The requirement was simply to penetrate a steel helmet, whoever told the producers of this video that it had to be done with automatic fire is either a hack or substance abuser. Otherwise, the memes about Mattel and _5.56mm_ were dispelled properly, which is a refreshing change of pace
Fleece, Sorry about my timing. You sound like a Man who's Been There. Welcome Back, In the day before the M-16, Your Automatic Riflemen used an M-14 with a Selector Switch and could apply Supressive Automatic Fire (Short Burst) where Machine Guns were not available , But your Right Not at that distance.
When I was in the Army (1960s/70s), we trained and used both M14 and M16/16a1. Each has its advantages. I don't recall ever firing the 14 on full Auto, except in training. It's a great Semi rifle, very accurate, and has excellent range and knockdown power. And I've always been partial to the 7.62. Maybe I got used to the recoil. But the 16? I used it full Auto, many times (mostly suppressing/covering fire < about 125 meters). It doesn't have the range of the 14, but I could carry a lot more ammo and it's very accurate out to about 400 meters (in good "seeing" conditions) when shooting at a man; 300 meters or so when conditions were not good. The 14 was very accurate (for me) out to about 550 meters (at a man) in good "seeing", and about 425 meters or so in less-than-good (or strong wind). In dense foliage, however, I absolutely loved the 16, much more than the 14: much easier to maneuver, aim, and fire because of the closer ranges; more ammo; and less weight. But, out of the bush, I missed the 14 once the changeover had taken place. To each, his own opinion is the correct one. As others have pointed out, nobody is going to fire the M14 on full Auto at a target 450 meters away (unless, for example, it was at a group of several men all standing close together). And, with the M14, we normally didn't have to do so: it's range and accuracy made it fully effective on Semi.
My father in law fought in Vietnam and lost both legs stepping on a land mine. He absolutely refused an M16 due to the constant jams and bad reputation for that. He was issued an M14 and that continues to be his favorite all time weapon. It has been years since he held one so when he held my M1A he was shocked at the weight lol
It can have issues with that, it depends largely on impact velocity. FMJ fragmenting 5.56 is only really intended for up to 400 yards or so, and most engagements are going to be less as far as I know. At those kinds of distances and with a 20" barrel as designed it will usually work great. Then people want to run M4 barrels though and you can't expect the same results, soft point ammo is better in that case.
Funny, I don't recall any Marine or Police Swat Team member EVER using an M-14 or M1A on any TARGET in the Off hand Position greater than 200 yards. A selector switch on an M-14 was meant for Close Combat of 100 meters or less. It was Never meant to be a Machine Gun. The M-16 Specialist Instructor in the video used the M-16 in the 'PRONE' position on water melons and was NOT that impressive, He should have used an M-14 with a bipod on Semi-Auto, He would have scored more hits at 450 meters.
The AR-15 style weapons (CAR-15, M-16, M4 carbine) are brilliant for shooting. As for not eating or sleeping until your weapon is maintained... I think people need to realize that the two most effecrive components in the most effective weapon you'll ever have are your mind and your body. Maintain yourself. You cam pick a new firearm off of a fallen enemy but you can never get that firearm to sneak back to friendly territory and inform your allies of hostile presence in a specific area.
The m14 was designed under the one shot one kill philosophy. It does not do a good job at sustained suppressive fire which is more of a new army, NATO philosophy. It should be noted that once this strategy was adopted, along with the new rifle, America started losing wars over and over again. It's interesting to see the military switching back over to 1911's and EBR's M21's and M14's again. It is the perfect patrol rifle. This video is just colt propaganda.
"losing wars" ???? The US did nothing but kill kill kill with those new rifles(m16).. Changing rifles had nothing to do with "losing" any wars(if you wanna say that, those weren't wars that were going to be own or lost fighting an ideology instead of a country)
Contributing to the problems of the early M16 was that the type of powder was changed to ball at the last minute, which is much dirtier than what was originally intended for the weapon. Also, certain internal parts (i.e. the barrel, chamber gas tube, etc.) were originally meant to be chrome-lined, but the weapon was sent to Vietnam without it. I may prefer the AK 47, but the modern AR 15/M16 is infinitely better than the rifle that was sent to Vietnam.
haha this video is funny it is so much of a lie that I was laughing...do you know how accurate the M14 is...hell they still use it as a sniper as the M14 DMR.
A normal m14 is not that accurate. They were rushed to produce and came out doing like 3moa back then. The modern ones they use now like the m21 or the mk 14 EBR that we’re built good with modern standards can do sub moa and are pretty accurate.
Look up the Armalite AR-18AR-18's action was powered by a short-stroke gas piston above the barrel. The gas piston was of 3-piece design to facilitate disassembly, with a hollow forward section with 4 radial gas vent holes fitting around a stainless steel gas block projecting rearwards from the foresight housing.
the M16 was more suited for Vietnam and eventually would have lost more troops if they were still using the m14 in the long run.. Yes there was some hiccups in the beginning but that wasn't due to the m16s design it was due to negligence (ie not chrome lining barrels, using old ball powder, and no cleaning or cleaning kits)
You can't kill anybody when you run out of 7.62-51. You can carry double amount of 5.56 for the same weight. Most engagements in vietnam all you could fire at was muzzle flashes.
The M14 was allot better rifle . The 7.62x51mm round would tare through the jungles vegetation unlike the M16's 5.56x45mm round . The M16 was originally useing a varmint round .223 . The 762 round creates a bigger hole 2 well placed shots where putting the enemy down . While the enemy was doped up on drugs the enemy kept advancing after 8 rounds where placed into them. The M16 still has jamming problems to this day it constently has to be cleaned and there's a ton of parts to field strip . That wasent a problem for the M14 . The only problem the M14 had was weight wich caused fatigue and recoil in full auto mode. The M14 has proven it's accuracy with the M14ERB, M21 & M39 .The M14 is better for picking off targets while the M16 is better suited for on the move fireing because of its type grouping in full auto because of it's low recoil.
@SSgt24thMEU cheap plastic where did you get that from? extra rails and such can alway's be modified, scar:l would be good but not that much of an upgrade over our fnc's...
Thank you for your service, and I agree, they never fully tested the M16 for "Combat Conditions" as in running it through mud, sand, heat, cold, and jungle conditions. I like the M1As, wouldn't mind one myself, especially fitted with the SAGE EBR stock.
@Caseyr0206 I know. It's not meant to be used on full auto at that range. In fact unless you just have a horde of guys a few feet in front of you, you should never use it on full auto.
@matthewmaki Have you ever used the M-16 in Combat? It really is a devestating weapon. And when you are carrying limited ammo due to weight, during a prolonged battle, it really is nice...
