# M-14 or M-16?



## MacArther (Jul 12, 2006)

I have heard from many people that the M-16 is a decently accurate weapon out to its combat limit, but that recently it is being found lacking in the stopping power when it goes against fanatics with bombs on their bodies who are intent on doing damage. To this I pose the question, in Iraq, would you prefer a M-16 or a M-14? I know I would have less ammo, but I would take the old M-14. Less ammo means I'll have to careful of how I use my shots, but the .308 is probably going to make up for the lighter weight of fire headed towards any given individual. Heck, just for kicks or close range survival I'd take a .44 or .50 caliber Desert Eagle, just to make sure a downed baddie stays down, or that I'm not defenseless if my gun jams or runs out of ammo. Any way, what would your choice be? This does not inclued the M4 carbine, just the M-16 and the subsequent attatchments it has, the same going for the M-14 not being the M-21 sniper variant.


----------



## schwarzpanzer (Jul 12, 2006)

I'd go for the M14 for even CQB (I'm a crap shot at long range ). I like it's penetration and stopping power and IIRC you can get them with folding stocks. Ammo may be a slight problem though (would have to ask nicely for GPMG ammo?).

I wouldn't like your chances with a Magnum - roomclearing yes, streetfighting no.

I'd go for an AK or an Uzi/Sterling myself.

I don't suppose the Mini-14 is included?

I've never liked the M16, particularly the 1st versions.

The M16A2 with the SS109 is better, but I still just don't like it - particulary the 3-round burst setting, though I know some do (weirdos! ).

I don't like the 5.56mm round, but love the 7.62 which I suppose is the key to this poll.

I've heard of the 5.56 Corbon is good, anyone got any info on that?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 13, 2006)

Well having been someone who has fired both and someone who was trained on the M-16 in Basic Training and beyond, I would go with the M-16. It is an overall better weapon and the stopping power is just fine. Ive seen it first hand. You dont really need the 7.62 for a personal weapon to take down the enemy. They fall just fine, trust me I know.



McArther said:


> To this I pose the question, in Iraq, would you prefer a M-16 or a M-14? I know I would have less ammo, but I would take the old M-14. Less ammo means I'll have to careful of how I use my shots, but the .308 is probably going to make up for the lighter weight of fire headed towards any given individual.



Well I would still want an M-16. You say you would have to take better aimed shots with the M-14 due to to less ammo. Got news for you, as someone who spent 14 months in Iraq, you want the more ammo and you dont have time to take the careful aimed shots (leave that for the snipers and the M-1 Abrams tanks).

Iraq is fast paced urban combat. It is not being fought out in the desert where you can see your oponent for miles away. It is hit and run, and the guy with the quicker shots and most ammo is the guy that lives.


----------



## lesofprimus (Jul 13, 2006)

I voted M-16 as well, although the M-4 is the more viable version.... We talked about this before, and this is what I would do to my M-16....

The Barrett M468 Conversion Kit....

The core component of the Barrett M468 is Remington's new 6.8mm SPC (Special Purpose Cartridge). Indeed, the rifle's name comes from the combination of M4 and 6.8mm. Introduced by Remington Arms in 2004, the 6.8mm (.270 caliber) SPC is more lethal than the 5.56mm cartridge, without a significant increase in overall bullet dimensions. Though slightly larger than the standard M-16 cartridge (6.8x43mm as opposed to 5.56x45mm), current issue M-16 magazines can easily be reconfigured to accept the new cartridge. In addition, while the SPC has a slightly lower muzzle velocity than the 5.56mm cartridge, its larger mass makes it ballistically similar to the lighter 5.56mm round (in terms of accuracy and bullet drop), and it delivers half again as much kinetic energy. In real terms, this means that the 6.8mm SPC has the same relative trajectory as the 5.56mm (which allows for the M468 to be fired and treated essentially like a 5.56mm M-16), but with 50% more stopping power, and a bullet speed of 2650 feet per second from a sixteen and one-half inch barrel, delivering 1715 foot-pounds of energy, with a six hundred meter effective range...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 13, 2006)

Agreed on the M-4 Les and damn the M-468 fricken looks sweet.


----------



## JohnnyL (Jul 21, 2006)

The muzzle velocity of the .223 is a good bit faster than that of the .308, it's supposed to have more energy, etc etc, more ammo, lighter, but I'd just want an old-fashioned big-bore rifle, you know?  It'd be a pain to lug around the battlefield, but it makes for a hell of a security blanket.


