Dagnabbit...this is worth an e-mail to your Congressperson

[Okla-homey]

Rifles are kind of low priority for procurement, it seems... always has been that way.

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,131317,00.html?ESRC=army-a.nl

Witness:
1) The Boy's of '61 going off to war with smoothbored pumpkin slingers from the War with Mexico and earlier...

2) Custer's 7th Cavalry at the Little Bighorn with single-shot carbines with soft brass cases that had to be pryzed out of the breech with a pocket knife after almost every shot.

3) Going to war in Cuba in 1898 with black powder '73 Springfields and muzzle-loading artillery.

4) Heading "Over There" in 1917 having to buy Lee-Enfield rifles from the Brits and artillery pieces from the French.

5) Starting off World War Deuce with the M1903 Springfields that we made up for World War Once a quarter century before.

6) Then there's the stories about the M16...

I say, lets give our boys a better rifle. stat. We're America dammit! We are capable of building the best battle implements evar. Alternatively, let's just buy 500,000 AK74's from China. Those things will still shoot reliably after being immersed in mud for a month.

[reevie]

Rifles aren't as sexy as F-22s.

[Okla-homey]

Rifles aren't as sexy as F-22s.

But they kill a dang site more jihaadist scum.

[yermom]

Rifles are kind of low priority for procurement, it seems... always has been that way.

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,131317,00.html?ESRC=army-a.nl

Witness:
1) The Boy's of '61 going off to war with smoothbored pumpkin slingers from the War with Mexico and earlier...

2) Custer's 7th Cavalry at the Little Bighorn with single-shot carbines with soft brass cases that had to be pryzed out of the breech with a pocket knife after almost every shot.

3) Going to war in Cuba in 1898 with black powder '73 Springfields and muzzle-loading artillery.

4) Heading "Over There" in 1917 having to buy Lee-Enfield rifles from the Brits and artillery pieces from the French.

5) Starting off World War Deuce with the M1903 Springfields that we made up for World War Once a quarter century before.

6) Then there's the stories about the M16...

I say, lets give our boys a better rifle. stat. We're America dammit! We are capable of building the best battle implements evar. Alternatively, let's just buy 500,000 AK74's from China. Those things will still shoot reliably after being immersed in mud for a month.

i never hear military types saying this, but anecdotal stuff seems to agree

[Ike]

so it seems to me, the casual outside observer, that probably the #1 factor that the army would look at in a rifle for mass procurement would be cost. I imagine that they sick with the current rifles because they get a great deal on them and they fit the parameters that they want a rifle to fit. I think that for the cost the army doesn't care so much about reliability if they think they can replace a rifle easily and on the cheap.

Just my thoughts on what is probably going on.

If I am indeed correct, then it's my opinion that reliability should probably be higher on their list of priorities, especially when we are asking our troops to fight in extreme environments.

[yermom]

and to make a move like that they would need to retrain people, switch out a crapload of ammunition...

i'm sure somebody somewhere got rich off of the military going with the M-16, and we are still paying for it

[Okla-homey]

so it seems to me, the casual outside observer, that probably the #1 factor that the army would look at in a rifle for mass procurement would be cost. I imagine that they sick with the current rifles because they get a great deal on them and they fit the parameters that they want a rifle to fit. I think that for the cost the army doesn't care so much about reliability if they think they can replace a rifle easily and on the cheap.

Just my thoughts on what is probably going on.

If I am indeed correct, then it's my opinion that reliability should probably be higher on their list of priorities, especially when we are asking our troops to fight in extreme environments.

Ike, geting off cheap may well have been the primary motivator until the mid twentieth century. Since then, I'm pretty convinced its been more about serving the needs of the "military-industrial complex" the president (also called "Ike") warned us about during his farewell address in 1960.

For the record, the CHICOMs, Sovs and their client states could and still do crank out about 10 AK's for the cost of a single M-16 variant.

[Okla-homey]

and to make a move like that they would need to retrain people, switch out a crapload of ammunition...

i'm sure somebody somewhere got rich off of the military going with the M-16, and we are still paying for it

That's just it, if the rifle is properly designed, there isn't much training required at all. That's why Comrade Kalishnikov's rifle has been so sucessful. An illiterate with no training can be taught to shoot it and keep it in firing order in about an hour.

