Have I become un-american?

[Ned]

I just got done re-watching the movie BlackHawkDown. I caught myself paying way too much attention to what model the badguy's rifle was then if we were winning. New addiction-bad. :sidegrin_

[garybob]

No, not at all. You just came to the realiazation that the "bad guys" weapons are better than what "our" forces use.

[preokc]

Ned, the facination i had with my first ak purchases were the forbiddeness of this "evil" rifle that no one in in this country needs to own(if you listen to the clintons) after all there not for hunting. needless to say after watching "sniper" several times(this was a long time ago) somehow i wound up ordering a svd rifle. i would love to have a usmc m40 like tom berengers that could in reality shot groups in a hurricane that would put to shame anything a svd rifle could on a good day but it didnt have the forbidden fruit stigma that the svd rifle had so thats what i wound up with.once your into collecting military rifles you do this with every movie you watch. as far as its because there weapons are better than ours is TOTAL BULLSHIT! our awesome men and women are equiped with the best. there fighting for us and its our responsability to keep it that way!

[Ned]

"..as far as its because there weapons are better than ours is bull.." Ya- I agree to that Preokc. Part of this new addiction for me is based on the fact that these rifles were in use..err.. are in use against possible friendly forces (wordy cuz I'm trying to be politically correct..lol) I could never shoot an AK as well as a m16 at distance. My fondest memory of my military service was my DI bust'in my chops all the time because I didn't put my elbows in the dirt correctly while engaging targets from a foxhole. I used to swear to myself at him.."If you would just leave this dirtball pvt alone a minute I'll bust down that 300meter flat-green meany for ya!" I got me an Expert badge despite his constant nagging with a score of 40..AND I only used 38 rounds..hid the extra 2 in the sand so I wouldn't have to explain how. Funny how you develope that love-hate thing for your 'ol DI..I can still see his face like it was yesterday. I can barely hit the postal match target at 100 with my AK. :small_gri

[preokc]

Ned, now im all screwed up, i geuss i need to say 1, thanks for service to our country!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 2,i get the biggest kick out of seeing weapons i own in movies or books.3i wish you could take me through the shooting course. sounds like a blast. thanks for your your service!! Philp E.

[Nickle]

as far as its because there weapons are better than ours is TOTAL BULLSHIT! our awesome men and women are equiped with the best. there fighting for us and its our responsability to keep it that way!

I could argue that point, but, you'ld just lose anyways. I think that 32 years of military service gives me the credentials (esp when combined with civilian gun knowledge). We HAD the best, the M1/M14. The M16 has some stupid problems, but, not as bad as it used to be. The AK is the M1911 of assault rifles (or Timex watch if you prefer). It takes a licking and keeps on working. M16's have to be pretty clean to function. And, Rack-Grade M16's aren't overly accurate either, though some prep work will do wonders.

Just remember, your military's weapons were made by the lowest bidder.

Nickle

[Packrat]

And AKs can turn in some pretty good numbers too, if you do some work on them and feed them decent ammo. But they are good enough to take care of the 95% of combat that occurrs at 200 yds and under, and let the SVDs take care of the stuff over 200 yds. You can do that when you have a rifle firing a serious military cartridge available at squad level. Soviet tactical weapons were built for a different system than the NATO countries use. The Soviets did not assume that every soldier was a marksman that would take care of his weapon as if his life depended upon it, and MTK designed a rifle for those soldiers.

Plus, everyone who has handled a military AK is quick to point out that there is a great difference between them and the firearms built for the the capitalists. Apparently the crap that couldn't pass QA was assembled into rifles for export.

[preokc]

dear nickle, dear packrat, i would just start off by saying thanks for your service to and our country!!! personally i wouldnt want to be shot at by any rifle. especially like in somalia where it was at VERY close range. our government has made mistakes(i cant beleive im defending the government)like the sherman tank verses a panzer or tiger but the gentlemans comments were about somalia. the m16 had evolved into the m4 and to me is class A weapon.i dont mean to sound disrespectful because americans have died to the failure of the m16 to function but one of my best friends was airborne and lrrps, i see him daily, he says he carried a m16. he said he never had a problem with it. he said he started training with garands. and they didnt get m60s till he was almost gone. they had older browning machine guns and m14s. but to tell me an old ak like the somalia militia had was better than what our forces had is bullshit! i work six months out of the year to pay my taxes(i pay my own health care to) the only spending proposal i wish the government would increase is military spending!!!!!!!!!!!!! i love ak,s but in the end its not the weapon but the soilder its issued to, and thats why where the best,strongest, most powerful country in the world!!!!!!!!!!!! ps, last weekend at the range 223 rounds were going through plate steel almost twice as thick as the 762x39 steel core rounds were.

[Nickle]

Well, I carried an M16A1 for a living for quite a while. (My assigned weapons are currently an M9 and an M2, the M2 mounted on a track). I'll concede that the A2, with 62 gr, M855 ammo does penetrate plates really well. But, being the owner of numerous pieces of military firepower, an M14SA, a XM15E2, an L1A1, an SKS, a RomAK 3, numerous bolt guns (including a hand-rebuilt sniper rifle that'll put an M40A1 or M24 to shame), I can tell you that the M16 is fussy about dirt, it's a close tolerance gun, that's super accurate, but can jam easy if not properly maintained (kinda like an M9 Berretta). The AK and it's siblings are not close tolerance, easily maintained, not as accurate (as a rule), but 100% reliable in combat.

