The Conservative Cave

Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: asdf2231 on October 22, 2008, 07:19:30 AM

Title: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: asdf2231 on October 22, 2008, 07:19:30 AM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4279340

Quote
ColoradoMagician  (150 posts)        Tue Oct-21-08 09:21 AM
Original message
Our soldiers weapons constantly jamming - Today Show
I can understand that we Americans argue the troops should be in war. Could we at least give them some tools that work?!?!?


Un-****ing-believable


Quote
lpbk2713  (1000+ posts)      Tue Oct-21-08 09:23 AM
Response to Original message
1. Procured from the lowest bidder.
 China.


Quote
billyoc  (1000+ posts)        Tue Oct-21-08 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
2. Jammin' Jenny, I believe, was the original nickname for the M-16.
 The Navy never even considered using them, AFAIK, they still use M-14's.


Quote
jmowreader (1000+ posts)        Tue Oct-21-08 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
3. No shit. The M-16 has ALWAYS been bad about this
 It's all in the gas system. H&K has a direct-replacement upper receiver for the M-16 and M-4 (the part is the HK416) that essentially solves this problem, but the Army doesn't want it for some reason.


Quote
DemoTex  (1000+ posts)        Tue Oct-21-08 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. During the battle of LZ Bird (12/27/1966) almost every M-16 jammed.


Quote
GTRMAN  (1000+ posts)      Tue Oct-21-08 09:59 AM
Response to Original message
4. not surprising
 They're still packing M-16s as far as I know. I guess it's an updated version from the one I carried, but it looks like they never have been able to fix it's fatal flaw.


 :whatever:




Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: franksolich on October 22, 2008, 07:21:44 AM
I'll reserve judgement about these firearms until the lying titty primitive weighs in.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Toastedturningtidelegs on October 22, 2008, 07:26:23 AM
I'll reserve judgement about these firearms until the lying titty primitive weighs in.
You may be waiting awhile Frank! He's probably still slumbering in an alcoholic haze. I'm sure as soon as he wakes and drinks his morning 12 pack, he will honor us with some tale of daring do with an m-16.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: TheSarge on October 22, 2008, 07:33:24 AM
(http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/2418/wtfvg8jl6.jpg)
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: asdf2231 on October 22, 2008, 07:56:12 AM
You may be waiting awhile Frank! He's probably still slumbering in an alcoholic haze. I'm sure as soon as he wakes and drinks his morning 12 pack, he will honor us with some tale of daring do with an m-16.

Nah, if he sees it he will chime in about the beloved Ithica 12 gauge he pointed at John Warner's chest and talk about how they all used AK's in the Super Special Forces Green Beret Marine Recon SEAL monkey forces.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Rebel on October 22, 2008, 07:57:59 AM
Quote
DemoTex  (1000+ posts)        Tue Oct-21-08 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. During the battle of LZ Bird (12/27/1966) almost every M-16 jammed.

They're not USING Vietnam-era M-16's, or SP1's jackass, they're using A2's or M-4's. Chances are, if their weapons are jamming up on them THIS much, they need to get'em swapped out at the armorer or start using some CLP for a change. The A2's and M-4's do NOT jam as much as you moonbats are portraying.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on October 22, 2008, 09:20:36 AM
Not good, not good at all.

Jammed weapons = fewer dead Iraqi women and children.

 :hammer:
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Texacon on October 22, 2008, 09:35:25 AM
I'll reserve judgement about these firearms until the lying titty primitive weighs in.

SEALS don't use the M-16.  If TiT chimes in on this one ...... he would be making a mistake.   :-)

KC
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Texacon on October 22, 2008, 09:37:23 AM
The M-16 I carried in the 82nd was a damn fine rifle.  The only time I ever had problems with it was if we had been shooting a lot of blanks through it and didn't have time to clean it.

KC
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on October 22, 2008, 09:54:26 AM
You couldn't pay people to be that ignorant.

Jamming in VN was due to a combination of the gas system's inherent features, morons at Army Ordnance deciding to insist the ammo be loaded with entirely the wrong kind of (very dirty-burning) powder in a 'cost-saving' move, and a wholly-baseless belief - not coordinated with the morons screwing up the ammo - that the M16 didn't need to be cleaned and hence needed no cleaning kits (the M14's cleaning rods, made for a 7.62mm bore, would of course not fit in the M16's smaller 5.56mm bore).