[royalfan5]

I'm really kind of surprised the Military isn't up to M-25 or something by now. As long as rifles are one the key ways to fight wouldn't it make sense to have a lot of them around at all times, and to be continually improving them. The cost of improving a rife has to be much less than a lot of our other military hardware, and it dumbfounds me that keeping them up is such a low priority.

[1stTimeCaller]

The Army pays $285 for each M-16.

[Xstnlsooner]

Custer had it coming..........

just sayin'.

[Okla-homey]

The Army pays $285 for each M-16.

Source please? That number seems very low to me.

[yermom]

i've heard you could get an AK for $40 in some 3rd world countries

[KABOOKIE]

The AK fires reliably but not as accurately as the M-16. And I dragged plenty M-16s through the dirt and mud and they still fired. I was unaware the military needed a "new" rifle.

[yermom]

in my quick look through google, i'm seeing complaints about the sand in Iraq plaguing them

also that in Vietnam when they started using them that they joked that Mattel made them since they didn't like them, although a lot of the issues with them had been fixed since then

[Scott D]

Ike, geting off cheap may well have been the primary motivator until the mid twentieth century. Since then, I'm pretty convinced its been more about serving the needs of the "military-industrial complex" the president (also called "Ike") warned us about during his farewell address in 1960.

For the record, the CHICOMs, Sovs and their client states could and still do crank out about 10 AK's for the cost of a single M-16 variant.

Me thinks you should see how a man who is considered a great American financial pioneer started his fortune. By selling the US Army guns that they already owned that were well out of date, and more harmful to the wielders than to any potential targets during the Civil War. That's really all you need to know about how our Army deals with buying rifles.

[KC//CRIMSON]

You can build an AK cheaper than you can buy one. My old man has a closet full of AKs. They are far more reliable than the M-16, that's why everyone wants one.

[SoonerBorn68]

They are far more reliable than the M-16, that's why everyone wants one.

Or two...or three. ;)

[soonerboomer93]

acutally the HK that they **** canned looked a lot better then the current weapons...

[soonerboomer93]

oh, and I think half the problem is that frankly they forget what they're working on. They're too busy trying to make them fancy and high tech and failing to realize that in this particular case, them simpler/more reliable the better.

[Ike]

at least they aren't microsoft rifles yet.

do you really want to pull the trigger? doing so could cause irreversible loss of life and/or data.
OK or Cancel

[Okla-homey]

at least they aren't microsoft rifles yet.

do you really want to pull the trigger? doing so could cause irreversible loss of life and/or data.
OK or Cancel

There have been research programs looking into a rifle with some sort of interlocking device which would only allow the person to whom the weapon is issued to fire it.

It's do-able, but not feasible because we wouldn't want a troop to be unable to fight if his weapon were destroyed somehow and he couldn't fire his wounded buddy's rifle because he could'nt deactivate the interlocking device.

[Scott D]

There have been research programs looking into a rifle with some sort of interlocking device which would only allow the person to whom the weapon is issued to fire it.

It's do-able, but not feasible because we wouldn't want a troop to be unable to fight if his weapon were destroyed somehow and he couldn't fire his wounded buddy's rifle because he could'nt deactivate the interlocking device.

why do you hate biometrics. ;)

[Rogue]

Where's Jerk? I'm looking for him and thought for sure he'd be in here? :confused:

[OklahomaTuba]

Amazing. Our folks should have the best of the best.

[Okla-homey]

Amazing. Our folks should have the best of the best.

The thing is Tuba, there are two schools of thought on personal weapons. One school, basically the "Kalishnikov" school, says simple and ruggedly designed weapons are best. Downside: accuracy.

The other school calls for the best accuracy possible which requires exacting tolerances and a lot of very complex machining. Downside: reliability.

Its tough to do both. IMHO, the M1903 Springfield and the M-1 Garand are two examples in which we got it right: Accurate and reliable.

I think the M-16 and its variants, including the M-4 carbine are pretty good weapons, particularly since modification with the forward assist mechanism, but they still lack the reliability our guys need in the dirty, dusty middle east.

