| |
| | Post 31 |
| Primus Pilus | I've heard it summed up in just a few words - the M-16 and the AK-47 were both intended to combine the best qualities of a LMG and a rifle. The M-16 does "rifle" better, the AK does LMG better.
__________________ Midshipman 3/c, USNR |
| |
| | Post 32 |
| Immunes | I have a scar from the front sight post of an M16 burnt into the top of my hand =\ |
| |
| | Post 33 |
| Milforum's Bouncer | Bet you won't do that again.
__________________ "The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental." - John Steinbeck |
| |
| | Post 34 |
| Milforum Moderator ![]() | i dont thing the AK is close to the LMG role. If anything its close to the SMG role, espcially in the folding stock versions. It is fairely accurate in semi auto mode and feels great when shooting...like its a real weapon...The m16, well ive said it before, is very accurate and confartable, but i dislike it. it has a reputation for jamming, which 5.56 and I argued about before, and which he claimes to be more of a cleaning issue...perhaps....but the AK hasent got a cleaning issue.... I was reassined to be a tank crewman a month ago and got a short m16. this is the first m16 ive had in the IDF which feels right to me, for some reason. i guss this one is less worn down than the ones ive had. still though, it weighs only 1.9 kg, which is great for your back but makes it feel toyish to me...
__________________ Breath dust, eat grease, drink diesel. Sleep standing up and fight sitting down. Think you'r a man? Join the tanks! |
| |
| | Post 35 |
| Primus Pilus | It doesn't really fit the SMG role, either. Lower rate of fire, greater penetration, and greater range sort of suggest something other than an SMG. Generalizations to be sure, but look at it next to weapons such as the MP-5, Uzi, etc. As for the M-16's "reputation for jamming," did you read the article this thread is in reference to?
__________________ "Oh! lad I don't know where you've been but I see you won first prize." The Scotsman |
| |
| | Post 36 |
| Milforum Moderator ![]() | I know the m16 has improved over the years and that even original versions were not likely to jam with proper care and maitanance. the point i made here and have maid before is: A) My m16s were usually older versions bought dirt cheap by IDF B)I still think a weapon should, if possible, need very low maitanance |
| |
| | Post 37 |
| Milforum's Bouncer | In a perfect world we use smokeless caseless rounds that went where we wished them to go and would clean itself and if we asked nicely would give us a nice massage and read a bedtime story to us on FTX. |
| |
| | Post 38 | |
| Tribunus Laticlavius | Quote:
__________________ Please note that 98% of what I say is my opinion and/or my "version" of the facts. Most of what I say is rumor with little to no evidence to back it up, just something I picked up somewhere. My City | |
| |
| | Post 39 |
| Immunes | Combat Marksmanship, we popped off almost 200 round in under 30 minutes. My rifle was smoking, and the hand guards were rather hot. My SSGT told me to remove my sling and give it to another Marine who had lost his, I forgot that my rifle was still smoking and that meant it was really hot. Needless to say I burnt myself, and me and my rifle become one.... Some of my skin adheard to the front sight post =\ |
| |
| | Post 40 |
| Milforum Moderator ![]() | 200 rounds in 30 mins dose that? I fired probably close to 100 rounds in somthing less than 2 minutes and my rifle dident smoke(targets fell apart though |
| |