@jsooterlexsc Any idea why they would do a full auto test at 400 yards? Doesnt seem to make sense to me. At semi I would guess both do as well with the 7.62 hitting a ton harder. For my part I have shot game with .223 and 7.62. .223 took several shots to the chest and I always has to track em down a long ways. 7.62 was one shot and down.
@esh325..and the smaller caliber round as opposed to the 47. I always thought the M14 should have been chambered in .270. Smaller, lighter, faster round still having the reach and knockdown. Then redesign the comb on the stock to reduce muzzle climb in full auto. Might have worked for the 16 as well. Then again, if they taught the troops to shoot better, most of the problems would be moot, don't you agree?
@RustAirsoftTeam WOW! That must have been hard for a squad to deal with. I can just imagine the frustration at drawing down on a target, perfect aperture, perfect shot, only to watch as the guy gets back up! When you shoot something, you want it DEAD, not spitting lead back at you! Thanks for sharing.
I love the M-14 too. I have an Armscorp M-14NM. It is s superb rifle and an absolute tackdriver at 100m. But the AR-10 is not the best of both worlds.It still uses the same heavy round as the M-14 and that means for the same given weight, I can carry twice as many M16 rounds. I carried an M16/M4 for over 23 years in the US Army Infantry and Rangers. The two things you carry the most of always are water and ammunition. And full auto is rarely used by a rifleman, That's why each fireteam has a SAW
@DaytonaRoadster I agree about the training. But when you're reflexively starting your immediate action drills every time you squeeze the trigger, whether or not the rifle actually fired, "absurd" has officially been reached. Idle curiousity, how many didn't make it back to be pissed? Pretty amazing how they love every other weapon issued better than the standard, isn't it? And how...happy...were the special forces guys when they were forced to give up their carbines for M4s?
@STL308 sounds cool. I've heard nothing but good stuff about the 6.8 SPC. Have you had hands on expeerience with that one, or considered it in your bullpup design?
@ad855 actually, I think the DMR is an A1 lower (apparently the 3 round burst gives 3 different trigger pulls, depending on where the cam is set) with a match grade A4 upper with a scope, and special ammunition. I'm thinking of the Mk14EBR (enhanced battle rifle)
@Osochilled Snipers don't use full auto. I don't actually know if it is still seeing much use or not though. One might think that other rifles would see more use for sniping situations, ones with bi-pods.
@CaptainObvious1970 The general rule for M193 fragmentation is 2700 f/s. The M4 with it's 14.5 inch barrel has a fragmentation range of less than 100 meters with current issue M855 spec ammunition. I'm not arguing that M14s don't have their place, but for the general infantry, the M16 is fine and does its job well. All these armchair commandos need to stop arguing that their grandpa/uncle/whoever did this that or the other because combat experiences/memories aren't passed down in the bloodstream
@SSgt24thMEU wouldnt the 416 be better because of it's heavier 6.8mm round? i heard that HK was making the 416 in 6.8 as it was a good balance between the 5.56 and the 7.62.
@esh325 You may be right, but I don't think so. I think the 5.56 round was developed first then it was released as the .223 commercially (and yes there is a slight difference). The 5.56 was initially developed after they tried the .222 and the .222 Mag. The pair of .222's were close but not quite what they wanted so they modified the magnum slightly and created the 5.56. You are correct in that the .222 was a varmint round.
@shaynemcallister This is the weapon that is the production version of the MAGPUL MASADA, correct? Some small variations in final design, but the composite stock and lower receiver, simplified blowback and interchangeable locking-bolt design all seem very similar. Firing from an open bolt is a pretty cool advantage, it puts the power of a LMG into the tactical range of a battle rifle, instead of just as a base of fire. Great suggestion! I would love to see the US Military take full advantage
@MrJapper88 What do you think of the mini series? I'm kicking around the idea of getting a mini 30, and in spite of all the negativity you hear on the internet pretty well everyone I've talked to that has one loves them.
@DDTea Conceded, however at 500 yards 5.56 is going slower than .22lr at the muzzle, and actually carrying a similar amount of energy (the bullet being half again as heavy, don't you know).
@Toolofdeath Easy question. The shock of blowing off the little toe, as well as the toes near it due to the concussion of the bullet, will send massive shock waves through the body that will ultimately provide a fatal heart attack. Failing that, it will at least provide enough pain to the target to better enable the shooter to take a better shot. M14 FTW!
@esh325 That is very true, the yawing and tumbling effect of the 5.56x45's are significantly reduced at longer ranges as well as hydrostatic shock. As you mentioned, to combat this deficiency dedicated marksmen in infantry squads are issued the Mk 14 EBR which is a modernized version of the m14 but pretty much the same rifle chambered in .308 winchester also known as the 7.62x51.
@STL308 Not that, I'm just a weapons freak. The FN Herstal Mk 17 SCAR-H Long (7.62X51) is currently slated to replace the M14, if it can fit in the military's budget. It's a tough piece of hardware. It has a short-stroke, gas-piston operating system. Upper receiver is aluminum, housing a free-floating barrel for better accuracy. Lower receiver is polymer for reduced weight. Both versions can be equipped with mission specific quick-change barrel lengths in 16-inch or 20-inch. Vaguely familiar.
@STL308 In Somalia the first deployment I had the M16, the second deployment I had the M14 with the military designator M68 Aimpoint. Future deployments to three other countries I had the M4 w/ M203 attachment. The M14 was by far the heaviest, but by far the best for me. However, there were mission specific appropriate times that I set aside the M14 for an M16 in CQB situations (back in 1993, most units didn't have M4's yet).
@RyanR3volution I didn't know that you can now buy a true Steyr here in the U.S. That would be pretty slick. I've always loved the lines of that bullpup. I have the MSAR STG 5.56, opting for the classic 20" barrel instead of the 16". it's a really sweet shooter, but it's only downfall (like all bullpups I've ever shot) is a very sluggish trigger pull due to the linkage.
@TWutangT The killer in Oslo used a modified M14 with banned ammo for use in millitary. Only hunters for big animals could use it. The bullets were ment for doing most damage than regualy bullets..
@nov284 What are you talking about? I've had a pretty low-quality AR and it went "boom" every time I wanted it to. Cleaning is easy: wipe down the gas key with a towel. Use a dry lube (e.g. wax, militec...). I could clean my AR faster than my friend could clean his SKS. Of course, I wasn't shooting 1000 rounds/day. It doesn't really require a serious cleaning--just maintenance where it counts (e.g. the chamber and locking lugs), just like any semi-auto.
