34:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: SnowMexican]
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HeavyMetal: You think an M-16 variant requires more armorer support than an M-14 or other battle rifle variant? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HeavyMetal: You think an M-16 variant requires more armorer support than an M-14 or other battle rifle variant? Certainly not more than the DMR variants of the M14, but yes on the regular infantry rifles as the AR needs more proactive parts replacement compared to most of its Cold War era contemporaries. Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: lol Examples of this have been shown by Garand Thumb and InRange. If stuff enters the giant hole on the side of the AK action, it dies. The AR does not have this problem. The AK, like every other thing developed by the Russians, is substandard trash. Arizona desert mud that flows into openings easily yet is very gritty is something that you don't really see too much of in the real world. I think the AK's real world track record for reliability speaks for itself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2024 7:12:18 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 18B30: As someone who has killed people with the M21 and the M-16A1, M16A2, and the M4A1…..we must agree to disagree. 18Z50….. may know something about carrying rifles in woods. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 18B30: Originally Posted By jeepnik: As one who used both M-16 and M-14 (I replaced the 16 after it failed miserably with the 14), the M-14 is head and shoulders above the M-16. As someone who has killed people with the M21 and the M-16A1, M16A2, and the M4A1…..we must agree to disagree. 18Z50….. may know something about carrying rifles in woods. #micdrop |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:17:09 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SnowMexican: Arizona desert mud that flows into openings easily yet is very gritty is something that you don't really see too much of in the real world. I think the AK's real world track record for reliability speaks for itself. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SnowMexican: Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: lol Examples of this have been shown by Garand Thumb and InRange. If stuff enters the giant hole on the side of the AK action, it dies. The AR does not have this problem. The AK, like every other thing developed by the Russians, is substandard trash. Arizona desert mud that flows into openings easily yet is very gritty is something that you don't really see too much of in the real world. I think the AK's real world track record for reliability speaks for itself. This isn't hard. When you disengage the safety on an AK, it opens a hole in the receiver that's about .3" inches tall and 3" long, and the AK doesn't posses any magical qualities that allow it to keep cycling if something impedes the BCG or FCG. There's an entire generation of veterans that trained Iraqi and Afghan personnel on AKs and saw first hand how clunky they are and how unreliable they can be, and there's combat footage of AK stoppages coming out of Ukraine. The people who repeat stories of extreme, invincible AK reliability are the same people that tell us .30 carbine couldn't penetrate North Korean coats, 1911s blow limbs clean off, guns can be converted to full auto by "filing the firing pin", etc. The AK is serviceable, and it was the maybe the best general issue rifle in the 50s and early 60s (mostly thanks to NATO's battle rifle detour), but it was left in the dust a long, long time ago. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:33:27 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: This isn't hard. When you disengage the safety on an AK, it opens a hole in the receiver that's about .3" inches tall and 3" long, and the AK doesn't posses any magical qualities that allow it to keep cycling if something impedes the BCG or FCG. There's an entire generation of veterans that trained Iraqi and Afghan personnel on AKs and saw first hand how clunky they are and how unreliable they can be, and there's combat footage of AK stoppages coming out of Ukraine. The people who repeat stories of extreme, invincible AK reliability are the same people that tell us .30 carbine couldn't penetrate North Korean coats, 1911s blow limbs clean off, guns can be converted to full auto by "filing the firing pin", etc. The AK is serviceable, and it was the maybe the best general issue rifle in the 50s and early 60s (mostly thanks to NATO's battle rifle detour), but it was left in the dust a long, long time ago. This is wishful cope, the AK's reputation for reliability is well deserved, and one of the reasons its operating system has been so widely copied. I am sorry if this conflicts with your youtube video. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 12:26:30 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: lol Examples of this have been shown by Garand Thumb and InRange. If stuff enters the giant hole on the side of the AK action, it dies. The AR does not have this problem. The AK, like every other thing developed by the Russians, is substandard trash. Yup, also the same reason the M14 doesn’t fair well either with its exposed action…. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 12:31:58 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AK-12: This is wishful cope, the AK's reputation for reliability is well deserved, and one of the reasons its operating system has been so widely copied. I am sorry if this conflicts with your youtube video. