Originally Posted by Cadet Seaman

The M2 was adopted in 1932 for ground forces, but was designed in 1921.

Do'h! I can't believe that I screwed up on that little bit of history.

Originally Posted by Whispering Death

Actually they are on the verge of replacing the M2 with the XM312 and then later the XM307.

Of all the OICW weapons systems it's looking like the M2 is going to be the first to be replaced.

LIES! ALL LIES!

Nothing will replace my baby, my sweet heart, my lover.

Check Please!!

Originally Posted by Joker

So if the AR15´s had a bad start and needed time to take out the kinks why not take another Rifle that may be a better rifle after some years than the AR 15´s can ever get??? I like the SCAR too, if all the stuff will work that they are planning than you have (this is a german proverb so i hope you understand it) a "egg putting wool-milk-pig" (all-in-Wonder maybe in english?)!!! So if it work give one to me too. But the more features you have the more things can break or just don´t work.

But you also can not say that the G36 is a piece of crap, that isn´t true!
And the XM8 uses mostly the gas system and the inner live of the G36(and that stuff is outstanding) thats it, all the rest at the outside like the plastic that "melts" under extrem heat(and i think this will not happen after 300 rounds = 10 clips wich is most of your ammunition)or this optical sight is the XM8 not a G36! Ok, you can not go over the obstacle course using the XM 8 as a ladder like you do it with your M16(i don´t know it, can you do such things with it please tell me, have no clue), but it´s the same in germany. You can make this things with our good, old and my loving but heavy G3 but not with the G36 it´s just not made to use as a ladder!! It ´s build to work well, shoot good and be lightweight ! But if you want to have a lighter weapon you must use somthing lighter than metal, and that is plastic. But plastic is also not so robust as metal!


Thats right and i don´t said that i never clean my rifle or german troops never do it, but its not so vulnerable. They don´t "HAVE" to make it twice a day because it´s not necesarry.Thats a fact!

I will not say that the only good weapons are made by H&K, every weapon has it weeknesses and like 5,56X45 said:"nothing is soldier proof". I will also not say that the XM8 is perfect (I totaly agree with the backup sights) but the system is reliable! So why not build up on a system like the XM8 or the FN SCAR??? You can´t also said that the AR 15 is the best thing ever made!!! And if the ammo is a weakness why they don´t fix it?? Ok, the SF get this new SPR Rifle and the xx grains heavier round to have more mannstopping power but what is with the rest of your troops out there??? They face the enemy every day they have more firefights than the SF have, but why the normal trooper´s of the 1st AD or 3rd ID don´t have this Rifle or the better round ??? And buying maybe 5 million rounds of this new and better round to handel out to the troops in Iraq for there patrols or what ever they doing and shooting the old round at the range should not be a problem for a country like the U.S.
I think its the same reason why soldier have to wear older Flakvests instead of IBA or Mich helmets at the beginning of the war.

And i bet you all know why????
MONEY
And that´s the point why somthing is Dropped or not!!! Regardless what weaknesses or Company!!!

Joker

The Army did try. In 1986, the M16A2 was made in 84', but the Army was waiting for a better rifle to come along and nothing did.

What units in Iraq wearing the older PASGT-V, I've only heard of rear enchlon units wearing them.

What units in Iraq wearing the older PASGT-V, I've only heard of rear enchlon units wearing them.

I don´t know what unit now still wears PASGT but at the start of the war some guy´s don´t have IBA or the SAPI plattes for it. I read that a lot of people bought themselfes additional body armor befor or that parents bought it and send it to their son´s. But i think now we are going .

Joker

Originally Posted by Joker

I don´t know what unit now still wears PASGT but at the start of the war some guy´s don´t have IBA or the SAPI plattes for it. I read that a lot of people bought themselfes additional body armor befor or that parents bought it and send it to their son´s. But i think now we are going .

Joker

I doubt people brought armor or parents sent it. The PASGT-V has the ISAPO with SAPI plates. Yes I agree we are getting off topic.