The prime cause, the foul ammo, has been gone from the system for 40 years.  XM193 Ball for the M16/M16A1 has been issued since then, and along with basic user maintenance and detail improvements to the weapon in the A1 version, totally addressed the problem.  Coincident with the introduction of the M16A2 over 20 years ago, the standard ammo became XM855 Ball, which is designed for the NATO SS109 bullet, requiring a faster spin for stable flight, and so the M16A2 barrel has a more aggressive or faster rifling pitch than earlier versions.  The A2 (and M4 carbine, which was briefly referred to as the M16A4 before being adopted as a Carbine) will handle all military 5.56mm ammo and about any commercial .223 Remington loading you could physically fit into the magazine.  The XM855 or any 'Green Tip' ammo should only be fired in an M16A2, M4 Carbine, or civilian rifle specifically designed to supply the aggressive rifling pitch necessary to spin the SS109 bullets.  I have fired some Green Tip from a .223 Ruger M77, a tack-driver (for a light sport rifle) able to deliver one-hole groups at that range using XM193 Ball, and at 50m five bullets from the XM855 made a horizontal 4" spread in a nice even line 3" below the point of aim, and all of them went through the target sideways (for some odd reason of chance, the bullet points were all up and pointing toward the point of aim).

Jamming now is due to one of two things - bad magazines or dirt, and dirt is strictly an operator issue.  You can't flop your ass down in the sand and dump your rifle beside you or under your crap, and then not carefully check it for grit and clean it out when you get back up.  It is also much better to use a dry graphite or Teflon lubricant in desert or cold environments than any kind of liquid, the liquid lube is a sand magnet in hte desert, and in the cold it will quickly render the weapon inop due to vastly-increased viscosity in cold conditions which seriously interferes with movement of the lockwork and firing pin. 
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Rebel on October 22, 2008, 10:22:42 AM
You couldn't pay people to be that ignorant.

Jamming in VN was due to a combination of the gas system's inherent features, morons at Army Ordnance deciding to insist the ammo be loaded with entirely the wrong kind of (very dirty-burning) powder in a 'cost-saving' move, and a wholly-baseless belief - not coordinated with the morons screwing up the ammo - that the M16 didn't need to be cleaned and hence needed no cleaning kits (the M14's cleaning rods, made for a 7.62mm bore, would of course not fit in the M16's smaller 5.56mm bore).

The prime cause, the foul ammo, has been gone from the system for 40 years.  XM193 Ball for the M16/M16A1 has been issued since then, and along with basic user maintenance and detail improvements to the weapon in the A1 version, totally addressed the problem.  Coincident with the introduction of the M16A2 over 20 years ago, the standard ammo became XM855 Ball, which is designed for the NATO SS109 bullet, requiring a faster spin for stable flight, and so the M16A2 barrel has a more aggressive or faster rifling pitch than earlier versions.  The A2 (and M4 carbine, which was briefly referred to as the M16A4 before being adopted as a Carbine) will handle all military 5.56mm ammo and about any commercial .223 Remington loading you could physically fit into the magazine.  The XM855 or any 'Green Tip' ammo should only be fired in an M16A2, M4 Carbine, or civilian rifle specifically designed to supply the aggressive rifling pitch necessary to spin the SS109 bullets.  I have fired some Green Tip from a .223 Ruger M77, a tack-driver (for a light sport rifle) able to deliver one-hole groups at that range using XM193 Ball, and at 50m five bullets from the XM855 made a horizontal 4" spread in a nice even line 3" below the point of aim, and all of them went through the target sideways (for some odd reason of chance, the bullet points were all up and pointing toward the point of aim).

Jamming now is due to one of two things - bad magazines or dirt, and dirt is strictly an operator issue.  You can't flop your ass down in the sand and dump your rifle beside you or under your crap, and then not carefully check it for grit and clean it out when you get back up.  It is also much better to use a dry graphite or Teflon lubricant in desert or cold environments than any kind of liquid, the liquid lube is a sand magnet in hte desert, and in the cold it will quickly render the weapon inop due to vastly-increased viscosity in cold conditions which seriously interferes with movement of the lockwork and firing pin. 

