AKs, M14s and M16s! Oh My!

Jawz II · Post by **Jawz II** » Mon Aug 11, 2003 8:16 pm

in dense vegetation with humid air id take the ak over the m14 easy
in open fields m14 for the accuracy

also,the nam thing,carry an ak was prolly the best way of getting shot by your own mates if u were an american,actually i think later on in the war american soldier were forbidden to use aks just for that reason

with an ak u get the silhouette of charlie and get his treatment!

although ak is about the most reliable weapon i know and m16 is the exact opposit specially the m16a1

now ak isnt all that accurate but in the jungles in nam i dont think it mattered much

if i had to choose between m16 and m14 the choice would be easy,m14 all the way baby,id rather feel like an old fashion rifleman with a good rifle

id feel like a kid playing war with m16,did u all know that mattel the toy company manufactured at one point the plastic stock for the m16?

it had a mattel logo on the first series they made but later it was removed,because of the troops complainin about it,i understand them...

i didnt pull all these facts outta my ass
and i sure as hell didnt pull em outta counterstrike

and ohyeah hamboy if u r gonna say m16 was better than ak in nam,think
again

the VC and NVA won that war

with aks

Doyle · Post by **Doyle** » Mon Aug 11, 2003 8:26 pm

No, we lost due to politics; we actually killed far more VC and NVA than we lost. We lost about 58,000, while they lost about a million. Granted, I think more South Vietnamese were killed than American soldiers during our involvement, but if you combined the two losses, I think it would still be less than what the North suffered.

Jawz II · Post by **Jawz II** » Mon Aug 11, 2003 8:39 pm

actually i do know about the body count ,they lost about like 20 times more ppl than us

after all they didnt have an air force and heavy bombers and operation rolling thunders and carriers and battleships and agent orange and other goodies

the politics...

well whenever u kill alotta of civvies specially babies the rest of the world is gonna have thing to say about it or two

see the rest of us are thought to think for ourselves and not worship the flag and pray to the president,unlike u yanks

dosent change the fact,in a jungle id go with an ak,every time

i actually could take one apart and clean it and then put it back together before i was 14

about the thumbling m16 rounds,once i talked to a vietnam vet about it and he said GIs used to tell stories about that stuff just to sound badass

but i really dunno whos right

Doyle · Post by **Doyle** » Mon Aug 11, 2003 8:42 pm

Actually, the North committed far more atrocities and killed far more non-combatants than we did. In the Tet Offensive alone, I believe they slaughtered something in the area of 5,000 civvies.

jerman999 · Post by **jerman999** » Mon Aug 11, 2003 8:59 pm

Jawz II wrote:well whenever u kill alotta of civvies specially babies the rest of the world is gonna have thing to say about it or two

http://www.vhcma.org/fact.html

Isolated atrocities committed by American soldiers produced torrents of outrage from antiwar critics and the news media while Communist atrocities were so common
that they received hardly any attention at all. The United States sought to minimize and prevent attacks on civilians
while North Vietnam made attacks on civilians a centerpiece of its strategy. Americans who deliberately killed civilians received prison sentences while Communists who did so received commendations.
From 1957 to 1973, the National Liberation Front assassinated 36,725 South Vietnamese and abducted another 58,499. The death squads focused on leaders at the village level and on anyone who improved the lives of the peasants such as medical personnel, social workers, and schoolteachers.

Hammer · Post by **Hammer** » Mon Aug 11, 2003 10:02 pm

Like Doyle said, we lost due to politics. The U.S. Military did not fail that war the U.S. Politcians did.

Neon Dingo · Post by **Neon Dingo** » Mon Aug 11, 2003 10:54 pm

NOT Killzig wrote:Call me crazy, but did you just quote porcu and attribute the quote to Killzig?

What!? What are you talking about? I'd never attribute an incorrect quote to somebody on this forum who steals people's signatures...

Darwin_187 · Post by **Darwin_187** » Tue Aug 12, 2003 2:40 am

airsoft guy wrote:Ruger 10/22 I love mine, it's so freaking awesome, it's a great plinker or rifle for wee critters, for home defense it's not too good though being as it's a .22. For home defense go with a pump shotgun, people hear you rack that slide and they'll leave or piss themselves if they're in the same room, that way you don't have to shoot anyone and mess up your new apartment, that and shotguns have low penetration into even thin apartment walls with the right ammunition, and it's not too hard to miss with a shotgun.

I got nothing but love for my 10/22- just got it zeroed with a nice new Bushnell scope and spent the afternoon shooting the "5" out of "75" yards. It's a great little gun and is the single most accurate rimfire rifle I've ever fired.

As for shotguns, I've got an 870 express synthetic (3") and would recomend one to anybody looking for a shotgun that will ever see any sort of rough handling; mine has taken more than its fair share of abuse and has never even once given me any type of problem in over 5 years of fairly regular use.

Question for hammer et. al- I read (somewhere... ar15.com maybe?) that the A1 was simply rushed into service before the bugs had been worked out, and that Colt had told the Dept. of the army as much (that with the current standard ammo, around 50% of the rifles could be expected to fail over their operational life). You know if there's any truth to this?

Peace all,
Darwin.

Hammer · Post by **Hammer** » Tue Aug 12, 2003 4:19 am

The A1 was rushed in to service and mostly issued without cleaning kits, the weapon performed perfectly in controled shooting conditions. But in the real battlefield it had a good deal of problems.

