M-16 and AK-47

Actually, I've heard in an Operation Iraqi Freedom debriefing that the commanding general of the 1st Marine Division recommended that all of his troops be equipped with M16A4s and ACOG sights, after one of his Marines hit two man-sized targets during combat from a distance of no less than 1.2 km, or just over 1300 yards, with standard (?) M855 ball ... is this true, DogmaDog?

From what I understand, DogmaDog, aren't Iraqi firearms hits due to sheer volume of fire more than accuracy? (Although I've heard of a Dragunov wielder who had to be taken out by an Army designated marksman with a red-dot sighted M14.)

Also, please tell me why the USMC has decided against the M4?
 
Edward,

I haven't heard any reports of M16 shots at 1300 yards, and I find it hard to credit such, partly because the reticle in the the ACOG only had graduations to 800 meters (the iron sights also only adjust to 800 m). Going from 600 to 1000 yards using 80 grain bullets requires the shooter to incline the muzzle by 20 minutes of angle (IIRC), so I'd guess that a target at 1300 yards would be below the visual field within the scope when the muzzle was elevated sufficiently to hit it (does that make sense?).

As far as A4 vs. M4, I'm not privy to all the politics involved, and of course the money, but part of the issue was that Colt wanted to sell M4s as a package with all sorts of accessories for each weapon, and the Marine Corps wanted to be able to buy stuff piecemeal, or not at all. The USMC also found that scores on the requalification course went down when shooters switched from the A2 to the M4--the 20" barrel, longer sight radius, and possibly sturdier stock favor the A2 when it comes to hitting the target. The USMC requal course is fired at 200, 300, and 500 yard lines...it's not clear that the 20" barrel is the better choice, considering that much of our fighting is at closer ranges.

As far as Iraqi hits go...well, you shoot enough, you'll hit something. You see them on TV, firing from their hip, kinda looking in the general direction of where they are shooting. I'm sure there are some marksmen among them...we just didn't run into any (thankfully).

DogmaDog
 
I get it, but it's possible that the Marine in question (a PFC) was using a lighter bullet weight.

Makes sense to me re: the M16A2 and the M4, and I can see why the USMC would want to not overburden its troops with potentially unnecessary gear. AFAIK the switchover to the XM8 system is based on the assumption that the size of the M4 is more preferable for "general" actions of the US military (tight engagements in urban terrain) while the 20" barrel and accuracy of the M16 are more appropriate for sharpshooting, thus the Sharpshooter variant (remove the barrel sleeve, remove the gas piston, operating rod, replace the 12.5" barrel with a 20" match-grade barrel). Hopefully the conversions can be done lower than the battalion level where it's reportedly at.

I see, re: the Iraqis; nonetheless, I'm assuming that your hit-loss ratio was sufficiently lopsided in the US favor? ;)
 
am i the only one noticing the factual errors in those 2 articles?

anyway if i had to pick an AR, m16 would be my last choice!

id pick a western made ak knock off, not the galil though

id prolly take on of the finnish ones, they are called sako or valmet,cant remember right now

they have the ak feeding system with the extra gas chamber thingie(cant remember the right name in english sorry) but with western quality, not that russian aks are bad quality, just that finnish ones have better quality

id get it in 7.62x 39 and the 5.56x45 (they have both!) depending on which country i was gonna use it in (which kind of ammo is more available)

but all in all id prefer the superior power of the 7.62 x 39 over the 5.56 anytime, up to say 300 meters,they are pretty similar,but beyond that ak kicks the m16s ass all the way to 500 in means of power

i dont have the numbers in my head, there are some good numbers out for comparing the power of the 2 rounds in physics terms (joule and KJ and etc)at diffrent ranges etc on the internet

do a google
 
I had thought that the 5.56 were just as effective due to there higher velocity ?
While the 7.62 is much more effective against solid obsticales like putting holes in doors, walls and soft skin vechicles.

Draw back it the extra weight of amo and gun.
Anyway what ran dose combat / skimish takes place now ? IIRC during ww2 it was 150ms.
 
their velocity is pretty much the same,m 16 is slighty higher
ak around 660-700

m16 around 800 (pretty sure its 700-750 or so)
only when they do hit, the ak delivers a big fat 7.62 = more power, bigger hole :eek:


up to 100 meters, m16 is better, tighter groupings when on full auto, slighty lighter in weight etc

200 meters or more, on single shot, m16 is more accurate, but at longer ranges, that dosent really matter, cause the m16 is no good
the knock down power of the 7.62x39 is superior

conclusion? m16 = great SMG

but as an assault rifle ak is better,alot more reliable than m16, cheaper to produce etc

the reason m16 jammed alot, and still dose, can only partially be explained by bad ammo and steel chambers as opposed to chrome ones, the main problem is in the design

i quote some sgt whos name i cant remember: "m16 defecates where it eats"
when its fired carbon residue from the cordite in the cartridge is blown into the whatchucallit!!

crap i gotta learn all the english names for the difrent parts in guns!

the reason us has stuck with it, is the same reason the english have stucked with their la-85 (or is it sa-80?) anyways most you know what im talking about,those green bullpup non functioning pieces of crap that they had to take to HK in order to get them to work!