Now that man knows his rounds.  :cheersmate:
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: TheSarge on October 22, 2008, 10:34:26 AM
They're not USING Vietnam-era M-16's, or SP1's jackass, they're using A2's or M-4's. Chances are, if their weapons are jamming up on them THIS much, they need to get'em swapped out at the armorer or start using some CLP for a change. The A2's and M-4's do NOT jam as much as you moonbats are portraying.

Actually in Iraq you have to dial back the amount of CLP you use.  The dust there is the quality of baby powder and using normal amounts of CLP attracts that stuff like crazy.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Tucker on October 22, 2008, 10:38:14 AM
Let us not forget the other war hero at the dump..... 11bravo. He'll set them straight. He has to go and re watch Hamburger Hill first.


DAT is correct regarding the A2. The M16 had some problems but with the the model M16A1 with its forward bolt assist, the problems pretty much disappeared. Towards the end of the war, the XM177E2 was introduced. The put the rifle into a whole nuther level of excellence. This weapon was the precursor to the A2M4 that is used today. If this weapon didn't function under combat conditions, it would be on the shelf. It's not so it does.


Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: NHSparky on October 22, 2008, 10:39:39 AM
Quote
billyoc  (1000+ posts)        Tue Oct-21-08 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
2. Jammin' Jenny, I believe, was the original nickname for the M-16.
 The Navy never even considered using them, AFAIK, they still use M-14's.

In-****in correct.  I did my small-arms quals on my first boat 20 years ago with an M16, .45, and 12-gauge Mossberg pump.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Tantal on October 22, 2008, 11:00:06 AM
Although I don't agree with the OP, I'd still rather have the HK 416 upper. Cleaner and cooler. Although I own 5, I'm still not a big fan of the M-16/AR-15 line of weapons. The only matter I'll agree with the communists on is their love of the AK. As the great philosopher Samuel L. Jackson once said "AK-47....when you absolutely, positively have to kill every motherf@&*er in the room....accept no substitutes."
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: asdf2231 on October 22, 2008, 11:55:45 AM
Quote
slampoet (1000+ posts)      Wed Oct-22-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. The 61-year-old AK-47 just works. Our military has had 60 years to deal with this.
 If ever there was a case against military pork spending and the real hidden cost in lives of making every single weapon in multiple congressional districts, you would think that this would be the one.
 

 
Quote
greyhound1966 (1000+ posts)        Wed Oct-22-08 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Good point. Political pork over functionality, the M-16 is a good example
 of why we spend a trillion a year and get almost nothing in return.

Do you suppose that once things begin to get bad enough people will get fed up with pounding sand down this rat hole?


Quote
greyhound1966 (1000+ posts)        Wed Oct-22-08 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
14. Over-complicated design and too much shell for a .22.
 IIRC, the idea of using a 30-30 case and necking it down for a .22 cal bullet came from the military itself. The original rifle and the round it was designed for was supposed to be very accurate and reliable.

In typical DoD fashion, instead of going with simple and reliable, we get the opposite because profits are much bigger and who cares if a few losers die because of it? If they had anything going for them they wouldn't be in the services.

Oh, how I hate these ****ers!
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: TheSarge on October 22, 2008, 12:07:08 PM
Quote
slampoet (1000+ posts)      Wed Oct-22-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. The 61-year-old AK-47 just works.

Imagine that...a DUmmie holding up as an example..the favorite weapon of every terroist and Third World dictator on the planet today.

 :whatever:
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on October 22, 2008, 12:20:39 PM
An AKMS or one of its near-clones is a world-beater for totally unskilled labor, MOUT by anyone, or as the primary weapon for dismounts in a Soviet-style Motorized Rifle Regiment or other Mech organization.  Compared to an M16A1, M16A2, or M4, though, it leaves a little bit to be desired as an all-purpose universal long arm for a First-World trained military.  Both have their strengths:  Durability/reliability for the AK, significant accuracy advantage for engagements at or beyond 150 meters for the M16 family.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: BlueStateSaint on October 22, 2008, 03:56:27 PM
This DUmb**** needs to read up more . . .

Quote
greyhound1966
 IIRC, the idea of using a 30-30 case and necking it down for a .22 cal bullet came from the military itself.

I lost a bet one time on this very question.  I said that it was a necked-down 7.26x51 (.308 Winchester, for those who don't know), and a friend of mine bet me $20 that it was a .300 Savage-based round.  Needless to say, it was based on the .300 Savage.  (Which reminds me--maybe I should get one of those!)

