deleted duplicate post

Is there actually a 77gr. round being issued to selct units?  Anyone have any other specs for it... manufacturer?

A lot of the 'reasons' for the M16 rifle are no longer valid.  We do not have bulk recruits that were inducted/drafted for Vietnam.. we have a professional volunteer force, most of whom have had some sort of expierance with firearms.

The M16 was for low quality recruits, that would be scared by a high power, high recoil rifle, in a dense tropical environment.  The requirement to carry X rounds due to remote locations with questionable resupply (remember the huey had not come into its own for mobile forces yet).

Today every swinging dick has a vehicle, a chopper or an airdrop available.  The need to carry large amounts of ammo is negated by the mobility/supply ability of the present day Army.

While shooting through a wall/door/brick wall is not a requirement... if the rag head can and you cannot you lose the advantage of being able to get the rag head when he takes cover/concealment.

There is no real reason NOT up upgrade to .30cal weapon.

BTW in the Navy I had to qualified Nuclear Weapons Security Guard with a 1911, M14 and a 12guage... M14=big fun.  In the first Gulf War I didn't see any action as our boat was not assigned to the battle fleet.  Shooting missiles == BIGGER FUN

Quoted: A lot of the 'reasons' for the M16 rifle are no longer valid.  We do not have bulk recruits that were inducted/drafted for Vietnam.. we have a professional volunteer force, most of whom have had some sort of expierance with firearms. The M16 was for low quality recruits, that would be scared by a high power, high recoil rifle, in a dense tropical environment.  The requirement to carry X rounds due to remote locations with questionable resupply (remember the huey had not come into its own for mobile forces yet).

HUH?

Quoted: A lot of the 'reasons' for the M16 rifle are no longer valid.  We do not have bulk recruits that were inducted/drafted for Vietnam.. we have a professional volunteer force, most of whom have had some sort of expierance with firearms. The M16 was for low quality recruits, that would be scared by a high power, high recoil rifle, in a dense tropical environment.  The requirement to carry X rounds due to remote locations with questionable resupply (remember the huey had not come into its own for mobile forces yet). Today every swinging dick has a vehicle, a chopper or an airdrop available.  The need to carry large amounts of ammo is negated by the mobility/supply ability of the present day Army. While shooting through a wall/door/brick wall is not a requirement... if the rag head can and you cannot you lose the advantage of being able to get the rag head when he takes cover/concealment. There is no real reason NOT up upgrade to .30cal weapon. BTW in the Navy I had to qualified Nuclear Weapons Security Guard with a 1911, M14 and a 12guage... M14=big fun.  In the first Gulf War I didn't see any action as our boat was not assigned to the battle fleet.  Shooting missiles == BIGGER FUN

AirCav had M16's in 1964 (See we were soldiers) I'm thinking that there weren't a whole lot of AirCav draftees in '64. Could be wrong though.

I guess you and Maj. Sgt. Plumley have a lot in common.

Originally Posted By patriot73

I shoot about 3" at 100 with M193 through a chrome lined 1/7 twist barrel. Although 855 tends to be tighter, I seem to hit ok with the lighter bullets.

Marine Corps KD Qualification starts at 200 meters, then at 300, and finally at 500.  Big difference there.


STLRN:
Glad to see something has changed.  And yeah, I was in from 85-89 Active, and 89-93 Reserves.  I remember a live fire in the Phillipines on Green Beach, Westpac '89, and watching two guys damn near go to blows over 20 live rounds.  Noone got to shoot enough live ammo.  A SAW gunner would rather give up his sister than give up any of his rounds.  

And yes, Blackhawk Down does have one quote about M855 out of the M4, but there are other accounts of Somalia out there, both in after actions and personal stories published elsewhere that reinforced the less than stellar performance of that combination.

OMFG.  The MOVIE 'We were brothers' is a STORY of THE FIRST use of mobile air.. you did turn the volume up when you sat on your couch watching the flick.. didn't you?  It took years before air mobile was large scale.  Choppers did make an entrance in Korea, but as evac or S&R.  And every movie is an accurate reference for historical discussion.

