The He-Man AR Haters Club... Part Two

[MAD DOG]

Bear in mind that I never said the AR is a "bad" rifle.
If it was simply "bad", I would have spanked it, sent it to bed without dinner, and hoped for improved performance the next day.

[George Hill]

I used to argue with my brother about ARs vs AKs.
Both use an intermediate cartridge. Neither are full sized rifle rounds. To debate the rifle based only on the caliber is wrong.
Proof - you can get an AR chambered in .243... but its still an AR with all of the normal AR problems.
The Design was flawed.
Ergonomics are a plus - but whats the point if the gun doesnt even go Click!?!
The flaw is the rifle's gas system.
Should the gas system be redesigned to use an operating rod and gas piston to push the bolt carrier back - that would be 75% of the rifles problem, 20% the lack of a fixed ejector, and the last 5% is the chamber and locking lugs design that makes it such a chore to clean.
Other than that - its a great little .223 rifle.

------------------
You might laugh in the face of FEAR... but unless your armed, its a nervous, unconvincing, little laugh.

[Destructo6]

George, someone did make those modifications, and a few more, on an AR, they call it the G36!

[4V50 Gary]

Each gun design is a compromise and the designer(s) strives to achieve a balance between mechanical principals and their accompanying drawbacks.

For now, let's set aside the caliber argument. I don't dislike the smaller mid-size cartridge, but I believe with regards to our own we've made some serious compromises with respects to barrel twists and bullet weights.

The beauty of the AR's gas impingment system is its fewer parts. This makes for a more accurate rifle system than one which utilizes an op rod (M1 Garand type action) or an op rod attached to a gas piston (Kalashnikov type action). The designer must accept that only certain propellants may be used lest the system suffers total breakdown. That was the failure which led to many U.S. casulties during the Viet Nam war.

Going to the Garand or Kalashnikov type action with a gas piston will produce a gun which is less propellant sensitive. However, the tradeoff is weight, more moving parts and less accuracy. While some rebuke this with shooting feats of their M14s, which are true, to keep that same M14 in top notch condition will require careful maintenance (which can include rebedding). It's a higher maintenance gun than the AR type action and this is one reason why the AR is superceding the M14 in matches.

For myself, the greatest weakness of the AR is its poor magazine design. Compare the magazine's thin aluminum lips to the that of the HK. While the mag of the FN-FAL isn't reinforced, its steel composition makes it a stronger magazine less prone to denting. Also consider how the NVA/VC or Chinese use to insert a magazine into their AK and then use the gun as a makeshift stool. Can't get tougher than an AK mag and that's not something to be tried with the AR.

I like the AR and enjoy shooting them a lot (especially my Southpaw version) but the AK will outlast it.

[PJ11B3VF7]

Gents, here are my two cents. The M16/M4 is not a main battle rifle. Ok, so 5.56 will not reach out as far as 7.62 or retain as much energy at longer ranges like 7.62 will.

Terrific.

Is it more prone to jamming than the AK? Yes. More than the FAL? I don't know, never shot one. More than the M14? Once again I don't know. My experience with the M14 was in its M21 configuration.

On the other hand, the M16/M4 is extremely reliable as long as you do your part. The only real problems I've ever had with mine (issue and personal one) was with the magazines (bent feed lips, weakened springs, bent and dinged up mag body). It is far more accurate than the AK-47. Is it more accurate than the AK-74? Idon't know, I've put only about 200 rds through a 74.
Would I stake my life on it. Yes. As long as I do my part, maintain it, clean it regularly and oil it I have the utmost confidence in the M16/M4.
My "combat" experience is limited to Desert Shield/Storm where I carried an M16A2 and later on an M249. As long as I did my part, they both worked just fine.
As far as clearing the weapon after a river crossing, that's simple and doesn't require that the weapon is cleared.
Opinions are like "noses" everyone has one and that is mine.
Have a good day, and I hope that Florida re-counts their votes in a hurry, the wait is driving me crazy.

[DUDE]

my Story is not FUBAR go look at it http://web.wwa.com/~dvelleux/m16rifle.html and as EchoFiveMike said the British use the M16A1 and M16A2 and the M4 Carbine and have been use it from the 70s till today

------------------
Technical Sergeant Andrew Robert Smith
CO LRRP Team
of the Second Ranger Battalion Charlie Company in WW2 Online.