[The]

Death Rays, my friends...death rays...

[SicEmBaylor]

Rifles are kind of low priority for procurement, it seems... always has been that way.

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,131317,00.html?ESRC=army-a.nl

Witness:
1) The Boy's of '61 going off to war with smoothbored pumpkin slingers from the War with Mexico and earlier...

2) Custer's 7th Cavalry at the Little Bighorn with single-shot carbines with soft brass cases that had to be pryzed out of the breech with a pocket knife after almost every shot.

3) Going to war in Cuba in 1898 with black powder '73 Springfields and muzzle-loading artillery.

4) Heading "Over There" in 1917 having to buy Lee-Enfield rifles from the Brits and artillery pieces from the French.

5) Starting off World War Deuce with the M1903 Springfields that we made up for World War Once a quarter century before.

6) Then there's the stories about the M16...

I say, lets give our boys a better rifle. stat. We're America dammit! We are capable of building the best battle implements evar. Alternatively, let's just buy 500,000 AK74's from China. Those things will still shoot reliably after being immersed in mud for a month.

The US, typically throughout history, has been woefully unprepared to fight every war that it has been involved with at least in the beginning.

[Jerk]

Nice advertisement by H&K

AK-47? pffft...the Marine Corps would never accept a rifle that shoots 5moa at 100 yards. The USMC had so many head shots with the M-16 during the battle of Fallujah that an independent commission had to come in and verify that the Jihadi scum weren't being executed at point blank range. They found out that most of the shots were from several hundred meters.

People curse the little black rifle because of what happened in Vietnam, when the wrong kind of gunpowder was used and the gas systems became fouled to the point it wouldn't work. Add the fact that, at first, troops were told that the rifle "didn't require cleaning" and it led to disaster. However, the M16 today is not the same rifle of the 1960's. The rotating bolt system and direct gas impengement system make for a very accurate rifle, and maintained with professional soldiers, they are very reliable. I have two AR's. One is a 5.56 NATO and it has never jammed with brass-cased ammo after several thousand rounds (except for a broken shell that occured after the 2nd time it had been fired and reloaded) The other is a 6.5mm x 39 (Grendel) and I've never had problems with the 25 round mags.

The whole thing about firing after the rifle has been submerged in water...you will FUBAR any rifle if the barrel is not drained first.

AK-47's are good for 3rd world peasants because they require little training and virtually no maintanence, unless in a humid environment. But they are just not accurate enough because of the tilting bolt system and the massive gas piston/carrier moving back and forth. They also have the ergonomics of a cinder block, and are not very modular and not particularly suited for mounting scopes, EOtechs, Aimpoints, or other devices, unless you want a milled receiver and you want to drill holes in it.

As for the 5.56, I'm not the biggest fan or cheerleader of it. I'm hoping they'll change the uppers to the 6.5 Grendel - which outshoots the 7.62 NATO at range and can function in an AR-15 lower.

From a Oklahoma law enforcement officer, and vet, in response to this same question on another forum:

Having no experience with, or seeing the need for, a piston driven system in an AR I can't comment on that. But I will tell you that I've fired well over 100,000 rounds (probably 3 times that) in a standard AR/M16 with very few problems with just a little maintence. To me, less moving parts means less vibration to interfere with the harmonics of the rifle. I've been lucky and had excellent accuracy with every AR I've ever owned.

http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2168

This is the guy that builds all of those guns for me that I post pics of here. He does it for fun, and doesn't charge me anything.

[Rogue]

This should be a great time for rifle making. With lightweight materials some great new weapons are being made, especially the sub-machine and sniper variety. For an all-purpose infantry type gun I would want the reliability of the Garand, but I'd hate to pack that sucker around all the time because it's heavy as hell.

Historically the accurate and reliable guns, except the AKs, didn't hold up well in the sandy places.

Sounds simple but, truthfully, this IS rocket science.

[Rogue]

:les: Jerk, check your inbox.