reason? national pride!

oh and forget everything you migh have heard about hydro shock, or poison bullets or tumbling rounds!

all bullets are poison(=unplasent to be hit by), cause shock(=im hit!am i hit? im hit!)
and tumble if the hit something the right (wrong?) way!!

ps.@edward eye,dude do you know what would happen if someone hit you in the forehead with a 5.56 from 1.2 km?
i donno either, but i seriously doubt it would ever break skin,it would prolly just piss you off!:lol:
 
Jawz II said:
200 meters or more, on single shot, m16 is more accurate, but at longer ranges, that it dosent really matter, cause the m16 is no good
the knock down power of the 7.62x39 is superior
Click to expand...

Along with the recoil power. The M14 fired 7.62 and after the 3rd shot on full auto wasn't good for anything other then an AA gun.
 
but all in all id prefer the superior power of the 7.62 x 39 over the 5.56 anytime, up to say 300 meters,they are pretty similar,but beyond that ak kicks the m16s ass all the way to 500 in means of power
Click to expand...

But KE and momentum at 500 meters is meaningless because won't be hitting anything at 500 meters with any open-site 7.62x39 AK-47 version. Trust me.

Its true that the 7.62x39 is heavier, making it somewhat more poweful but its shortened case means its velocity is low(2,400 fps) compared to its larger version, the 7.62x54R.(2,800 fps. The 5.56x45mm is something like 3000 to 3300 fps depending on the rifle.)

Thats takes away any hope of open-site shooting beyond 300 meters for average soldiers. If you slap a scope on an AK you can increase its accuracy greatly. Mainly because the fixedsights on most AK versions are horrible.

But the whole reason that assuault rifles came into being is because it became obvious that soldiers very rarely see the enemy beyond 300 meters.

If I were looking for something which could hit targets beyond 300 meters with incredible stopping power, I would choose the 7.62x51mm NATO in which ever rifle I could get. G3 or M-14 ect. Its almost as light as the 7.62x39 but you can hit human size targets 800-1000 meters away.

Below 500 meters the 5.56x45mm is more than adequate. Plus if your rifle fires 5.56x45mm rounds then you can carry twice the amount of ammo compared to the 7.62x39mm.

The Soviet Union realized the inferiority of 7.62x39 in the early-1970s when they replaced it with the 5.45x39mm.

the reason m16 jammed alot, and still dose, can only partially be explained by bad ammo and steel chambers as opposed to chrome ones, the main problem is in the design
Click to expand...

They fixed those in 1967 as I stated in the artical. The M-16 uses both chromed bores and high quality ammo.
 
The Soviet Union realized the inferiority of 7.62x39 in the early-1970s when they replaced it with the 5.45x39mm.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The 7.62 is pretty much an obsolete caliber for anything other than high-powered rifles.

This is why nearly every developed nation and most developing nations have adopted it in favor of the 7.62*39. The ones who still uses it standardly only do so because its all they have or all they can afford.

the reason us has stuck with it, is the same reason the english have stucked with their la-85 (or is it sa-80?) anyways most you know what im talking about,those green bullpup non functioning pieces of crap that they had to take to HK in order to get them to work!
Click to expand...

Germany, France, Russia, Japan, India, Swistzerland, Swedan and alot of other countries use 5.56x39mm in their own rifles. Its not Just the UK and US.

Its like the 9mm Para of the rifle bullets.
 
MarineCorps said:
Along with the recoil power. The M14 fired 7.62 and after the 3rd shot on full auto wasn't good for anything other then an AA gun.
Click to expand...
you cant hit anything with any gun at full auto at 200 meters

you would shoot single shots!
 
Bizon77 said:
Exactly. The 7.62 is pretty much an obsolete caliber for anything other than high-powered rifles.

This is why nearly every developed nation and most developing nations have adopted it in favor of the 7.62*39. The ones who still uses it standardly only do so because its all they have or all they can afford.



Germany, France, Russia, Japan, India, Swistzerland, Swedan and alot of other countries use 5.56x39mm in their own rifles. Its not Just the UK and US.

Its like the 9mm Para of the rifle bullets.
Click to expand...

Also, I'm willing to bet that %99 of all western assault rifles designed after 1974 uses the 5.56x45mm.
 
Bugfatty300 said:
But KE and momentum at 500 meters is meaningless because won't be hitting anything at 500 meters with any open-site 7.62x39 AK-47 version. Trust me.

Its true that the 7.62x39 is heavier, making it somewhat more poweful but its shortened case means its velocity is low(2,400 fps) compared to its larger version, the 7.62x54R.(2,800 fps. The 5.56x45mm is something like 3000 to 3300 fps depending on the rifle.)

Thats takes away any hope of open-site shooting beyond 300 meters for average soldiers. If you slap a scope on an AK you can increase its accuracy greatly. Mainly because the fixedsights on most AK versions are horrible.

But the whole reason that assuault rifles came into being is because it became obvious that soldiers very rarely see the enemy beyond 300 meters.

