M16 is ded
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/2015/10/26/commandant-approves-m4-standard-rifle-marine-corps-infantry/74593750/
How does it feel to know the M16 line of rifles is going into the garbage can?
The Marines, the most prolific user of the rifle, are already switching to the M4. They claim the M4, loaded with special ammunition, outperforms the A4 up to ranges of 600m.
>Join the 14.5" masterrace
>>27776527
sad OP
the A4 is my longtime raifu
>>27776527
Surplus USMC M16A4s when?!!?
>>27776527
>5.56
> 600m
would it really be effective at that range ,
legitimately curious
>>27776572
Was just thinking this
>>27776536
The 20" M16s of yesteryear will forever hold a place in our hearts.
>>27776527
>>27776572
Also, colt still produces the AR15A4 to milspec standards, so its not like they're all gone suddenly
>>27776581
Here's the information of the ammunition. Say goodbye to the ole green tipped rounds.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/02/17/usmc-adopt-new-5-56mm-mk318-mod-0-ammunition/
>>27776581
If the target isn't armored, yeah of course.
Whoever it is is going to be out of the fight, even if it's a more minor wound where he's basically just got a tumbling 22 cal bullet going into and/or through him.
>>27776527
>They claim the M4, loaded with special ammunition, outperforms the A4 up to ranges of 600m.
Sure they do...
It'll be fun to start hearing more and more people blaming 5.56 as people continue to gimp it with short barrels.
>>27776572
Fucking never. ATF will find some way to fuck us, and by extension the USMC, over.
>>27776612
it does though
Gene Stoner is rolling in his grave.
>>27776581
This
I'm still genuinely baffled at why US infantry soldiers in Afghanistan AREN'T fielded M14s after 14+years of long-range combat with talibs.
Seriously every trooper in A-stan should have a rifle that he can reliably engage targets with.
>>27776629
And how much better would the mk318 perform out of a 20" barrel?
>>27776612
>>27776609
>>27776527
Did they use the same new ammo with both rifles,
OR
Did they use green tip on the "20 and MK 318 Mod 0 on the 14.5"
Sounds sketchy mang
>>27776527
>They claim the M4, loaded with special ammunition, outperforms the A4 up to ranges of 600m.
In what way would it?
>>27776629
... But how?
How are you gaining performance by losing barrel length?
>>27776666
Barrel harmonics.
>>27776656
Someone should look into how they determined this. Considering the amount of bad and biased testing that went on during the AR-15's trial run to get into service in the early 60s, I would not be surprised if this were the case.
Also, is it Colt that makes this M4 variant? Or is it some third party M4-esque copy?
MIC at its worst
>>27776572
>>27776582
Never, they'll probably give them to the Iraqi Army/ANA/"Moderate Rebels"/ISIS for free. CMP M16A4s would be godlike though
>>27776725
oh fuck off
>>27776609
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/03/20/army-and-marine-corps-still-disagree-over-m16-m4-bullet.html
Congress is going to make them decide which round they'll end up adopting. They'll probably end up with the M855A1 in spite of whatever performance/reliability concerns just because the Army has more sway and they've already sunk so much money into it
>>27776640
Because the m14 isn't exactly a good weapon.
>>27776640
Well some are, marksmen
>>27776726
They're a mix of Colt/FN. They're not new M4s, the Marine Corps have been stockpiling them for a while. They're probably old army ones that didn't get converted into M4A1s
>>27776755
I don't know about that. The article you provided was from March, these other twos are pretty recent.
I think they are only adopting the M4 contingent on using that new ammunition.
>possible minor performance advantage
>switch standard service rifle immediately
and people wonder why the US spends so much on defense
>>27776572
Lowers never.
Uppers probably not.
Parts kits maybe but don't hold your breath.
>>27776806
You're ignoring the fact that the carbine is lighter and way more compact.
>>27776828
>You're ignoring the fact that the carbine is lighter and way more compact.
That was factored into the equation. How much is this going to cost?
>>27776842
Probably not too much. These are not brand new M4s.
>>27776852
>Probably not too much.
whatever
>>27776726
>>27776656
We used the barrier rounds in all of our weapons on my last deployment in 2013
>>27776806
The Marine Corps is actually paying little to nothing for the M4s.
Just for shits and giggles, let's say a new rifle costs the USMC $1,500. To outfit, I don't know, 100,000 Marines with said rifle that is only $150,000,000. Compare that to an F-22, which had a cost per unit of $322 million.
