AR Sponsor
Posted: 5/8/2011 4:24:09 PM EDT
|
Hey guy before i start i just want to say this isnt a hate thread.
I was reading this earlier http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008Intl/Schatz.pdf Now i know nothing about the author, but the .pdf got me very curious about the argument ofif the AR-15 has outlived its life. From the article it really appears as if the platform is behind the times but i was wondering how everyone else felt about it? |
| After 46 years of service ,updates,upgrades..the now modularity and ease of servicing the system,no replacement offering anything significant to justify replacement no I dont think its outdated.Its the still the standard every other 5.56 mm weapon system is measured by.And like usual who ever wrote the article is trying to pander for the replacement being a better bet..OICW failed,XM8 failed and I dont see the 416 taking over in big enough numbers to matter. |
| It all depends on whether you're talking about the M16 US combat weapon or the AR15 as a semi-automatic civilian firearm. Every gun maker in the world is trying to come up with an M16-beater and the H&K 416 is starting to gain traction. Still the same cartridge though. As for a civilian/police semi-auto, the D.I. AR15 is probably going to be around for a long, long time. |
|
Technically - Yes
Are there superior weapons out there? Sure But most of the weapons that have been deemed "superior", like the SCAR or the ACR, fire the same round, from the same magazine, at close to the same weight, and have similar accuracy characteristics . The only real advantage being easier to clean due to the piston system, and with the ACR the ability to change barrels quickly in the field (don't know about the SCAR?). And arguably better ergonomics. Oh, and the variable gas system for running a suppressor. With the countless number of surplus barrels, recivers, and small parts stockpiled. And all the experienced armorers around every corner, as said in the post above, the AR is not going anywhere for a long time. IMO, It will take a change in service round to justify swapping platforms, and even then the AR may just be "re-tooled" for the new chambering. To paraphrase, the AR is to the West what the AKM is to the East, and I dont see the Russians giving there AK's up anytime soon 
|
|
I have lived with the M-16 weapons system for my entire 26 year Army career. Its maintenance intensive and compareatively fragile as compared to the AK-47. I replaced my extractor spring with the Wolf spring and insert, used only good magazines, and performed careful and frequent maintenance. My weapons never malfunctioned. However - I watched plenty of other Solsiers who could care less about taking care of thier weapon have it jam on them in the worst possible moment...
I got a chance to test fire the HK XM8 at FT Bragg and was then disgusted when the US firearms industry took the Government to court and got it killed. It was a great weapon. The HK rep opened the bolt, took an E tool full of sand and dumped it into the action. Then shook out most of it (There was still plenty in there) loaded it and fired off a full mag on auto without a jam. Politics and money got Soldiers killed on the battlefield. Whats in my safe? A M4 piston carbine. |
|
Quoted:
Technically - Yes Are there superior weapons out there? Sure But most of the weapons that have been deemed "superior", like the SCAR or the ACR, fire the same round, from the same magazine, at close to the same weight, and have similar accuracy characteristics . The only real advantage being easier to clean due to the piston system, and with the ACR the ability to change barrels quickly in the field (don't know about the SCAR?). And arguably better ergonomics. Oh, and the variable gas system for running a suppressor. With the countless number of surplus barrels, recivers, and small parts stockpiled. And all the experienced armorers around every corner, as said in the post above, the AR is not going anywhere for a long time. IMO, It will take a change in service round to justify swapping platforms, and even then the AR may just be "re-tooled" for the new chambering. To paraphrase, the AR is to the West what the AKM is to the East, and I dont see the Russians giving there AK's up anytime soon
I think you are right on it. A gas piston upper in 6.8 would do wonders for reliabilty and lethality while being an inexpensive upgrade. |
|
Quoted: Outdated with regards to what exactly? That's what I'm saying. There's an outdated when compared to the latest and greatest tech.... And an outdated compared to what's still usable and efficient. A lot of drive "outdated" vehicles each and every day. I agree with the guy who said it's outdated technically but isn't going anywhere anytime soon. |
|
Maintinence intensive and comparitively fragile compared to AK..ever read the Pat Rogers filthy 14 article.I think an AK with stamped steel receiver would crush easier than an M16 rifle if run over on solid ground.I would hardly call the M16 fragile with all due respect to your service.In my experience you can clean a filthy M16 or M4 in 15 minutes it does not have to be eat off clean to work.