Just another minor instance of DUmb****s actually knowing nothing about the military . . . except TomInTib, that is.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: franksolich on October 22, 2008, 04:17:25 PM
Just another minor instance of DUmb****s actually knowing nothing about the military . . . except TomInTib, that is.

I am truly disappointed.

I wanted to withhold my own opinion of the matter until the lying titty primitive chimed in, and here it is, several hours later, and the lying titty primitive hasn't shown up at this bonfire yet.

Rendering me opinionless.

I dunno.  Maybe the lying titty primitive is busy, being a barker for hand-held egg-beaters at some trade show or local fair or something--you know, where someone sets up a 4'x8' table with some posters in the background, and goes through a bunch of food products, showing how the implement works, and selling them for $20 per to an admiring crowd.

Although the lying titty primitive looks as if he's more adept at capturing the attention of flies, and not housewives bored with whatever hubby is doing, and so looking for some other diversion.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: GOBUCKS on October 22, 2008, 05:05:01 PM
Quote
I dunno.  Maybe the lying titty primitive is busy, being a barker for hand-held egg-beaters at some trade show or local fair or something--you know, where someone sets up a 4'x8' table with some posters in the background, and goes through a bunch of food products, showing how the implement works, and selling them for $20 per to an admiring crowd.

He's Vince, the Sham-Wow guy!!


(Note we've still never heard the story of his imaginary gig on the humongous imaginary yacht.)
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Airwolf on October 22, 2008, 06:50:37 PM
You couldn't pay people to be that ignorant.

Jamming in VN was due to a combination of the gas system's inherent features, morons at Army Ordnance deciding to insist the ammo be loaded with entirely the wrong kind of (very dirty-burning) powder in a 'cost-saving' move, and a wholly-baseless belief - not coordinated with the morons screwing up the ammo - that the M16 didn't need to be cleaned and hence needed no cleaning kits (the M14's cleaning rods, made for a 7.62mm bore, would of course not fit in the M16's smaller 5.56mm bore).

The prime cause, the foul ammo, has been gone from the system for 40 years.  XM193 Ball for the M16/M16A1 has been issued since then, and along with basic user maintenance and detail improvements to the weapon in the A1 version, totally addressed the problem.  Coincident with the introduction of the M16A2 over 20 years ago, the standard ammo became XM855 Ball, which is designed for the NATO SS109 bullet, requiring a faster spin for stable flight, and so the M16A2 barrel has a more aggressive or faster rifling pitch than earlier versions.  The A2 (and M4 carbine, which was briefly referred to as the M16A4 before being adopted as a Carbine) will handle all military 5.56mm ammo and about any commercial .223 Remington loading you could physically fit into the magazine.  The XM855 or any 'Green Tip' ammo should only be fired in an M16A2, M4 Carbine, or civilian rifle specifically designed to supply the aggressive rifling pitch necessary to spin the SS109 bullets.  I have fired some Green Tip from a .223 Ruger M77, a tack-driver (for a light sport rifle) able to deliver one-hole groups at that range using XM193 Ball, and at 50m five bullets from the XM855 made a horizontal 4" spread in a nice even line 3" below the point of aim, and all of them went through the target sideways (for some odd reason of chance, the bullet points were all up and pointing toward the point of aim).

Jamming now is due to one of two things - bad magazines or dirt, and dirt is strictly an operator issue.  You can't flop your ass down in the sand and dump your rifle beside you or under your crap, and then not carefully check it for grit and clean it out when you get back up.  It is also much better to use a dry graphite or Teflon lubricant in desert or cold environments than any kind of liquid, the liquid lube is a sand magnet in hte desert, and in the cold it will quickly render the weapon inop due to vastly-increased viscosity in cold conditions which seriously interferes with movement of the lockwork and firing pin. 


What he said.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Tucker on October 22, 2008, 08:08:16 PM
This DUmb**** needs to read up more . . .

I lost a bet one time on this very question.  I said that it was a necked-down 7.26x51 (.308 Winchester, for those who don't know), and a friend of mine bet me $20 that it was a .300 Savage-based round.  Needless to say, it was based on the .300 Savage.  (Which reminds me--maybe I should get one of those!)

Just another minor instance of DUmb****s actually knowing nothing about the military . . . except TomInTib, that is.