@Blackhawk5656 ROTC in High School and all my family on the mother's side joined up. I tried to join straight out of HS but they wouldn't take me because of a minor medical condition. I've studied firearms and ballistics ever since. To answer your deleted question: you are referring to projectile 'spall' or the arc of a light-weight enveloped round inside a soft target. This CAN cause lots of damage, but only if the INERTIA of the round is great enough. 5.56 at 500+ yards wont cut it.
@WatchRyder Flakvests are designed to protect against ricochet or shrapnel. Not projectiles. They do offer SOME ballistic protection, they typically are at most Level IIIA protection.
Burst fire is rarely ever used mainly the only times you would use the burst fire or full auto option is when you have to clear your magazine or eliminate the bullet currently cycled in the chamber of your weapon. I still don't understand why they do that but the burst fire as you mentioned I'm probably sure is going to be used during rifle target training so you know how it feels like but in live combat situations they'll tell you to use the semi auto for the same reason that I typed before.
Many people bash the 5.56 round because it is so small but it really is an amazing round. I resisted getting a 5.56 for yrs but when I got one I fell in love with it very fast. Yes there are some things the 7.62 do better but overall the M16 and 5.56 were a huge improvement. Lighter, easier to control, more rounds and very flexable platform. What more could you ask for?
@Stritchers the original M14 was designed as an assault rifle and had selective fire modes, safe, semi, and full auto fire. Most current builds for the military have it in semi auto only.
@TheGrankuma It's a battle rifle because it was made to work. Frozen, covered in mud, full of sand, in 140 degrees, when its rusty and wet and hasn't been cleaned in days, it fires. Field cleaning doesn't involve disassembly. You can keep it operationally clean by locking the bolt to the rear and cleaning the exposed parts, punching the bore, and cleaning the chamber. The m16 needs disassembled a couple of times a day to keep it shooting.
@WaywardPatriot I agree. If there is .308/7.62 replacement it will be the SCAR-H. The SCAR rifle is modular design that can refit different stocks and barrel lengths easily. The normal SCAR is 5.56, but the SCAR-H (H for heavy) is in 7.62x51.
@STL308 What i meant by that comment is its a much more effective sniping platform than the AR-15 type rifle. The M16 generally is a better assault rifle as it can lay down suppressive fire more effectively, but the 7.62MM round of the M14 enables an operator to engage targets at a much further distance effectively than with a 5.56, its a better DMR than the M16, as the 5.56 isnt really a good round for sniping, it doesnt have the punch at extended ranges. Plus the M14 is more reliable.
@WaywardPatriot yeah. it's a cool gun. I think you can even switch between open bolt and closed bolt operation. Open bolt to allow for greater cooling in LMG mode, and closed for higher accuracy and prevention of dust getting into the chamber. But you could also convert the same gun into a sort of sniper rifle or Designated Marksman rifle.
@STL308 The .45GAP and 10mm just never took off well with the general public and it made it insanely expensive to buy ammo for it on the rare occasion that one could even find it. That's sad since they're really awesome calibers. Off-duty I always carry a Government model Colt 1911. Working the road I am required to carry the Glock 22 and I get an S&W M&P M4 with all the trimmings (and a 5 shot .357 mag hidden elsewhere) I also still get my Glock 22, M14, M4, and Benelli for work on SWAT.
@esh325 The SPC was not tested but according to manufacturers ballistics tables, the 100 grain .243 Win destroys the 110 grain 6.8 SPC. 2018 fps and 904 ftlbs at 500 yards vs. 1500 fps and 550 ftlbs. The 6.8 is also more expensive to make, the .243 uses "cut down" .308 brass.
@WaywardPatriot well i dont see the m16 or m4 getting replaced anytime soon considering we only buy new weapons mostly for spec ops. dont get me wrong i love the m14 but i dont think it has what takes for todays fighting as an standard weapon
@WaywardPatriot the PSD is the only weapon i want to replace the m16 ....i've heard about this weapon but i wasnt sure what it was but that gun has the power and accuracy...its like a more approved m16 with a shorter barrel....but i doubt i will see a change in a standard issued weapon in my military career
@TWutangT no.. we have even used the AG3 and still using the 7.62 nato. the doctors had not seen that kind of wounds before still after 25 years as doctor.. eyewitness told about the innpacked of the bullets were not the "common".. in furture we may know what kind of ammo he used.
@simon12194 Probably might not solve the problem of recoil since the stock of the M14 still has that pivot in the rear grip area. M14 is still used nowadays as a Designated Marksman Rifle (DMR) since it's still a good accurate rifle, just not in full auto.
@Caseyr0206 and rarely is the M-16 placed on 3 rnd burst in combat. In fact US forces are trained not to place it on 3 rnd burst to conserve ammo and, surprise, maintain accuracy.
@STL308 You know, I am shocked to hear a perspective so similar to what I've said about another pistol round in the recent past-- the .45 GAP. It might or might not be as good as the .45 ACP but what does that matter if you can't find or afford bullets for the gun. I had only heard wonder stories about the 6.8, it's good to hear other perspectives.
Maybe poor maintenance, but let's not forget non chrome lined chambers and bore, the army switching the powder, and all the minor tweaks along the way.
SIMPLE SOLUTION- M-16 for the Jungle and Rice Paddy, M-14 for the Sand Box. And if you want to try something Really Heavy ? Carry an M-3 'Grease Gun' through a Rice Paddy with all those spare mag's of .45 ACP with the mud sucking you down in 120 deg. heat. Sorry about my 'Late' timing on this thread, but I just Received this from 'Google'.
@snakeeyes119 I think I'd been in the fleet for, oh, maybe 4 years before I got issued a rifle that didn't jam at nearly every stage of fire. Last year I got a brand-new fresh out of the box A4 (complete with cardboard protector in the barrel). She made it most of the week before I got my first jam...I dunno if the rifle knows I have zero respect for it and just returns the favor or what, but man, I can't seem to get issued the reliable one.
@789995 I see the point you are making and im in no position to say you are wrong because i havent been in combat but dont you think suppressive fire is more the job of the machine gun and not the rifle. wouldnt you prefer good accurate rounds to 800 metres?
@STL308 Hey, you're the one who said that you bet I haven't looked into these weapons. I just felt it appropriate response to let you know the little bit of familiarity with them that I've got. And I'd do back-flips if they replaced the M16 with the SCAR 17. If they replaced it with the SCAR 16, well, that's not really much of a change in the way that it needs it the mos-- power.
