User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/15/2001 6:17:37 PM EDT
[#1]
"modern marvels" love that show...
No_Expert |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2001 6:23:04 PM EDT
[#2]
Awesome, Im watching.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2001 6:34:42 PM EDT
[#3]
btt. You beat me to it. I just turned it on.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2001 6:42:08 PM EDT
[#4]
I wonder how often they reair shows. I watched it (tale of the M16 on History Channel) over a year ago. A couple of years ago they started "Tales of the Gun" They told alot of cool stuff, including the History of the Tommy Gun, the Gun in General, etc...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2001 6:43:50 PM EDT
[#5]
Too bad I don't get History Channel anymore. I'd have to upgrade to the next package to get 1 channel and I have no use for the rest of those channels.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2001 9:19:47 PM EDT
[#6]
When it first aired I liked it so much I ordered a copy from The History Channel along with a few others.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2001 11:06:34 PM EDT
[#7]
Hahahaha. "The AK47 is for revolutionaries who are too poor to afford the M16."[:D]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2001 11:19:39 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: Hahahaha. "The AK47 is for revolutionaries who are too poor to afford the M16."[:D] LOL! Quote of the day! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 1:06:04 AM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: Quoted: Hahahaha. "The AK47 is for revolutionaries who are too poor to afford the M16."[:D] LOL! Quote of the day! Good show...and this does happen to be my favorite quote! medcop |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 7:46:04 AM EDT
[#10]
Yup, a lot of our dead boys in Vietnam probably wouldn't laugh at that little quote... though the Vietnamese might have been laughing when they charged our boys whose jammed rifles wouldn't fire...
Funny, I don't think the AK-47 went through the development problems that the M-16 did... and it came from those ignorant peasant tyrants on the other side of the iron curtain. Like my ARs a lot... but I LOVE my AK-74 clone! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 7:48:55 AM EDT
[#11]
Before making statements about the teething problems or lack thereof in the AK family, read a bit about them. They didn't spring fully formed from Kalashnikov's forehead. The difference is that the bugs weren't worked out in the middle of a war.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 7:56:22 AM EDT
[#12]
Yup, they weren't dumb enough to send a rifle into battle that was designed by computer nerds who didn't think things like chromed chambers were important or cleaning kits for that matter. Men died because the rifle was flawed from its design, end of story.
Early AKs had problems too, EVERY gun does, but as you correctly pointed out - they were corrected in the design and development stage. Now, if I have to go into a combat theatre without arsenal/armorer support, I'll take an AK over an AR EVERY damn day! If I have the luxury of logistics support, maybe I'll go with an AR - MAYBE! The design of the AK series is superior. The AR is a fine rifle without a doubt. The AK is an EXCEPTIONAL rifle. When you throw in the fact that you can probably manufacture a couple dozen AKs for the price of ONE AR, which is a better bargain when it comes to equipping large numbers of people. BTW, I'll take any SAR (budget AK) over any Hesse AR (budget AR) in the blink of an eye. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 8:04:00 AM EDT
[#13]
Once again, they talked about the m1 carbine being so weak that the bullets would bounce of the overcoats of chinese and n. korean soldiers. Is this a fact or an urban legend?
Edited to add: And that exploding ar10... I knew it failed the tests, but that's the first time I heard of a barrel breach. My grandpa's got an original ar10 from holland. I'm pretty sure the barrel's original equipment... should I be concerned? [grenade] |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 8:12:52 AM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: Men died because the rifle was flawed from its design, end of story. The AR is a fine rifle without a doubt. Well, which is it, a flawed design or a fine rifle? I personally wouldn't have anything to do with a weapon that I thought was a flawed design. Why are you here if you genuinely subscribe to that belief? When you throw in the fact that you can probably manufacture a couple dozen AKs for the price of ONE AR, which is a better bargain when it comes to equipping large numbers of people. Again, only relevant if you are a revolutionary too poor to afford a better weapon like the M16. [;)] The AK is undeniably a great combat weapon, especially for countries/people with financial limitations and unable to provide much, if any education and training on the use and care of the weapon. When the M16s better ergonomics and far superior accuracy are combined with the proper knowledge of how to employ and maintain it, I consider it the better weapon. That obviously does not apply to some camel jockey in the middle of Afghanistan. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 8:43:08 AM EDT
[#15]
I watch it all the time..... I bought the video!!!
Nuckles. [smash] |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 8:51:56 AM EDT
[#16]
Recorded it over a year ago, seen it about 10 times and still watch it everytime it comes on.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 9:17:22 AM EDT
[#17]
How about this quote:
"The troops were told that the M16 is a self-cleaning rifle!" Oh really? The AK is not for those who can't afford an M16, it's for those who want the very best for the money. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 10:49:57 AM EDT
[#18]
Boomer, perhaps I wasn't clear enough. The design that went to Vietnam in 1965 I believe was fatally flawed and resulted in the deaths of our men. The design TODAY is a fine weapon.