----------



## Glider (Jul 21, 2006)

Of the two I would go for the M16. If I had a free choice, then the latest SA80.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 22, 2006)

Same here.


----------



## mosquitoman (Jul 23, 2006)

I'd go for an Ak personally- I'm left handed so I wouldn't be able to use an SA80


----------



## lesofprimus (Jul 23, 2006)

The AK-74M is the newest generation of the AK-47 model, and is considered to be superior in everyway, owing to the smaller cartridge size...


----------



## Glider (Jul 23, 2006)

mosquitoman said:


> I'd go for an Ak personally- I'm left handed so I wouldn't be able to use an SA80



I do't want to dissapoint you but if your left handed you would be in as much trouble with an AK47, which I believe is also right hand only.

Happy to be corrected by anyone with more experience than I.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 23, 2006)

lesofprimus said:


> The AK-74M is the newest generation of the AK-47 model, and is considered to be superior in everyway, owing to the smaller cartridge size...




Downrange in Iraq plenty of guys started using ht Ak because it was so abundant and worked so well in the desert.


----------



## lesofprimus (Jul 23, 2006)

The AK-47 can be fired left handed, as the Liberians and Somolians have proven (Spray and Pray)...


----------



## lesofprimus (Jul 23, 2006)

The thing I liked about the -47 was the ease of field stripping and cleaning, as well as the ruggedness of it... The heavier cartridge also allows for "brush hunting" where the 5.56 round will skip and bounce and the 7.62 goes right on through...

It was my preferred weapon of choice while on active duty....


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 23, 2006)

Understandably.


----------



## schwarzpanzer (Aug 3, 2006)

I don't know how anyone can like the SA80.

The AK74M isn't the newest, there's also the Abakan (AN94 IIRC?) and others.

2-round bursts - not a bad idea?

Also there's a new counterweight that is moved by the gas piston on somew models - reducing (or even cutting out completely!) recoil.

An SAS test of the AK74 said something like; 'on full-auto, the muzzle brake means the LoS doesn't shift'.8) 

A lot of Russians issued with the AK74 have gone back to the AK47, for it's stopping power.

I like the G36 and Steyr AUG. They are also ambidexterous. The G36 is strangely comfortable, but certainly doesn't look it.

Has anyone got any info on the Corbon 5.56mm round please?

I think Fedorov's 6.5mm, which was the 1st intermediate cartridge, is probably the best size. The 2nd best would be the EM2's 7.7mm. The 3rd? - the 7.92 Kurz Patrone.


----------



## P38 Pilot (Aug 6, 2006)

I voted for M-16. I haven't fired one, but from what I have heard, its a good weapon.

Personally, I have fired an AK-47 that belongs to my dad's cousin.(Its only semi...) Its a very good gun with some kick to it. It can get heavy when you have all the ammo, which is probably why I would prefer a -16 or M-4. 

Les is right. Its a rugged weapon and is pretty good. Knockdown power is definetly a tribute in this rifle. But if were a soldier walking miles with heavy gear on me, I would want a rifle thats light weight, using more ammo in a magazine. 

Also, I would want a rifle with less recoil so I could line up my shots.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 6, 2006)

Apparently the Israeli operators like the AK-47 too. It was THE weapon to use when they attacked the Eygptian Green Island, because they came from under-water. They wanted a weapon that worked when they got out.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 7, 2006)

I did not find the AK-47 that bad when it came to recoil. There was practically no recoil. Maybe a bit more than the M-16 but not much.

It also was not very heavy in my opinion. Atleast no heavier than any other weapon of its class.


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 7, 2006)

Have to agree 100% with u there Adler....


----------



## P38 Pilot (Aug 7, 2006)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I did not find the AK-47 that bad when it came to recoil. There was practically no recoil. Maybe a bit more than the M-16 but not much.
> 
> It also was not very heavy in my opinion. Atleast no heavier than any other weapon of its class.



Maybe I was it a was two years ago when I fired it. Ill have to see about firing it again sometime.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 7, 2006)

Maybe its because you are too small to fire it.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 7, 2006)

Just kidding P38.

Size really does not matter when shooting a rifle, it is how you hold it and your fireing techniques.

In basic training they go over so many of these things over and over and over again that you get so tired of it, but when the time comes to fire you dont even realize it and it almost feels natural or like a surprise that the weapon fired.


----------



## MacArther (Aug 8, 2006)

Oy, I've fired a Paintball marker that has a pretty harsh reply, and I fired my friends .38 caliber pistol. Question is, how bad is a M-14 in recoil, cause I just love the Garand and its subsequent modifications and evolutions.

