How Reliable Is the M-16 Rifle? Part I

Ny Times ^ | 11/2/2009 | C.J. Chivers

[Saije]

Few issues are more personal to soldiers than the question of whether they can trust their rifles. And few rifles in history have generated more controversy over their reliability than the American M-16 assault rifle and its carbine version, the M-4.

In recent weeks, a fresh round of complaints about weapon malfunctions in Afghanistan, mentioned in an Army historian’s report that documented small-arms jamming during the fierce battle in Wanat last year, has rekindled the discussion. Are the M-16 and M-4 the best rifles available for American troops? Or are they fussy and punchless and less than ideal for war?

Don’t expect a clear answer any time soon. Expect several clear answers at once – many of them contradictory. This is because when talk turns to the M-16 and the M-4, it enters emotionally charged territory. The conversation is burdened by history, cluttered with conflicting anecdotes, and argued over by passionate camps.

This much is indisputable: Since the mid-1960s, when at Gen. William C. Westmoreland’s request an earlier version of the M-16 became the primary American rifle in Vietnam, the reputation of the M-16 family has been checkered.

This is in part because the rifle had a painfully flawed roll-out. Beginning intensely in 1966, soldiers and Marines complained of the weapon’s terrifying tendency to jam mid-fight. What’s more, the jamming was often one of the worst sorts: a phenomenon known as “failure to extract,” which meant that a spent cartridge case remained lodged in the chamber after a bullet flew out the muzzle.

[SJSAMPLE]

"I do not have to tell you who won the war. You know, the artillery did."

As a former artilleryman myself, I tend to agree with General Patton.

[Lurker]

Sometime in the last few years a gentleman in Joliet IL was doing some home remodeling and tore into an old plaster wall. There behind it was a brand spanking new 1919 A1 Thompson.

The guy called the cops to have them come pick it up....

[Bender2]

You run into a fascinating group of folks dealing in military collectibles and weapons, especially Class 3 fully automatic ones. Most are pretty good Joes & Janes but occasionally you come upon one or two that makes you wonder how in nObama’s name they got through the background check.

One claimed he was making up new Stens from parts and new receivers he made himself, but the ATF found it funny the newly manufactured receivers, he claimed to have made from scratch, had the British proof marks & serial numbers under the parkarizing. I believe he is still serving time for selling as new those off paper Stens. He got 25 to life in 1974 but knowing Ross even as liitle as I did, he would never be able to keep his nose clean for long.

The first time I saw him at a Houston Gun Show in 1971 or 2, if I recall correctly, he was wearing ragged Levis tucked into mirror bright shinned Aggies Senior knee-high riding boots (Yet he never went to A&M nor rode a horse), a yellow Ban-lon golf shirt under a Waffen SS Standartenführer tunic and a coonskin Davy Crockett hat cocked sideways where the tail hung down the right side of his heavily bearded face.

Hey, my old Pappy always said clothes make the man... And those sure did mark Ross as someone you'd never forget!

[Lurker]

he was wearing ragged Levis tucked into mirror bright shinned Aggies Senior knee-high riding boots (Yet he never went to A&M nor rode a horse), a yellow Ban-lon golf shirt under a Waffen SS Standartenführer tunic and a coonskin Davy Crockett hat cocked sideways where the tail hung down the right side of his heavily bearded face.

So you're saying he got l*** a lot then. I mean how could ANY lady resist a package that complete?

I nearly weep when I think about that Thompson behind that wall for all those years and what it would bring on the open market if it weren't for the 1968 GCA.

[Last Dakotan]

The culprit is federal law 922(o): prohibition of civilians owning/building any machineguns made after 1986.

What - and Belgian civilians get to purchase these? It has to be more than just that. The past 30 years have seen American firms in nearly every industry from machine tools to consumer electronics either collapse entirely or become shells of what they once were. Either way domestic innovation has stopped.

[wbarmy]

If I remember correctly, the other problem was that the M-16 was designed to use gun cotton (nitrocellulose). This prevented any type of fouling in the weapon and was strong enough to clear dirt from the barrel on the first shot.

[ctdonath2]

What to expect when domestic manufacture is either exported for significant cost savings, or prohibited outright?

[Favor Center]

“Good enough for me, unless you want to go for lesser, American-designed options.”

It’s bad enough that we have laws that limit development to large companies, now we have to deal with the contempt of our fellow citizens - that American designs are inferior. Geez. Is it any wonder that so few want to go into engineering? Law and business is so much easier and more profitable.....

Especially when trying to compete with state-owned companies.

[Favor Center]

“If I remember correctly, the other problem was that the M-16 was designed to use gun cotton (nitrocellulose). “

I think you’re thinking of the extruded vs ball powder issue. The ball powder that was the problem was also made from nitrocellulose, of course. I understand it was one of the additives that was the problem with that particular ball powder. Modern ball powder is fine.

[MaxMax]

Great point. I use dry lube on my M4 Panther and it has always fired without a hiccup.
Same with my Kimber ultra. The best invention for firearms is dry teflon lube.

[MaxMax]

I am going to take my AR out for some exercise later today after I vote.

I notice that some states close the bars during voting hours, but I have
yet to hear of gun ranges being closed. Hmmm. /grin

[Stonewall Jackson]

Do you think the Army would hand out a couple thousand M-16’s and M-4’s so we can test them for ourselves? ;-)

[smokingfrog]

Always keep in mind that your weapon was made by the lowest bidder.

[Shooter 2.5]

I don’t think there’s a problem. Just issue ammo like WWII Garands. Issue eight round magazines and only forty rounds of ammo.

That will cure any jamming problem.

[s]

[Shooter 2.5]

I have a Saiga 12 which has, to date, never worked. It’s a single shot.

[Shooter 2.5]

if it weren't for the 1968 GCA.

You can blame the American gunmakers for that brand of protectionism.

[SJSAMPLE]

That “contempt” comes from knowlege of the designs, not any particular derision of American companies or designers.

Get over it. FN makes a great product (as does Colt).

Our soldiers deserve THE BEST equipment, not equipment that you find politically expedient. If an American company (Magpul, for one) can step in and make a weapon that competes with the SCAR, the HK 416, and others, FINE. If not, that’s just the way it is.

[mad_as_he$$]

Short answer. the Army in it's wisdom allowed the use of powder that was different than the M-16 was designed for. In addition there were no cleaning kits or instructions supplied to troops early on. <p. The NYT writing a story about Military weapons is like Joe Biden talking to Toastmasters - stupid.

[mad_as_he$$]

No we can buy Barrett.

[mad_as_he$$]

Oh BTW the M-4 is made by Beretta.