[olevetonahill]

Ok heres my 2 cts
In the 60s My group trained with the m14 , a very dependable and accurate weapon Now your talking HEAVY . But you could drag that sucker thru any rice paddy and it would still fire everytime . When I got to the Nam I was issued My 16 . I said WTF . Had to learn the damn thing befor 1st fire fight .
Now The biggest prob I saw with the 16 was the need to keep it clean , But hell if you were to damn lazy to clean your weapion you should not expect to survive any way . The prob was in the transition from the 14 to the 16 the Troops wernt used to it and didnt keep it as clean as it neeeded to be , They were used to the 14 . hence all the Malfunctions . after the realised that tyhe 16 neede to be kept a hell of lot cleaner than the 14 the problems diminished dramaticly . Kept clean the 16 was very reliable and accurate .
For what its worth I kept mine either on safe or select fire . very seldom full Un less we had our tits in a wringer and needed to spray an pray .

[Jerk]

Olev, were you issued the comic book with the G.I. woman in it telling the troops how to clean and maintain their M16s?

I'm going to do a little searching and see if I can find it.

[Okla-homey]

Ok heres my 2 cts
In the 60s My group trained with the m14 , a very dependable and accurate weapon Now your talking HEAVY . But you could drag that sucker thru any rice paddy and it would still fire everytime . When I got to the Nam I was issued My 16 . I said WTF . Had to learn the damn thing befor 1st fire fight .
Now The biggest prob I saw with the 16 was the need to keep it clean , But hell if you were to damn lazy to clean your weapion you should not expect to survive any way . The prob was in the transition from the 14 to the 16 the Troops wernt used to it and didnt keep it as clean as it neeeded to be , They were used to the 14 . hence all the Malfunctions . after the realised that tyhe 16 neede to be kept a hell of lot cleaner than the 14 the problems diminished dramaticly . Kept clean the 16 was very reliable and accurate .
For what its worth I kept mine either on safe or select fire . very seldom full Un less we had our tits in a wringer and needed to spray an pray .

In the desert, that talcum fine dust and sand gets into every nook and cranny. My sergeants to make our d00ds take their M-4's down all the way every coupla days.

[olevetonahill]

In the desert, that talcum fine dust and sand gets into every nook and cranny. My sergeants to make our d00ds take their M-4's down all the way every coupla days.
Dayum I cleaned my 16 every chance I got , It was hell of lot more often evry 2 days .

[Jerk]

http://www.countryjoe.com/strip.jpg

[Okla-homey]

Dayum I cleaned my 16 every chance I got , It was hell of lot more often evry 2 days .

Not just field cleaning. That they did a couple times a day. I'm talking taking it all the way down.

[olevetonahill]

Not just field cleaning. That they did a couple times a day. I'm talking taking it all the way down.
In the field it was kinda hard to break one all the way down . Thats why I did the fiels strip an claean every chance I got
A true story
when we stopped for a break one day, My buddy broke his 16 down to clean , he was sittin a lil ways off from the rest off us . when out of the bush came a victor charlie with his AK Tom bout **** his drawers hes was trying to yell and hide and get his weapon back together at the same time .
Man we LAFAO when the VC said Chu Hoi Chu Hoi . and handed him his AK .
WE made him cover the rear for the rest of the patrol :D

[Jerk]

For dummies like me who read olevet's post and was like, wtf?

Chu Hoi

http://www.psywarrior.com/viet.html

[olevetonahill]

For dummies like me who read olevet's post and was like, wtf?

Chu Hoi

http://www.psywarrior.com/viet.html
Sorry Bro I didnt think to say what it meant I was to busy lmfao and remembering how skeered my bud was .:D

[KABOOKIE]

Sorry guys. If anyone thinks the AK is some bullet proof piece of weaponry then you're woefully mistaken. It jams. It falls apart. It couldn't hit a basketball >100 yards away. The thing is made to spray lead and when it breaks you throw the P.O.S. in the garbage.

I could take my M-16 and repeatably hit a coke can at 300 yards. I dragged it through the dirt in Pendleton and fine sands of the Gulf during GWI. In the six years I was in the USMC it never jammed once. Did I clean it every day? Hell yes. That's what you do with a fine piece of machinery. Did it take the Gov't weeks to train me how to use it? Hell yes. But that's the kind of fighting force of men I want on my team. If you want some stamped and rolled P.O.S. rifle that any Ivan, Ho Chin, or Akmed can pull the trigger and not hit **** then go ahead and swear your allegiance to the hammer and sickle.