>small arms are cheap
>>27776794
The firearm blog article is from 2010. They are currently using SOST ammo, but Congress doesn't like the idea of the services using 2 different types of ammo going forward.
>>27776866
What answer should the anon have given you to assauage your chapped cunt?
>>27776880
FN sells them to the military for ~$650 per rifle. Almost every rifle in the Marines now has an ACOG though, so the accessories probably all add up.
>>27776806
I think the end of the year range days are more egregious examples
>>27776880
according to supply paperwork when i worked in our company armory, the M4 replacement cost is $1100.
>>27776527
I'm not phased because I got to use a C7A1 at basic, and was actually told that I was in the last platoon EVER to use them before they go to the smelter to be recycled into cans or whatever. Recruits will get to use A2s from then on. (I think even the Army platoons were using them, we only use A1s because the navy likes ironsights since scopes aren't exactly a boon if you're on a tiny fishing vessel trying to shoot someone 3 feet away)
I know it's not EXACTLY an M16 but hey, M4s are basically the same as M16s but shorter and with a different trigger group, aren't they?
>>27776581
afaik it's "effective" up to 400m and intended for 100m, and the reason it's used is because of STANAG. To just up and switch to battle rifles would be a massive upheaval of an international standard that's literally too big and to old to fail, because the alternatives are better but not so mindblowing that a switch is necessary right this minute. Also, not every engagement is over an entire desert., so ridiculous long rifles as standard wouldn't be good for people who happen to be in cities, on ships, etc.
Also, it'd fuck with drill manuals, just to add insult to clerical work and mismanagement
>>27776806
I think it's more likely that the M16s are old and instead of continuing to service them and order parts, they're just gonna adopt the ACTUAL standard rifle and cease being special snowflakes
>>27776909
The articles posted earlier in the thread claim they already have the 17,000 M4's to issue to the infantry, so it won't cost anything.
That's an interesting number though, does that account for the RCO?
>>27776640
Because it's not reliable and heavy as fuck.
>>27776640
It's like 9 feet long and uses a round you can't forage for in bushes. Also it's about 11 feet long.
>>27776927
No, it only accounts for the actual weapon itself. other pieces of serialized gear had their own costs listed as well, as far as i remember, both the RCO and PEQ-16 were below $2000.
I assume that the Unit Replacement Cost entailed every single penny it would cost to get a brand new system shipped to that unit, to include paperwork, man hours, and shipping considerations. So $1100 is probably much higher than what the Marine Corps pays per rifle.
>>27776640
because this is a thing.
I can almost guarantee they are gonna keep them for basic training purposes at least.
>>27776572
Never because ATF keks and libshits get a boner when smashing them. That and king nigger wants to give them to rebels that fight russia.
>>27776640
>wooden weapons
lol
phone ring
"m16 is kill"
"no"
>>27776733
wound vectors?
>>27776572
They've already been phasing out the M16 with the M4 for like the past 5 years. The only rifles they have left are probably totally banged to shit.
If at all, they'll probably be sold to the CMP where they will be altered for civilian use, and a large quantity may also go to law enforcement, because everyone knows modern LEOs are complete fucking gear queers
>>27776527
>>27776572
>>27776582
>>27776628
>>27776728
once a machinegun :(
>>27776572
Never
They'll rather throw it down the bottom of the ocean than entrust the American people with it
>>27776572
Probably not. They'll unfortunately go DRMO or to some other country's military.
>>27777367
>The only rifles they have left are probably totally banged to shit.
Naw man. Servicing and refurbishing them if they get issued is a pain in the ass and the unit replacement cost is low. It's much cheaper to trash weapons that see use and buy new ones.
The stock of reserve M-16's is huge, and it's new, never issued weapons.
can someone please tell me what the biggest differences between the m16a4 and modern AR15 variants are?
Does the M16 even have changeable furniture?
One thing I understand is that A1 and A2 were made before the consideration of the pitcanny rail or so I believe, which seems pretty awesome to think about.
>>27777399
I would like to add on to your post by saying, would you really want a upper that has quite literally been beat to shit over the past 30 years by a bunch of boots? The barrels are probably sewer pipes and there will be enough wobble in the upper to shoot yourself in the foot while aiming ahead
>>27777134
The m-14 in none of its current configurations as used by the military except honor guard, uses wooden stocks. Quit being stupid
>>27777367
Marine Corps Recruit Training Depot Parris Island was issued brand new M16A4s with Brand new ACOGs about 3 years ago. A great Many POG Units were also issued new M16s around the same time. As far as I have been told only infantry units will be phasing out m16s with m4s but it's going to take a fucking long time before the phase out is complete. It might be done by the time your grand kids go to college.