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AK-12: Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: This isn't hard. When you disengage the safety on an AK, it opens a hole in the receiver that's about .3" inches tall and 3" long, and the AK doesn't posses any magical qualities that allow it to keep cycling if something impedes the BCG or FCG. There's an entire generation of veterans that trained Iraqi and Afghan personnel on AKs and saw first hand how clunky they are and how unreliable they can be, and there's combat footage of AK stoppages coming out of Ukraine. The people who repeat stories of extreme, invincible AK reliability are the same people that tell us .30 carbine couldn't penetrate North Korean coats, 1911s blow limbs clean off, guns can be converted to full auto by "filing the firing pin", etc. The AK is serviceable, and it was the maybe the best general issue rifle in the 50s and early 60s (mostly thanks to NATO's battle rifle detour), but it was left in the dust a long, long time ago. This is wishful cope, the AK's reputation for reliability is well deserved, and one of the reasons its operating system has been so widely copied. I am sorry if this conflicts with your youtube video. Username checks out. lol The AK operating system is just a simplified, upside down Garand. The real win at the time was the combination of smaller form factor, intermediate cartridge, and larger magazine. But you probably knew that already. A handful of AK derivatives have come out featuring big improvements like the SG 550 family and the Galil ACEs, but a much wider variety of guns have been developed using AR15 or AR18 systems, and there are reasons for that. The AK is reliable in a general sense, but it isn't really any more reliable than the majority of guns fielded since the '60s outside of exceptions like the SA80 and Insas. Most modern service rifles will give the AK family a run for its money. The only people fielding AKs without significant architectural upgrades are communists, terrorists, and gang bangers. If it was as good as the mythology claims, that wouldn't be the case. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 12:45:38 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Username checks out. lol The AK operating system is just a simplified, upside down Garand. The real win at the time was the combination of smaller form factor, intermediate cartridge, and larger magazine. But you probably knew that already. A handful of AK derivatives have come out featuring big improvements like the SG 550 family and the Galil ACEs, but a much wider variety of guns have been developed using AR15 or AR18 systems, and there are reasons for that. The AK is reliable in a general sense, but it isn't really any more reliable than the majority of guns fielded since the '60s outside of exceptions like the SA80 and Insas. Most modern service rifles will give the AK family a run for its money. The only people fielding AKs without significant architectural upgrades are communists, terrorists, and gang bangers. If it was as good as the mythology claims, that wouldn't be the case. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Originally Posted By AK-12: Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: This isn't hard. When you disengage the safety on an AK, it opens a hole in the receiver that's about .3" inches tall and 3" long, and the AK doesn't posses any magical qualities that allow it to keep cycling if something impedes the BCG or FCG. There's an entire generation of veterans that trained Iraqi and Afghan personnel on AKs and saw first hand how clunky they are and how unreliable they can be, and there's combat footage of AK stoppages coming out of Ukraine. The people who repeat stories of extreme, invincible AK reliability are the same people that tell us .30 carbine couldn't penetrate North Korean coats, 1911s blow limbs clean off, guns can be converted to full auto by "filing the firing pin", etc. The AK is serviceable, and it was the maybe the best general issue rifle in the 50s and early 60s (mostly thanks to NATO's battle rifle detour), but it was left in the dust a long, long time ago. This is wishful cope, the AK's reputation for reliability is well deserved, and one of the reasons its operating system has been so widely copied. I am sorry if this conflicts with your youtube video. Username checks out. lol The AK operating system is just a simplified, upside down Garand. The real win at the time was the combination of smaller form factor, intermediate cartridge, and larger magazine. But you probably knew that already. A handful of AK derivatives have come out featuring big improvements like the SG 550 family and the Galil ACEs, but a much wider variety of guns have been developed using AR15 or AR18 systems, and there are reasons for that. The AK is reliable in a general sense, but it isn't really any more reliable than the majority of guns fielded since the '60s outside of exceptions like the SA80 and Insas. Most modern service rifles will give the AK family a run for its money. The only people fielding AKs without significant architectural upgrades are communists, terrorists, and gang bangers. If it was as good as the mythology claims, that wouldn't be the case. I like the mentality of “bury an AK for 10 years and dig it up, it’ll shoot all day”. Almost as if it’s the only firearm platform ever developed that doesn’t need cleaning or oil. Why can’t we make the AR like that, are we too stupid?  It’s the 1990’s history channel gun information still being regurgitated. “Enemy can hear the M1 clip being ejected” “Soviet weaponry can fire their ammo and nato ammo” “AK can run on zero maintenance EVER” And so many more… |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 1:12:09 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ghostface: Yup, also the same reason the M14 doesn’t fair well either with its exposed action…. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ghostface: Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: lol Examples of this have been shown by Garand Thumb and InRange. If stuff enters the giant hole on the side of the AK action, it dies. The AR does not have this problem. The AK, like every other thing developed by the Russians, is substandard trash. Yup, also the same reason the M14 doesn’t fair well either with its exposed action…. Two things: The M14 isn’t hyped as the most reliable autoloading rifle in the world. The M14’s exposed bolt doesn’t leave the action wide open while in battery. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 1:50:45 PM EDT
[#13]
