[Kenny Bunk]

Since I was brought up to speed on this by this thread, I have learned that Colt has offered to manufacture a piston powered action. They insist that they offered this a long time ago, but that the Army ordered the gas-tube system. Reason? Somebody thinks the follow-up shot is wilder with a piston than with the blow-back! Which, of course one would never know if your piece jams!

I was in the AF when they were the first to procure the AR15. As it evolved into the M-16 and caused so many problems in the Army, I have always mistrusted the system, even though it demonstrably improved.

Guess I also never quite understood the .223 as a military round. My prejudice was that it was a varmint round ... wouldn't dream of it on deer! Plenty lethal at close range, I never though it could do the job down range, or against a skinned vehicle, for example.

As a kid, I hunted everything in Maine with a 6.5X55 surplus Swedish Mauser, which I still have and still use occasionally with commercial sporting ammo. Just the handiest damn weapon, excellent at long range and extremely accurate, deadly even on a moose! So when the Army announced the 6.8, I thought "Hey that's more like it!"

I have two youngsters ... a niece and a nephew ... in Iraq and Afghanistan. I want them to have the most powerful reliable weapons they can handle ... even if I have to buy them.

[Travis McGee]

The best you can do for your kin in those places is get them Trijicon sights, if they don’t have them.

[2CAVTrooper]

One small problem with the .223 is over penetration at close range due to small mass and high velocity. But at around 150-200m that sucker will tumble when it hits ruining the enemy's whole day.

The biggest gripe I've ever had with he M-16 were the crappy magazines we had.

The second was during high rates of fire the barrel would smoke thus obscuring your sight picture.