@STL308 The IMI Tavor TAR 21--one of the best bullpup design rifles out there, proudly brought by the same folks who gave you the Uzi... Israel. I like the Steyr better astheticly, but in CQB, nothing beats a bullpup. Zalman Shebs (along with Boyarski, Shiloni and Erez) designed it for 11 years. Integrating into IDF by 2011. They fixed its aversion to sand, but the linkage is still just as sluggish as every other bullpup. It's 3.15 times the price per unit than the M4. Also Vaguely familiar.
@hackerhunterdotexe I know that is what the bullet is designed to do, but I have seen about an equal number of people who say that the 5.56 just goes straight through as often as it "tumbles". I'd rather use the ammo that will act the same way. I like a lot of your points and your debating style, but I cannot seem to find any that can completely prove to me that the 5.56 is superior to the 7.62x51. Of course, it could be because I'm still relatively new to firearms.
I agree(and dream of owning an M14) but you can't picture kids nowadays who do enlist shooting the larger heavier M14. The M16's good point is that it is lightweight and each soldeir can carry hundreds of 5.56 rounds on foot. Hopefully we can find new light weight rifle to the same trick even better.
I've owned and fired M14 and AR15. In the early 80's I bought a "Mini 14" and discovered that it was probably better than either. It had the simple utility of the M14 and the advantage of low recoil, lightweight .223 ammunition. They didn't need to re-invent the wheel, they just needed to make the M14 in .223... Just my opinion of course but I've lugged a Garand and a load of .30-06 ammo around and I'd take .223 any day of the week.
Weight. My dads friend had to use it for 6 months of the time he was deployed in Iraq and much preferred it over the m16/m4. He loved it so much that he now has his own personal one. (he shoots competitively and has over 40 guns including assault rifles, army surplus riles, hunting rifles, and handguns.)
its because of the powder they were using... during trials they used stick powder which worked perfectly and never had a jam. but when they went into mass production they used ball powder which burned worse and caused gunk to build up in the receiver and caused jams and thanks to no cleaning kits issued because of the high rating in testing they thought they didn't need them
@hackerhunterdotexe I'm not familiar enough with all the specific possible trauma caused by the different calibers. All I can say for sure is that they didn't tell soldiers with M1 Garands or M14s to shoot the enemy 2-3 times like they do the M16/M4 now. Soldiers issued the former did not complain about a lack of killing power like soldiers who are issued the latter. Any bullet can kill game with proper shot placement, but you don't go into combat armed with .22LR.
I've put thousands of rounds surplus 5.56through my Mini-14 without any problems. However the Mini-14 was designed to chamber the 5.56. Some rifles this is not the case so you need to be careful, contact the manufacturer first. "Firing a 5.56mm cartridge (which is loaded to higher pressure) in a .223 Remington chambered rifle (which has a shorter throat causing a further boost in pressure), could exceed the safety margin in a .223 Remington rifle. It cannot be done with complete safety"
In the military regardless they teach you to fire weapons on semi automatic instead of full auto to achieve the greatest amount of accuracy and to not accidently wound an innocent bystandard or injure your own squadmates. A full auto M16 sounds like the way to go but rarely will they ever let you do that. I got my info from a former United States Marine Corps Force Reconaissance infantryman and many other former US Marine Corps Infantrymen.
@esh325 The Army has been having the problems for some reason. I guess they never passed out the changed ballistics caused by the shorter barrel of the M4. Back in the mid 1980s, I was on an evaluation team assessing different round chamberings for the M16. We tested 5.56. 6.8, .243 winchester, 7.62, and .30-06. Best performance over all was .30-06 185 grain. Best for highest ammo load was .243 winchester 100 grain.
@esh325 The problem the Marines encountered was already a known issue for the 5.56. That was the bullet staying on path after object penetration. Windshields are a bitch. You are taught to hold low to get closer to a 90 degreee impact. The green tip largely eliminated that problem.
@unit529 I used to think that in a firefight I would aim and fire deliberately. I learned the value of suppressive fire in Desert Storm. Don't discount its effect. It scares the daylights out of your enemy and unless highly trained, they stop shooting and go for cover allowing you to maneuver. Given that, the more rounds you carry, the better. I've fired both, and I can see the advantages of the 16.
@rahfields have you ever seen what a well placed shot with 5.56 nato does if you hit body its fucked its not to ensure kill more of a yea i hit it for sure its also much easier for hitting moving targets
@simon12194 Despite the fact it already weighs 11.5 pounds loaded? Another problem with the M14 was that it was very heavy including heavy ammunition and made it difficult to maneuver. The M16 on the other hand weighs less than 9 pounds loaded.
@wierdosinc So you're saying if a terrorist shoots you with a weapon (any weapon, for this point it doesn't matter) in the head and I shoot the guy next to you in the head the exact same way with the exact same weapon at the exact same trajectory, angle and range, the result would be different based solely upon which of us (the terrorist or me) pulled the trigger? I don't quite understand...
yeah a light machine gun is more suitable for full auto, plus the saw holds 200 rounds. So its more suitable for sustained fire, which would help a group maintain fire superiority.
@nov284 That statement is misleading. 1500 fps = 457 m/s. In terms of kinetic energy, which is proportional to velocity squared, that's a 209 000 fold difference for the same mass (which they aren't, but I'm just making a point)!
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
who shoots at a target 400+ yards away on full auto? give me a break.
The requirement was simply to penetrate a steel helmet, whoever told the producers of this video that it had to be done with automatic fire is either a hack or substance abuser. Otherwise, the memes about Mattel and _5.56mm_ were dispelled properly, which is a refreshing change of pace
Who engages a single threat a 450 meters with automatic rifle fire?
The only guy in a squad that should be firing in full auto at that kind of range is your machine gunner.
usmc2076, SEMPER FI MARINE !
Fleece, Sorry about my timing. You sound like a Man who's Been There. Welcome Back, In the day before the M-16, Your Automatic Riflemen used an M-14 with a Selector Switch and could apply Supressive Automatic Fire (Short Burst) where Machine Guns were not available , But your Right Not at that distance.
if its under 100 yards every guy can. pass that useless.unless its a mass charge then yeah
I had the M16a2 in the Marines. Beautiful rifle. I own a semi M14 now (M1a). I like them both.
1:10 "Ken Elmore is an instructor for COLT Defense" [and thus has a vested interest in making the M14 look bad]
the guy shooting full auto at 450 meter, wtf
he cant hit it with a m14 but a m16 he does it multiple times ?? biased documentary
yes on full auto, that's the point
When I was in the Army (1960s/70s), we trained and used both M14 and M16/16a1. Each has its advantages. I don't recall ever firing the 14 on full Auto, except in training. It's a great Semi rifle, very accurate, and has excellent range and knockdown power. And I've always been partial to the 7.62. Maybe I got used to the recoil.
