Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 10/10/2004 9:09:30 AM EST
The M-16 is OK but it looks like the military wants something that can really take a beating and not
malfunction.

Galil is simple very reliable, rework some of the ergonomics and you are good to go.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 9:11:12 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 9:11:40 AM EST
The Galil, based off the Finnish Valmet, based off the AK.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 9:14:02 AM EST
uhh.. no.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 9:16:28 AM EST
The AK is only superior if you have an army of illiterate peasants. Otherwise its worth it to field a better weapons system.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 9:34:46 AM EST

Originally Posted By mike45acp:
The M-16 is OK but it looks like the military wants something that can really take a beating and not
malfunction.

Galil is simple very reliable, rework some of the ergonomics and you are good to go.



NO!

1) The M16 rarely malfunctions if it's kept clean, something that all US military personell are taught to do in Basic Training, and EXPECTED to do regularly when issued any weapon.

2) If the Galil is so great, how come the Israelis switched to M16s, and gave the Galils to their 3rd-line troops?

3) Basically, US military doctrine expects a rifle to be extremely accurate, and reliable enough to work if properly cleaned. There is nothing the Galil does better than the M16 that the US military would want...

Basically, the M16 is the perfect rifle for OUR military, and untill something better is invented (which, contrary to what HK would like us to believe, has not happened yet), there is no way to change...

Especially not to a gun which has been ABANDONED by it's inventors...

That would be like some other country swapping their AK74s or AUGs for M1 Garands or M14s....
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 9:34:52 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/10/2004 9:42:53 AM EST by ED_P]

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
The AK is only superior if you have an army of illiterate peasants. Otherwise its worth it to field a better weapons system.



The Finnish Valmet was designed with a far better site radius than a standard AK, and modernized sights,
2 things I think the AK lacked. And from what I've read at least, they milled the chamber with much more
concern for the throat, to improve seating every round identically. That, plus better ammunition, made it much more accurate than many AK models, while still benefiting from all the plusses of the AK's design.

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
1) The M16 rarely malfunctions if it's kept clean, something that all US military personell are taught to do in Basic Training, and EXPECTED to do regularly when issued any weapon.


I think the Army convoy ambushed in Iraq made me lose my faith in how support troops clean their weapons, though all of the Marines I know over there cleaned their M-16's every day.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 9:44:24 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/10/2004 9:48:37 AM EST by vito113]

Originally Posted By mike45acp:
The M-16 is OK but it looks like the military wants something that can really take a beating and not
malfunction.

Galil is simple very reliable, rework some of the ergonomics and you are good to go.



NO, NO, NO!……In Israel the Galil is used today only in the Armored corps, Artillery corps, and some stationary elements in the Israel Air Force (Anti Aircraft). ……

IDF standard front line weapon is now…… the M16 and M4!

www.israeli-weapons.com/israeli_weapons_small_arms.html

Andy
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 9:49:00 AM EST
could IDF have sideline them b/c they were getting old? or maybe b/c the U.S. is giving them so many freebies? just thought i'd throw that out there. i know it gets old having to clean a weapon 2 or 3 times a day just to keep it working.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 9:51:29 AM EST

Originally Posted By ED_P:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
I think the Army convoy ambushed in Iraq made me lose my faith in how support troops clean their weapons, though all of the Marines I know over there cleaned their M-16's every day.



A 'good' soldier will clean his weapon every day…

ANdy
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 10:03:02 AM EST
yeah but does at AR have a built in bottle opener for your beer?
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 10:23:43 AM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
2) If the Galil is so great, how come the Israelis switched to M16s, and gave the Galils to their 3rd-line troops?



+1 Trust the guys who have been doing this stuff every day for years.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 10:25:35 AM EST
based on an office full of israelis that hated the galil, no.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 11:10:56 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 11:11:50 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 11:32:28 AM EST

Originally Posted By ED_P:

I think the Army convoy ambushed in Iraq made me lose my faith in how support troops clean their weapons, though all of the Marines I know over there cleaned their M-16's every day.