One spec of  the M16 was it be designed for the small asian soldiers.  They couldn't field a 10lb garand and the M1 Carbine was criticized as to weak at range.  So they took an even SMALLER bullet but pushed it a lot faster.   Also to justify the smaller cartridge they Army siad that most action was at less than the 300years the M1 was designed for.  

The Army did look at .22 cal pre WWII... but as previously posted it was scrapped due to the huge amount of .30-06 still laying around after WWII.  The M1 Garand was actually chambered in .22 for a few tests.  

The M16 is an out of date platform, designed for spec that are no longer valid.  The only reason we still have it is because of the $$$$ involved with designing a new weapon.

Please back up your argument with facts, not MOVIES in the .99cent bin.  Geeze.

Well, yesterday my SWAT guys had occassion to shoot at a brick house....the house was donated to our agency for training purposes....it is a simple, brick single family dwelling scheduled for demolition to make room for  a mall or some such shit.....anyway, we have the use of it for training purposed til mid Feb...
The house isn't armored......it is brick wall, lathe and plaster construction.
They shot the brick yesterday with our .300 Win Mag countersniper rifle....at 20`yards measured....the 180 grain bullet did NOT penetrate the brick wall.......
They then shot it from the INSIDE out with the same rifle....no penetration.....at living room distance.
They also shot FROM the INSIDE a mag dump of 7.62 NATO ammo from a self loading rifle....no penetration although there was deformation of the brick wall from repeated hits of the 7.62 ammo....

If a .300 win mag ain't gonna do it, WTF that a troop can carry will?????

by the way, hearing protection is a MUST when shooting inside!!!!!!!

Quoted: One spec of  the M16 was it be designed for the small asian soldiers.

Where did you read this? Just curious.

Also to justify the smaller cartridge they Army siad that most action was at less than the 300 years the M1 was designed for.

This was concluded after extensive research. That research is still available for viewing today.

Quoted: OMFG.  The MOVIE 'We were brothers' is a STORY of THE FIRST use of mobile air.. you did turn the volume up when you sat on your couch watching the flick.. didn't you?  It took years before air mobile was large scale.  Choppers did make an entrance in Korea, but as evac or S&R.  And every movie is an accurate reference for historical discussion. One spec of  the M16 was it be designed for the small asian soldiers.  They couldn't field a 10lb garand and the M1 Carbine was criticized as to weak at range.  So they took an even SMALLER bullet but pushed it a lot faster.   Also to justify the smaller cartridge they Army siad that most action was at less than the 300years the M1 was designed for.   The Army did look at .22 cal pre WWII... but as previously posted it was scrapped due to the huge amount of .30-06 still laying around after WWII.  The M1 Garand was actually chambered in .22 for a few tests.   The M16 is an out of date platform, designed for spec that are no longer valid.  The only reason we still have it is because of the $$$$ involved with designing a new weapon. Please back up your argument with facts, not MOVIES in the .99cent bin.  Geeze.

It's outdated.  That's why many of the special forces and other people that have more freedom to choose still keep choosing the M4 type weapons.  In fact, shorter barrels are more often used while in vehicles.  Like you said, everyone has a ride now.  They just want to get it into action faster.  If you think the M16 is outdated, then what about the m14??  There is no one weapon, that is perfect for every mission, but the M4 / M16 HAS proven to be deadly from Vietnam to Iraq.  If we have to sit here and list the positive aspects to you and prove to you that this platform is deadly, you're in the wrong fucking forum.

Quoted: Are full auto .308 carbines controllable?

NO

Quoted: Is there actually a 77gr. round being issued to selct units?  Anyone have any other specs for it... manufacturer?

Mk262, uses the Sierra 77gr....

Produced by Black Hills Ammunition, IIRC...