The M-16A1, A2, A3, the M-4 and M-4A1 all have the same (perceived) weakness, and that is the fact that gas from the cartridge is vented directly back into the action behind the bolt. Everyone in this forum should know that the clearances between these two parts is vital, as it dictates whether or not the bolt will close, as well as the timing of the bolt opening. If the bolt retracts, opening the chamber too early, there are three different failures that can occur.
This type of action was actually invented by Ljungman and fielded in a rifle in 1942. The rifle did work decently, but it was never adopted in large numbers, except in Egypt, IIRC. Every other design sidesteps this problem by using a piston or a blowback design. The blowback design does allow fouling on the surface of the bolt or breechblock, but the piston design does not. As a result, rifles with piston designs do require less cleaning than the M-16 series. Joker is correct in that regard.
I have never been a fan of the M-16, not because of the calibre, but rather due to the long procurement and improvement cycles that this mediocre design has been forced into. When the US decided to adopt the M-14, they tested it against the FN-FAL. The M-14 lost the first trial and was sent back for a re-design. Same thing happened a second time. Then a third. Finally, on the 4th try, the much improved M-14 barely beat (the unmodified) FN-FAL and went on to equip the US Armed Forces for a very short period of time. The M-16's evolution was even more torturous. The original M-16 was awful, incredibly sensitive to the ammunition used, and issued without cleaning kits. Even after the kits were issued, many soldiers ended up using the cleaning rods to remove spent casings that were jammed in the chamber... in the middle of firefights. As well, the rifling in the barrel was wrong, and the rounds were tumbling almost immediately after they left the muzzle. This lowered both the accuracy and the lethality of the weapon. The rifle then went through many improvement cycles, during which the buffer was changed, the barrel was modified three times, the flash hider was changed, and the bolt forward assist was added. Bolt forward assist.... how many other rifles have a bolt forward assist? AFAIK, none. This mod was made necessary by the fact that the M-16 fouls far more than any other rifle. After all the mods were completed, the weight of the rifle went from 7.5 pounds loaded to 8.5 pounds loaded, and during all of this foolishness, many US soldiers died because their M-16 rifles malfunctioned.
In spite of it's checkered past, the M-16 has become a good rifle. But it seems that the debate in this thread has become polarized between those who believe that the M-16 should not be replaced due to the fact that "there's nothing better out there", and others who think it should be replaced. Twenty years ago it might have been true that there were none better, but no longer. FN, IMI and Steyer all have rifle designs that compare very favourably with the M-16, and HK has 3. In fact, HK even designed a new upper receiver that gives the M-16 a short stroke piston, making it, IMO a far superior weapon.
As for the crowd that says that HK and other "plastic" rifles will melt with sustained fire, don't believe everything you hear. Today's rifles and pistols are made with polymers that are incredibly heat resistant. In addition, they have another sterling quality. Metal handguards become hot as radiant heat transfers from the barrel to the interior of the handguard. In sustained fire situations, some handguards do get difficult to hold. Polymer handguards are actually an improvement in this regard as heat passes through them far more slowly, allowing the soldier to continue to effectively hold and use his weapon. I think that the barrel would melt long before the polymer handguard melts, and by that time, a metal handguard would be impossible to hold.
Here is a bit more food for thought:
http://www.hkdefense.us/pages/milita...nes/hk416.html

Just because many of us have used the M-16 does not make it the best. Likewise, just because it was developed in the US does not make it better or worse than others that were built elsewhere. Ironically, many believe that the best M-16s are now made in Canada. Colt seems to think so, as they bought the company that makes them! (Diemaco) I hope that the US Army does indeed hold open trials for a new assault rifle to replace the M-4, and then we will all find out which is the best. Just don't be surprised when the M-4 loses.

Dean.

THATS WHAT I´M TALKING ABOUT

As a result, rifles with piston designs do require less cleaning than the M-16 series. Joker is correct in that regard.

When the US decided to adopt the M-14, they tested it against the FN-FAL. The M-14 lost the first trial and was sent back for a re-design. Same thing happened a second time. Then a third. Finally, on the 4th try, the much improved M-14 barely beat (the unmodified) FN-FAL

....the flash hider was changed, and the bolt forward assist was added. Bolt forward assist.... how many other rifles have a bolt forward assist? AFAIK, none. This mod was made necessary by the fact that the M-16 fouls far more than any other rifle.

Like i said!!!

FN, IMI and Steyer all have rifle designs that compare very favourably with the M-16, and HK has 3. In fact, HK even designed a new upper receiver that gives the M-16 a short stroke piston, making it, IMO a far superior weapon.