>>27776589
Amen. A moment of silence please
>>27777553
M4's going to infantry units first, how fucking ironic.
>>27776572
Never, thanks to Bill Clinton.
The good ones will be sold to law enforcement. The old ones to moderate rebels.
>>27776572
they could just switch barrels and forends
![m14inafghanistan[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/I3d0rkE.jpg "m14inafghanistan[1].jpg")
>>27777521
Some M14s issued in Afghanistan come straight from old cold war era supply depots. They don't EBR all of them
>>27776656
It's still enough to say that the new platform is better.
Remember they shed pounds and inches with this deal too.
>>27777583
The whole "moderate rebels" things pisses me off so much. How can the government trust a bunch of backwater idiots with free full auto guns, but their own people have to jump through tons of hoops and pay out the ass for 30 year old registered automatics?
![030510_rcm14004[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/uDyFVip.jpg "030510_rcm14004[1].jpg")
>>27777521
>>27779758
![m14-ebr-seeing-hard-service-afghanistan-2013[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/n5JjARu.jpg "m14-ebr-seeing-hard-service-afghanistan-2013[1].jpg")
>>27779799
>>27779799
>>27779810
I suppose this is just what's needed when you fight ridgeline to ridgeline
>>27776591
>Milspec standards
Kek. No F marked FSB and M4 feedramps are now 'mil-spec' for the M16A4?
>>27776609
>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/02/17/usmc-adopt-new-5-56mm-mk318-mod-0-ammunition/
>It isn’t a hollow point. It is an Open-Tip Match round much like the M118LR. The jacket is drawn from the base (instead of the cheaper method of jacket drawn from the nose and an exposed lead base) to the tip of the bullet. The tiny little hole there is just a remnant from jacketing the bullet that way. It isn’t designed for expansion or calculated to cause unnecessary suffering, so it doesn’t violate the Hague conventions
>>27779962
>F marks mean milspec
i bet you don't even have a single god damned clue what mil spec actually requires.
what happened to that guys face and hand?
also
>accept an even smaller barrel
oh yeah that'll do real well
or
try a bullpup
shorten the gun without reducing barrel length
>>27780327
wasn't wearing his PPE
>>27780315
I thought the US never signed the treaty banning expanding ammunition. So who gives a fuck?
>>27780353
i know but why even bother with the bullshit explanation in the first place if there's nothing to hide?
>>27776527
> same system, different length.
> you're still making a thread about it.
Yeah nah I feel great ya cunt now fuck off
>>27776640
get the fuck out of here sprey
>m14
>reliable
>>27776638
why would the pioneer of lightweight weaponry be angry about this Fuddlord?
>>27776527
>>Join the 14.5" masterrace
Gee I would love to, only the ATF is too busy having it's way with my tender hole.
>>27780386
I don't know how to tell you this, but...
>M14's are reliable
>>27777583
>moderate
jesus christ, why can't the US get anything right when it comes to foreign policy?
Seriously guys, it's embarrassing to watch you fail every single time.
>>27780327
get out of here britbong
>>27780388
>chop perfectly balanced controllable and lightweight automatic rifle
>remove automatic function
>just fuck my barrel profile up senpai
>slap 5 lbs of rails and bullshit on rifle
>>27780397
https://www.full30.com/video/6618755f336970e55e6c50c1fe894ff8
let Gun Jesus lead you to the light
>>27780555
you are now aware that the early AR-10s had an aluminum alloy barrel. If stoner was a live today he would make something like the m4
>>27776589
Is that swastika?
>>27776980
Army paid 1800$ per M4 in 2014.
I wonder what the heck the plain "Carbine" is
There is also a great deal of money spent of M4 Carbine Mods for unspecified amounts.
I don't know.
"Carbine" was bought for 733$ dollars per piece in 2014
>>27780587
In Thailand there are swastikas all over the place. They don't mean what you think it does.
>>27780601
There are swastikas all over Asia, if it's Vietnam it probably has to do with Buddhism. Take a gander of a map over Tokyo and you're going to see swastikas all over the place.
