well id have to say the best wepon is the c7-a1 is one of the best because its met for cold and warm climates and its got a few things the m-16 dosent
USMC Johnny said:In my opionion(being a Marine, which we pride ourselfs on long distance shooting)
The M-16A2(.223 Cal Rifle) is the worst gun issued to the military, and the M4 is a close second(.223 sucks!)
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/...and just even occationally clean your weapon.
JEA said:The SA80 A1 family of weapons, of whish the L85 is one variant (there's also a Light Support Weapon variant and a new carbine version), was a quite bad rifle. I say quite bad because it was blown out of proportion by the press wanting to take a dig at our government. It is an accurate rifle, especially with the SUSAT optical sight. I've never heard of one falling apart when fired, but the problem with the magazine falling off was rectified very early on. However, it was very unreliable. This was mainly because it required a high level of maintenance, which was just unpractical on exercise never mind operations.
There was also a problem with the feed of blank ammunition, due to the fact that the blanks we use have a crimped tip. This coupled with the fact that the rifle required even more maintenance when firing blanks (they throw out a lot more carbon than ball), lead to the troops having little faith in it. And rightly so.
The SA80 A2 is the new version which has undergone extensive modification. It is now an extremely reliable weapon. The initial tests in Oman, Norway, Belize and UK put it among the best assault rifles as far as reliability goes. Once the stats of how it performed in Iraq filter through the army and eventually to the public, I believe it will become a very highly regarded weapon. The problem with the feed of blank ammunition has also been rectified with a new magazine specifically for blank rounds, which will give British soldiers confidence in the weapon.
USMC Johnny said:Ever shot someone with a 9mm?? If the distance is great than 10meters(30ft) it takes more than one shot to knock someone down.
If Afghanistan I had to fire 3 shots at one guy, and I still didn't see him fall.(and I know you will be like "you missed him") I'm a pistol expert, I didn't miss. I hit him 3 times in the chest, but he didn't fall.
9mm is weak, but great for amount of ammo in the clip.
c/LtCdr said:5.56 is fine, as long as its military issue ammo...cant hit jack with cheap civilian ammunition. The burst doesnt give you the opportunity to aim the second two shots, with full auto you can aim as you fire. Yes, it wastes ammo, but as long as I don't have to pay for it... :rambo: :rambo:
doddsy2978 said:Blimey! The British Army are taught 'ammunition conservation', in other words, use as few rounds as is required to do the job. Are Americans not taught the same? Is this coz we are a poor nation nowadays?
03USMC said:Berreta Desert Eagle in .50 or .44 mag? Kids are we watchin to many action movies?
03USMC said:I can't speak for the U.S. Army but the USMC teaches aimmed fire. Really their kinda **** about it. The whole Rifleman thing.
In Iraq they shouldn't use beretta, its a disgrace for a soldier, what you really need in is a desert eagle .50 cal or at least a .44 . 3 shots from a beretta couldn't bring an idiot down,but 3 shot from either of desert eagles can. Also at least one man in a squad should have a backpack-fed
Xm-314 minigun, it takes a while to fire but his squad mates can defend him while it starts to fire and then he'll unleash h**l.