No, it just leaves a big hole to the FCG. Face it, its insides are on the outsides.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 1:58:12 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By M1Zeppelin: I like the mentality of “bury an AK for 10 years and dig it up, it’ll shoot all day”. Almost as if it’s the only firearm platform ever developed that doesn’t need cleaning or oil. Why can’t we make the AR like that, are we too stupid? It’s the 1990’s history channel gun information still being regurgitated. “Enemy can hear the M1 clip being ejected” “Soviet weaponry can fire their ammo and nato ammo” “AK can run on zero maintenance EVER” And so many more… Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By M1Zeppelin: Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Originally Posted By AK-12: Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: This isn't hard. When you disengage the safety on an AK, it opens a hole in the receiver that's about .3" inches tall and 3" long, and the AK doesn't posses any magical qualities that allow it to keep cycling if something impedes the BCG or FCG. There's an entire generation of veterans that trained Iraqi and Afghan personnel on AKs and saw first hand how clunky they are and how unreliable they can be, and there's combat footage of AK stoppages coming out of Ukraine. The people who repeat stories of extreme, invincible AK reliability are the same people that tell us .30 carbine couldn't penetrate North Korean coats, 1911s blow limbs clean off, guns can be converted to full auto by "filing the firing pin", etc. The AK is serviceable, and it was the maybe the best general issue rifle in the 50s and early 60s (mostly thanks to NATO's battle rifle detour), but it was left in the dust a long, long time ago. This is wishful cope, the AK's reputation for reliability is well deserved, and one of the reasons its operating system has been so widely copied. I am sorry if this conflicts with your youtube video. Username checks out. lol The AK operating system is just a simplified, upside down Garand. The real win at the time was the combination of smaller form factor, intermediate cartridge, and larger magazine. But you probably knew that already. A handful of AK derivatives have come out featuring big improvements like the SG 550 family and the Galil ACEs, but a much wider variety of guns have been developed using AR15 or AR18 systems, and there are reasons for that. The AK is reliable in a general sense, but it isn't really any more reliable than the majority of guns fielded since the '60s outside of exceptions like the SA80 and Insas. Most modern service rifles will give the AK family a run for its money. The only people fielding AKs without significant architectural upgrades are communists, terrorists, and gang bangers. If it was as good as the mythology claims, that wouldn't be the case. I like the mentality of “bury an AK for 10 years and dig it up, it’ll shoot all day”. Almost as if it’s the only firearm platform ever developed that doesn’t need cleaning or oil. Why can’t we make the AR like that, are we too stupid? It’s the 1990’s history channel gun information still being regurgitated. “Enemy can hear the M1 clip being ejected” “Soviet weaponry can fire their ammo and nato ammo” “AK can run on zero maintenance EVER” And so many more… It's funnier than that. According to legend, we're supposed to believe this magical rifle was designed by a wounded tanker with a 7th grade education, NOBODY has been able to match it in almost 80 years, and with the exception of Switzerland, the entire Western world is either too stupid or too stubborn to just steal it like we have other technologies. Incredible stuff. But the catch with the AK is that reliability is the ONE THING that's supposed to differentiate it from the field. If we acknowledge that maybe newer designs are really reliable, the AK becomes a clunky turd with no redeeming qualities compared to the field. AK guys can't have that, so the legend persists. |
|
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:07:47 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AK-12: This is wishful cope, the AK's reputation for reliability is well deserved, and one of the reasons its operating system has been so widely copied. I am sorry if this conflicts with your youtube video. No, this is the wishful cope. |
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:09:10 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Username checks out. lol The AK operating system is just a simplified, upside down Garand. The real win at the time was the combination of smaller form factor, intermediate cartridge, and larger magazine. But you probably knew that already. A handful of AK derivatives have come out featuring big improvements like the SG 550 family and the Galil ACEs, but a much wider variety of guns have been developed using AR15 or AR18 systems, and there are reasons for that. The AK is reliable in a general sense, but it isn't really any more reliable than the majority of guns fielded since the '60s outside of exceptions like the SA80 and Insas. Most modern service rifles will give the AK family a run for its money. The only people fielding AKs without significant architectural upgrades are communists, terrorists, and gang bangers. If it was as good as the mythology claims, that wouldn't be the case. The AK does relatively well in the mud tests, but the AR crushes those tests. |
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:12:59 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SnowMexican: Certainly not more than the DMR variants of the M14, but yes on the regular infantry rifles as the AR needs more proactive parts replacement compared to most of its Cold War era contemporaries. The AR design has proven to have much less parts breakage than the M14. The military competition team armorers have confirmed that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:13:31 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1shott: The only thing I dont like about the M14 is the weight, face it, its a heavy pig. the real USGI M14 rifles are only a bit heavier than the M16A2 the commercial ones with the oversized stock, and heavy match barrel are heavy |
|
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:17:56 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SnowMexican: I think the AK's real world track record for reliability speaks for itself. I've actually read where a commie general in Vietnam state the AR was better in the jungle. Rust was a problem with AKs, which were steel, with steel mags and steel cased ammo. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:20:54 PM EDT
[#20]
I don't think that slot has really proven to be much of a liability. I've had junk get into the action of both M-14 types and AK's and usually the worst that happens is a jam that is easily cleared and you move on. Getting shit in my M-16 is a bit more likely to brick the damn thing if it jams with the bolt not quite in battery. I've had all kind of stuff happen to my M-14's over the years from bolt rollers coming off to a worn hammer pin that converted itself into a burst pack. The only one that stopped me in my tracks was the FA mal as I was shooting a match and they gave me the boot post haste. I guess I have to admit that I have never had a worn or broken component stop an AK if you don't count shitty rusted mags.