PS Anyone else seen the Italian variant of the Garand that looks like a M-14 but can have a skeleton stock and a grenade launcher?


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 8, 2006)

As someone who owns AR-15 (20in), CAR-15 (16in), Springfield M1A (civie M14), Bulgarian AK, L1A1, Enfield, and has shot numerous others, I vote for CAR-15 (M4) if I had to carry it. However, M14 is still my favorite. You can't abuse these things enough. While none of these have severe recoil, I would say my AK with slant brake is the easiest to keep on target. The recoil is more like a long push and recoil is straight back with NO muzzle flip. In fact, I would love to see a slow mo video of this rifle firing, as I believe the muzzle break to be so efficient that I bet it actually dips down slightly. Not near as accurate as any of the other rifles however. But then again, for battle purposes within 200 yards any of them are utterly deadly in halfway competent hands.

Here is my latest lust. Just gotta convince myself I needs it and not just wants it.


----------



## MacArther (Aug 8, 2006)

Gotta love the PDW, just cool and the round actually goes out quite a ways. I'll pull out my fire arms book and compare specs for the two discussed weapons, as well as throw in the PDW. The PDW with its 5.7mm round and small standard barrel goes past 200 meters, although the accurate range probably would not fall at the high end of the spectrum past 200 meters. The M-14 gets 800 plus meters easy. Finally, the 
M-16A1 (the one listed in my book) gets a little over 500 meters. In compairison, the De Lisle Carbine of WW2 (one of my favorite weapons of all time) was getting a little over 400 meters on a .45 caliber cartrige, fired from the same magazine as the 1911 Colt, and all of this with a suppressor. The M-14 has a muzzle velocity of 595 mps (the Italian version, the M59 getting 823 mps with the 7.62mm NATO round), while the M-16 doubles it at 1000 mps, and the PDW is in the middle at 850 mps. The M-14 has a theoretical cyclic rate of 750 rpm, without allowance for a barrel change (which would be neccessary with that many bullets being fired). The M-16A1 has a rate of 800 rpm, also not allowing for cool down or barrel changing. The PDW has a variable rpm going from 800 to 1000 rpms. However, a truly monsterous RPM is achieved by the XM-214, which can be set to fire from 2000 to 10,000 rpm of NATO 5.56mm rounds. I would like the M-14 at longer ranges, because I could control my fire easier and "reach out at touch someone" ALOT better. Also, a 7.62 round will retain its kenetic energy better than a 
5.56 NATO round ala objects with more mass retaining their velocity better and being harder to slow down (basic I think from "Objects in motion will remain in motion unless acted upon" theory). As per the size and weight problems, there would have eventually been a folding/skeleton stock version of the M-14 in the US inventory had it been around long enough as the primary infantry rifle. The M-16(A1 in this case) is better for close in brawls, although I would still be wary of the light round's stopping power. Personally, I'd take a PDW or the new Israeli battle rifle (supposedly as accurate as some bolt rifles at quite a good range, although I still haven't heard the caliber) in lieu of the M-16 if I could not get a M-14 or variant there of.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 8, 2006)

Look the PS90 is not comparable weapon to either the M14 nor the M4. However, the cool factor is off the scale for close quarters. What bothers me about the PS90 is the availability of rounds if you don't reload. I do.8) Again, back to the poll, M14 vs M16? I take the M16. I'm fat, out of shape and don't want to lug around a 10lb rifle when I can carry a 6.5lb carbine that smacks *** all day long.

I'll take all the criticism that can be heaped upon me, but you better be in real shape and have lugged your gear on a 20 mile hike before you can claim that a few pounds "aint nuthin". I know better.


----------



## MacArther (Aug 8, 2006)

Been there done that, and there are intermitent full out sprints at times. I have basically done the 20 miles from the number of times I traversed a large scenario paintball field once. Let me tell you, 10lb marker, 20lb pod set fully loaded are not fun to lug around. Added to this is the bursts of speed. But I digress, I would still go for the M-14, cause I'm used to lifting weight (although my back won't like me afterwards).


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 9, 2006)

Carried an M-60 Machine gun for 12 miles one time. Damn that sucked!


----------



## 102first_hussars (Aug 9, 2006)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Just kidding P38.
> 
> Size really does not matter when shooting a rifle, it is how you hold it and your fireing techniques.
> 
> In basic training they go over so many of these things over and over and over again that you get so tired of it, but when the time comes to fire you dont even realize it and it almost feels natural or like a surprise that the weapon fired.