[Ken Cook]

Ok, I'll stick my neck out and risk the flames.
From what I can see, the main complaints about the AR-15 are;
1. Caliber related (which is supposedly thrown out for the sake of this thread.)
2. Reliability of the rifle.
3. Design flaws.
4. Lack of range and accuracy when compared to the M14 or other .308 rifles. (this is really part of problem number 1.)

To address 2 first, the reliability of the rifle is always mentioned in the same sentence with "as long as you do your part."
Well what makes this different than any OTHER firearm?
If you don't take care of it, it won't take care of you. Is the AR harder to maintain than the M14? Well, I own both, and serviced both as a Marine Armorer and I don't see a lot of difference from the user's perspective.
They're both a PITA to clean.
3. Design flaws?
The only thing I saw mentioned as a design flaw was the gas system. It's not a "flaw" if it works, and it DOES work. It may not be your favorite flavor of gas system, but that doesn't mean it's flawed. What other flaws do any of you think there are?

Finally 1 and 4.
Power, range and accuracy.
Well yes. the .308 is more powerful than the .223, but on th other hand the .308 is a serious wimp compared to the .460 Weatherby Mag. What's the point?
Getting shot is getting shot, and I don't think there's ever been a case of someone getting hit by a .223 and immediatly saying with relief, "Thank GOD it wasn't a .308!"
Range and accuracy?
The black gun is now beating the PANTS off of the M14 in long range competition and now dominates the 1000 yard range.
True, you have to do a lot of mods on the AR to get it to DO that, but a stock, service grade M14 ain't gonna be in the running for 1st place either, ya know?
Will the .223/5.56 kill you just as dead at 1000 yards as the .308/7.62? Probably, but I won't volunteer to stand out there and be the guy to find out!
The AR-15 was designed as a battle rifle, and once "the facts of life" were figured out, it's served VERY well in that capacity.
If you don't like it, that's fine, I personally hate SKS's and AK47's.
They're good for what they're intended for, I just don't like'em.
But I give them the respect they're due.


------------------
Your mind is your primary weapon.
USE IT!

[George Hill]

No - it all comes down to your #3 Design Flaw. Because #2 is caused by #3. #4 is because of #1.

As Mad Dog said before - It defecates where it eats. Thats a major problem.
It allows carbon to build up where carbon should not be. Lack of a fixed ejector is an invitation to problems that I have seen - Correia has seen - and others have seen. The TINIEST of particals jam it up so bad as to render it TOTALLY useless. Dang thing doesnt even make a decent club.

"As long as you do your part..."
This is a WEAPON... Not a Bench Rest comp-rifle. A weapon gets used and abused... not treated like a Fabrige Egg. "Doing your part" should including pissing into the action to rinse the mud out of it - and not much more.

[MAD DOG]

Reliability.
The be all, end all for real combat weapons.

And then we have the AR15 Insult Rifle. Sheesh.

I purchased a brand new one, and it malfunctioned continuously after the first 200 rounds went downrange. Failure to eject.
Big malfs, everytime.
Traded out bolt groups from working guns, no dice. Cleaned it with a fine toothed comb, and it still didn't work. I am reasonably accomplished as a gunsmith, but could NOT get it to work at all. Wore out the manual trying to make it happen.
I took it to two different AR armorers, both with years of USMC experience/expertise at same. Neither could make it operate for love nor money even after detail stripping it and going through each part piecemeal.
One suggested we unscrew the front sight, and put a new gun under it.

Lets not forget the other gripes, including the flimsyness of the weapon itself. Aluminum alloy receiver, recoil spring in the flimsy stock, etc. NOT a bayonet platform at all, as proven repeatedly.

Y'all can make all of the excuses you want for continuing to own one, but I for one have wised up.
Speaking as a shooter, design engineer and gunsmith, I lack both the anal compulsive attributes and the "spare time" necessary for the care and feeding of so ridiculous a system. It defecates where it ingests, alrighty, and that is not the way to go.

[This message has been edited by MAD DOG (edited November 08, 2000).]

[DUDE]

you need one more bit of info: ther are women in the U.S. Military now not like in the 50s and 60s and a lot of women don't like to carry or shoot a 9lbs M14.

------------------
Technical Sergeant Andrew Robert Smith
CO LRRP Team
of the Second Ranger Battalion Charlie Company in WW2 Online.