What makes you think the Galil would have done any better? Not saying it wouldn't, but we trained a lot of Iraqi recruits for the Iraqi Police, and I saw jammed AKs all the time (mainly because I think the phrase "clean the weapon" doesn't translate into Arabic, it was a foriegn concept to them)

I was the gunner to our team, I cleaned the three weapon systems I was responsible for every day, the MK-19, SAW and M9. I would have cleaned them every day if it was a Galil, or AK, or any other weapon system out there.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 11:38:59 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/10/2004 11:40:23 AM EST by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By ED_P:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
The AK is only superior if you have an army of illiterate peasants. Otherwise its worth it to field a better weapons system.



The Finnish Valmet was designed with a far better site radius than a standard AK, and modernized sights,
2 things I think the AK lacked. And from what I've read at least, they milled the chamber with much more
concern for the throat, to improve seating every round identically. That, plus better ammunition, made it much more accurate than many AK models, while still benefiting from all the plusses of the AK's design.

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
1) The M16 rarely malfunctions if it's kept clean, something that all US military personell are taught to do in Basic Training, and EXPECTED to do regularly when issued any weapon.


I think the Army convoy ambushed in Iraq made me lose my faith in how support troops clean their weapons, though all of the Marines I know over there cleaned their M-16's every day.



They would have jammed Galils too...

If you can jam the FN MAG-58 (M-240 GPMG), you can jam anything...
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 11:40:15 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 11:46:33 AM EST

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
The AK is only superior if you have an army of illiterate peasants. Otherwise its worth it to field a better weapons system.



I agree, to a certain extent.

Just to put it in this light: A 20" barrel M16 can regularly hit targets out to 600 yards with a reasonable shooter. Now, try that with an AK. Of course the AK can take a beating, but so can an AR.

I mean, the M16 is modular and adaptable. Need ultimate stopping power? Use a .458 Socom or .50 Beowulf upper. Need compactness? A 9x19 upper. Training? Use a .22LR upper.

And, a milled receiver is notoriously strong. Most AKs built today are stamped, and although still resilent, are inferior to AKs of the milled receiver kind. Also, due to the use of upper and lowers, any jams or failures or anything of that sort will be localized and can be repaired and cleared quickly.

Both rifles are excellent, but pound-for-pound, a M16 is a better rifle to have in combat.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 11:51:13 AM EST
I have a better idea......................Readopt the M-14 and give all the surplus M-16 to ARFCOMers......limit 5 per household!!
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 11:52:14 AM EST

Originally Posted By MK4Mod0:
I have a better idea......................Readopt the M-14 and give all the surplus M-16 to ARFCOMers......limit 5 per household!!



Hopefully the CMP will refrain from converting them to semi...

Link Posted: 10/10/2004 11:59:39 AM EST
Lumpy pointed out something that a lot of people dont know when they make the IDF argument... they are largely supported by US money, the deal with that US Funding is that it can be used to purchase weapons that are manufactured in the United States ONLY -- This really limits the menu selections.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:00:09 PM EST
I'm sorry, but 5 is not enough.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:03:42 PM EST

Originally Posted By ED_P:

The Finnish Valmet was designed with a far better site radius than a standard AK, and modernized sights,
2 things I think the AK lacked. And from what I've read at least, they milled the chamber with much more
concern for the throat, to improve seating every round identically. That, plus better ammunition, made it much more accurate than many AK models, while still benefiting from all the plusses of the AK's design.




I would believe that, I had a Valmet and it was equal to friend's Colt H-BARs in accuracy. Still regret getting rid of it - traded it for a Colt Delta H-BAR. Hated the handling if the heavy barrel AR and ended up ditching that. At least I have an SAR3 now which is sort of a poor man's Valmet.

Wouldn't consider replacing the M16 with the Valmet/Galil in service use though. Can't mount optics easily to it and nothing to make replacement worth the expense.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:04:56 PM EST
SIG 550! Accept no substitutes.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:05:36 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/10/2004 12:06:39 PM EST by ED_P]

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
They would have jammed Galils too...

If you can jam the FN MAG-58 (M-240 GPMG), you can jam anything...



I heard that the M3's (the lighterweight counterpart to the M2 50 cal) jammed if not cleaned
frequently over there as well, it's just the degree to which a gun can tolerate filth before malfunctioning.

It would be very difficult to argue that an AK clone is more susceptible to filth than an M-16.

Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:08:19 PM EST

Originally Posted By Gunzilla:
Lumpy pointed out something that a lot of people dont know when they make the IDF argument... they are largely supported by US money, the deal with that US Funding is that it can be used to purchase weapons that are manufactured in the United States ONLY -- This really limits the menu selections.



Well, the Israelis have recently decided to move to a locally produced weapon SOLELY on political pressure to issue a made-at-home design. It's called the Tavor, it's a bullpup, and it's not an AK-derived system.

So even without 'financial pressure', they don't want the Galil back.

There are plenty of Israelis who don't want the Tavor, either...

The M16 is the choice of western-trained special forces units all over the world... I'm gonna bet that once we're done with the Iraqi military, some of their more 'elite' units will carry American, not Romanian weapons...
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:09:35 PM EST
Lumpy196,

What were the reasons you gave up the Galil?
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:12:58 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:13:12 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/10/2004 12:15:23 PM EST by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By ED_P:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
They would have jammed Galils too...

If you can jam the FN MAG-58 (M-240 GPMG), you can jam anything...



I heard that the M3's (the lighterweight counterpart to the M2 50 cal) jammed if not cleaned
frequently over there as well, it's just the degree to which a gun can tolerate filth before malfunctioning.

It would be very difficult to argue that an AK clone is more susceptible to filth than an M-16.




The M-3 and M-2 have proven quite jam-happy in Iraq. So much so that troops are complaining asking for a closed bolt version of these weapons to stop jamming... The kicker? The M-2 and M-3 are BOTH closed bolt weapons,. the only belt-fed closed bolt weapons in US inventory!!! Think of that the next time 'Cpl Gun Expert' tells you what we need for issue weapons...

Not really...

Experience in Iraq has proven that ALL guns are equally suceptable...

Guardian, and several others from this board who have BEEN to Iraq and either (a) used AKs in combat or (b) supervised folks using AKs in combat reported that jamming was very much an issue...

A large part of the AK's 'reliability' is legend. And that legend is very much enhanced by the fact that the AK has generally been a weapon our guys have had shot AT them... When an AK jams, it's generally the enemy's problem, and the only way we'd find out that 'Abu Wabu was killed/retreated because his AK jammed' would be to test fire every weapon dropped by a dead or fleeing enemy soldier.... They're not going to yell 'Shit, my AK jammed' at us in the middle of a firefight.... Our guys aren't going to say 'He stopped shooting, is he reloading or did it jam', but rather 'He stopped shooting... Anybody got a grenade?'...

Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:17:24 PM EST

Originally Posted By ED_P:
Originally Posted By Dave_A:
1) The M16 rarely malfunctions if it's kept clean, something that all US military personell are taught to do in Basic Training, and EXPECTED to do regularly when issued any weapon.


I think the Army convoy ambushed in Iraq made me lose my faith in how support troops clean their weapons, though all of the Marines I know over there cleaned their M-16's every day.


Never been in the US Army, but looking at all of the news reports, I have deduced that the US Army does not train all of its soldiers to be front line trigger-pulling soldiers.

It seem those people were more or less back office people, whose function normally in previous war with drawn enemy lines would not see actual combat or anything close to it. Simple reason, training costs money, if these are not going to be seeing combat, why train them for combat?

But this Middle East war is a war with no fixed lines. Because of the truck convoy took wrong turn somewhere, they ended getting ambushed. And with all the anti-gun sentiment in all of our public schools, the would probably have zero firearms training before entering the military. Remember these people grew up during Bill Clinton's '94 AWB, where military-style assualt weapons were the scrouge of the world peace and harmony.

The conclusion is that you can't blame the M16 in this instance.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:21:18 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/10/2004 12:22:44 PM EST by ED_P]
Dave_A,

I must respectfully disagree. Alot of things make the AK more reliable. I'm not arguing it's
more accurate, as I own both and know which one holds tighter groups.

Even in my humble personal experience, I've never had a mag or ammo problem with an AK.

The larger rim size, and continuous curve, plus far better follower, make the AK a much more
reliable magazine than the M16 magazine, though heavier.

I've had more than one AR magazine start to get old, and cause feeding issues, particularly near
the bottom of the mag. The changes to the follower, black to green, and now an HK
design, don't inspire my confidence. A continuous curve mag can have a far more reliable follower
right from the start, and the AK follower is just that.

