Army, Marines rate weapon success

Stars and Stripes ^ | Sunday, July 13, 2003 | Mark Oliva

[Blueflag]

What about the SAW? It fires the same round (I believe) as the M-16, but is rated effective out to about 1000 yards.

I defer to those who have lugged the 22 pounder around.

[joesnuffy]

How many grains of unique??????
whoa

[demlosers]

Interesting question, I wouldn't know. Isn't that a question for great grand papas?

[Future Snake Eater]

If shooting ability for a given cartridge size was a measure of manhood, my 110-lb girlfriend must have a johnson that drags on the ground.

LOL! Now there's an image for us to consider...

[Centurion2000]

You're shooting some wimpy loads .... my Rugers in 45Colt will throw a 360gr round at 1200 fps. Not too many guys are going to be getting up from that .. (like zero)

[Prodigal Son]

The reason the SAW is effective out to that rate is because it's spraying out a high volume of fire. Technically, the M16 is good out to that range if you can see what you're shooting at and can see where the rounds land. The maximum range of the M16 is over 3500 meters. Effective range is only 550 though. The 50 Cal has a max range of over 6 kilometers but the effective range is 1800 meters. That's over a mile. The thing with the 50 is, you can legitimately aim at things that far away and hope to hit it.

The barrel for the 50 is almost 4 feet long. This accounts for most of this accuracy. The thing with the M4 is- you're losing barrel length. That's what makes it less accurate than the M16A2 at range.

[Shooter 2.5]

I can hear it now. If that squirrel gun can't drop a horse at 1200 yards, what good is it?

Seriously, I think they were overjoyed to get rid of the single shots.

I had a Trapdoor that had knife blade marks on the inside of the receiver where the previous owner had to pry the copper cases out of the chamber. I didn't know what the marks were until I read about the Seventh Cavalry having the same problem.

[tortoise]

Yeah, the military needs a 7.62 rifle more than ever.

If range and accuracy are the primary concern, they would be better off with a 6.5mm. Hell, they could just neck down 7.62 NATO. Flatter trajectory, way more effective range, and better penetration in the same size package.

7.62 is really the wrong answer to just about any problem the military has these days. Like the 9mm, the only reason it is around is due to legacy issues. There are reasons those cartridges have been dumped in various times and places. We don't need to move backwards, we need to move forward.

[Shooter 2.5]

You're shooting some wimpy loads

You forgot your sarcasm tag.

Again, to the beginners on this thread, DO NOT TRY THE 9MM AND 45 AUTO LOADS THAT WERE LISTED. THEY ARE DANGEROUSLY OVERCHARGED.

[nightdriver]

"Reliability complaints also found fault with the oil soldiers and Marines used to clean their weapons. In the dusty, sandstorm-plagued battlefields of Iraq, weapons became clogged with sand, trapped by the heavy oil, called CLP."

There are myriad excellent substitutes for oil as a lubricant on firearms and trust the mule-headed military brass to be the last in the world to be aware of it. Did they think Iraq was NOT going to be dusty?

One such is trade-named "dri-kote" which is does not attract dust and is an excellent colorless lubricant. One good application of it and dust and grit just bounce off of those tightly toleranced parts. However, if today's army is anything like my training outfit, a soldier would be court-martialed for using it.

I would expect that most of the weapons problems can be traced back to bureauocratic paralysis and lack of professionalism in the upper echelons of the military services.

[Gary Boldwater]

You're absolutely correct!

[OldEagle]

"They showed firing pin marks on the primers, neglecting to say that the non-existant problem started in 1936."

Usually this is caused by the rifle being designed with no return spring on the firing pin. The casual movement of the pin is often enough to make a small dent in the primer, but nowhere near strong enough to fire the primer.

I like the idea of an M14 or two in a squad.

[Jhoffa_]

Why do we have weapons that leave dents in the primer of unfired rounds?

Don't they know that's a bad thing?

[Shooter 2.5]

Those firing pin marks scared me when I first saw them so I bought some Mil Spec primers.

Ten years later, I still haven't used them after getting used to the marks.

I found that Winchesters are pretty good and I use them for everything.

A friend e mailed me and asked for my pet M1A load. It's AA2520 with 168 grain Sierra MatchKings, Remington Brass and Winchester Primers. Sorry, I don't post powder charges.

[nightdriver]

"Standard load for the .45ACP is a 230-grain bullet and about 10grs of Unique(what I use)."

Sounds a wee bit hot to me. I'm told that the military load is 6 grains of Unique. I used to use 7.5 grains of Unique and really shortened the life of the recoil springs of my 1911. The brass would eject straight up instead of out to the side with that load.

[CGTRWK]

Barrel length has no effect on intrinsic accuracy. The only benefit of a longer barrel is a longer sight radius with iron sights. Actually that's not entirely true, you also get reduced wind drift and bullet drop from higher velocity - but going from a M16A2 to a M4, it's not enough to matter.

That's probably the problem - M4 iron sights are no good at a distance.

[tortoise]

I like the idea of an M14 or two in a squad.

It's a bad idea logistically. Much better to just configure an M16 for longer range use; the military .223 has about the same effective range as a military .308 out of a given barrel length, but the rifles they are using aren't configured for it. With a different selection of ammunition, a 20" barrel will keep .223 accurate and supersonic past 1000 yards.

I'd say forget the M14 -- too expensive -- and just put a suitable optic on some 20" M16 upper. That will give you all the accuracy and lethality you need out past 800 meters or so, and with minimal logistical overhead or cost.

[Comus]

The 9mm round is very popular with Eurofags. What we have to understand is the basic difference in the role of handguns for Americans. Americans consider the handgun a defensive tool against armed adversaries. The Europeans have traditionally used handguns to execute unarmed prisoners and civilians. For them a .22 would work.

[Prodigal Son]

So I'm going to get the same accuracy out of a 4 inch barrel as a 40 inch one? Maybe. I think I'd take the longer barrel myself if I wanted to shoot far.

[ASOC]

Marines have a 'deticated marksman' or two per platoon, I believe.

The use recycled Army M14 sniper rifles -rebarrled- and some high end optics, cost effective firepower.....