>>27780601
>>27780651
Ty for ekzplanation
>>27780422
Hey, man, we aren't the ones responsible. We're more pissed than you are. Anyone who has looked at the issue for longer than ten seconds is pissed, and all we can do is sit by and watch the Jackass in Chief do shit that we didn't elect him to do. Matter of fact, depending who you talk to, most people tried to elect him to do the OPPOSITE of what he's doing.
Just remember, don't hate the American people, hate our shit fucking current leadership.
>>27780601
there is no difference
the nazis used all kinds of swastikas
as did everyone else
>>27780669
>HK patch on helmet
>hi-power condition 0-1 in helicopter
>no ammo in 30 cal
>>27780762
>complains about patches
>not knowing the difference between a 30cal and a 50 cal
>>27780802
Barrel shroud tricked me.
Who knows how canadians have their helicopter gunners armed.
>>27780810
Heh :p
Its still not as bad as when the Norwegian subtitles on my Band of Brothers-dvd managed to place "30 mm" instead of "30cal" into every damn episode
>>27780824
I cringe when people say "two 50mm machine guns" etc in government documents
>>27780828
Makes me think about WarHammer 40K when i hear such things.
>>27780601
They technically have different names. The swastika has been a symbol of fortune for as long as we've existed as a species. We've been digging shit out of the ground, dated to over eight thousand years BC, with swastikas present in some form.
The Nazis just twisted it 45 degrees and called it the "hakenkreuz", or crooked cross.
>>27776527
Damn
I carried both and the A4 just felt so solid and tight in your shoulder........my groups were always better
>>27780824
>not having door-mounted 50mm cannons on your helicopters
shameful desu
>>27776527
They should've just put telestocks on their M16s.
>>27777492
>can someone please tell me what the biggest differences between the m16a4 and modern AR15 variants are?
A selector switch
>>27776527
CMP selling surplus M16s when?
>>27781595
Never. The good ones will be given to ISIS, the OK ones will be used for training, and the irreparably shitty ones will be scrapped.
>>27781621
It would be much simpler to sell them. And why would we be giving them to ISIS?
>>27776806
Except the m4 has been in use in the military since 1996.
>>27780390
Pin and weld man.
>>27776806
Because there's totally not a metric fuckload of Colt/FN M4s laying around or anything...
>>27781646
Do you even Realpolitik?
>>27781791
Tile Forever! Carpet Never
>American citizens can't be trusted with full auto rifles
>but uneducated shitter "moderate rebels" can
Thanks Clinton you fucking nigger
>>27776666
Barrel length gives you distance as it gives powder more time to burn. But a shorter barrel of the same thickness will be more accurate as it is stiffer. You can achieve the same accuracy of a short barrel by adding thickness to a longer barrel. I'm sure you can see why that would be an issue with standard ground infantry.
>>27776572
Theyre going to be beat to shit and sand blasted.
>>27776527
>every Marine a carbineman
Shameful.
I thought they wanted the m27 as their main service rifle. Thats why they sneaked into their IAR program.
>>27776527
moments later, 250,000 M16A4 rifles pop up in the hands of "moderate rebels"
Moderate Rebels love the ar platform.
>>27780597
Didn't they start converting M4s to M4A1s around that time
>>27782501
>He actually ever believed that was even remotely true or a possibility
You are a moron. Grade A moron.
>>27780587
Its a Buddhist symbol. Nazis just stole it because muh "Aryan Master Race".
The world would be a better place if armed forces had switched to this gun while it had a chance.
>>27776572
Shipped to third world countries.
>all these faggots ITT saying M14 isn't reliable
confirmed no guns who have never fired one lol
>>27783309
Are you sure you're in the right thread? Also, yeah, the M14 is hugely overrated.
http://looserounds.com/2015/01/30/the-m14-not-much-for-fighting-a-case-against-the-m14-legend/
>>27783165
Cunt.
>>27776589
Is that a hippy marine?
>>27783365
>http://looserounds.com/2015/01/30/the-m14-not-much-for-fighting-a-case-against-the-m14-legend/
Im sure every gun has its problems, but at least it wasnt an m16
military would have been better off had they just used the m14 through the war instead of the varmint round desu
>>27783388
Thank u for respon
>>27783487
>>27783365
>not adopting an FN FAL in either .280 british, 7.92×33mm Kurz, or 7.62×45mm Czech..