Quoted: Quoted: OMFG.  The MOVIE 'We were brothers' is a STORY of THE FIRST use of mobile air.. you did turn the volume up when you sat on your couch watching the flick.. didn't you?  It took years before air mobile was large scale.  Choppers did make an entrance in Korea, but as evac or S&R.  And every movie is an accurate reference for historical discussion. One spec of  the M16 was it be designed for the small asian soldiers.  They couldn't field a 10lb garand and the M1 Carbine was criticized as to weak at range.  So they took an even SMALLER bullet but pushed it a lot faster.   Also to justify the smaller cartridge they Army siad that most action was at less than the 300years the M1 was designed for.   The Army did look at .22 cal pre WWII... but as previously posted it was scrapped due to the huge amount of .30-06 still laying around after WWII.  The M1 Garand was actually chambered in .22 for a few tests.   The M16 is an out of date platform, designed for spec that are no longer valid.  The only reason we still have it is because of the $$$$ involved with designing a new weapon. Please back up your argument with facts, not MOVIES in the .99cent bin.  Geeze. It's outdated.  That's why many of the special forces and other people that have more freedom to choose still keep choosing the M4 type weapons.  In fact, shorter barrels are more often used while in vehicles.  Like you said, everyone has a ride now.  They just want to get it into action faster.  If you think the M16 is outdated, then what about the m14??  There is no one weapon, that is perfect for every mission, but the M4 / M16 HAS proven to be deadly from Vietnam to Iraq.  If we have to sit here and list the positive aspects to you and prove to you that this platform is deadly, you're in the wrong fucking forum.

If the M16 (well, you're actually arguing about the .223, not the rifle itself) is so obselete, then how come every major power has abandoned 7.62mm as a line cartridge?

5.56x45

5.45x39

See a pattern?

7.62mm is a great MG and sniper cartridge (ergo, the new Army sniper weapon is an M16 pattern weapon firing the same 7.62x51 caliber that such weapons have used since the M14/M21), but it is a terrible choice for standard-issue...

77gr OTM 5.56mm, on the other hand, would solve most of the short-barrel-low-velocity issues found with the M4....

What's a 66 grain? must be a typo?

Quoted: A lot of the 'reasons' for the M16 rifle are no longer valid.  We do not have bulk recruits that were inducted/drafted for Vietnam.. we have a professional volunteer force, most of whom have had some sort of expierance with firearms. The M16 was for low quality recruits, that would be scared by a high power, high recoil rifle, in a dense tropical environment.  The requirement to carry X rounds due to remote locations with questionable resupply (remember the huey had not come into its own for mobile forces yet). Today every swinging dick has a vehicle, a chopper or an airdrop available.  The need to carry large amounts of ammo is negated by the mobility/supply ability of the present day Army. While shooting through a wall/door/brick wall is not a requirement... if the rag head can and you cannot you lose the advantage of being able to get the rag head when he takes cover/concealment. There is no real reason NOT up upgrade to .30cal weapon. BTW in the Navy I had to qualified Nuclear Weapons Security Guard with a 1911, M14 and a 12guage... M14=big fun.  In the first Gulf War I didn't see any action as our boat was not assigned to the battle fleet.  Shooting missiles == BIGGER FUN

The M16 was not adopted 'for vietnam' or 'for a draftee force'

The M16 and small-caliber-high-velocity rounds were adopted due to a change in doctrine that brought the maximum range of infantry combat to around 300yds... Therefore, the principal advantage of the 7.62x51 at the time (long range accuracy) was un-needed, and there was no longer any justification for it's disadvantages (extra weight, lack of controlability in automatic fire)...

It proved so effective in use in Vietnam that the Russians moved away from 7.62mm (which had been their STANDARD caliber since before Communisim  (7.62 Nagant, 7.62x25, 7.62x39, 7.62x54)) in 1974.