[Jerk]

Sorry guys. If anyone thinks the AK is some bullet proof piece of weaponry then you're woefully mistaken. It jams. It falls apart. It couldn't hit a basketball >100 yards away. The thing is made to spray lead and when it breaks you throw the P.O.S. in the garbage.

I could take my M-16 and repeatably hit a coke can at 300 yards. I dragged it through the dirt in Pendleton and fine sands of the Gulf during GWI. In the six years I was in the USMC it never jammed once. Did I clean it every day? Hell yes. That's what you do with a fine piece of machinery. Did it take the Gov't weeks to train me how to use it? Hell yes. But that's the kind of fighting force of men I want on my team. If you want some stamped and rolled P.O.S. rifle that any Ivan, Ho Chin, or Akmed can pull the trigger and not hit **** then go ahead and swear your allegiance to the hammer and sickle.

Yep. The AR-15 is usually a 1 (or less) MOA rifle

The AK is minute-of-barndoor

It's also been well-documented that the fragmentation from the high-velocity 5.56 bullet does alot more damage than the slow-moving 7.62x39 Soviet, which is basically a cartridge that falls somewhere in between a rifle round and a pistol round.

Having said that, I'd prefer the 16" or 20" barreled AR over the M-4's 14" just to get that extra speed.

[KC//CRIMSON]

The M-16 is more of a rifle, but the AK is a "machine gun." For stopping power and reliability I'll take the AK. JMO.

[olevetonahill]

The M-16 is more of a rifle, but the AK is a "machine gun." For stopping power and reliability I'll take the AK. JMO.
300 meters , Me and My old 16 you and your whatever AK thingy 60 rds each . Ill have 40 left. you will be out . and Dead .
Just sayin :eek:

[KC//CRIMSON]

Yep. The AR-15 is usually a 1 (or less) MOA rifle

The AK is minute-of-barndoor

It's also been well-documented that the fragmentation from the high-velocity 5.56 bullet does alot more damage than the slow-moving 7.62x39 Soviet, which is basically a cartridge that falls somewhere in between a rifle round and a pistol round.

Having said that, I'd prefer the 16" or 20" barreled AR over the M-4's 14" just to get that extra speed.


Really? Watch the cinder and wood block demo. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6BpI3xD6h0

[KC//CRIMSON]

300 meters , Me and My old 16 you and your whatever AK thingy 60 rds each . Ill have 40 left. you will be out . and Dead .
Just sayin :eek:


If your that far away I'll just drop a mortar on your a**. Hope you don't drop your sweet 16 into the water, or YOU ARE dead.;)

[Jerk]

Really? Watch the cinder and wood block demo. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6BpI3xD6h0

That clearly shows which rifle is more accurate.

If I need to shoot through cinder blocks, I'll bring the FAL (7.62 NATO aka .308 Winchester)

[olevetonahill]

If your that far away I'll just drop a mortar on your a**. Hope you don't drop your sweet 16 into the water, or YOU ARE dead.;)
Bring it bro . Ive dodged my share of mortars and 122 rockets . :D

[Jerk]

Guys...kind of changing the topic, but I've heard that the US military is going to be adopting a new rocket launcher that is alot like the RPG-7 and is easily reloadable in the field and not a "fire and throw-away" weapon like the AT-4

[Jerk]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcM3VZpUnCA

[SicEmBaylor]

Just so you hillbillies know....
An e-mail is more effective than snail mail and a phone call is even better.

[Jerk]

Another dayamed thing:

That H&K upper cost 5 thousand friggin' dollars. Just an upper! Not the complete rifle.

I guess we can take it out of the UN budget.

[Jerk]

You couldn't do this with an ak
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXgcQNsUKO0

[KABOOKIE]

RPG Class....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyhWdgiBOvo

[KC//CRIMSON]

You couldn't do this with an ak
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXgcQNsUKO0

Heh. The dude just to the left of the main guy is firing an AK.;)