As for the crowd that says that HK and other "plastic" rifles will melt with sustained fire, don't believe everything you hear. Today's rifles and pistols are made with polymers that are incredibly heat resistant. In addition, they have another sterling quality. Metal handguards become hot as radiant heat transfers from the barrel to the interior of the handguard. In sustained fire situations, some handguards do get difficult to hold. Polymer handguards are actually an improvement in this regard as heat passes through them far more slowly, allowing the soldier to continue to effectively hold and use his weapon. I think that the barrel would melt long before the polymer handguard melts, and by that time, a metal handguard would be impossible to hold.

just because it was developed in the US does not make it better or worse than others that were built elsewhere. Ironically, many believe that the best M-16s are now made in Canada.

Thank you Dean that you agree with me!!!
It´s often very difficult for me especially all the technical and military stuff to put it into words because it´s 11 years ago that i had english in school and it was not about all these special stuff.

Greetz JOKER

P.S.

Just don't be surprised when the M-4 loses.

But think about what happend with the M-14, it´s also possible that not the better weapon wins because they compare apples with oranges (improved M-14 with standart FN FAL).
Or like § 15 in Murphys Law of Combat:
"Never forget that your weapon is made by the lowest bidder"

Ohhhh and @ Cadet Seaman:

I doubt people brought armor or parents sent it. The PASGT-V has the ISAPO with SAPI plates.

But what if there were not enough of these additional ISAPO overvests?? I can only say what i have read with my own eyes, if all these people don´t tell the truth theres nothing i can do.

Why do they always want to make it all plastic and crud? The thing that your R&D folks have yet to wake up to is one very big thing: The AK47 (very simple design) works phenominally well in terms of taking a huge beating and still continuing to work. Its a bloody inaccurate piece of crap too, but at least try to pick up some of the GOOD characteristics of the AK. You don't have to make it an inaccurate piece of crap, nor do you have to copy straight across for caliber, etc. But WTF is the deal with making an assault rifle out of plastic when other materials have been proven to be more durable?

Originally Posted by godofthunder9010

Why do they always want to make it all plastic and crud? The thing that your R&D folks have yet to wake up to is one very big thing: The AK47 (very simple design) works phenominally well in terms of taking a huge beating and still continuing to work. Its a bloody inaccurate piece of crap too, but at least try to pick up some of the GOOD characteristics of the AK. You don't have to make it an inaccurate piece of crap, nor do you have to copy straight across for caliber, etc. But WTF is the deal with making an assault rifle out of plastic when other materials have been proven to be more durable?

GoT, believe it or not, polymers are, pound for pound, far more durable than steel. Kevlar is a polymer, and it has replaced steel in flak jackets so effectively that nobody makes steel plated ones anymore. (And if someone did, nobody would wear them!) The same thing is happening in the field of assault rifles, and frankly, it's about time. Wood handguards have been around since the rifle was invented, and wood was the material of choice for the M-14, the FN-FAL and the AK series butts and handguards. Metal handguards were used in the very first assault rifle, the StG-44, as well in other weapons. It has seemed to me that the Europeans have more often used steel (Austrian FN-FAL, British SLR, (was actually in plastic) German G-3) while in North America, we used wood (M-14, FN-C1, FN-C2) until the M-16 came out.
Wood has some great qualities, it's cheap, durable and it insulates far better than metal, and I have NEVER seen or even heard of a wood handguard that started burning in a firefight. To melt a polymer handguard would require even more heat than is needed to light wood on fire.
Keep something else in mind. For countries with cold climates, metal is not an option. There is nothing like losing the skin of your fingers when you pick up your rifle at -30. I've picked mine up at that temperature, and I was always sure to do so using the handguard and pistol grip. I still have all my skin.
In an assault rifle, the only parts being made out of polymers are the handguard, butt, pistol grip and magazine. None of these parts are subject to premature wear, and polymers are better than steel for all of them. In addition, many pistol manufacturers, including HK and Glock make their slides out of polymers, and AFAIK, there have been no reports of mass failures due to inferior materials. In fact, the US government just bought 65,000 HK USP polymer slide pistols. It really can't be all that bad!

Dean.

Case in point, Vietnam. The NVA smuggled a lot of AK-47's and the VC buried them on various occasions. The box of AK's gets loaded with mud. Dig em up, knock the mud out, fire it: no problem. M16 is a little pickier. That's the point. Polymer or not, wood or not, steel or not, whatever. But something that takes a better beating w/o sacrificing accuracy.