>>27783516
thank u 4 ur service
>>27783570
>FN FAL
you mean that gun that has the shit gas system and shits the bed with sand? yeah no thanks
>>27783570
>.280 british, 7.92×33mm Kurz, or 7.62×45mm Czech.
snowflake cartridge inferior to 308, a very slow 7.62x39, and a proprietary 7.62x39 the czechs made for the sole purpose of fucking with russia?
ew no thanks, Idk why you have such awful taste in calibers.
So do they think that infantry will only be fighting in urban areas from now on? Noone in afghanistan got into firefights over 600 meters?
>>27779796
Because democrats hate their own people, hasn't that been obvious for decades?
>>27779821
An AR-10 variant would be a far better choice. I understand they are just using what is on hand, but the M-14 is outdated as fuck.
>>27780397
>M14's are reliable
>Y2K+15
>still believing this fuddlore bullshit
>>27783622
>implying the FNFAL reliability wasn't due to having initially being designed for an intermediate cartridge(,280 British, 7x49 Venezuelan ) then suddenly having to convert the design to 308 when NATO formed and it became a standard.
>>27783641
>durr hurr hurr soldiers shooting accurately at 600 meters.
>not hiding behind cover and taking potshots /"covering fire" in the general direction of the enemy waiting for artillery, armor or air support to arrive.
So why dont they just take each m16 and put a shorter barrel on them and hand them out as m4's? Why buy new rifles?
>>27783991
They already have the M4s they need. There is no buying new rifles.
>>27776527
Is anyone genuinely surprised by this?
Can we discuss when the USMC is going to make "Every Marine, A Rifleman" "Every Marine, a lightmachinegunman" and make the M27 the standard?
The M27 is pretty. I want one. :(
>>27776572
They might not be able to sell off the lowers due to ATFaggotry, but all the other parts should be good, like upper receivers, bolts, barrels, stocks, handguards, magazines, etc.
We might not see full rifles as surplus, but I think it wouldn't be unlikely that they'd sell it all off as parts, so that would be an influx of cheap AR-15 parts.
>>27783149
>muh aryan pride
>steals something like a bunch of dindus
Hah.
>>27783165
I really like the AR-18, but the AR-15 is seriously a much better performing rifle by design.
>>27776638
The M4 is literally a carbine length M16, what the fuck are you talking about?
>>27776640
>heavy
>long
>recoils too much so full-auto and rapid fire is an unrealistic option for the majority of grunts
>action is open and exposed, known for being sensitive to sand, so lets take it to the sandbox
>cartridge with a performance most grunts just won't make use of
>beats itself to death through use
>>27785370
Care to elaborate anon. What gives the ar15 an edge?
>>27780397
>action seizes up with just the slightest bit of sand
>this would be reliable and dependable in the Middle East
>>27785499
More durable by design (the AR-18 could simply not take the same kind of abuse, and actually had a few weak points here and there)
WAY better inherent accuracy.
Great modularity.
The basic AR-18 is a perfectly adequate rifle, but it's designed to be cheap, it's a bit like the AK approach but not quite as extreme.
![jsdf1[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/sb3QBd2.jpg "jsdf1[1].jpg")
>>27783165
Well one country did.
>>27780601
The nazis appropriated it, like they did with so many other symbols--for example, the Roman eagle. However, since this one was on their flag, it's the one that's most remembered and associated with them.
How many years before LSAT replaces everything?
>>27777501
Same can be said for any millsurp, it's about the history
>>27780565
Here's a question, the M1 was very reliable right? What happened to make the M14 so unreliable? Or does the M1 behave the same in these conditions
>>27783165
You're retarded if you believe this.
>>27776572
never. expect to see them in the hands of "moderates" in the middle east soon.
>>27780555
Soon the military will issue 7.5" akimbo M4-based pistols with laser sights and M203s mounted on both.
>>27776527
How long until the Army decides to start issuing CQBRs to everyone so they can stay ahead of the Corps in the cute little service rifle arms race?
>>27787416
it wasn't the Army wanting to be ahead that made them adopt the M4 first, it was Conway being retarded that made the USMC not adopt the M4
"Marines like that M4 carbine because it looks cool. And I’ve had some Marines complain to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff saying ‘you know, the officers are getting these things, but we’re still having to carry this rifle.’ Well, the Marine Corps will always be a rifle Marine Corps. The carbine is an extension of the pistol, not a reduction of a rifle. And in the Afghanistan scenario where you’re shooting long distances you gotta be able to reach out and touch ‘em. And a carbine is just not designed to do that."
