Posted on 06/07/2006 9:05:49 PM PDT by mak7.62
Bullets
The M-16 (5.56) is a nice rifle but out of its class unless it was tangling with some rabbits and other small varmints. It is not designed for a heavy delivered hit like the 308 or 7.62 caliber rifles. Unless it has been cambered with the 308 that what the Saudi government had their M-16 chambered for the large caliber the Arabs have always used a larger caliber in their battles. I have never owned one of these so I don’t know how the frame holds up under rapid fire. Even the Russians realized when they tried to copy our 5.56 round it lacked knockdown power with their 5.45 they made their rounds so that when they entered you the bullet would bend over and cause massive damaged to the body (was a trauma shock to your body) and caused server damaged when hit. It packed more a punch that our own sweet beloved round
The M-16 is a high dollar item made for the USA military it is tightly built rifle made for accuracy and sand and grim can cause a jam. Ak-47 is built loose and is not acceptable to sand and grim and other conditions that cause troubles for the M-16. You can probably buy a truckload of Ak-47 for around what you buy a few M-16 rifles for. That is why all third world countries use them they are probably running about 40 dollars a piece from China brand new. I remember when you could buy a Mak-90 from the Roses stores for only $90.00 dollars brand new. Bill Clinton caused all kinds of problems with bands and prices on rifles. Now it seems they did away with all the cheaper foreign prices and now we are at the mercy of the USA rifles companies requiring high dollars for about same quality rifles.
The M16 replaced the M14 in Vietnam due to the Ak-47 jungle fighting capabilities. The M-14 was a gift from God in open country but liking due to its length in jungle conditions. It was no doubt about its stopping power if you were up against its muzzle velocity and feet per second of the grain projectile used it had excellent knock down power. The M-16 must change the rifling again to change the bullets weight because rifling is configured in a lot to do with the grains of the bullet. If you don’t fire the right grain for the rifle twists in your barrel the accuracy is affect by the distance and travel of the bullet. I don’t know how much more they can bore out the barrels and re-bore the rifle it would make the barrel weak, it would be better to replace them. But in close fighting conditions shooting at close quarters the heaver grain bullets would probably do ok. Since accuracy might not suffer being in close as the bullets fly from the barrels. I think they should buy the rights to the new (T.A.R-21 Tavor assault rifle compact Bull pup design made by Israeli and camber it for the 7.62 round used by the Ak-47 they are small and light and powerful to do the job. I think this weapon design will be the top rifle of the future. Bull pup gives you shortness and still has a long-range barrel built into the design of the rifles. Who said you couldn’t have your cake and eat it too.
AK-47 = junk.
Don't tell anyone hit by a 5.56 that it is a pipsqueek.
M1/M14 about the best main battle rifles ever.
7MM rules.
Back before Kennedy was assasinated (no, not Ted), and guns could be sold mail order, the American Rifleman always had a full page ad on the back cover from a company that sold war-surplus rifles and pistols. Their descriptions were, to a 13-year-old, hilarious. The writeup for the 6.5MM Carcano was:
"Excellent condition! Like new! Never fired and only dropped once!"
Those were the days before PC and the feminization of the US.
This used to be a great country.
He might be the Chicken Man from the Outback Steakhouse commercials...he says the food is from the future.
Not possible this cheap. Maybe $190.
The debate over the 5.56mm cartridge's effectiveness as a miltary round has only been raging since the M-16 was introduced back in the 60's. If the MSM ever bothered to address that debate, it was just to sneer at the debaters as "right-wing gun nuts."
Until now, that is. Why is that so? It couldn't be because all the other "concerns" the left has mouthed about our troops (body armor, armored Humvees, etc.) have failed in their objective to take down Donald Rumsfeld and George Bush, so now it's time to move on to the next thing that might do the trick, could it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.