Some things never change.

[rogerm]

http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/showt ... hp?t=90094

gee... the M4 has problems? really now? Who'd a thunk? (sarcasm added)

[Francis Marion]

I have personally fired tens of thousands of rounds through my M4 and the only jams I have ever had was from damaged magazines that allowed a double feed. The article makes the claim that their weapons were "meticulously cared for and routinely inspected by commanders." I know Army weapons cleaning supplies and procedures, I know how inspections are conducted, I know the Afghan environment, and I know Joe. The only authorized weapons lubricant is CLP and, in Afghanistan, that stuff attracts dust to a gun faster than sailors to a brothel. If regular inspections were being conducted then Joe was not applying adequate lubrication so he could pass inspection. This would only amplify the effects of the second command failure, a complete lack of fire discipline as described by their accounts of full auto fire. The M4/M16 is not the most durable of firearms but it's no POS either.

[rogerm]

I agree, defiantly not the POS it was years past, my A2 worked just fine by all accounts. But to read that article, I agree with you-- too many things just don't add up.

[gpready]

Alright now....If you properly clean, maintain, lube, and lastly OPERATE your weapon..be it a M16 "A2", "A4", or "M4"....99.999% of the time that weapon will function properly! Here is an article of Marines fighting for nearly 2 hours without complaints of weapon malfunction.

http://www.marines.mil/unit/iimef/2ndme ... gents.aspx

Joe

[WC Matt]

Alright now....If you properly clean, maintain, lube, and lastly OPERATE your weapon..be it a M16 "A2", "A4", or "M4"....99.999% of the time that weapon will function properly! Here is an article of Marines fighting for nearly 2 hours without complaints of weapon malfunction.

http://www.marines.mil/unit/iimef/2ndme ... gents.aspx

Joe

There is nothing wrong with that rifle. But you do have to maintain it. That is true for any weapons system.
Matt

[rogerm]

you have to admit, the AK (or SKS) is peasant proof.

[BG6]

Alright now....If you properly clean, maintain, lube, and lastly OPERATE your weapon..be it a M16 "A2", "A4", or "M4"....99.999% of the time that weapon will function properly! Here is an article of Marines fighting for nearly 2 hours without complaints of weapon malfunction.

Wow, almost TWO HOURS?

Waitaminnit . . ."fighting" might also mean using it as the M4 Bayonet Extender . . .though I'm not sure it would last 2 hours in such duty.

That whirring sound is coming from Eugene Stoner's grave, over what they've done to the Armalite carbine that he intended as a replacement for the .30 carbine -- NOT to replace a BATTLE RIFLE.

It would please me if all of my enemies carried Armalites locked to full-auto-only. I will be carrying an FN-FAL and firing one round at a time, and none of those other people will get close enough to hurt me.

[WC Matt]

you have to admit, the AK (or SKS) is peasant proof.

Yes Ro-germ (hey, I couldn't resist ) that's what they were designed to be and used by. untrained/semi trained indivduals in situations (think: eastern front, WW II, 1942) where reliability/simplicity is all important. Nothing wrong with those attributes, by the way.
Matt

[WC Matt]

Wow, almost TWO HOURS?

Waitaminnit . . ."fighting" might also mean using it as the M4 Bayonet Extender . . .though I'm not sure it would last 2 hours in such duty.

That whirring sound is coming from Eugene Stoner's grave, over what they've done to the Armalite carbine that he intended as a replacement for the .30 carbine -- NOT to replace a BATTLE RIFLE.

It would please me if all of my enemies carried Armalites locked to full-auto-only. I will be carrying an FN-FAL and firing one round at a time, and none of those other people will get close enough to hurt me.

The M16 family of rifles work just fine in the "club & pointy" department. As for the FN FAL of which I own one, if they were such great rifles with their range and accuracy, why did the Isralies throw them away in favor of the AK in such numbers that their General staff took notice and start work on a replacement?
People who make statements about "let the other guy use that mouse gun, I'll stand back with my M1A/FN or H&K 91 and take 'em out" are kidding themselves or fighting 18th century redcoats.
Matt

[raymond]

It all goes back to studies done during the 1950's where it was found that the average soldier would wait until the enemy was less than 200 yard away before opening fire. Under such conditions, there is no advantage to equipping millions of troops with more expensive weaponry that can kill at 800 yards like the M1 or M14 series of rifles. Also by this time, most infantry weapons had transitioned to select fire. If you are not shooting single well aimed shots, carrying more ammunition makes more sense, and the lighter weight of smaller caliber assault rifles allow just that. The FAL never was given a fair chance during trials because it was a "foreign" weapon, and buying large numbers of them would not have set well with either the public or the congress at the time it was going through trials.