But you'll probably just go all "oorah debuldawg semper fi" on me
>marines, fighting harder and not smarter since their inception
>>27776527
>How does it feel to know the M16 line of rifles is going into the garbage can
>The M16 line of rifles is going into the garbage can
>The M16 line of rifles
>M4
This is an advanced form of stupid.
>>27776640
m14 is a piece of shit.
It only works as a prissy bench rifle.
>>27782140
Thick barrels are not inherently more accurate based on them being thick.
>>27787943
He's right about M4s firing M855 being inadequate for long-distance shooting.
>>27788040
>effective range is 50 meters less than an M16
tell me more armchair general, you surely know more than all my humble experience actually using one
>>27788075
thanks for your service
>>27781854
what in the ever living fuck is going on with the franken AR? A A2 stock and 20 inch barrel, a magpull fored, and a carry pandle with a pic rail on it?
>>27788075
Thank you for your service.
>>27788075
ty 4 service
>>27776640
Current doctrine is to carry as much ammo as possible and pin down the enemy long enough for air support/drones with IR cameras to blow the whole place up.
>>27786278
If you're ever in a fight where some guy is blowing dirt into your action with an airhose or you completely submerge your rifle in thick mud, you will probably be at a disadvantage.
these "torture tests" don't really simulate the real world conditions a soldier would actually put the M1/14 action through in places like Iwo Jima, the jungles of Vietnam or the mountains in Afghanistan.
it worked well enough for them back then and I don't plan on nearly abusing the platform as much as it was on those battlefields.
>>27788075
ty 4 svce
>>27788950
Yeah true, the test was pretty extreme and was more comparative. I just think it's interesting everyone tips on the M14 because it's unreliable but they say the M1 was fantastic. Accuracy problems aside, isn't it the same gun with a little more stuff? I am curious if it's just fuddlore or if they seriously fucked the Garand design when making the M14
>>27781854
If this is the future of America,
>it's beautiful
>>27783440
A hippy nazi marine to be exact.
>>27789376
I think it's more likely that he's wearing the swastika as the old Buddhist symbol than as a Nazi icon.
Or maybe he's wearing the swastika ironically? Which would make him a hipster hippy nazi marine?
>>27789280
At this rate, lots of purging is going to be needed to bring that purity back though. These smiles would look unsettling in that context.
>>27789280
>that floor
>beautiful
no
>>27776572
Only thing you could ever see is parts kits - uppers and furniture to be exact
>>27783622
>Poo pooing the FAL's desert performance because Israel did it in order to push for a domestic made rifle.
Several desert nations used the FAL with great succesw
>>27789213
If you are citing those "accuracy problems" from that looserounds blogpost I would like to let you know it was very poorly sourced and written with an agenda.
The M14 in it's bone stock form performed at 2-3 moa which is completely expected from the M80 ball they fed it.
And then the 7.62 LSAT project finishes in 2016 and then there is a mad fucking rush for telescoped 556 and 762 and every fucking M4 gets thrown in the trash.
Seriously, nobody's considering that the military is switching over to the M4 because its like 150 dollars cheaper to manufacture over the M16A4? Funny considering the M4 costs the military 400 dollars a unit.
>>27789213
If anything they improved the bolt design by replacing a hard surface lug with a roller that can slide over small amounts of debris without loosing bolt thrust.
>>27785527
Quit talking out of your ass.
Numerous tests past and present have proved that a AR15 and 18 using same ammo, same twist rate, same barrel length, same conditions, have produced accuracies with negligible differences out of a rifle meant to only go out to 600 meters with a round that doesn't go much farther.
Second, durable by what standard? That its stamped? So what? The AK is stamped and is more complex than the AR 18 in terms of its receiver design. And the system has gone on to make the SCAR, Sig, G36, pretty much every fucking European rifle system that uses a short stroke piston, and it has shown to put LESS stress on the lower than the AR15 allowing for polymer lowers, unlike the AR15 which's polymer lowers Glock because the immense stress put on the buffer tube.
And the same level of modularity is able to be achieved with the AR18 because guess what?
All the AR15 has going for it is the fact that you can swap barrels and/or uppers, same thing is possible with the AR18.
>>27789609
The brits also had the same issues with the fal, although even the turks had the same issues with the G3-sand gets into the roller locking collar and makes the action nearly impossible to force back open short of sitting the Buttstock on the ground and kicking the charging handle open with your foot in an attempt to force it open.