The 30-30 is a tapered case with a rim.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Rebel on October 22, 2008, 08:11:05 PM
The 30-30 is a tapered case with a rim.

Yeah, I'm thinking the DUmmie is thinking of a .30 Caliber that the M-1 Carbine fires.

For velocity? The tapered round is the ONLY way to go. Maybe someone should mention to the fool that ALL military small-arms, aside from maybe sub-machine guns, have tapered ammunition.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Tucker on October 22, 2008, 08:15:19 PM
The 30-30 is the round mentioned by Kennedy as the round that is a vest buster and should be banned.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Rebel on October 22, 2008, 08:16:33 PM
The 30-30 is the round mentioned by Kennedy as the round that is a vest buster and should be banned.

I hear teflon-coated work pretty well also.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Tucker on October 22, 2008, 08:21:09 PM
I hear teflon-coated work pretty well also.

That would be the KTW rounds that were labeled as cop killer bullets. They got banned after two cops were killed with them. One got shot in the side where there were no panel and the other one got shot in the head.

Any rifle round will penetrate a level ll vest. Most rifle rounds will penetrate a level lll vest.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Tucker on October 22, 2008, 08:28:35 PM
Didja ever see that video of the guy holding the steel plate while some other dude shot it with a FAL from about 10 yards?

No. Did it punch a hole in it?
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on October 22, 2008, 09:02:09 PM
Surprisingly not.  I forget how thick it was, but it knocked the guy back a bit when it hit the plate.  He was all dressed in Class III to hold the plate, but I still think he either very brave or very stupid.

I'll go with "B" for $400, Alex.

 :mental:
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Peter3_1 on October 22, 2008, 09:13:27 PM
Stateside, we refered to the M-16 as the "Mattie Matel"  rifle. Most of us prefered the old M-14 and the 7.62 round. Der. Stoner did develope a formidable weapons system  that eventually gave us the M-15 out of the AR-15. But it was supposed to be a rifle, carbine and a SAW  FROM DAY ONE. But the "gumment" , as always, knew better.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Tucker on October 22, 2008, 09:16:24 PM
Surprisingly not.  I forget how thick it was, but it knocked the guy back a bit when it hit the plate.  He was all dressed in Class III to hold the plate, but I still think he either very brave or very stupid.

I'd vote very stupid. What was his DUmmy name. :evillaugh:
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Rebel on October 22, 2008, 09:17:12 PM
Stateside, we refered to the M-16 as the "Mattie Matel"  rifle. Most of us prefered the old M-14 and the 7.62 round. Der. Stoner did develope a formidable weapons system  that eventually gave us the M-15 out of the AR-15. But it was supposed to be a rifle, carbine and a SAW  FROM DAY ONE. But the "gumment" , as always, knew better.

Peter, you need an avatar, mang.

BTW, I don't know how many of you know this, but Peter, if I'm not mistaken, was in the infantry during the Vietnam War. He's just not one to brag about it like the ones who NEVER went, like TominTib.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Rebel on October 22, 2008, 09:20:54 PM
As for me, in a fight, I'd rather be throwing .308s at them from 600 yards while they try to get in range to shoot back at me.

Well, as for me, I'd rather be throwing grenades at the f'ers.  :evillaugh:

Hell, manually or with an M-79 or 203. Doesn't matter. MK-19 would be nice.  :-)
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Tucker on October 22, 2008, 09:22:05 PM
I have a Bushie M4, and I like the rifle, I shoot crappy Wolf ammo out of it most of the time, and it never gives me any problems, but, it's a semi, not a select fire.

As for me, in a fight, I'd rather be throwing .308s at them from 600 yards while they try to get in range to shoot back at me.

Did I ever mention that I do have an FAL? With my DPMS LR-308. :-)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/tucker13/f829c638.jpg)
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Tucker on October 22, 2008, 09:27:34 PM
I love the rifles Tucker, but damn, .308 is like buying gold right now.

