Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
3/20/2017 5:03:23 PM
Posted: 6/2/2001 5:32:13 PM EDT
I put up a post a few days ago about the G36 and was wondering. If the AR is a 40 year old design and has evolved into a 223/5.56 cal. rifle that almost all others have immulated in one way or another; why can't it be improved to stick around for another 40 years? Sure, it has it's gas issue with the chamber. But let me say in the Army I had M16 /A nothing A1 / A2 & in the civilian world AR Sp / A1 / A2 / M4 / Space Guns and I have never (knock on wood) seen a AR go down in any way because the action "gummed up." (Yes, I know how to clean a rifle.) I also must say I know it takes all flavors of firearms for us shooting fans. However, I am concerned with M16 contracts go to foreign firearm makers, Foreign firearm makers selling over hyped weapons, and lastly the people in the Armed Forces which are armed with these weapons. It has been said that the M16 way be around in service as far as 2035. (Unless the $14,000 SABRE goes down in price) And it seems to me there is no superior substitute for AR at this time. Though I know there is no such thing as a perfect firearm. How do you think the AR family should evolve to become better than it is? [:)]
Link Posted: 6/2/2001 5:44:37 PM EDT
Top Top