But the 16? I used it full Auto, many times (mostly suppressing/covering fire < about 125 meters). It doesn't have the range of the 14, but I could carry a lot more ammo and it's very accurate out to about 400 meters (in good "seeing" conditions) when shooting at a man; 300 meters or so when conditions were not good.
The 14 was very accurate (for me) out to about 550 meters (at a man) in good "seeing", and about 425 meters or so in less-than-good (or strong wind).
In dense foliage, however, I absolutely loved the 16, much more than the 14: much easier to maneuver, aim, and fire because of the closer ranges; more ammo; and less weight. But, out of the bush, I missed the 14 once the changeover had taken place.
To each, his own opinion is the correct one.
As others have pointed out, nobody is going to fire the M14 on full Auto at a target 450 meters away (unless, for example, it was at a group of several men all standing close together). And, with the M14, we normally didn't have to do so: it's range and accuracy made it fully effective on Semi.
My father in law fought in Vietnam and lost both legs stepping on a land mine. He absolutely refused an M16 due to the constant jams and bad reputation for that. He was issued an M14 and that continues to be his favorite all time weapon. It has been years since he held one so when he held my M1A he was shocked at the weight lol
the guy shooting is from colt. it's biased.
The Strange Channel of Jeff butthurt much?
It can have issues with that, it depends largely on impact velocity. FMJ fragmenting 5.56 is only really intended for up to 400 yards or so, and most engagements are going to be less as far as I know. At those kinds of distances and with a 20" barrel as designed it will usually work great. Then people want to run M4 barrels though and you can't expect the same results, soft point ammo is better in that case.
Funny, I don't recall any Marine or Police Swat Team member EVER using an M-14 or M1A on any TARGET in the Off hand Position greater than 200 yards. A selector switch on an M-14 was meant for Close Combat of 100 meters or less. It was Never meant to be a Machine Gun. The M-16 Specialist Instructor in the video used the M-16 in the 'PRONE' position on water melons and was NOT that impressive, He should have used an M-14 with a bipod on Semi-Auto, He would have scored more hits at 450 meters.
Id say closer than 100 meters, itll really chop things up in a tough bind. Lol
+YAH REMNANT Tough bind meaning both two 5.56s in single file in the same hole might equal one .308 round.
The AR-15 style weapons (CAR-15, M-16, M4 carbine) are brilliant for shooting. As for not eating or sleeping until your weapon is maintained... I think people need to realize that the two most effecrive components in the most effective weapon you'll ever have are your mind and your body. Maintain yourself. You cam pick a new firearm off of a fallen enemy but you can never get that firearm to sneak back to friendly territory and inform your allies of hostile presence in a specific area.
The m14 was designed under the one shot one kill philosophy. It does not do a good job at sustained suppressive fire which is more of a new army, NATO philosophy. It should be noted that once this strategy was adopted, along with the new rifle, America started losing wars over and over again. It's interesting to see the military switching back over to 1911's and EBR's M21's and M14's again. It is the perfect patrol rifle. This video is just colt propaganda.
Michele Vick I couldn't agree with you more.
"losing wars" ???? The US did nothing but kill kill kill with those new rifles(m16).. Changing rifles had nothing to do with "losing" any wars(if you wanna say that, those weren't wars that were going to be own or lost fighting an ideology instead of a country)
Contributing to the problems of the early M16 was that the type of powder was changed to ball at the last minute, which is much dirtier than what was originally intended for the weapon. Also, certain internal parts (i.e. the barrel, chamber gas tube, etc.) were originally meant to be chrome-lined, but the weapon was sent to Vietnam without it. I may prefer the AK 47, but the modern AR 15/M16 is infinitely better than the rifle that was sent to Vietnam.
haha this video is funny it is so much of a lie that I was laughing...do you know how accurate the M14 is...hell they still use it as a sniper as the M14 DMR.
A normal m14 is not that accurate. They were rushed to produce and came out doing like 3moa back then. The modern ones they use now like the m21 or the mk 14 EBR that we’re built good with modern standards can do sub moa and are pretty accurate.
Look up the Armalite AR-18AR-18's action was powered by a short-stroke gas piston above the barrel. The gas piston was of 3-piece design to facilitate disassembly, with a hollow forward section with 4 radial gas vent holes fitting around a stainless steel gas block projecting rearwards from the foresight housing.
M-14 all the way, never should have introduced the M-16. Would have saved many of our troops in Vietnam.
Oh, you're stupid.
Not really. better Jungle warfare training would have saved lives
the M16 was more suited for Vietnam and eventually would have lost more troops if they were still using the m14 in the long run.. Yes there was some hiccups in the beginning but that wasn't due to the m16s design it was due to negligence (ie not chrome lining barrels, using old ball powder, and no cleaning or cleaning kits)
You can't kill anybody when you run out of 7.62-51. You can carry double amount of 5.56 for the same weight. Most engagements in vietnam all you could fire at was muzzle flashes.
The M14 was allot better rifle . The 7.62x51mm round would tare through the jungles vegetation unlike the M16's 5.56x45mm round . The M16 was originally useing a varmint round .223 . The 762 round creates a bigger hole 2 well placed shots where putting the enemy down . While the enemy was doped up on drugs the enemy kept advancing after 8 rounds where placed into them. The M16 still has jamming problems to this day it constently has to be cleaned and there's a ton of parts to field strip . That wasent a problem for the M14 . The only problem the M14 had was weight wich caused fatigue and recoil in full auto mode. The M14 has proven it's accuracy with the M14ERB, M21 & M39 .The M14 is better for picking off targets while the M16 is better suited for on the move fireing because of its type grouping in full auto because of it's low recoil.
@SSgt24thMEU cheap plastic where did you get that from? extra rails and such can alway's be modified, scar:l would be good but not that much of an upgrade over our fnc's...
First off the m14 is mainly use fer semi auto fire, not full auto...and truth is THA m16 sucks...
Thank you for your service, and I agree, they never fully tested the M16 for "Combat Conditions" as in running it through mud, sand, heat, cold, and jungle conditions. I like the M1As, wouldn't mind one myself, especially fitted with the SAGE EBR stock.
@Caseyr0206 I know. It's not meant to be used on full auto at that range. In fact unless you just have a horde of guys a few feet in front of you, you should never use it on full auto.
@matthewmaki Have you ever used the M-16 in Combat? It really is a devestating weapon. And when you are carrying limited ammo due to weight, during a prolonged battle, it really is nice...