None of them have ever really caused me enough problems that it would influence my decision on what platform I use though. My M-16 is my default rifle and closest to a do-all but I still like having a 30 cal truck gun. I wouldn't think twice about throwing any of the platforms mentioned here behind my seat. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:22:24 PM EDT
[#21]
Certainly not more than the DMR variants of the M14, but yes on the regular infantry rifles as the AR needs more proactive parts replacement compared to most of its Cold War era contemporaries. What were these contemporaries that were adopted in great number? What is your data to support your assertion? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:25:59 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DonS: The AR design has proven to have much less parts breakage than the M14. The military competition team armorers have confirmed that. He's talking about recoil springs and ejector springs etc wearing out. Normal wear and tear. How those things equate to the M16 being 'unreliable until the GWOT' makes no sense though; change the parts when they are supposed to be changed, just like any other machine, and keep it lubed, just like any other machine, and they are reliable. Have been since the beginning. Mods that came with the GWOT were good, but hardly game changers for the design from a reliability perspective. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:26:36 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 03RN: I think the m14 makes sense in the evolution of arms. The m1 to the m14 to the m16. I think going from .30-06 to the 556 and enblocs to 20/30rd mags is just a hill to far for the 1950s minds. Yep The old men at Springfield Armory ( the Govt. one ) and the pentagon were stuck in World War One ideas, and could not accept what the Germans, Soviets, Brits, Belgians knew Intermediate select fire was the way to go |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:33:42 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Colt653: Yep The old men at Springfield Armory ( the Govt. one ) and the pentagon were stuck in World War One ideas, and could not accept what the Germans, Soviets, Brits, Belgians knew Intermediate select fire was the way to go Didnt those guys design the M2 Carbine? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 6:28:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AK-12]
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Username checks out. lol The AK operating system is just a simplified, upside down Garand. The real win at the time was the combination of smaller form factor, intermediate cartridge, and larger magazine. But you probably knew that already. A handful of AK derivatives have come out featuring big improvements like the SG 550 family and the Galil ACEs, but a much wider variety of guns have been developed using AR15 or AR18 systems, and there are reasons for that. The AK is reliable in a general sense, but it isn't really any more reliable than the majority of guns fielded since the '60s outside of exceptions like the SA80 and Insas. Most modern service rifles will give the AK family a run for its money. The only people fielding AKs without significant architectural upgrades are communists, terrorists, and gang bangers. If it was as good as the mythology claims, that wouldn't be the case. I'm not sure why people repeat this. A long stroke piston with a rotating bolt that has a cam lug protruding into the carrier doesn't make it a copy of the Garand. The AK safety and FCG are actually based on the Remington Model 8, but firearm designs tend to evolve rather than sprout as clean sheet designs most of the time. You can similarly look at the FN MAG and AR's relations to the BAR and 1941 Johnson respectively. There are a lot more than just a handful of designs based on the AK, some of which the US military is still using. While it's disingenuous to combine the AR-15 and AR-18 when counting derivatives, the AK is still probably second behind those two. The AR-18 has more derivatives than the AR-15. This isn't to take anything away from the AR, history has shown it to have been developed to a much fuller potential. In fact, one of the reasons it doesn't have a ton of derivatives is that the design itself has been so widely adopted. But even putting the early fielding flubs aside, a big advantage of the AK over the AR is that while both rifles will run dirty, the AK will run dry. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 6:38:53 PM EDT
[#26]
Someone showed John C. Garand an M-14 and I think he was quoted as saying "get that fucking thing away from me."
The M-14 is a cool rifle. It is not a good or practical rifle though, especially in 2024. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 6:41:01 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Colt653: Yep The old men at Springfield Armory ( the Govt. one ) and the pentagon were stuck in World War One ideas, and could not accept what the Germans, Soviets, Brits, Belgians knew Intermediate select fire was the way to go I don't even think select fire is needed. It seems that our elite units stay in semi-auto almost all the time. Unless you have something like an M27, with 60 or 100 round magazines, you're not doing much full auto, for very long. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 7:29:11 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BB: Didnt those guys design the M2 Carbine? Yes the M1 carbine was a REMF PDW for officers, mortarmen, typists etc. When they saw the Stg.44 converting them to M2 was a stop gap |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 7:42:22 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Quintin: Someone showed John C. Garand an M-14 and I think he was quoted as saying "get that fucking thing away from me." The M-14 is a cool rifle. It is not a good or practical rifle though, especially in 2024. Garand helped out with the M-14 magazine design. |
|
|
|
BC, CAN
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 7:58:59 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HeavyMetal: What were these contemporaries that were adopted in great number? What is your data to support your assertion? FAL - 7 million produced, G3 - 7.8 million produced, AK at least 50 million produced. The FAL and G3 may not be as prolific as the AR in 2024 but at the close of the Cold War they were running pretty damn close to the 7 million ARs produced at that point. As far as data, mostly by way of talking to people with relevant experience at the time, whether it be a guy who served in the Canadian Airborne and got use both the FAL and the C7, or the guy who served in the Rhodesian Bush War, or any number of Vietnam vets. It is what it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 7:59:58 PM EDT
[#31]
Carried the M16A1 and the M14 some while I was in.