If I were looking for something which could hit targets beyond 300 meters with incredible stopping power, I would choose the 7.62x51mm NATO in which ever rifle I could get. G3 or M-14 ect. Its almost as light as the 7.62x39 but you can hit human size targets 800-1000 meters away.

Below 500 meters the 5.56x45mm is more than adequate. Plus if your rifle fires 5.56x45mm rounds then you can carry twice the amount of ammo compared to the 7.62x39mm.

The Soviet Union realized the inferiority of 7.62x39 in the early-1970s when they replaced it with the 5.45x39mm.



They fixed those in 1967 as I stated in the artical. The M-16 uses both chromed bores and high quality ammo.
Click to expand...



peneteration and power at 500 meters is not meaningless,you trust me!

at least not if you are talking about war where millions of rounds are fired from both sides at all kinds of ranges,and not a one on one duell


soldiers might not see each other at 300m in urban areas and jungle, but out in the open where big groups of soldiers fight,the distance is bound to be more than 100 meter, with both sides in lines

example what if you are firing at a truck from 200m? or chopper? or if youre shooting at someone from 100 meters, only the person youre trying to shoot is behind something the ".22" wont peneterate? like a sheet of paper... ;)



i didnt find aks that inaccurate, they tend to pull alittle to the left,thats about it,iron isnt the best,but it works

im not a good shot,but then again you have to be an exceptional shooter to hit someone from 300m with any AR,so i dont see your point

as far as rifles go, i would pick 7.62x51 (g3) too for alround fighting,unless i was going to some jungle,its the better choice for open fields,mountain, desert, even urban fighting,cause it can defeat most kinds of cover in citys,house walls, etc

or even better, for long range shooting only id get one of those expencive bolt action hunting rifles with a good scope (308 and bigger)!

or a SVD dragynov 7.62x54
(damn those look sweet)


Bugfatty300 said:
Also, I'm willing to bet that %99 of all western assault rifles designed after 1974 uses the 5.56x45mm.
Click to expand...

yeah most(all?) western countries jumped on the 5.56 bandwagon, after america introduced it, just like they did with the 7.62 nato when it was new.

many have even rifles that use m16 magazines!

why?

because of alittle thing called nato!

america was supposed to rescue us from the russians!!


i dont have to explain more, do i?
 
example what if you are firing at a truck from 200m? or chopper? or if youre shotting at someone from 100meters,only the person youre trying to shoot is behind something the ".22" wont peneterate? like a sheet of paper...
Click to expand...

If I were firing from a helicopter I would use a M2 machine gun or a 7.62x51mm machine gun which is most likely what you would find mounted on a helicopter or truck. Not an SKS or Ak-47.

soldiers might not see each other at 300m in urban areas and jungle,but out in the open where big groups of soldiers fight,the distance is bound to be at least 100 meter or alot more, with both sides in lines
Click to expand...

Which is where a 7.62x51mm machine gun or squad automatic comes into role. Again there are better replacements for the 7.62x39mm.

im not a good shot,but then again you have to be exceptional to hit someone from 300 m with any AR,so i dont see your point
Click to expand...

Then every soldier, sailor, airmen in the U.S. armed forces must be super expert marksmen then. :rolleyes:

I regularly pick-off soda cans at 300+ meters with my Cold haevy barrel AR-15. Can you or any average shooter do that with an AK or SKS?
 
because of alittle thing called nato!
Click to expand...

Japan and India are part of NATO? How do you explain all the other non-NATO countries that have adopted the 5.56mm?

And even the soviets ditched the 7.62*39 for the 5.45*39mm.

This is a flawed arguement.
 
read my line you quoted up there,it said if you were firing AT a chopper, not from

or a house, or car, or whatever someone is in/behind that you are trying to kill

in war its a really good thing to have all of your soldiers effective, at longer ranges too, as opposed to having 2 MGs firing and the rest of the troops holding their penises and watching!


ps.im begining to doubt you got the whole metric system down...

300m is really goddamn long,you can hardly even see a can at that range...

ps2.cans are all you can kill at 300m with m16 :D

maybe cats too,havent tried it..

ps3.read this article, written by an officer who served in nam,and was one of the first to be issued what he calls: "the little black gun that wouldnt shoot"

http://www.jouster.com/articles30m1/index.html
 
ps2.cans are all you can kill at 300m with m16
Click to expand...

what If you pocket the round in hes open mouth ? or an eye ?
They should just increase the barrel lenght to L 14
and bring back big bayonets :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kyriakos
Was there any realistic or worthwhile French goal in the peninsular war?
Replies
17
Views
914
Birdjaguar
Birdjaguar
S
Is this real history?
Replies
19
Views
903
Patine
Patine
Lonecat Nekophrodite
Analyze this Siege of Numidia scene in Gladiator II
Replies
8
Views
1K
Lonecat Nekophrodite
Lonecat Nekophrodite
S
The Market Line (UPDATED for 1/1/2025)
Replies
2
Views
497
PiR
PiR
innonimatu
Religion, liberalism, socialism, conservatism - the past casts long shadows
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
Birdjaguar
Birdjaguar
Back
Top Bottom