Fast forweard further, the Army again decides to move the 'maximum expected engagement range' inward, and we get the M4... The problem is that making a 'handier, lighter' rifle reduces the velocity of the rounds it fires (vis-a-vis short bbl) and thus reduces their effectiveness (5.xxmm rounds are velocity dependant)... The solution is to make the round heavier. However, the way to do it is not to make the round WIDER (thus requiring a new weapon), but to make it LONGER,

The optimum twists have allready been explored by the competition shooting community, and for 77gr and higher, 1-7 is just about right, IIRC...

Oh, and as for your statement on the nature of the Army's recruits, while they are all volunteers, the vast majority that I have met handled their first rifle (often first firearm) in BCT. I would immagine that the soldiers of Vietnam, drafted or not, had more weapons familiarity than the kids who grew up in the gun/violence-phobic 90s....

Every time one of the "reservist gun experts" opens their mouth and spews some ridiculous BS about the 5.56 being a round designed for asians and women it just makes me want to vomit. . Just because you heard it from your best bud at basic dosen't make it true. You want to talk facts. heres a few that are undisputed. A 5.56 that fragments creates a larger wound volume than a 7.62 x 51 that dosen't. I'd post pics if I could, but I'm 'puter illiterate in that regard. Check the AR-15 ammo oracle for pics though, and go to this address for fragmentation threshold/range info.http://ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=16&t=189353. It's the most accurate summary of 5.56 ballistic performance that I have yet to find anywhere.

From the chart, one can surmise that the 62 grain M855 is the least effective of the rounds ever issued, It was pushed onto the M-16 because the army brass, after having had a moment of clear thought, shoved their heads back up their asses and tried to go again for "long range perfomance". That and the SAW had recently been adopted, it was adopted simultaneously with the ss-109 FN round (that later was designated the M855). Another brilliant stroke from a bunch of West Pointers who have probably never had to fire their rifle for real in their entire lives.

The assertion that you no longer need to carry large amounts of ammo on loadout dosen't hold water either. Just because 99 times out of 100 you'll be resupplied, that won't comfort you the one time you aren't and you're overrun with an empty rifle.

Everyone needs to take the time to read the ammo oracle and the info at the above address before they come on here posting about 5.56 ineffectiveness. This stuff is kind of expected to be common knowledge and it really pisses peple off when the clueless and uninitiated come on here and start spewing heresay about the round.

(Anyone out there wanna make the links hot for the people too lazy to copy and paste?)

Quoted: AirCav had M16's in 1964 (See we were soldiers) I'm thinking that there weren't a whole lot of AirCav draftees in '64. Could be wrong though.

According to the book, there were draftees. And some of them were nearing the end of their enlistment when the unit deployed.

Quoted: Quoted: Fact: The M855 in the 1/7 twist M4bbl is not a great performer.  I did not say it didn't perform, I said not great.  Reports like this came back from Somalia.  Out of the 20"bbl it works better. Fact: M855 is poor in the accuracy dept. out of the 1/12 twist.  Try it in an SP1 and you'll notice the difference.  I have passed up good deals on surplus ammo because at the time I only had my SP1. Fact: M193 is poor in the accuracy dept. out of the 1/7 twist.   I have seen this first hand when M855 was going to deployed FMF units and the last of the M193 was being shot up for Quals.   Marines still got expert, but across the board aggregate scores were down. Fact: Nobody gets to shoot as much live ammo anymore. I fired more live ammo as an Air Force Security Forces Reservist than I did as an Active Duty Marine 0311.  That needs to change first. We need some good, solid testing with multiple weights and twists, and figure out the best combination.  1/9 seems to have the edge here, but lets spend a few bucks and find out for sure.   Today we are in the sandbox, tomorrow we may be in rice paddies, jungle or snow covered mountains.  If one size dont fit all, we damn well better have a back up.   You were in prior to the GWOT than because Marine units are shooting millions of rounds preparing for deployment.

Yep.