Size does matter, dont you ever see those kids say in Somalia who couldnt even hold the weapon to there shoulder? they had to fire from the hip


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 9, 2006)

102first_hussars said:


> Size does matter, dont you ever see those kids say in Somalia who couldnt even hold the weapon to there shoulder? they had to fire from the hip



No Hussars it does not. If you are taught the proper firing techniques, it does not matter how big you are. 

We had a girl in Basic Training that were 4ft 6in and she shot 39 out of 40 on the range for an Expert qualification. 

You just have to be properly taught how to fire a weapon.


----------



## MacArther (Aug 9, 2006)

> Carried an M-60 Machine gun for 12 miles one time. Damn that sucked!



Did ya at least get to pop some insurgents as payback for your toil? Heck, did ya shoot some kid tv show stars (i.e. the dreaded purple dinasour, the british multicolor things with shapes on their heads)? Cause ya need a reward after that.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 9, 2006)

No response worth giving for that post...


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 9, 2006)

Why...yes. I have seen those kids from Somalia. In fact, here is a recently judged street fight with clips of the latest fashions, proper fighting stances and attire.


----------



## P38 Pilot (Aug 9, 2006)

No offense taken Alder. You are right. I was smaller, but I have definitely gotten taller and stronger and I think I might be able to fire from the shoulder.



102first_hussars said:


> Size does matter, dont you ever see those kids say in Somalia who couldnt even hold the weapon to there shoulder? they had to fire from the hip


Funny thing is, I had to fire from the hip because of my size when I did shoot it. It was hard for me two years ago to fire from the shoulder!


----------



## P38 Pilot (Aug 9, 2006)

MacArther said:


> Did ya at least get to pop some insurgents as payback for your toil? Heck, did ya shoot some kid tv show stars (i.e. the dreaded purple dinasour, the british multicolor things with shapes on their heads)? Cause ya need a reward after that.


 
Well that was the craziest response to a soldier who had to carry a M-60 12 miles! M-60 is one heavy machine gun which is probably why they started issuing the M-249!

But at the end were you able to fire it though Alder? That would have been awesome firing a machine gun like that!


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 9, 2006)

I think Macarther was being slighty sincere, cause Ive hauled an M-60 before, and 12 miles is a long walk...


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 9, 2006)

Hey I can't believe that some of the vets on this site didn't find the Monrovian Street fighting of some humor. I missed again.


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 9, 2006)

I hadnt clicked it yet, but I will now to make u happy...


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 9, 2006)

Dont know if u know this or not, but I was in Liberia during all the fun there... Its all funny unless they're spraying that sh*t at u and ur Teammates....

There is a video floating around this website of those still shots in action.... Lemme see if I can find it...

No luck, but I found this one on my comp.... This clip signifies why u should always take cover....


----------



## P38 Pilot (Aug 9, 2006)

lesofprimus said:


> I think Macarther was being slighty sincere, cause Ive hauled an M-60 before, and 12 miles is a long walk...


Long especially if your caring one heavy piece of equipment 

To me the clip you posted was funny because there those guys were firing what looked like to be a .50 caliber, then their all scrambling into their truck like a bunch of frightened rabbits after being shot at!


----------



## P38 Pilot (Aug 9, 2006)

Take that back, it looks like a 20mm...


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 9, 2006)

And they were not just being fired at, but 2 of them died from gunshot wounds....


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2006)

lesofprimus said:


> Dont know if u know this or not, but I was in Liberia during all the fun there... Its all funny unless they're spraying that sh*t at u and ur Teammates....
> 
> There is a video floating around this website of those still shots in action.... Lemme see if I can find it...
> 
> No luck, but I found this one on my comp.... This clip signifies why u should always take cover....



Pegged the Ahole sitting on the cab with the smug face of immunity. How high do you have to be to sit next to 12.7mm with no ear protection and not flinch. Answer: Pretty friggin' high.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 10, 2006)

P38 Pilot said:


> Well that was the craziest response to a soldier who had to carry a M-60 12 miles! M-60 is one heavy machine gun which is probably why they started issuing the M-249!
> 
> But at the end were you able to fire it though Alder? That would have been awesome firing a machine gun like that!



Um I fired the M-60 everyday actually. Its the standard door gun on our UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters. My unit just recieved the M-240H and we will start using them from our aircraft in September.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 10, 2006)

Those are 2 of my favorite pics that I have taken by the way. Well the bottom one someone else took of me....