And as far as ammo and the AR, I've had trouble with a few brands of ammo (Korean PMC comes
to mind) which I've never experienced with an AK.

I'm not saying dump the AR for an AK, but I think the AK design makes alot more sense on alot of
levels. It's only arguable weakness in my mind is accuracy.
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:29:10 PM EST

Originally Posted By ED_P:
Dave_A,

I must respectfully disagree. Alot of things make the AK more reliable. I'm not arguing it's
more accurate, as I own both and know which one holds tighter groups.

Even in my humble personal experience, I've never had a mag or ammo problem with an AK.

The larger rim size, and continuous curve, plus far better follower, make the AK a much more
reliable magazine than the M16 magazine, though heavier.

I've had more than one AR magazine start to get old, and cause feeding issues, particularly near
the bottom of the mag. The changes to the follower, black to green, and now an HK
design, don't inspire my confidence. A continuous curve mag can have a far more reliable follower
right from the start, and the AK follower is just that.

And as far as ammo and the AR, I've had trouble with a few brands of ammo (Korean PMC comes
to mind) which I've never experienced with an AK.

I'm not saying dump the AR for an AK, but I think the AK design makes alot more sense on alot of
levels. It's only arguable weakness in my mind is accuracy.



And the fact that it too will jam in the sandy conditions of Iraq if not cleaned properly, which is the same deal for the M16, it too will jam in the sandy conditions of Iraq if not cleaned properly.

Key is, the weapons need to be cleaned, and there is no excuse for not cleaning it.

So if both weapons were maintained and cleaned properly, there is no reason to go to an AK type rifle if you have an M16.

Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:36:56 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/10/2004 12:40:04 PM EST by ED_P]
gaurdian_855,

I agree all guns jam in dirty conditions, I just believe the AK has a higher "boiling point"
before it becomes un-useable. The AR, without cleaning, has a lower boiling point.

I wish I had an link to an extensive magazine article a while back on cold weather testing.
A number of guns, including the M-14, , M-16, Galil, and Valmet, were all subjected to
the exact same cold conditions, and only the Galil and Valmet functioned without fail.

No doubt all guns jam, I agree, but I prefer a higher boiling point design.

Talk about a never ending argument here at Arfcom- what fun!

Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:37:24 PM EST

Originally Posted By warlord:

Originally Posted By ED_P:
Originally Posted By Dave_A:
1) The M16 rarely malfunctions if it's kept clean, something that all US military personell are taught to do in Basic Training, and EXPECTED to do regularly when issued any weapon.


I think the Army convoy ambushed in Iraq made me lose my faith in how support troops clean their weapons, though all of the Marines I know over there cleaned their M-16's every day.


Never been in the US Army, but looking at all of the news reports, I have deduced that the US Army does not train all of its soldiers to be front line trigger-pulling soldiers.

It seem those people were more or less back office people, whose function normally in previous war with drawn enemy lines would not see actual combat or anything close to it. Simple reason, training costs money, if these are not going to be seeing combat, why train them for combat?

But this Middle East war is a war with no fixed lines. Because of the truck convoy took wrong turn somewhere, they ended getting ambushed. And with all the anti-gun sentiment in all of our public schools, the would probably have zero firearms training before entering the military. Remember these people grew up during Bill Clinton's '94 AWB, where military-style assualt weapons were the scrouge of the world peace and harmony.

The conclusion is that you can't blame the M16 in this instance.



BCT is the same for everyone, weather you are a signal corpsman, band member, or infantryman...

My point was that everyone has been taught at least once how to clean, and that you can't blame the M16 (which we agree about) for a situation where poor maintanance jammed everything, including the 'legendary' piston operated weapons...

And yes, I agree, it would be nice to see at least one high school with a rifle club per school district...

Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:41:01 PM EST

Originally Posted By ED_P:
gaurdian_855,

I agree all guns jam in dirty conditions, I just believe the AK has a higher "boiling point"
before it becomes un-useable. The AR, without cleaning, has a lower boiling point.

I wish I had an link to an extensive magazine article a while back on cold weather testing.
A number of guns, including the M-14, , M-16, Galil, and Valmet, were all subjected to
the exact same cold conditions, and only the Galil and Valmet functioned without fail.

