M16A2 is ageing

L

LeatherNeckRVA

Active member
Now that the m16a2 is getting on in the years I keep hearing marines(i don't have friends in the other branches ,sorry :( ) talking about what weapon they would like to see replace it. I don't have any experience with military grade weapons yet but I'm interested to find out what you guys think would be a good replacement, if indeed the U.S. is in the market for one.
 
Well i think the army is looking to replace it with the XM8 but i thought it was more M4 size then M16. If i was us military and was looking to replace like with like i would want the G36, as it is 5.56mm, used by its NATO allies and is one of the best rifles in the world at the minute, though it isnt bullpup design!

http://www.world.guns.ru/assault/as14-e.htm
 
I heard rumors about the M4 as well but I think it's unlikely because I don't think the US would give up the distinct advantage that the M16A2 has over the AK, which is the effectiveness at 350 yards.
 
well...are we talking about the actual age of the m-16s already in the inventories (in other words..they are losing strength and might burst if fired, requiring them to be replaced because they are unsafe), or are we talking about the age of the design of the weapon that makes it desirable to replace it?

I mean, they can always make a new weapon to replace an old unsafe one..but if they want to redesign and introduce a new weapon, its going to be some mucho bucks... 8)
 
exactly, but its an investment that needs to be made if the US is going to continue to keep up with our enemies and our allies.
 
The M-16 has not outlived its usefulness. Spending tons of money for only a slight improvement is a waste. That money would be better served going to training.
 
M16 is still a viable weapon.

LeatherNeckRVA said:
exactly, but its an investment that needs to be made if the US is going to continue to keep up with our enemies and our allies.
Click to expand...

What are we actually keeping up with? The business end (the round) is the same 5.56mm round. The money would probably be better spent on training and an updated package for the M203, something like the 20mm round that is being developed with the variable fuse and more direct fire.

Semper Fi...
 
I agree. Don't fix what isn't broken. The M-16 has long range, good accuracy, "mod"-ability...and uses the same type of ammunition as the weapon that you all want to see replace it. I agree that it will eventually have to be replaced...but come on it works fine. People still use Garands for certain tasks and they're over 50 years old!
 
id have to say that i think the X-M8 should replace it or they could even make a small upgrade and use what us aussies use the Stey Aug
 
Nothing wrong with the A2. Every body has just fallen in love with hi tech that can mount all kinds of optics etc..The more gadgets you put on a weapon the more gadgets will fail when you need them. Like right in the middle of a fire fight, :shock:
 
03USMC said:
Nothing wrong with the A2. Every body has just fallen in love with hi tech that can mount all kinds of optics etc..The more gadgets you put on a weapon the more gadgets will fail when you need them. Like right in the middle of a fire fight, :shock:
Click to expand...

For some reason all those optics has a problem with mud, go figure.... :D
 
I still like the M-16.
:rambo:
Optics.. yes, mud, rain, dirt.. it's not useful in combat terrain. Except for battle in build-up area.
optics.. remember to bring your lens wiper and lotion in your full pack..!
 
But man I'm gonna tell ya an M-4 with Eotech optics, a 203 , two mags taped together with riggers tape an assault sling, while yer wearin a bush cover and got yer cammie stick all tiger stripped makes one heckuva "Hey Mom look at me!" photo. :lol:

Never mind that steady string of Maggies Drawers you shot in the 300 meter slow fire :oops:
 
Shadowalker said:
Well i think the army is looking to replace it with the XM8 but i thought it was more M4 size then M16. If i was us military and was looking to replace like with like i would want the G36, as it is 5.56mm, used by its NATO allies and is one of the best rifles in the world at the minute, though it isnt bullpup design!

http://www.world.guns.ru/assault/as14-e.htm
Click to expand...

Bullpup designs suck. They are horrid for left handers who make up a large part of your force. Telling them to learn to shoot right is a BS answer too.

The G36 is identical to the M8. The G36 is based on the AR18 (In design of function/action).

The M8 is a G36 only the US forces will have a better sight and a more robust stock capable of IMTing and buttstroking better. The current standard sight on the G36 is less than ideal and the stock is a bit flimsy if you intend to use it to break a fall.

Our rail/mounting system will also allow for more versatility than a G36.

Other than that, it's optics.
 
steady string of Maggies Drawers you shot in the 300 meter slow fire
Click to expand...

what slow fire at 300? is that part of rifle quals now? in COMPETITION, 300 is rapid fire prone from standing...

also the Australians Steyr Aug is a piece of crap. ask the Brits from GW1. those bullpup design rifles dont work very well at all. they are more prone to failure than even the early XM16s from 1964-1965...

david
 
I like the M-16 style of layout.
I personally dislike the bullpups. It doesn't allow you to rapidly switch hands for the corners. And yes, I shoot left handed.
And yes, no need to waste money. The M-16 is doing fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top