[Shooter 2.5]

The advantage over the M-14s was light weight, lighter weight of packed ammunition, far greater magazine capacities and no tell-tale PING! when the magazine was expended.

Wrong rifle. You're writing about an 8 round M-1 Garand and not an M-14. The magazine of the M-14's and the early Viet Nam era M-16's had the same 20 round magazine capacity.

[Vn_survivor_67-68]

and what do you think "packed" ammo means?

I suppose you might think it means "packed" into a magazine, LOL. But even if that were so, the 5.56 weighs about 1/2 of what 7.62 does, no matter how ya "pack" it.

whoops

[NewRomeTacitus]

Wrong rifle. You're writing about an 8 round M-1 Garand and not an M-14.

Thank you for correcting my 1962-born ignorance. In truth I was doubtful of recollection when typing, but still knew that the weight factor (especially in the oven-like environments requiring long patrols) was integral toward the military's pursuit of a new weapon.

BTW fellas, I was a participant in the testing of the Baretta 9 mm versus the Colt .45s. Everyone I talked to overwhelmingly decided on the Colt over the far weaker and higher-maintenance automatic but you see how that went.