@jsooterlexsc Any idea why they would do a full auto test at 400 yards? Doesnt seem to make sense to me. At semi I would guess both do as well with the 7.62 hitting a ton harder. For my part I have shot game with .223 and 7.62. .223 took several shots to the chest and I always has to track em down a long ways. 7.62 was one shot and down.
@esh325..and the smaller caliber round as opposed to the 47. I always thought the M14 should have been chambered in .270. Smaller, lighter, faster round still having the reach and knockdown. Then redesign the comb on the stock to reduce muzzle climb in full auto. Might have worked for the 16 as well. Then again, if they taught the troops to shoot better, most of the problems would be moot, don't you agree?
@RustAirsoftTeam WOW! That must have been hard for a squad to deal with. I can just imagine the frustration at drawing down on a target, perfect aperture, perfect shot, only to watch as the guy gets back up! When you shoot something, you want it DEAD, not spitting lead back at you! Thanks for sharing.
I love the M-14 too. I have an Armscorp M-14NM. It is s superb rifle and an absolute tackdriver at 100m. But the AR-10 is not the best of both worlds.It still uses the same heavy round as the M-14 and that means for the same given weight, I can carry twice as many M16 rounds. I carried an M16/M4 for over 23 years in the US Army Infantry and Rangers. The two things you carry the most of always are water and ammunition. And full auto is rarely used by a rifleman, That's why each fireteam has a SAW
@DaytonaRoadster I agree about the training. But when you're reflexively starting your immediate action drills every time you squeeze the trigger, whether or not the rifle actually fired, "absurd" has officially been reached. Idle curiousity, how many didn't make it back to be pissed?
Pretty amazing how they love every other weapon issued better than the standard, isn't it? And how...happy...were the special forces guys when they were forced to give up their carbines for M4s?
@STL308 sounds cool. I've heard nothing but good stuff about the 6.8 SPC. Have you had hands on expeerience with that one, or considered it in your bullpup design?
@WaywardPatriot
Correct, also in a conventional fight with both sides wearing body armour the 5.56 isn't a effective as the 7.62mm.
Hmm, tried to look for some other sources, but none mentioned muzzle velocity. Got a source? Send me a message.
@ad855 actually, I think the DMR is an A1 lower (apparently the 3 round burst gives 3 different trigger pulls, depending on where the cam is set) with a match grade A4 upper with a scope, and special ammunition. I'm thinking of the Mk14EBR (enhanced battle rifle)
"shells packed with powder" :) The British are so amusing when they talk about firearms.
@Osochilled Snipers don't use full auto.
I don't actually know if it is still seeing much use or not though.
One might think that other rifles would see more use for sniping situations, ones with bi-pods.
@CaptainObvious1970 The general rule for M193 fragmentation is 2700 f/s. The M4 with it's 14.5 inch barrel has a fragmentation range of less than 100 meters with current issue M855 spec ammunition. I'm not arguing that M14s don't have their place, but for the general infantry, the M16 is fine and does its job well. All these armchair commandos need to stop arguing that their grandpa/uncle/whoever did this that or the other because combat experiences/memories aren't passed down in the bloodstream
I love the wound ballistics of the 5.56. Wow, 20 plus cuts inside in all directions. omg.
@SSgt24thMEU wouldnt the 416 be better because of it's heavier 6.8mm round? i heard that HK was making the 416 in 6.8 as it was a good balance between the 5.56 and the 7.62.
@esh325 You may be right, but I don't think so. I think the 5.56 round was developed first then it was released as the .223 commercially (and yes there is a slight difference). The 5.56 was initially developed after they tried the .222 and the .222 Mag. The pair of .222's were close but not quite what they wanted so they modified the magnum slightly and created the 5.56. You are correct in that the .222 was a varmint round.
@shaynemcallister This is the weapon that is the production version of the MAGPUL MASADA, correct? Some small variations in final design, but the composite stock and lower receiver, simplified blowback and interchangeable locking-bolt design all seem very similar. Firing from an open bolt is a pretty cool advantage, it puts the power of a LMG into the tactical range of a battle rifle, instead of just as a base of fire. Great suggestion! I would love to see the US Military take full advantage
What is the top part of the M16 for? You know, where the peep sight is. Is it a handle? Or is it just strictly where the peep sight is held?
@MrJapper88 What do you think of the mini series? I'm kicking around the idea of getting a mini 30, and in spite of all the negativity you hear on the internet pretty well everyone I've talked to that has one loves them.
@DDTea Conceded, however at 500 yards 5.56 is going slower than .22lr at the muzzle, and actually carrying a similar amount of energy (the bullet being half again as heavy, don't you know).
@rahfields
First shot to ensure aim, second to ensure hit, third to ensure kill.
Seems pretty reliable.
@jsooterlexsc, If an m14 can do that much damage why not add a scope and make it into a sniper? One shot and down seems to be it's unique ability
@Toolofdeath
Easy question. The shock of blowing off the little toe, as well as the toes near it due to the concussion of the bullet, will send massive shock waves through the body that will ultimately provide a fatal heart attack. Failing that, it will at least provide enough pain to the target to better enable the shooter to take a better shot.
M14 FTW!
@SSgt24thMEU must have been thinking of a different weapon then. is it possible to privately own a 416 or 417?
@esh325 That is very true, the yawing and tumbling effect of the 5.56x45's are significantly reduced at longer ranges as well as hydrostatic shock. As you mentioned, to combat this deficiency dedicated marksmen in infantry squads are issued the Mk 14 EBR which is a modernized version of the m14 but pretty much the same rifle chambered in .308 winchester also known as the 7.62x51.
@STL308 Not that, I'm just a weapons freak. The FN Herstal Mk 17 SCAR-H Long (7.62X51) is currently slated to replace the M14, if it can fit in the military's budget. It's a tough piece of hardware. It has a short-stroke, gas-piston operating system. Upper receiver is aluminum, housing a free-floating barrel for better accuracy. Lower receiver is polymer for reduced weight. Both versions can be equipped with mission specific quick-change barrel lengths in 16-inch or 20-inch. Vaguely familiar.
@STL308 In Somalia the first deployment I had the M16, the second deployment I had the M14 with the military designator M68 Aimpoint. Future deployments to three other countries I had the M4 w/ M203 attachment. The M14 was by far the heaviest, but by far the best for me. However, there were mission specific appropriate times that I set aside the M14 for an M16 in CQB situations (back in 1993, most units didn't have M4's yet).
@RyanR3volution I didn't know that you can now buy a true Steyr here in the U.S. That would be pretty slick. I've always loved the lines of that bullpup. I have the MSAR STG 5.56, opting for the classic 20" barrel instead of the 16". it's a really sweet shooter, but it's only downfall (like all bullpups I've ever shot) is a very sluggish trigger pull due to the linkage.