I disagree. I bought an M1A before I got out of the US Army in the late 70's. Didn't need an AR15 for a couple decades. Then I bought a cool XM177 clone after watching Tour of Duty and then that one led to building my own and that was enough fun I built several. |
|
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 8:01:27 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By hoss622: I don't even think select fire is needed. It seems that our elite units stay in semi-auto almost all the time. Unless you have something like an M27, with 60 or 100 round magazines, you're not doing much full auto, for very long. I think that's mostly true. FA might be useful for some specific things like break contact drills. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 8:08:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Papposilenus]
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Colt653: Yep The old men at Springfield Armory ( the Govt. one ) and the pentagon were stuck in World War One ideas, and could not accept what the Germans, Soviets, Brits, Belgians knew Intermediate select fire was the way to go Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Colt653: Originally Posted By 03RN: I think the m14 makes sense in the evolution of arms. The m1 to the m14 to the m16. I think going from .30-06 to the 556 and enblocs to 20/30rd mags is just a hill to far for the 1950s minds. Yep The old men at Springfield Armory ( the Govt. one ) and the pentagon were stuck in World War One ideas, and could not accept what the Germans, Soviets, Brits, Belgians knew Intermediate select fire was the way to go I think were worried about different types wars The European powers were preparing for guerrilla wars in their (former) colonies after WW2. The US was preparing for fire and maneuver WW3 with the Soviets in the Fulda Gap I don't think they planned on bailing out France in Vietnam. |
|
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 8:16:57 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SnowMexican: FAL - 7 million produced, G3 - 7.8 million produced, AK at least 50 million produced. The FAL and G3 may not be as prolific as the AR in 2024 but at the close of the Cold War they were running pretty damn close to the 7 million ARs produced at that point. As far as data, mostly by way of talking to people with relevant experience at the time, whether it be a guy who served in the Canadian Airborne and got use both the FAL and the C7, or the guy who served in the Rhodesian Bush War, or any number of Vietnam vets. It is what it is. AK production was because it was the standard Soviet/WP weapon and also the commies spread it throughout the Third World. FAL and G3 were the NATO rifles that were pushed for foreign sales. And as something gets wide adoption that in itself becomes a reason to adopt it. |
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 8:22:34 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Papposilenus: I think were worried about different types wars The European powers were preparing for guerrilla wars in their (former) colonies after WW2. The US was preparing for fire and maneuver WW3 with the Soviets in the Fulda Gap I don't think they planned on bailing out France in Vietnam. US army ordnance was retarded most of it's existence. It wasn't making good decision for Fulda Gap or Vietnam, and it took a fucking Democrat POTUS to point them in the right direction (much as a Republican had to do during the Civil War). The US did well when someone like Browning was doing the designs, or when they employed Garand. Otherwise they came up with bad ideas. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 8:32:23 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Two things: The M14 isn’t hyped as the most reliable autoloading rifle in the world. The M14’s exposed bolt doesn’t leave the action wide open while in battery. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Originally Posted By Ghostface: Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: lol Examples of this have been shown by Garand Thumb and InRange. If stuff enters the giant hole on the side of the AK action, it dies. The AR does not have this problem. The AK, like every other thing developed by the Russians, is substandard trash. Yup, also the same reason the M14 doesn’t fair well either with its exposed action…. Two things: The M14 isn’t hyped as the most reliable autoloading rifle in the world. The M14’s exposed bolt doesn’t leave the action wide open while in battery. Snd it still doesn't do well in those conditions.... |
|
|
|
BC, CAN
|
Posted: 4/23/2024 11:54:27 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DonS: I've actually read where a commie general in Vietnam state the AR was better in the jungle. Rust was a problem with AKs, which were steel, with steel mags and steel cased ammo. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DonS: I've actually read where a commie general in Vietnam state the AR was better in the jungle. Rust was a problem with AKs, which were steel, with steel mags and steel cased ammo. I don't think that was the general consensus. Yes they did have some maintenance issues considering that they had to endure a several months journey under austere conditions along the Ho Chi Minh trail before even reaching South Vietnam, and who knows what kind of conditions they were subject to once they reached their destination? It probably didn't help that the rifles and ammunition the Vietnamese mainly recieved were 1950s surplus castoffs or the then inferior Chinese copies thereof. They didn't receive AKMs until 1972, meaning they didn't receiving any newly built Soviet Originally Posted By BB: He's talking about recoil springs and ejector springs etc wearing out. Normal wear and tear. How those things equate to the M16 being 'unreliable until the GWOT' makes no sense though; change the parts when they are supposed to be changed, just like any other machine, and keep it lubed, just like any other machine, and they are reliable. Have been since the beginning. Mods that came with the GWOT were good, but hardly game changers for the design from a reliability perspective. The bolt carrier group, gas rings, and (vintage) magazines were all things that are fairly short lived wear items on the AR that you don't really have to worry too much about on most competing designs. I would say that failure to replace the more usual wear items like springs on a timely basis will tend to have more immediate consequences than on most other designs. Also the barrel was bent fairly easily on the earlier models. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2024 12:49:39 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SnowMexican: I don't think that was the general consensus. Yes they did have some maintenance issues considering that they had to endure a several months journey under austere conditions along the Ho Chi Minh trail before even reaching South Vietnam, and who knows what kind of conditions they were subject to once they reached their destination? It probably didn't help that the rifles and ammunition the Vietnamese mainly recieved were 1950s surplus castoffs or the then inferior Chinese copies thereof. They didn't receive AKMs until 1972, meaning they didn't receiving any newly built Soviet The bolt carrier group, gas rings, and (vintage) magazines were all things that are fairly short lived wear items on the AR that you don't really have to worry too much about on most competing designs. I would say that failure to replace the more usual wear items like springs on a timely basis will tend to have more immediate consequences than on most other designs. Also the barrel was bent fairly easily on the earlier models. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SnowMexican: Originally Posted By DonS: I've actually read where a commie general in Vietnam state the AR was better in the jungle. Rust was a problem with AKs, which were steel, with steel mags and steel cased ammo. I don't think that was the general consensus. Yes they did have some maintenance issues considering that they had to endure a several months journey under austere conditions along the Ho Chi Minh trail before even reaching South Vietnam, and who knows what kind of conditions they were subject to once they reached their destination? It probably didn't help that the rifles and ammunition the Vietnamese mainly recieved were 1950s surplus castoffs or the then inferior Chinese copies thereof. They didn't receive AKMs until 1972, meaning they didn't receiving any newly built Soviet Originally Posted By BB: He's talking about recoil springs and ejector springs etc wearing out. Normal wear and tear. How those things equate to the M16 being 'unreliable until the GWOT' makes no sense though; change the parts when they are supposed to be changed, just like any other machine, and keep it lubed, just like any other machine, and they are reliable. Have been since the beginning. Mods that came with the GWOT were good, but hardly game changers for the design from a reliability perspective. The bolt carrier group, gas rings, and (vintage) magazines were all things that are fairly short lived wear items on the AR that you don't really have to worry too much about on most competing designs. I would say that failure to replace the more usual wear items like springs on a timely basis will tend to have more immediate consequences than on most other designs. Also the barrel was bent fairly easily on the earlier models. You think bolt carrier groups are short lived wear items? You still believe they had issues with barrels bending? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2024 1:25:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Dragynn]
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: lol Examples of this have been shown by Garand Thumb and InRange. If stuff enters the giant hole on the side of the AK action, it dies. The AR does not have this problem. The AK, like every other thing developed by the Russians, is substandard trash. Oh now I understand, you're an expert on AK's because you've watched youtube.  I've seen a video or two myself, so maybe i'm an expert too? Seen one where a guy pulled the dustcover off an AK and crammed a ham sandwich into the receiver, gun still functioned fine. Seen another where a guy pulled out the recoil spring and looped a bunch of rubber bands around the front site and the back of the bolt carrier, gun still worked. Saw another where some guys in Africa pulled an old rusted to hell AK out of a dirt mound where a bunch of conflict weapons had been buried for years, they hosed it off, ran a stick down the bore, opened up a can of motor oil and poured all over it, then put in a mag and the damn thing ran just fine after being buried for 30 years. Maybe some time you might want to have a talk with the guys at BFLV about AK reliability, there is a very large thread on this very site with a ton of info from them. Maybe check with the people who actually use them day in and day out year after year and see what they have to say. I've personally been owning, using and working on them for over 35 years, have hunted and taken dozens of deer with them. How many do you own? https://www.ar15.com/forums/AK-47/AK-abuse-update-on-Page-11-/64-159106/ "...- This may sound crazy but it's fair to say that they finally suffer a catastrophic failure (cracked trunion) at 80,000-100,000 rounds.." (of full-auto fire). 30 days of steel case at BFLV, 80% through AK's, the rest through RPD's and PKM's.:  Ham sandwich video no longer available sadly, but comments from an article about it: "My favorite moment comes when they test the durability of the weapons. With just a little bit of dirt sprinkled on a forward bolt, the M16 jams. Our frustrated host throws it, a feeling many U.S. forces are familiar with. The AK-47, however, perhaps the most durable weapon on the planet, operates when lathered with cottage cheese, peanut butter, and even a ham sandwich. “Daaaangit, I dropped my ham sandwich in my AK again!”