[RikWriter]

Sorry Mad Dog (well, not really sorry) but not only can I not join your club but after serving as a light infantry soldier, and after having owned and/or fired extensively (in range and field conditions) HK91s, FN FALs, M1As, different models of the AK47, Galils and Steyr AUGs, I still prefer the AR15 system to any of the above. The FAL comes in a close second, but I am still more accurate with the AR, and for me, the way I was taught to be a rifleman, accuracy is King. Reliability is also crucial, but I have never had reliability problems with ARs using good ammo. And by good ammo, I mean non-Eastern Bloc factory ammo. Not just commercial ammo, because I mostly shoot military surplus. The only ammo I have had problem with out of any AR is Russian ammo, which has that annoying lacquer coating.
I know some people have magazine problems, but being in the infantry taught me quickly how to recognize a bad magazine, and I bought enough when they were cheap to be able to afford to discard bad ones.

[MAD DOG]

Dude, you wrote (I would say scrawled, but it is screen text):
"you need one more bit of info: ther are women in the U.S. Military now not like in the 50s and 60s and a lot of women don't like to carry or shoot a 9lbs M14."

My only retort is that neither women or ARs belong in the combative branches of the military. They are too fragile, and require too much maintenance.
Vive la difference!

[George Hill]

Rik, I too was a Light Fighter. Light I taught me to make the best of what I had at hand... Namely the AR series in different forms.
Being out of the service - and able to objectivly evaluate everything and bein gout long enough to forget my mental conditioning about the M16 series... I woke up to realize that almost everyone else has a better gun for battle. Even an SKS is better suited to fighting on a real battlefield.

[DUDE]

well MAD DOG women are in combat and so is the M16 so you need to GIT OVER IT the M16 is here to STAY. and the M16 is a good gun and any time you say it's a bad gun i will be here to say it's a good gun

------------------
Technical Sergeant Andrew Robert Smith
CO LRRP Team
of the Second Ranger Battalion Charlie Company in WW2 Online.

[4V50 Gary]

Women in combat? While on one hand I really don't care to have women serve in a combat unit, the COWARD in me says "Better them than me!"

[WalterGAII]

So, how many of you big bad soldiers have been in battle LATELY??? I've fired thousands of rounds through my Bush Shorty, mostly my reloads. It never fails, and its accuracy is outstanding.

I don't consider my AR a battle rifle or an assault rifle, as I'm not planning on going into battle, nor am I planning on assaulting anyone.

If you don't like 'em, don't buy 'em. Spend more time getting a better education; you'll be glad that you did.

[mussi]

An AR is a cool gun. It works, we have lots of parts for it, and we
can fire our most beloved 5.56 ammo.

I can do that with a SIG 550, which almost never jams, has a useful
collapsible stock, great sights and full auto for the numerous small
close in social situations that airse. And it as a rail for a scope.
And the mags have a built-in coupling system.

And - we don't need a forward assist.

Drawbacks of the 550 family:

a. Not ambidextrous (bolt latch is on the left side); to make it a
lefty gun you need a new upper receiver and bolt

b. No drums, or 40-shot mags. 30 is max.

c. No national match triggers. For HP compo here, minimum trigger
weight is 3 lbs, IIRC.

d. No threads on barrel, flash hider is integral to barrel. Though,
Bruegger and Thomet has a silencer mounting for this 'problem'.

e. Only .223, no similar rifle in 9mm, or .308.

f. Quite flimsy. A SIG 510 could be abused a lot.

g. Barrel gets glowing red after sending through 5 mags in full-auto.
No barrel quickchange, gun has to be sent in to the Army armory or
SIG.

[MAD DOG]

if I wuz better edicatid, i woulna bot no AR to begin wit.

DUDE, Once again, I never said it was a "bad gun". Please RE-read my post at the top of this column.

The whole point of my ongoing (well reasoned, well written, lucid, only occasionally mispelled) diatribe is that I am well educated, I bought some ARs, and now I am very sorry I did.
I am only really interested in weapons that are VERY reliable and fully functional under a broad range of conditions, and I have been sorely disappointed in the ARs.
I want others to know that they too, can be sucked in by the glamour and hype surrounding this POS, and Caveat Emptor!

I recall my first experiences with ARs.
After taking a new weapon out of the wrapper and sighting it in, and then having nothing but problems with it in the first three days of jungle time, in shear disgust I shoved it muzzle first into the river mud. It made a nice blurping sound.
I then unpacked my always reliable 12 gauge Remington model 31 shotgun which I had brought with me "just in case", and never looked back.
I am firmly convinced that had I continued using an AR in that environment, I would not have returned.
Twenty years later, after listening to all of the latter day accolades of the AR, I ventured once again into what was to be yet another miasma of malfunctionality.