Remember, I'm getting a divorce and money is something that you need only if you don't die today.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Peter3_1 on October 22, 2008, 09:29:03 PM
I was Mech. Inf. but was fortunate to stay stateside. I served with the 1/61 inf, 1/10 inf  and 2/10 inf.. Sheer luck of the screwed up Puzzle Palace left me without order for RVN, untill it was too late. .
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Airwolf on October 22, 2008, 09:32:34 PM
I wonder what a 30.06 armor piercing round would have done to that steel plate and the level III behind it? It has a tungsten steel core not a lead one like ball ammo.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Peter3_1 on October 22, 2008, 09:35:22 PM
What color is the tip on those? I have a couple dozen link belt and loose rounds  with black tipsfrom the early 1950's. If you'd like them.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Tucker on October 22, 2008, 09:40:32 PM
What color is the tip on those? I have a couple dozen link belt and loose rounds  with black tipsfrom the early 1950's. If you'd like them.

Black. I bought some AP rounds for my 03A3 while in Tennessee last week. :hyper:
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Peter3_1 on October 22, 2008, 09:41:16 PM
Thought so. But I don't own anything that is chambered .30-'06.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Gwitness on October 22, 2008, 11:59:00 PM
Quote
greyhound1966 (1000+ posts)        Wed Oct-22-08 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
14. Over-complicated design and too much shell for a .22.
 IIRC, the idea of using a 30-30 case and necking it down for a .22 cal bullet came from the military itself. The original rifle and the round it was designed for was supposed to be very accurate and reliable.

In typical DoD fashion, instead of going with simple and reliable, we get the opposite because profits are much bigger and who cares if a few losers die because of it? If they had anything going for them they wouldn't be in the services.

Oh, how I hate these ****ers!

The .223 round is a derivative of the .222 Remington...not the .308 or the .30-30
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: GOBUCKS on October 23, 2008, 01:15:51 AM
The .223 round is a derivative of the .222 Remington...not the .308 or the .30-30
Of course. It's really surprising that even a DUmmy would be making statements like they did. Anyone who had ever seen a .30-30 round, and a .223 or .222, would see the only similarity is the fact the cases are made of brass. It's surprising such a moron has ever heard the term "necked down".

I use both .300 Savage and .222 Rem. a lot.
One similarity is that in the '50s both were available and extremely popular in the Remington 722, and I believe for a short time both were chambered in Win. Model 70.

Both rounds are rimless, and that's about it.

The Savage is great for whitetails, and the .222 is a groundhog machine.
 
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: BlueStateSaint on October 23, 2008, 05:10:16 AM
The .223 round is a derivative of the .222 Remington...not the .308 or the .30-30

Ya might want to check that one--I found out that it was actually derived from the .300 Savage, which, as GOBUCKS said, is a great round for whitetails.  Had to do some digging around, but that's what I found.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on October 23, 2008, 09:36:46 AM
Ya might want to check that one--I found out that it was actually derived from the .300 Savage, which, as GOBUCKS said, is a great round for whitetails.  Had to do some digging around, but that's what I found.

Dunno about that, and kinda doubt it.  I've read that they were indeed an "Improved" .222 Rem, which is why the commercial round was called ".223 Rem" (The true bullet diameter of both is .224, like virtually all center-fire .22s) in order to distinguish it from the existing round.  If you look at the .222 and .223 cases, they are identical in every way except the headstamkp markings and the fact that the .223 case is a few mm longer behind the bottleneck, in order to hold enough powder to boost the bullet velocity up to the 3200-3500 fps neighborhood required to make it a man-killer instead of a chuck-killer.

The .300 Savage on the other hand has no dimensions in common with the .223 Rem, in fact it looks like a 7.62X51 NATO's little brother (Slightly smaller in every dimension except the bullet).  If anything it looks like a stretched Russkii 7.62X39.   
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: dutch508 on October 23, 2008, 09:51:01 AM
an M1 Garand, chambering a 30.06, will deal with DUmmie looters just fine.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: GOBUCKS on October 23, 2008, 10:01:50 AM
Quote
The .300 Savage on the other hand has no dimensions in common with the .223 Rem, in fact it looks like a 7.62X51 NATO's little brother (Slightly smaller in every dimension except the bullet).  If anything it looks like a stretched Russkii 7.62X39.   
 
Agree. Savage overall length is significantly greater than .222 or .223, shoulder angle is sharper and relatively short, overall diameter is considerably higher. Case volume is roughly twice that of .222 or .223. I can load to within about 100-200 fps of .308 nominal velocity. Deer cannot feel the difference.
Title: Re: Primitives enlighten us on the M-16 weapon family...
Post by: Bondai on October 23, 2008, 12:32:29 PM
My favorite..


(http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d25/bondai/M1A.jpg)