The white glove test has no relevance at all except for the anal retentiveness off instructors who believe that test is actually relevant.More wear and tear is done with over cleaning and scraping than anything else that can screw up the M16 series.Anything more than 15 miute clan and inspection on critical assemblies is a waste of time and in some cases damaging to the rifle.If I am correct wasnt XM8 a bit fragile hell I remeber when G36 had its problems with its operating rod or trunion something failing in that weapon way back that made it somewaht fragile as well? |
|
Quoted:
Maintinence intensive and comparitively fragile compared to AK..ever read the Pat Rogers filthy 14 article.I think an AK with stamped steel receiver would crush easier than an M16 rifle if run over on solid ground.I would hardly call the M16 fragile with all due respect to your service.In my experience you can clean a filthy M16 or M4 in 15 minutes it does not have to be eat off clean to work. The white glove test has no relevance at all except for the anal retentiveness off instructors who believe that test is actually relevant.More wear and tear is done with over cleaning and scraping than anything else that can screw up the M16 series.Anything more than 15 miute clan and inspection on critical assemblies is a waste of time and in some cases damaging to the rifle.If I am correct wasnt XM8 a bit fragile hell I remeber when G36 had its problems with its operating rod or trunion something failing in that weapon way back that made it somewaht fragile as well? I agree that most wear and damage to M-16's/M4's are done by over/poor cleaning methods. [Like destroying the muzzle crown (And the weapons accuracy) by scraping it with a cleaning rod] And yes - I know about Filthy 14. I also agree that the weapon can go for a very long time full of carbon. I carried the M4 thru Afghanistan and Iraq - and if you dont clean the dirt and dust out of them each night, they jam. I have seen the Afghans and Iraqi's fight with AK's that looked like a glob of dirt shaped like a rifle. Come to think of it, I dont think I have ever actually seen an Afghan or Iraqi Soldier - or IP ever actually clean thier weapons. Thats the point I was trying to make. Those same AK's were inaccurate as hell, but thats another story. Never seen an AK run over by a truck, but I have seen an M-16A2 run over by a 5ton and it was not pretty LOL. I think the run over test is a bit much for any weapon. I did see an M4 stock broken off - making the waepon inoperational, when a Soldier did a parachute landing fall roll over his weapons case after he forgot to lower it. I dont know about the G-36. I shot one for the German shooting badge and it worked fine. However - they problably worked all the problems out by then. Im not saying that the M-16 family of weapons are dead yet..... Like another poster previously stated, the 1911 is problably still the best fighting handgun out there. I just think that the weapon could be improved - or a better weapon fielded. I have seen all the malfunctions talked about in the first post. On the range and on the battlefield. My weapon always worked because I took care of it. But Im a gun person. More and more Soldiers come into the Army each year with absolutely no firearms experiance. I just think that the Army could provide a better system. |
|
Quoted: Technically - Yes Are there superior weapons out there? Sure But most of the weapons that have been deemed "superior", like the SCAR or the ACR, fire the same round, from the same magazine, at close to the same weight, and have similar accuracy characteristics . The only real advantage being easier to clean due to the piston system, and with the ACR the ability to change barrels quickly in the field (don't know about the SCAR?). And arguably better ergonomics. Oh, and the variable gas system for running a suppressor. With the countless number of surplus barrels, recivers, and small parts stockpiled. And all the experienced armorers around every corner, as said in the post above, the AR is not going anywhere for a long time. IMO, It will take a change in service round to justify swapping platforms, and even then the AR may just be "re-tooled" for the new chambering. To paraphrase, the AR is to the West what the AKM is to the East, and I dont see the Russians giving there AK's up anytime soon That is my opinion as well. There is no real advantage to switching platforms since the AR15 is so modular. It's gonna take new technology or a new round for anything to change. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Technically - Yes Are there superior weapons out there? Sure But most of the weapons that have been deemed "superior", like the SCAR or the ACR, fire the same round, from the same magazine, at close to the same weight, and have similar accuracy characteristics . The only real advantage being easier to clean due to the piston system, and with the ACR the ability to change barrels quickly in the field (don't know about the SCAR?). And arguably better ergonomics. Oh, and the variable gas system for running a suppressor. With the countless number of surplus barrels, recivers, and small parts stockpiled. And all the experienced armorers around every corner, as said in the post above, the AR is not going anywhere for a long time. IMO, It will take a change in service round to justify swapping platforms, and even then the AR may just be "re-tooled" for the new chambering. To paraphrase, the AR is to the West what the AKM is to the East, and I dont see the Russians giving there AK's up anytime soon
That is my opinion as well. There is no real advantage to switching platforms since the AR15 is so modular. It's gonna take new technology or a new round for anything to change. Even if we keep the same round wouldnt a cleaner running gun that requires far less maintenance be better? If it performs the same but has the reliability of an AK thats a huge improvement |
AR Sponsor