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2006)

Cool pics. Those are keepers.


----------



## MacArther (Aug 10, 2006)

Isn't the 240H the the 5.56mm Mimi, or whatever their calling the SAW nowadays?


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 10, 2006)

Macarther, are u aware that on the previous page, ur comment concerning the M-60 was taken as an insult???

Go back and read the posts and reply accordingly...


----------



## MacArther (Aug 11, 2006)

No, I wasn't. Normally I pick up on these things, but I've been under the weather, so sorry if I was insulting in any way, cause it wasn't meant as such. If you'll excuse me, I must now mope around about my mistake, cause insults are never good, and now *I* feel angry cause I made an insulting mistake.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 11, 2006)

The M-240H is just a M-240 that has been modified for use from an aircraft with a butterfly grip like on the M-60D.

The M-240H is a 7.62 Gas-operated, open bolt machine gun. It can fire up to 950 rounds a minute but atleast in the Door Gunner training program we fire only up 200 rounds a minute. The weapon weighs in at 27lb approx. 

The great thing about the M-240H is if our aircrat goes down we can convert the M-240H quickly into an infantry version for easier aiming and fireing from the ground. We could not do with that the old M-60Ds that we had.

Versions of the M-240:

M-240: coaxial version developed for the M-1 Abrams tank.

M-240E-1 D: pintle mount version

M-240G: Infantry version used by the USMC

M-240B: Infantry version used by the US Army. Includes Recoil Buffer and Heat guard.

M-240H: Door gunner version for Aircraft. Improved and developed in development since 2000.


----------



## JF3D (Aug 11, 2006)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> The M-240H is just a M-240 that has been modified for use from an aircraft with a butterfly grip like on the M-60D.
> 
> Versions of the M-240:
> 
> ...




240D is the coax for M-60/M-1/M-2/3. M240 is based on the FN MAG which has been around since the late 50's and was a contender in the Weapons Boards that selected the M60. Sadly we picked the BUORD POS that foisted the M60 on us. By the way, the MAG is derived from the Browning Automatic Rifle in which the action was used as the basis so it goes back a little bit farther then 2000.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 11, 2006)

MacArther said:


> No, I wasn't. Normally I pick up on these things, but I've been under the weather, so sorry if I was insulting in any way, cause it wasn't meant as such. If you'll excuse me, I must now mope around about my mistake, cause insults are never good, and now *I* feel angry cause I made an insulting mistake.



Wow. Les has more power than I thought. Les is like Obi Wan in Episode I when chasing the changling into the bar and the guy offers to sell Obi Wan death sticks. Les, I mean Obi Wan, then performs Jedi magic and makes the drug dealer "rethink his life".

Now that's power to be reckoned with.


----------



## MacArther (Aug 11, 2006)

Ummm, no I really am sorry, and I really am angry at myself for not catching any insulting words or phrases that I may have put together on accident.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 11, 2006)

You are too nice Mac. Don't worry about insulting people here. Nobody likes you anyway.


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 11, 2006)

Hehe...


----------



## MacArther (Aug 11, 2006)

YAYYYY, I'm hated!!! WHOHOOOOO!!!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 12, 2006)

JF3D said:


> 240D is the coax for M-60/M-1/M-2/3. M240 is based on the FN MAG which has been around since the late 50's and was a contender in the Weapons Boards that selected the M60. Sadly we picked the BUORD POS that foisted the M60 on us. By the way, the MAG is derived from the Browning Automatic Rifle in which the action was used as the basis so it goes back a little bit farther then 2000.



No the Delta is a pintle mount version, so that it could be mounted on...

you guessed it Pintle Mounts!

We used them on our Blackhawks (well my unit did not because we still used the M-60D until this month, but other units that I worked with) until they came out with the improved pintle mount version the M-240H.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 12, 2006)

As for the M-60, I loved it. It never broke, quit, or jammed on me the whole 14 months that I was in Iraq, and I was accurate as hell with it. Could hit anything I had to flying at 150 knots, 50ft over the ground.


----------



## P38 Pilot (Aug 12, 2006)

Cool. 



MacArther said:


> YAYYYY, I'm hated!!! WHOHOOOOO!!!



Ummm.....I sure did miss some didnt I.....


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 22, 2006)

It's okay P-38. Sometimes that happens when your from Alabama.

I sure miss home.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 22, 2006)

Its normal.


----------