>>27789495
It's a deck, you fucking idiot, they are outside.
>>27776527
>14.5"
>not using 15.7" for maximum harmonics
>keked by the Canadians again
>>27791625
Middy gas?
>>27792465
Canadians are not smart enough to do that.
>>27781646
Because liberals would rather do that than provide another source of guns to civilians
>>27781389
Hey Cpl I know we have troops to bull dog and less time for photo ops!
>>27776527
How are they gonna do drill with M4s?
>>27776527
"We found out that the M4 actually outshoots the A4 at all ranges out to 600 meters with the new ammunition," Woodburn said, referring to the 5.56mm AB49 Special Operations Science and Technology cartridge the Corps is looking to make the standard.
Did anyone care to notice this? also is the new ammunition supposed to be more accurate with an m4 than an m16? Because that is what they are implying,
>>27789425
>wearing the swastika ironically?
Now I wasn't alive in the late 60s but I don't think this was a thing back then.
>>27797167
It sounds like their M16s are getting worn out and they're desperate for any excuse to replace them with the M4s they already have in inventory instead of buying new rifles.
>>27776527
What would be the point of a less than 20" .308 battlerifle? also other countries have bullpups with barrel lengths of 20" which could be argued is just as maneuverable as an m4.
>>27797227
That actually makes a lot more sense in terms of military weapons testing but why wouldn't they use new rifles to test? I mean i see why they wouldn't.
>>27781389
A telestock on a 20" barrel seems like a fantastic idea. I am trying to build one now and I think the only considerable disadvantage would be the slightly more recoil of not having a rifle length recoil buffer.
>why not have a telescoping rifle length stock buffer?
>>27797265
>why not have a telescoping rifle length stock buffer?
Like the Vltor A5?
>>27797288
>Vltor A5
What do you think about it? Does it work?
>>27797353
It owns. It reduces felt recoil and increases reliability. You can basically run any upper you want on it, from a 20" rifle to a 10.3" carbine, suppressed or unsuppressed, without changing out buffers, and it will work. There's no reason to use a regular carbine receiver extension if you have the option of using the A5.
>>27797497
You have spread wonder to my life anon. I thank you.
>>27788075
Thank you for your service, debildawg
>>27786683
This and 36 grain bullets
>>27786278
It is unreliable but it has one big boon in its favor. The same open action that allowed muck and dirt in also allows cleaning fluid (aka water) in. So if you did get it lodged in mud open a canteen and wash the mud out. It's a difference in philosophy, would you rather it be rare to jam, but take action to clear, or jam often and be easy to clear.
>>27797990
>fuck, my fucking M14 jammed again
>cover me while I get my canteen out and give the action a good scrubbing
>god damn do I wish I had a FAL, or an AK, or any other fucking rifle besides this piece of shit
>>27777521
Huh? Any older ship in the navy has several normal wood stocked 14s in the armory usually for use as line throwing guns. When I was on landing craft we had 3 along with our 16s
>>27785370
not really it is currently a more "advanced" design with years of improvements and developments with miles of spare parts and aftermarket mods as a basic weapon the 18/180 is a better rifle
>>27797990
The M1 was and is an extremely reliable system, and the M14, with the White gas system and the bolt roller even more so, at least when manufactured to the proper spec. The single most common mechanical problem reported with the M14 in servicee was misaligned flash suppressors, generally resulting from overenthusiastic use of the weapon in bayonet drills, and/or Private Nimshits using the weapon plus fixed bayonet as a prybar whenever his squad leader took his eye off him.
That having been said, military reliability testing of the 1930s did not include all this retarded Youtube fuckery "herp derp let me bury the rifle in chocolate pudding" "herp derp let me bury the rifle in mud so that only the muzzle protrudes and fire it like this" shit that doesn't reflect things that happen in the real world, or at least that happen to non-morons.
I suppose you could bury a K98 in wet cement with only the muzzle sticking out, then fire it, cycle the bolt, and pretend to be surprised when foreign matter enters the action. "o noes we have proven that the Mauser 1898 action is an unreliable pice of shiet!!!!!!111oneoneeleven" It wasn't a problem in, you know, actual trench warfare.
Oh, and the open-top receiver design is an aid in clearing malfunctions caused by faulty ammo.
>>27776527
And nothing of value was lost.
>>27776527
>mfw army did this forever ago and we still got M16's anyway in our Infantry company at 4th. I.D.