@TWutangT The killer in Oslo used a modified M14 with banned ammo for use in millitary. Only hunters for big animals could use it. The bullets were ment for doing most damage than regualy bullets..
@nov284 What are you talking about? I've had a pretty low-quality AR and it went "boom" every time I wanted it to. Cleaning is easy: wipe down the gas key with a towel. Use a dry lube (e.g. wax, militec...). I could clean my AR faster than my friend could clean his SKS. Of course, I wasn't shooting 1000 rounds/day. It doesn't really require a serious cleaning--just maintenance where it counts (e.g. the chamber and locking lugs), just like any semi-auto.
@esh325
charging handle on the right hand side is also a big minus. the old handles are sharp and short, yank on it hard enough and it can cut.
@Blackhawk5656 ROTC in High School and all my family on the mother's side joined up. I tried to join straight out of HS but they wouldn't take me because of a minor medical condition.
I've studied firearms and ballistics ever since.
To answer your deleted question: you are referring to projectile 'spall' or the arc of a light-weight enveloped round inside a soft target. This CAN cause lots of damage, but only if the INERTIA of the round is great enough. 5.56 at 500+ yards wont cut it.
@WatchRyder
Flakvests are designed to protect against ricochet or shrapnel. Not projectiles.
They do offer SOME ballistic protection, they typically are at most Level IIIA protection.
Burst fire is rarely ever used mainly the only times you would use the burst fire or full auto option is when you have to clear your magazine or eliminate the bullet currently cycled in the chamber of your weapon. I still don't understand why they do that but the burst fire as you mentioned I'm probably sure is going to be used during rifle target training so you know how it feels like but in live combat situations they'll tell you to use the semi auto for the same reason that I typed before.
@DramaticGnome1210 not hollow points. Last time they said something about an round witch exploding when hitting something hard.
Many people bash the 5.56 round because it is so small but it really is an amazing round. I resisted getting a 5.56 for yrs but when I got one I fell in love with it very fast. Yes there are some things the 7.62 do better but overall the M16 and 5.56 were a huge improvement. Lighter, easier to control, more rounds and very flexable platform. What more could you ask for?
@Stritchers the original M14 was designed as an assault rifle and had selective fire modes, safe, semi, and full auto fire. Most current builds for the military have it in semi auto only.
@TheGrankuma It's a battle rifle because it was made to work. Frozen, covered in mud, full of sand, in 140 degrees, when its rusty and wet and hasn't been cleaned in days, it fires. Field cleaning doesn't involve disassembly. You can keep it operationally clean by locking the bolt to the rear and cleaning the exposed parts, punching the bore, and cleaning the chamber. The m16 needs disassembled a couple of times a day to keep it shooting.
@WaywardPatriot I agree. If there is .308/7.62 replacement it will be the SCAR-H. The SCAR rifle is modular design that can refit different stocks and barrel lengths easily. The normal SCAR is 5.56, but the SCAR-H (H for heavy) is in 7.62x51.
@nov284 Depends on your location. It is legal to hunt with .223 in some places though.
@STL308 What i meant by that comment is its a much more effective sniping platform than the AR-15 type rifle. The M16 generally is a better assault rifle as it can lay down suppressive fire more effectively, but the 7.62MM round of the M14 enables an operator to engage targets at a much further distance effectively than with a 5.56, its a better DMR than the M16, as the 5.56 isnt really a good round for sniping, it doesnt have the punch at extended ranges. Plus the M14 is more reliable.
@WaywardPatriot yeah. it's a cool gun. I think you can even switch between open bolt and closed bolt operation. Open bolt to allow for greater cooling in LMG mode, and closed for higher accuracy and prevention of dust getting into the chamber. But you could also convert the same gun into a sort of sniper rifle or Designated Marksman rifle.
@shananagans5 A riFle that goes boom when I pull the trigger? Preferably without an armorer level cleaning three times a day?
@STL308 The .45GAP and 10mm just never took off well with the general public and it made it insanely expensive to buy ammo for it on the rare occasion that one could even find it. That's sad since they're really awesome calibers. Off-duty I always carry a Government model Colt 1911. Working the road I am required to carry the Glock 22 and I get an S&W M&P M4 with all the trimmings (and a 5 shot .357 mag hidden elsewhere) I also still get my Glock 22, M14, M4, and Benelli for work on SWAT.
@esh325 The SPC was not tested but according to manufacturers ballistics tables, the 100 grain .243 Win destroys the 110 grain 6.8 SPC. 2018 fps and 904 ftlbs at 500 yards vs. 1500 fps and 550 ftlbs. The 6.8 is also more expensive to make, the .243 uses "cut down" .308 brass.
what is the name of the tv show yhat this video is taken from?
@WaywardPatriot well i dont see the m16 or m4 getting replaced anytime soon considering we only buy new weapons mostly for spec ops. dont get me wrong i love the m14 but i dont think it has what takes for todays fighting as an standard weapon
@WaywardPatriot the PSD is the only weapon i want to replace the m16 ....i've heard about this weapon but i wasnt sure what it was but that gun has the power and accuracy...its like a more approved m16 with a shorter barrel....but i doubt i will see a change in a standard issued weapon in my military career
@TWutangT no.. we have even used the AG3 and still using the 7.62 nato. the doctors had not seen that kind of wounds before still after 25 years as doctor.. eyewitness told about the innpacked of the bullets were not the "common".. in furture we may know what kind of ammo he used.
@simon12194 Probably might not solve the problem of recoil since the stock of the M14 still has that pivot in the rear grip area. M14 is still used nowadays as a Designated Marksman Rifle (DMR) since it's still a good accurate rifle, just not in full auto.
@Caseyr0206 and rarely is the M-16 placed on 3 rnd burst in combat. In fact US forces are trained not to place it on 3 rnd burst to conserve ammo and, surprise, maintain accuracy.
@STL308 You know, I am shocked to hear a perspective so similar to what I've said about another pistol round in the recent past-- the .45 GAP. It might or might not be as good as the .45 ACP but what does that matter if you can't find or afford bullets for the gun. I had only heard wonder stories about the 6.8, it's good to hear other perspectives.
that recoil pivot on the m14 in this video has changed and fixed with newer editions like the ebr?
@WaywardPatriot are you in the military?
@nov284
Mate I am not dismising what you are saying. But have you ever used the M-16 in a combat situation.
Maybe poor maintenance, but let's not forget non chrome lined chambers and bore, the army switching the powder, and all the minor tweaks along the way.