[Chad Young]

Tell you guys what - anyone unhappy with their AR series gun can send it to me and I will give it a good home.

Seriously, If I went into battle and had to pick one gun, I think the Valmet M76 in .223 would beat out the AR series of weapons.

[krept]

I think some of the BGs in Somalia were saying "Thank Allah that wasn't a .308" from what I heard...

I also heard that some in Desert Storm traded in their M16A2s for M14s for the longer ranged shots...

My personal preference of the two is the AK in the caliber Kalashnikov designed it for. For the time being if it's past 50 yards or so, I'll think a looong while before engaging. Until I get my favorite, the M1A, that is...

[Turk]

Here we go again. M-16 verus the world.

Let me state my experience with a M-16.

Vietnam 68-69, 173rd Abn Bdge Sep)M-60 gunner, Squad Leader, Hawk Team Leader (Ambush Team) and Infantry Plt. Sarg.

When ever I pulled the trigger of my 16 it fired when I held the trigger back in full auto it fired. I never had my weapon jam or anyone in my Platoon jam. And never heard of any in the company jamming.

I've seen the 16 in water, covered with mud and dust also used it a couple weeks in sand dunes in the Bon Song costal area. They always fired.

Concerning one of the posts that the SKS is a better rifle for a real battle field. All I can say about that is "what part of the galaxy do you live on?" because I never seen anyone standing in line to trade their 16 for a SKS. It doesn't even come close.

Also about the 5.56 NATO being a minor caliber. True smaller that a 7.62 NATO but I would bet if you've seen a chest exit wound from a M193 ball round it's a little meaning less if you're the one that's been hit.

If you take care of your rifle (cleaning) it will take care of you.

Failures of the 16's early use was the Powders fault not the rifles fault.

It would be interesting to know how may soldiers this really impacted. Even while in Vietnam all I ever heard was this happened to my buddy in the Cav. or what ever unit. No first hand experience.

My Plt. Sarg (my mentor) and who I took his place was with the 1st. Cav. for his 1st tour and was in the battle of the I Drang. The Cav's butt was in a real sling during this battle and bad enough for the commander to give the Broken Arrow call sign. He never said anything bad about the 16 being a problem and failing them. He was finest soldier I've ever known. Would you believe his basic ammo load. One magazine in the rifle and one in his pocket. As he stated to me one time his job was to supervise the firefight not fight it and this he did well.

You guys can discuss this subject forever but in my experience give me the 16 any day.

Turk

[George Hill]

Wow real military experience... Your not unique there.

Never heard of an jam in your entire company?
I find that hard to believe. Possible - it is. But I just cant see it actually happening.

Of course no one will trade a 1,000 rifle for a 125 dollar rifle... The rifle might suck - but it still holds a value.

[Zorro]

You have to wet nurse the damn thing!

CLEAN IT in the morning! CLEAN IT at LUNCH! CLEAN IT at DINNERTIME! CLEAN IT in the MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT because you had a nightmare it wasn't clean enough!!!

Then make sure you got some of "The Good" magazines AND make sure they do take a hard blow of get some dirt in them or some water or sand!

M-16 when you have a lot of things to worry about it adds about 50 more!

[DUDE]

my uncle was a U.S. Navy CB in Vietnam and he use the M16. and then he was in Panama and he did Covert Ops with the Rangers and the Green Berets and he use the M16 ther to. and when i told him that i had got an AR15 he said good it's one of the best Military Rifles in the World today

------------------
Technical Sergeant Andrew Robert Smith
CO LRRP Team
of the Second Ranger Battalion Charlie Company in WW2 Online.

[Shin-Tao]

Been in battle lately, huh?
Been in battle EVER?


Since this is an Infantry weapon let's hear a bit more from former Infantrymen.


1)The M16 is so accurate!
Answer. Accuracy isn't the number one requirement of an assault rifle.

2)It works fine if you clean it!
Answer. A service rifle should still work fine even when you don't have the time to clean it. Like when people are shooting at you.

3)It's very light!
Answer. And breaks.

4)I've fired blah, blah number of rounds through MY AR, and it works fine.
Answer. Not while on your belly in the dirt crawling through God knows what.

Education. Only the "educated" know enough to like the AR.
Now what course teaches you about assault rifles? None.

Like the AR? Fine. Then enlist and try it out where it is supposed to be used.