Viktor · Post by **Viktor** » Tue Aug 12, 2003 11:46 am

Didn't the USAF take delivery of the first M16s? I'm sure I read they introduced them with proper training and cleaning kit and had no problems. Mind you, I think they were mostly issued to USAF MPs and therefore were not used in conditions such as the extended jungle firefights the grunts in the 2/7 Cav found themselves in around LZ X-Ray and LZ Albanny in the Ia Drang valley in '65....

While the AK family of weapons are designed to cope with a wide range of climatic conditions and can tolerate more neglect and fouling than most assault rifles due to fairly "open" manufacturing tolerances in its operating part, the whole "Shit in it, bury in the sand for 6 months, dig it back up and it'll work fine!" myth which surrounds these weapons is total bullshit! An AK needs its moving parts cleaned and gas fouling cleared every 400-500 rounds to remain operating reliably. You let the cleaning slide a little and the RoF will start dropping off and the low gas pressure at the piston will result in partial cycling of the weapon, causing mis-fed and stovepipe stoppages.

Watch any of the recent Iraq or current Liberian news footage where an AK is being fired and you'll see these guns having to be manually cycled again and again due to poor maintence/damage or badly stored Cold War surplus ammo.

Hammer · Post by **Hammer** » Tue Aug 12, 2003 6:25 pm

The USAF did take the first deliveries, and you're right about the AKs. The original Soviet one I got way back when has a nasty problem of collecting icky black powder on the gas piston, more so than any weapon I've ever fired.

Alphawulf · Post by **Alphawulf** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 8:55 am

Well here's how I look at it, it's the person behind the gun that makes most of the difference. If you've shot your gun before, and gotten a feel for it, that makes almost all the difference in the world. Unless it's a Taurus, which is utter crap.

trythebill · Post by **trythebill** » Thu Aug 14, 2003 5:11 am

Everyone seems to be missing one major point; the m14 is a battle rifle while the AK47 is an assault rifle. there is a difference, the battle rifle has a longer barrel, fires a full-power cartridge and is not to be used in automatic fire to any great effect. the m14 was implemented when the american rifleman was still thought to be in need of a weapon with long range and a large bullet.(.308 is just a shortened 30-06, with the proper adapter you can fire .308 from a 30-06 weapon) The AK47 was designed with the soviet doctrine of massive amounts of un-aimed automatic fire, much like the ppsh41 submachine guns of WW2. Both are reliable, well designed, and do their jobs well.

here's some thoughts on the AR15/M16 http://www.madogre.com/Interviews/Hate_the_AR15.htm

PerroViejo · Post by **PerroViejo** » Thu Aug 14, 2003 6:25 am

trythebill wrote:Everyone seems to be missing one major point; the m14 is a battle rifle while the AK47 is an assault rifle. there is a difference, the battle rifle has a longer barrel, fires a full-power cartridge and is not to be used in automatic fire to any great effect. the m14 was implemented when the american rifleman was still thought to be in need of a weapon with long range and a large bullet.(.308 is just a shortened 30-06, with the proper adapter you can fire .308 from a 30-06 weapon) The AK47 was designed with the soviet doctrine of massive amounts of un-aimed automatic fire, much like the ppsh41 submachine guns of WW2. Both are reliable, well designed, and do their jobs well.

here's some thoughts on the AR15/M16 http://www.madogre.com/Interviews/Hate_the_AR15.htm

This is a very enlightening / disturbing read. I wonder if people in the service are either encouraged or barred from learning this sort of thing; If that fellow is right, God help our troops in the middle east. Outside of damp tropical weather I think that desert warfare is the worst thing to throw at any weapon system, sand gets into everything.

Anybody know if the AR15 /M4 /M16 is the weapon at the heart of the Land Warrior system?

airsoft guy · Post by **airsoft guy** » Thu Aug 14, 2003 9:42 am

I do belive that the main weapon in the Land Warrior System is the M4 but I'm sure that the M-16 will be used in it since they can take all the same stuff and everyone is already issued the A2.

i hope all the US troops in the Middle East die

Now why would you say a thing like that? That's the kind of thing that warrents an angry mob comming for you in the middle of the night with pitchforks amd torches so the townsfolk can light you on fire and then toss you off a tall cliff onto jagged rocks.

Hammer · Post by **Hammer** » Thu Aug 14, 2003 10:12 pm

Who said that Airsoft guy?

OnTheBounce · Post by **OnTheBounce** » Thu Aug 14, 2003 10:34 pm

Hammer wrote:Who said that Airsoft guy?

I am wondering the same thing.

Did a post get deleted? Is there something in that link that I missed? Is AsG flame-baiting?

These questions (and many more) are to be answered in the next episode of Forum Antics: the Animated Series!

Or maybe not...

OTB

Hammer · Post by **Hammer** » Thu Aug 14, 2003 10:37 pm

What's my role in that series?

OnTheBounce · Post by **OnTheBounce** » Thu Aug 14, 2003 10:40 pm

Hammer wrote:What's my role in that series?

Well, they first cast Adam Baldwin in your role, but then there were about 75 revisions to the script and so you ended up argely as comic relief.

(It happens a lot. Just ask James Whale. Oh, wait! He's dead...)

OTB

Doyle · Post by **Doyle** » Thu Aug 14, 2003 10:46 pm

That was a wonderful little Porcu quote. Looks like it got deleted.