SIMPLE SOLUTION- M-16 for the Jungle and Rice Paddy, M-14 for the Sand Box. And if you want to try something Really Heavy ? Carry an M-3 'Grease Gun' through a Rice Paddy with all those spare mag's of .45 ACP with the mud sucking you down in 120 deg. heat. Sorry about my 'Late' timing on this thread, but I just Received this from 'Google'.
would u use the m14 on full auto or semi?
@snakeeyes119 I think I'd been in the fleet for, oh, maybe 4 years before I got issued a rifle that didn't jam at nearly every stage of fire. Last year I got a brand-new fresh out of the box A4 (complete with cardboard protector in the barrel). She made it most of the week before I got my first jam...I dunno if the rifle knows I have zero respect for it and just returns the favor or what, but man, I can't seem to get issued the reliable one.
@789995 I see the point you are making and im in no position to say you are wrong because i havent been in combat but dont you think suppressive fire is more the job of the machine gun and not the rifle. wouldnt you prefer good accurate rounds to 800 metres?
@STL308 Hey, you're the one who said that you bet I haven't looked into these weapons. I just felt it appropriate response to let you know the little bit of familiarity with them that I've got. And I'd do back-flips if they replaced the M16 with the SCAR 17. If they replaced it with the SCAR 16, well, that's not really much of a change in the way that it needs it the mos-- power.
@STL308 The IMI Tavor TAR 21--one of the best bullpup design rifles out there, proudly brought by the same folks who gave you the Uzi... Israel. I like the Steyr better astheticly, but in CQB, nothing beats a bullpup. Zalman Shebs (along with Boyarski, Shiloni and Erez) designed it for 11 years. Integrating into IDF by 2011. They fixed its aversion to sand, but the linkage is still just as sluggish as every other bullpup. It's 3.15 times the price per unit than the M4. Also Vaguely familiar.
@hackerhunterdotexe
I know that is what the bullet is designed to do, but I have seen about an equal number of people who say that the 5.56 just goes straight through as often as it "tumbles". I'd rather use the ammo that will act the same way.
I like a lot of your points and your debating style, but I cannot seem to find any that can completely prove to me that the 5.56 is superior to the 7.62x51. Of course, it could be because I'm still relatively new to firearms.
I agree(and dream of owning an M14) but you can't picture kids nowadays who do enlist shooting the larger heavier M14. The M16's good point is that it is lightweight and each soldeir can carry hundreds of 5.56 rounds on foot. Hopefully we can find new light weight rifle to the same trick even better.
I've owned and fired M14 and AR15. In the early 80's I bought a "Mini 14" and discovered that it was probably better than either. It had the simple utility of the M14 and the advantage of low recoil, lightweight .223 ammunition. They didn't need to re-invent the wheel, they just needed to make the M14 in .223...
Just my opinion of course but I've lugged a Garand and a load of .30-06 ammo around and I'd take .223 any day of the week.
Weight. My dads friend had to use it for 6 months of the time he was deployed in Iraq and much preferred it over the m16/m4. He loved it so much that he now has his own personal one. (he shoots competitively and has over 40 guns including assault rifles, army surplus riles, hunting rifles, and handguns.)
its because of the powder they were using... during trials they used stick powder which worked perfectly and never had a jam. but when they went into mass production they used ball powder which burned worse and caused gunk to build up in the receiver and caused jams and thanks to no cleaning kits issued because of the high rating in testing they thought they didn't need them
what about semi automatic mode on the M14 we are now useing it as designated marksmen rifles
@hackerhunterdotexe
I'm not familiar enough with all the specific possible trauma caused by the different calibers. All I can say for sure is that they didn't tell soldiers with M1 Garands or M14s to shoot the enemy 2-3 times like they do the M16/M4 now. Soldiers issued the former did not complain about a lack of killing power like soldiers who are issued the latter. Any bullet can kill game with proper shot placement, but you don't go into combat armed with .22LR.
I've put thousands of rounds surplus 5.56through my Mini-14 without any problems. However the Mini-14 was designed to chamber the 5.56. Some rifles this is not the case so you need to be careful, contact the manufacturer first.
"Firing a 5.56mm cartridge (which is loaded to higher pressure) in a .223 Remington chambered rifle (which has a shorter throat causing a further boost in pressure), could exceed the safety margin in a .223 Remington rifle. It cannot be done with complete safety"
In the military regardless they teach you to fire weapons on semi automatic instead of full auto to achieve the greatest amount of accuracy and to not accidently wound an innocent bystandard or injure your own squadmates. A full auto M16 sounds like the way to go but rarely will they ever let you do that. I got my info from a former United States Marine Corps Force Reconaissance infantryman and many other former US Marine Corps Infantrymen.
@esh325 The Army has been having the problems for some reason. I guess they never passed out the changed ballistics caused by the shorter barrel of the M4. Back in the mid 1980s, I was on an evaluation team assessing different round chamberings for the M16. We tested 5.56. 6.8, .243 winchester, 7.62, and .30-06. Best performance over all was .30-06 185 grain. Best for highest ammo load was .243 winchester 100 grain.
@esh325 The problem the Marines encountered was already a known issue for the 5.56. That was the bullet staying on path after object penetration. Windshields are a bitch. You are taught to hold low to get closer to a 90 degreee impact. The green tip largely eliminated that problem.
@unit529 I used to think that in a firefight I would aim and fire deliberately. I learned the value of suppressive fire in Desert Storm. Don't discount its effect. It scares the daylights out of your enemy and unless highly trained, they stop shooting and go for cover allowing you to maneuver. Given that, the more rounds you carry, the better. I've fired both, and I can see the advantages of the 16.
@rahfields have you ever seen what a well placed shot with 5.56 nato does if you hit body its fucked its not to ensure kill more of a yea i hit it for sure its also much easier for hitting moving targets
@simon12194 Despite the fact it already weighs 11.5 pounds loaded? Another problem with the M14 was that it was very heavy including heavy ammunition and made it difficult to maneuver. The M16 on the other hand weighs less than 9 pounds loaded.
@wierdosinc So you're saying if a terrorist shoots you with a weapon (any weapon, for this point it doesn't matter) in the head and I shoot the guy next to you in the head the exact same way with the exact same weapon at the exact same trajectory, angle and range, the result would be different based solely upon which of us (the terrorist or me) pulled the trigger? I don't quite understand...
yeah a light machine gun is more suitable for full auto, plus the saw holds 200 rounds. So its more suitable for sustained fire, which would help a group maintain fire superiority.
@nov284 That statement is misleading. 1500 fps = 457 m/s. In terms of kinetic energy, which is proportional to velocity squared, that's a 209 000 fold difference for the same mass (which they aren't, but I'm just making a point)!