The AKs of the 50s are the same as the AKs of today. They got the design right before they sent it into the field. I'll second what Kali said, best bang for the buck other than perhaps a CETME. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 12:03:55 PM EDT
[#19]
The original design of the M16 (AR-15) by Gene Stoner wasn't flawed. What was flawed were the morons in Government who made the decision to not chock up the money for the Chrome bore and the Ammunition Specified by the manufacturer. Had the government followed Stoner's specifications, alot of soldiers would be alive today.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 12:08:58 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted: The original design of the M16 (AR-15) by Gene Stoner wasn't flawed. What was flawed were the morons in Government who made the decision to not chock up the money for the Chrome bore and the Ammunition Specified by the manufacturer. Had the government followed Stoner's specifications, alot of soldiers would be alive today. The show claims that the Army specified the chrome, but McNamara overrode the desision. He used the fact that Stoner didn't specify chrome so it didn't need it. Stoner didn't specify chrome because he didn't really know that the gun needed it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 12:23:38 PM EDT
[#21]
Furthermore, the ordnance higher-ups changed the twist spec from 1 in 10" as specified by the ammo designers to 1 in 14" in an attempt to make the weapon less accurate for comparison testing against the M14. And to make matters worse, they changed the powder spec to ball powder which was a lot dirtier, in an attempt at increasing the range of the now unstable bullet. Only problem is they didn't change things back when the gun finally went into service. The cancelling of the chrome chamber was the final nail. The moral of the story: Don't Let Politicians Involve Themselves In Weapons Design Or War In General.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 12:25:24 PM EDT
[#22]
I also noted that they explained exactly the experience in Korea (human waves of hell) that went into the design of the AR15. They need a huge amount of firepower in a short range. The targets were there, everywhere, so they didn't really need to aim very much.
Isn't it ironic that the military deleted the full auto function from the M16? Now what do we have? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 12:43:57 PM EDT
[#23]
Daishi, no worries. The one that blew up was some sort of prototype titanium steel-lined contraption. All production 10s had full steel barrels. Be nice to grandpa and get him to let ya shoot that thing.
My votes for urban legend on that carbine thing. If it will go through a car bumper a thick coat isn't going to stop it. 110 grains at 1900 feet per second or so? I don't think so. Toughest thing about the show last night was switching between it and the Victoria's Secret schtick. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 4:33:19 PM EDT
[#24]
If a thick coat could stop a 110 Grain Bullet at 1790 FPS, then why would we have to worry about most any handguns (except 44 Mag., .454 Cassul, etc.)
30 Carbine: 110 Grains/1790 fps/783 Lbs-Ft 454 Cassul: 260 Grains/1800 fps/1871 Lbs-Ft 45 Long Colt: 225 Grains/920 fps/423 Lbs-Ft 45 Automatic: 230 Grains/880 fps/396 Lbs-Ft 44 Magnum: 250 Grains/1230 fps/840 Lbs-Ft 40 S&W: 165 Grains/1130 fps/468 Lbs-Ft 10mm ACP: 175 Grains/1290 fps/649 Lbs-Ft 380 ACP: 95 Grains/955 fps/192 Lbs-Ft 38 Special +P: 130 Grains/925 fps/247 Lbs-Ft 9mm Luger: 147 Grains/990 fps/320 Lbs-Ft How about a Saturday Night Special (25 Auto.) 25 ACP: 45 Grains/815 fps/66 Lbs-Ft Hell, if half of that were true, then what would stop a a bullet with 1/13 of the power of a 30 Carbine ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 4:52:42 PM EDT
[#25]
Just for reference:
22 Short: 29 Grains/865 fps/46 Lbs-Ft 22 Long Rifle: 40 Grains/1060 fps/96 Lbs-Ft 5.56mm Q3131A: 55 Grains/3270 fps/1305 Lbs-Ft 7mm Rem. Magnum: 140 Grains/3150 fps/3085 Lbs-Ft 30-30 Winchester: 150 Grains/2480 fps/2049 Lbs-Ft 7.62x39 Russian: 123 Grains/2365 fps/1527 Lbs-Ft 30-06 Springfield: 150 Grains/3050 fps/3089 Lbs-Ft 300 Winchester Mag: 150 Grains/3260 fps/3539 Lbs-Ft 7.62x51 NATO: 147 Grains/2800 fps/2562 Lbs-Ft 8mm Mauser: 170 Grains/2360 fps/2102 Lbs-Ft 45-70 Gov't: 300 Grains/1880 fps/2355 Lbs-Ft 458 Winchester: 510 Grains/2040 fps/4712 Lbs-Ft 50 BMG: 662 Grains/2912 fps/12,081 Lbs-Ft 600 Nitro: 900 Grains/1950 fps/7357 Lbs-Ft 12 Gauge Magnum Slug: 291 Grains/1760 fps/2919 Lbs-Ft |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2001 5:41:28 PM EDT
[#26]
So many errors and omissions on that show last night!
Was 30 carbine originally a pistol cartridge? They made it sound as if Stoner invented the idea of direct gas impingement. They didn't even mention that the Nazis thought of the whole intermediate cartridge rifle concept or that Stoner got the gas system idea from them and the Russians. They also made it sound like the troops in Korea didn't have enough firepower! LOL! Browning 1919? BAR? M2? Not enough? They didn't spend nearly enough time talking about the A2 and nothing about the M4 but they did show the Land Warrior stuff (fixed bayonet as always). I thought it was hilarious when they said that the expert riflemen could fire the M14 on full auto with precision, but that the average grunt could not do anything with it. Whatever. Sounds like the US Govt. spent a ton of money on the wrong problem then. All in all, very entertaining. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2001 11:07:03 AM EDT
[#27]
Dammit, I hate it when documentaries present myth as fact. They acted as if the carbine/overcoat story was a proven event... I figured something was rotten with it... [:(]
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