|
|
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 4/23/2024 1:44:27 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SnowMexican: I don't think that was the general consensus. Yes they did have some maintenance issues considering that they had to endure a several months journey under austere conditions along the Ho Chi Minh trail before even reaching South Vietnam, and who knows what kind of conditions they were subject to once they reached their destination? It probably didn't help that the rifles and ammunition the Vietnamese mainly recieved were 1950s surplus castoffs or the then inferior Chinese copies thereof. They didn't receive AKMs until 1972, meaning they didn't receiving any newly built Soviet Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SnowMexican: I don't think that was the general consensus. Yes they did have some maintenance issues considering that they had to endure a several months journey under austere conditions along the Ho Chi Minh trail before even reaching South Vietnam, and who knows what kind of conditions they were subject to once they reached their destination? It probably didn't help that the rifles and ammunition the Vietnamese mainly recieved were 1950s surplus castoffs or the then inferior Chinese copies thereof. They didn't receive AKMs until 1972, meaning they didn't receiving any newly built Soviet I don't think we have much of any insight into it at all. Mostly we have 'nam vet lore that's biased based on jamming M16s issued with the wrong ammo. Communists are not much of a source for reliable info on this sort of thing. My point is that AK reliability isn't based on a solid foundation. It's lore. Originally Posted By SnowMexican: The bolt carrier group, gas rings, and (vintage) magazines were all things that are fairly short lived wear items on the AR that you don't really have to worry too much about on most competing designs. I would say that failure to replace the more usual wear items like springs on a timely basis will tend to have more immediate consequences than on most other designs. Also the barrel was bent fairly easily on the earlier models. Well established experience is that M1As break a lot while ARs run and run. The AR design is simply superior. FAL, G3, M14, AK are basically late WW2 tech, and inferior. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2024 1:45:49 PM EDT
[#41]
The AK worked okay for it's intent after they got production dialed in the late 50s- a dirt cheap prolific submachine gun with extra range (intermediate cartridge). Doesn't matter if it breaks, there's another one.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2024 1:49:09 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SnowMexican: FAL - 7 million produced, G3 - 7.8 million produced, AK at least 50 million produced. The FAL and G3 may not be as prolific as the AR in 2024 but at the close of the Cold War they were running pretty damn close to the 7 million ARs produced at that point. As far as data, mostly by way of talking to people with relevant experience at the time, whether it be a guy who served in the Canadian Airborne and got use both the FAL and the C7, or the guy who served in the Rhodesian Bush War, or any number of Vietnam vets. It is what it is. The FAL and G-3 weren’t contemporaries of the M-16, they were contemporaries of the M-14. |
|
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 4/23/2024 1:54:00 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Windustsearch: The AK worked okay for it's intent after they got production dialed in the late 50s- a dirt cheap prolific submachine gun with extra range (intermediate cartridge). Doesn't matter if it breaks, there's another one. Sure. It was perhaps the best pre-AR fighting carbine used in quantity. The other option was the under powered US carbine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2024 2:00:59 PM EDT
[#44]
So after 11 pages of this, doesn't seem like there is much agreement...
So how about this, what do most people consider to be the BEST service rifle ever issued? Like to hear mainly from vets who have used multiple different ones if that's okay. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2024 2:21:20 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dragynn: So after 11 pages of this, doesn't seem like there is much agreement... So how about this, what do most people consider to be the BEST service rifle ever issued? Like to hear mainly from vets who have used multiple different ones if that's okay. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2024 3:08:15 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By R2point0: Or how about we let this purse swinging contest die its long overdue death? Probably best. |
|
|
|
BC, CAN
|
Posted: 4/23/2024 4:07:57 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 03RN: You think bolt carrier groups are short lived wear items? You still believe they had issues with barrels bending? Yeah. You have to replace them a lot more frequently than you would on an AK or just about any other design, and they're relatively expensive too. Pencil barrels did bend easily, which is one of the reasons that they're no longer the standard. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2024 5:02:56 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AbleArcher]