>The only elements still capable of mounting the assault were F and G Companies, and Weise planned to use both. There were fifty-four Marines left in Golf, and as Weise saddled up with them he noted that, with the exception of grenadiers and machine gunners, almost all were carrying AK-47s. Weise saw only one Ml6; it was carried by Captain Vargas. The only other functioning M16 was carried by Weise himself.
>>27783149
you can find the swastika everywhere in history, it was not just the hindu or buddhist who used it.
>>27799588
Also widely used by Native Amerians, US 45th Infantry Division used it till WW2
>>27798184
Thanks for explaining things, I'll keep an eye out for a nice used M14 clone for myself.
>The flag of the President of the Republic of Finland
>Adopted 1978
>Dat Swastika
>>27800004
That's just the cross of liberty.
>based Finnish Air Force triggering the ignorant with its insignia.
>>27781854
i wonder how many of them are his wives
>>27776640
Watch Restrepo or Korengal, a couple guys in the company have m14s, there is also a close up of a guy's rifle being a Knights .308
>>27783689
The M14 is just so sexy tho man
>>27779810
>>27779799
>>27800935
And it works, no matter how much people shit on it. M110 is still better for long range applications.
>>27788028
Yes they are, as long as they're just as concentric they will be stiffer. More metal is less flex.
>>27799760
>>27798184
The problem isn't that the M14 is a bad system, it wasn't for the 50's and 60's. It was slightly less reliable than the garand - part of this was due to mags; the Garand is a great system but in reality it still needed at the very very least a weekly cleaning in moderate temperature field environments.
The M14 simply isn't on the same level as the garand, it's good enough if treated well, but it's not as robust.
As a bone stock battle rifle slinging 3-6 MOA is it's bread and butter, and the irons are excellent for that; but as soon as you try to accuriize it the real problems flare up, and as soon as you start adding thing like scope + mounts and bipods or even pre-bedded stocks the weight explodes.
The reason at least I try to push people away from M14's is thus:
1. They cost waaaaay waaaay too much for what they are, this is key, and it needs to be prioritized all the damn time.
I mean it's the current year - you can buy a bolt action precision rifle out of the box ready to go for less, and all it's competitors are cheaper.
If it was a sub 1k rifle/ we could get Norinco's I would change my tune lickety split
2: Every similar early cold war wooden battle rifle which predates it achieves parity to it or outperforms it at a lower cost to own - Hakim, Ljungman, and esp. the Mas 49 and FN49.
3. Every later cold war battle rifle outperforms (with the exception of perhaps the BM59) it by leaps and bounds and most are cheaper to own: FN FAL, CETME/G3, Stgw. 57, Type 64, SG542.
4. The M21, and pretty much every accurized/sniper/DM M14 variant is outmatched by the lighter SVD or G3 SG1.
5. Even ignoring some of the issues common in variants of battle rifles converted into mag fed automatic rifles/SAW's, the FN FALO outperformed the M14A1
>>27785824
>you will never EVER own a type 89
fucking kill me
>>27787416
Vietnam already beat us to it.
>>27779796
Because they rebelling against a different government.
Politicians will espouse the virtues of an armed populace rising against tyranny, just not their own tyranny.
After all, tyranny only happens elsewhere, we don't need to be armed :^)
>>27803886
They're also ahead of the Navy and Air Force in the "Worst Imaginable Camo" race.
>>27788950
>it worked well enough for them back then
It didn't
>>27783744
That's what Americans do, other nations don't have that luxury.
>>27803977
Yeah, most pictures are from parades, though. The dress uniform is different than the field. But I agree, the blue looks like they're trying way too hard.
>>27788028
yes they are. the barrels move less under the stress of riring
>>27781646
>And why would we be giving them to ISIS?
because how else would we proxy war with Russia?
>>27777034
>do not go gently
>mfw
>>27788075
thx 4 tha snax. oohyah debldug
>>27776527
Why not the M416?
>>27803476
Claiming that the Garand is more reliable than the M14 is just plain Garand fuddery.
>>27804441
>Why not the M27?
because they already have thousands of M4s sitting around gathering dust, so switching to the M4 costs them nothing (except their dignity)
>>27776897
But they won't need new sights for all the new rifles, so the ACOGs will be recycled.
>>27804441
Because the iar 27 wasn't a back door attempt to adopt a shitty German rifle.
>>27791387
And that stops them from painting it every now and then?
>>27805838
Yes? Have you been outside recently? It's awful.