Why does this come up so often? Fact of the matter is, I can carry almost three times the amount of 5.56mm compared with 7.62, by weight. In mags, that is. In the future, wars will be fought fast and hard in urban centers. It will not be lone marksman battling it out at 800m. Thats what snipers are for. M80 ball, BTW, does LESS damage than 5.56 that fragments. Past the fragmentation range the M80 has the advantage again, but is it worth the weight?

And no, M16s were not designed for Asian soldiers. An existing design was purchased by the AF to replace the existing mix of M1s, M1 Carbines, BARs, Thompsons, M3s, etc. that it's guards were issued with.

Orion67, M855 is not known for accuracy from ANY barrel, even 1/9 match barrels. Thats what we get for making a three piece bullet and putting in atop a powder column that allows for up to 120 fps range in velocity from one shot to the next.

Quoted: December 19, 2005 The problem with the 5.56mm round was that it was not designed to take down man sized targets (or animal equivalents like white tailed deer, or black bears), and is less effective in blasting through walls and vehicles during urban fighting. When first introduced, it was intended for use by draftees, who were often in need of automatic fire capability (because so few were marksmen).

Who wrote this crap?? I don't know if this or the 66 grain bullet is worse??
I kept waiting for that "designed to wound" stuff again!!!
Who says 5.56 Nato will not penetrate heavy clothing???? O.K., where is old painless, we need to break out the "wardrobe of truth"
Then the other extreme brags about an instant death ray ass shot by some super duper round???

Back  around 1922, John Gurand came up with the perfect all around Cal,   .276
What go's around, comes around

Quoted: OMFG.  The MOVIE 'We were brothers' is a STORY of THE FIRST use of mobile air.. you did turn the volume up when you sat on your couch watching the flick.. didn't you?  It took years before air mobile was large scale.  Choppers did make an entrance in Korea, but as evac or S&R.  And every movie is an accurate reference for historical discussion. One spec of  the M16 was it be designed for the small asian soldiers.  They couldn't field a 10lb garand and the M1 Carbine was criticized as to weak at range.  So they took an even SMALLER bullet but pushed it a lot faster.   Also to justify the smaller cartridge they Army siad that most action was at less than the 300years the M1 was designed for.   The Army did look at .22 cal pre WWII... but as previously posted it was scrapped due to the huge amount of .30-06 still laying around after WWII.  The M1 Garand was actually chambered in .22 for a few tests.   The M16 is an out of date platform, designed for spec that are no longer valid.  The only reason we still have it is because of the $$$$ involved with designing a new weapon. Please back up your argument with facts, not MOVIES in the .99cent bin.  Geeze.

This guy needs to seriusly STFU, sit back and absorb the knowlege on ARF for at least six months and buy AND READ Black Rifle II before he is allowed to post again.

Quoted: OMFG.  The MOVIE 'We were brothers' is a STORY of THE FIRST use of mobile air.. you did turn the volume up when you sat on your couch watching the flick.. didn't you?  It took years before air mobile was large scale.  Choppers did make an entrance in Korea, but as evac or S&R.  And every movie is an accurate reference for historical discussion. One spec of  the M16 was it be designed for the small asian soldiers.  They couldn't field a 10lb garand and the M1 Carbine was criticized as to weak at range.  So they took an even SMALLER bullet but pushed it a lot faster.   Also to justify the smaller cartridge they Army siad that most action was at less than the 300years the M1 was designed for.   The Army did look at .22 cal pre WWII... but as previously posted it was scrapped due to the huge amount of .30-06 still laying around after WWII.  The M1 Garand was actually chambered in .22 for a few tests.   The M16 is an out of date platform, designed for spec that are no longer valid.  The only reason we still have it is because of the $$$$ involved with designing a new weapon. Please back up your argument with facts, not MOVIES in the .99cent bin.  Geeze.

The Marine Corps conducted the first helicopter air assault Sept 21, 1951 landing 224 Marines and 17000 lbs of supplies on hill 884 during battle of the punch bowl.

That has to be one of the most ridiculous POS writings I have ever seen.

POS Thread -- and Dumber comments added -- 5.56mm works -- trust me.