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dragynn: Oh now I understand, you're an expert on AK's because you've watched youtube. I've seen a video or two myself, so maybe i'm an expert too? Seen one where a guy pulled the dustcover off an AK and crammed a ham sandwich into the receiver, gun still functioned fine. Seen another where a guy pulled out the recoil spring and looped a bunch of rubber bands around the front site and the back of the bolt carrier, gun still worked. Saw another where some guys in Africa pulled an old rusted to hell AK out of a dirt mound where a bunch of conflict weapons had been buried for years, they hosed it off, ran a stick down the bore, opened up a can of motor oil and poured all over it, then put in a mag and the damn thing ran just fine after being buried for 30 years. Maybe some time you might want to have a talk with the guys at BFLV about AK reliability, there is a very large thread on this very site with a ton of info from them. Maybe check with the people who actually use them day in and day out year after year and see what they have to say. I've personally been owning, using and working on them for over 35 years, have hunted and taken dozens of deer with them. How many do you own? https://www.ar15.com/forums/AK-47/AK-abuse-update-on-Page-11-/64-159106/ "...- This may sound crazy but it's fair to say that they finally suffer a catastrophic failure (cracked trunion) at 80,000-100,000 rounds.." (of full-auto fire). 30 days of steel case at BFLV, 80% through AK's, the rest through RPD's and PKM's.: https://i.imgur.com/Vs9GAes.jpeg Ham sandwich video no longer available sadly, but comments from an article about it: "My favorite moment comes when they test the durability of the weapons. With just a little bit of dirt sprinkled on a forward bolt, the M16 jams. Our frustrated host throws it, a feeling many U.S. forces are familiar with. The AK-47, however, perhaps the most durable weapon on the planet, operates when lathered with cottage cheese, peanut butter, and even a ham sandwich. “Daaaangit, I dropped my ham sandwich in my AK again!” Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dragynn: Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: lol Examples of this have been shown by Garand Thumb and InRange. If stuff enters the giant hole on the side of the AK action, it dies. The AR does not have this problem. The AK, like every other thing developed by the Russians, is substandard trash. Oh now I understand, you're an expert on AK's because you've watched youtube. I've seen a video or two myself, so maybe i'm an expert too? Seen one where a guy pulled the dustcover off an AK and crammed a ham sandwich into the receiver, gun still functioned fine. Seen another where a guy pulled out the recoil spring and looped a bunch of rubber bands around the front site and the back of the bolt carrier, gun still worked. Saw another where some guys in Africa pulled an old rusted to hell AK out of a dirt mound where a bunch of conflict weapons had been buried for years, they hosed it off, ran a stick down the bore, opened up a can of motor oil and poured all over it, then put in a mag and the damn thing ran just fine after being buried for 30 years. Maybe some time you might want to have a talk with the guys at BFLV about AK reliability, there is a very large thread on this very site with a ton of info from them. Maybe check with the people who actually use them day in and day out year after year and see what they have to say. I've personally been owning, using and working on them for over 35 years, have hunted and taken dozens of deer with them. How many do you own? https://www.ar15.com/forums/AK-47/AK-abuse-update-on-Page-11-/64-159106/ "...- This may sound crazy but it's fair to say that they finally suffer a catastrophic failure (cracked trunion) at 80,000-100,000 rounds.." (of full-auto fire). 30 days of steel case at BFLV, 80% through AK's, the rest through RPD's and PKM's.: https://i.imgur.com/Vs9GAes.jpeg Ham sandwich video no longer available sadly, but comments from an article about it: "My favorite moment comes when they test the durability of the weapons. With just a little bit of dirt sprinkled on a forward bolt, the M16 jams. Our frustrated host throws it, a feeling many U.S. forces are familiar with. The AK-47, however, perhaps the most durable weapon on the planet, operates when lathered with cottage cheese, peanut butter, and even a ham sandwich. “Daaaangit, I dropped my ham sandwich in my AK again!” Are you trying to reference a CarnikCon video to make a salient point?  043 AR 15 VS AK 47, Solved Once and For All 22 01 2013 |
|
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/23/2024 6:08:21 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Colt653: Yep The old men at Springfield Armory ( the Govt. one ) and the pentagon were stuck in World War One ideas, and could not accept what the Germans, Soviets, Brits, Belgians knew Intermediate select fire was the way to go This idea doesn't stand up to scrutiny because none of those countries actually had a modern intermediate caliber rifle. The Germans and Soviets were both using chopped down full-caliber rifle rounds shoved in to oversized SMGs that had extremely poor ballistics and were doctrinally considered SMGs that still had to be supported by full power rifles. It should also be remembered that the vaunted Stg 44 and the original milled receiver AKs were actually heavier than the M14. The Brits and Belgians were just proposing a full power rifle in a slightly different caliber than the Americans. The final version of .280 Brit was firing a 140gr bullet at 2550 fps - that's actually more powerful than the reduced-charge 7.62x51 loads adopted by the Japanese and Spanish. The modern intermediate caliber cartridge that is effective at rifle ranges was invented by the US Army with 5.56x45 and subsequently copied by other nations with 5.45x39 and 5.8x42 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2024 6:24:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: HeavyMetal]
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SnowMexican: Yeah. You have to replace them a lot more frequently than you would on an AK or just about any other design, and they're relatively expensive too. Pencil barrels did bend easily, which is one of the reasons that they're no longer the standard. ^repeats bad information. Almost everything you said is wrong. |
|
|
|
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