If you're using "iron" sights, and limit the range to 300 meters or less, I'd take the AK every time, as the M16 has no advantage.

[garybob]

Oh now, Ned and preokc don't get your panties in a bunch. I'm not slamming our troops in anyway shape or form.

The debate of 762x39 versus the 5.56 round will continue till we're all dead and gone.

If your shooting at paper out beyond 400 - 600 yards, I'll agree that the m-14/m-16 is superior to the Kalashnikov. But I think what we're talking about here is actual battle situations.

The problems with the mouse gun in Vietnam are well documented. Obviously it's a filthy blowback design that needs a fair amount of cleaning to perform properly. The government really pooched the cow when they strayed from the Armalite AR18 design which of course used a gas piston and pusher rod.

Why did our boys in Afghanistan scream and complain about the kill capability of their m16 and m4, and cry out for a real gun, ala M-14. Same thing with their puppy 9mm pistols.

Same thing in Somalia, strong evidence that the 5.56x45 ball round had poor stopping power, particularly when fired from the 14.5" m4 carbine.

I don't know bout where you live, but my newspaper's where I live showed with pictures and print and described how our boys were discarding their 5.56 weapons for the AK with approval from their CO. What's that tell us? This was/is of course in Iraq.

According to SOCOM the m4 carbine has a number of significant flaws. The most woriesome being, failure to extract, failure to eject, failure to function in desert and artic environments, too few rounds for barrel burst, and receiver explodes if fired when flooded with water.

Why has the Gov./military been conducting tests on new heavier rounds for the mousegun for what the last 3-5 years and now seem to be leaning toward the 6.8x43 round? Some mules the military are testing actually will accept a AK mag and perform with it, ammo and all.

I don't know what kinda steel plates preokc was shooting at but here's my own little test. 150 feet. Shooting at an old refrigerater. Three gun test. AK in 762x39, AK in 545x39 and ar15 in 5.56x45. Refrigerators as you know are double walled. Results, 762x39 in one side and out the other. Other two rounds penetrated one side but didn't come out the other. Should we discuss tree branches, auto glass, door skins, or walls of buildings.?

Back in the day like WWII our fine M1 and M14 that Nickie spoke of were the shit but our boys were much better marksman, and routinely fired on the enemy out and past 300 yds. In this day and age it's an accepted fact that most generally our boys aren't engaging till they see the enemy, so of course the emphasis in on CBC, and for that I'll take the AK over the m16 all day long.

I wonder how long the vietnamese would have lasted in their tunnels dragging an m16 through the dirt, mud, and humidity/moisture. Not long I'm afraid. Why were our boys instructed not to leave a loaded round in the chamber of an m16 over night?

Bottom line is that war is about killing even though people just want to believe it's just manuevers. And in war and battle at realistic distances and combat scenarios the AK is a far superior, better designed, longer lasting, more reliable killing machine.

[garybob]

I won't even mention the devestating results that my FAL had on the ole white appliance, a real combat rifle round, that .308.

And Ned, the next time your in the video store, pick up the tape, "We were soldiers".

[Ned]

Didn't the Army Ordanance guys skip a few steps upon the introduction of the M16 into the Vietnam conflict..like chroming and changing powder type which led to various troubles like..."Why were our boys instructed not to leave a loaded round in the chamber of an m16 over night?" I don't think the Army liked being told they had to use the m16 and kinda drug their feet. I'm not defending the M16. I grew up stak'inout groundpigs with an odd6 and wasn't too pleased with my initial basic training rifle. It had a slight twisting effect between the barrel assemble and the stock..lol..I could point around corners! I shot well though. :p

[Nickle]

Didn't the Army Ordanance guys skip a few steps upon the introduction of the M16 into the Vietnam conflict..like chroming and changing powder type which led to various troubles like..."Why were our boys instructed not to leave a loaded round in the chamber of an m16 over night?" I don't think the Army liked being told they had to use the m16 and kinda drug their feet. I'm not defending the M16. I grew up stak'inout groundpigs with an odd6 and wasn't too pleased with my initial basic training rifle. It had a slight twisting effect between the barrel assemble and the stock..lol..I could point around corners! I shot well though. :p

Any of you folks read "The Black Rifle"? If you haven't, you should. Pretty dry reading sometimes, but shows you how the Dept of Defense screwed the pooch.

And I wasn't aware that 18 comes before 15. The AR-18 was designed well after the M16 was put in production.

Myself, if I was to use what I wanted, it'd be the M14. Deadly accurate, out to 1000 meters (if you do your part, and it's a good rack-grade), lots of killing power, enough firepower (full-auto is overrated, best for idiots that can't shoot) and easy to maintain. Next choice would probably be a Dragunov/PSL/RomAK 3, same reasons. Then the FAL, then the AK-47/AKM. Last choices would be the M16 or AK-74.

Nickle

[223]

I'd take the AK every time, as the M16 has no advantage.


LOL,carry 400 rounds of 7.62x39 around for a while and report back :D