No doubt all guns jam, I agree, but I prefer a higher boiling point design.

Talk about a never ending argument here at Arfcom!




The problem with your argument is that all of the 'boiling points' are well beyond a normal day's work...

The AR reaches it's 'boiling point' between 5,000 and 7,000 rounds of ammunition, condition dependant.

That's 166 to 233 magazines of ammo...

No one's going to shoot that much ammo without cleaning. If they do, it's not the rifle's fault...

In the end, the AK-pattern doesn't offer anything that is usefull to OUR military as we fight... Period...

And yes, it is the never ending discussion on this board, allong with 9mm vs .45ACP and 'Gas Piston vs Direct Impingement'....
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 12:50:35 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/10/2004 12:53:16 PM EST by Gunzilla]

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By Gunzilla:
Lumpy pointed out something that a lot of people dont know when they make the IDF argument... they are largely supported by US money, the deal with that US Funding is that it can be used to purchase weapons that are manufactured in the United States ONLY -- This really limits the menu selections.



Well, the Israelis have recently decided to move to a locally produced weapon SOLELY on political pressure to issue a made-at-home design. It's called the Tavor, it's a bullpup, and it's not an AK-derived system.

So even without 'financial pressure', they don't want the Galil back.

There are plenty of Israelis who don't want the Tavor, either...

The M16 is the choice of western-trained special forces units all over the world... I'm gonna bet that once we're done with the Iraqi military, some of their more 'elite' units will carry American, not Romanian weapons...



That decision is far from recent, as has the Tavor been around for awhile... I think if you'll check, that they originally tried to find a US based company to cast the injection molded "housing" for the Tavor... this would free them to make the gun largely a home-made weapon and still satisfy the use requirement for US made.

ATK was rumored to be talking with them, but rumors also have it that there were conflicts with the AICWS and "other" alliances... I tried to talk a couple of companies here Stateside into contacting Israel about the Tavor a couple of few years back, but little interest really.

The push to adopt the Tavor is political... I am sure as you have fielded one that you understand?
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 1:14:39 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/10/2004 1:15:09 PM EST by warlord]

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By warlord:

Originally Posted By ED_P:
Originally Posted By Dave_A:
1) The M16 rarely malfunctions if it's kept clean, something that all US military personell are taught to do in Basic Training, and EXPECTED to do regularly when issued any weapon.


I think the Army convoy ambushed in Iraq made me lose my faith in how support troops clean their weapons, though all of the Marines I know over there cleaned their M-16's every day.


Never been in the US Army, but looking at all of the news reports, I have deduced that the US Army does not train all of its soldiers to be front line trigger-pulling soldiers.

It seem those people were more or less back office people, whose function normally in previous war with drawn enemy lines would not see actual combat or anything close to it. Simple reason, training costs money, if these are not going to be seeing combat, why train them for combat?

But this Middle East war is a war with no fixed lines. Because of the truck convoy took wrong turn somewhere, they ended getting ambushed. And with all the anti-gun sentiment in all of our public schools, the would probably have zero firearms training before entering the military. Remember these people grew up during Bill Clinton's '94 AWB, where military-style assualt weapons were the scrouge of the world peace and harmony.

The conclusion is that you can't blame the M16 in this instance.



BCT is the same for everyone, weather you are a signal corpsman, band member, or infantryman...

My point was that everyone has been taught at least once how to clean, and that you can't blame the M16 (which we agree about) for a situation where poor maintanance jammed everything, including the 'legendary' piston operated weapons...

And yes, I agree, it would be nice to see at least one high school with a rifle club per school district...


But you've got to remember that these people are not firearms enthusiasts like most of the people on this board, to them this is just another job and they probably just didn't comprehend the importance of clean firearms, also they were on the move day and night, so that they may have not had the time.

Way, way back in 1968, my old high school Barstow Calif(Ft Irwin National Training Ctr was just 20 miles north, outside of town), actually had an indoor rifle on campus for 22LR, and they actually had rifle training as part of the school curriculum for the people who were in enrolled in the ROTC! But, sadly due to efforts of the anti-gunners, the shooting part was been discontinued and the range has been torn down.
Top Top