[raymond]

Matt

The Ak variant that the Israelis came up with is the Galil. With it, they cured what I consider the biggest drawback of the Ak, namely the rear sight. They put a peep sight similar to the one on the M16 on the rear of the gun's receiver as opposed the the rear leaf sight on the rear of the barrel on the standard AK. You get a longer sight radius and improved sight picture which I think improves accuracy. I own a Galil, and have shot several AK variants and as far as I am concerned, the Galil is the best AK variant there is.

[WC Matt]

Matt

The Ak variant that the Israelis came up with is the Galil. With it, they cured what I consider the biggest drawback of the Ak, namely the rear sight. They put a peep sight similar to the one on the M16 on the rear of the gun's receiver as opposed the the rear leaf sight on the rear of the barrel on the standard AK. You get a longer sight radius and improved sight picture which I think improves accuracy. I own a Galil, and have shot several AK variants and as far as I am concerned, the Galil is the best AK variant there is.

Raymond
I'm a Galil owner myself And as for your comment about it being "the best AK variant there is" Probably won't sit well with the folks over at Valmet or the makers of the Swiss Greun rifle . I had heard some where that the AK reciever that the Israelis used as the pattern for the Galil was a Finish Valmet reciever.
Matt

[WC Matt]

It all goes back to studies done during the 1950's where it was found that the average soldier would wait until the enemy was less than 200 yard away before opening fire. Under such conditions, there is no advantage to equipping millions of troops with more expensive weaponry that can kill at 800 yards like the M1 or M14 series of rifles. Also by this time, most infantry weapons had transitioned to select fire. If you are not shooting single well aimed shots, carrying more ammunition makes more sense, and the lighter weight of smaller caliber assault rifles allow just that. The FAL never was given a fair chance during trials because it was a "foreign" weapon, and buying large numbers of them would not have set well with either the public or the congress at the time it was going through trials.

Raymond
I remember reading about this years ago. It was experiences on the WW II battle field that led to the change in doctraine in how the Military (Army) would develope/procure weapons, equipment and tactics.
Some other equipment developed & adopted as a result of those experiences would be the fully tracked and enclosed APC and "M-Series" vehicles.
Matt

[rickf]

Two phrases come to mind here. "Spray and Pray" and "One shot,One kill". The only real need for full auto from anything other than the SAW was for cover fire to advance or retrieve someone. Anything else was wasted ammo or panic! I am sure there have been instances where it is necessary as in the charge on Khe Sanh but not under normal circumstances.




Rick

[sherwan_88]

Our army incorporates the HK G3 as its main rifle
Last year in winter, a friend of mine, who's a serving Major (Infantry) took me to a Army firing range, there i had the opportunity to fire two mainstream army weapons, the G3 and the MP5. Got to see a RR 105 fire too.. When we were all done, i asked him why doesn't the army incorporate a Assault rifle as a mainstream weapon rather than a bulky heavy long battle rifle, he replied that, our training is based on the fact that we engage the enemy in the open, and distance and with accurate fire, for suppression we simply deploy a MG3 and suppress the hell out of the enemy while the soldier fella easily acquires a target, and hits him accurately, for that we incorporate the G3, the caliber is heavy and very lethal, has a very high effective range, its accurate and also can sustain long firing periods as opposed to rifles with shorter barrels. It all started making sense, when he explained how our army's fire and maneuver system works, the rifle fits perfectly.

I am a big fan of the M4, though it has its perks but its far more superior to any rifle out there, because it is light, customizable, adaptable and most importantly accurate and controllable. I think M4 is a great assault rifle, fast in fast out, great for Spec ops and tactical ops, including fire and maneuver tactics, but sustained fire, come on, it wasn't built for that...the m16 is there to do that job, and The Ak with the M4 though both are icons, but i would personally prefer a M4 over 10 Aks or 10 G3's.