Should the US adopt the AK47 and ump the AR15

DaveH

DaveH

Joined
Dec 2, 1999
Messages
12,249
Just wondering when on 60 minutes the ambushed supply convery people all talked about how their rifles immediately jammed.

Or maybe they weren't good at keeping them clean?
 
Dave, I'd be more interested in knowing how the weapons performed in the hands of the combat troops. I think the Army has admitted its support personnel haven't gotten the kind of frontline training they needed for this war.
 
The army will continue to use the M16/M4. There are a number of programs going on for product improvement, in both function, and although I doubt it will see widespread use, caliber.

Face it, nobody is going to foot the bill for total replacement, and it really isn't needed. Heavier bullets in 5.56mm will be the future.
 
There was an article in our local paper that stated that USA soldiers could use liberated weapons if they got the OK. That was the same policy in Southeast Asia.

And truth be told, if I was plunked down in the sand, I'd want a AK, myself. I am befuddled on how a soldier can go through training and still not know how to clean FOUR PARTS and read service bulletins on CLP Break-Free. My flat-top AR-15 is now lightly oiled with CLP, but if some sniper needed the rifle and Uncle Sam came to get it, I'd degrease the bolt and bolt carrier (yeah, yeah, and pipe-stem-cleaner the gas tube and wipe off the firing pin) or make darn sure the new owner did the same.

Rather then issue the AK-47 or AKS-74, I'd take a good look at the Valmet or a Galil. Yes, I like the Frabrique Nationale FN FAL, but it's a tad heavy to hump every day, don't you think?
 
I've met alot of people who REALLY know thier stuff and swear by the AR-15, and raise hell every time a thread like this comes up. That being said I don't think I'll ever own another one myself. Just too darn cantankerous for my tastes. (This opinion coming from a guy who also prefers revolvers over autos)

An ironic thing about the weight issue regarding Galil's and FAL's is that when the M-16 first came out it was supposed to be like 7.5 pounds at the most, real light, etc. and then by the time they got done refining it the darn thing wasn't much lighter than the M-14 that it replaced!

I'd rather see FN's or Galils out there, as long as we're talking 5.56 rather than 7.62.

My solution...very low tech...rebarrel the Mini-14, slap it on synthetic and there ya' go...:D

Of course before anything of that nature (which would never happen until it's replaced by some kinda StarWars weapons) Perhaps they oughta evaluate whether there's a true equipment problem, or a training problem. (it aint usually the equipment when it comes down to this)
 
BreakFree CLP apparently attracts sand and grit and retains it in the action and the military supply people were aware of this long before we sent troops into the sandbox for the second time and issued only BreakFree CLP as the lubricant. There have been a number of articles on this issue, but I suggest that you go over to Col. David Hackworth's www.sftt.org site and see what the people there had to say about it. It all sounds very much like the ammunition question for the M-16 in VietNam back in the mid-1960s.*

For those of you who are all excited for the Galil, I suggest that you ask Emanuel. He apparently has contacted Israelis who tell him that the favored weapon in the IDF is the M-16 and that the Galil is used by the reserve units, not the front line units. At least that is what he posted when I asked him about that issue a year or so back. May I also note that the only reason for the various nations choosing the FAL over the M-16A2 was the fact that it was not from the USA, and over the Galil because it was not from Israel. The commentary that I have read on it is that it is rather more complex than either of these other two and very much more delicate.

And for those of you who do not like the lightweight round, I suggest that you look, not at the AK-47 or the AKM, but at the more modern Russian weaponry, the AK-74, which is in 5.45x39mm.

* See these: http://www.militec1.com/mildocs/MilitecIraq.html
http://www.militec1.com/articles/SFTT.html
 
First, AK is for folks that can't spell HK.
;)
Second, proper maintenence *can* mean life and death.
:(

It aint the weapon, it's the guy holding it.
 
RWS-The Mini-14 is nowhere near as durable as it's big brother.

FullerH-Don't put much stock in Hackworth's opinion of the M16. He has never quit crying about since Vietnam. That and he's always pretty pessimistic, if not apocolyptic, about everything. Just read his predictions about combat in Iraq, all were wrong.
 
Hugh,
Apparently now they have a new weapon called the Tavor from Israel Military Industries.


As far as I've been told and saw with my own eyes is that indeed the favorite rifle of the Special Forces and indeed most active Israeli soldiers remains the M-16, or better said the carbine version of it. One guy I know though would choose the UZI over anything else.
Everybody's got their favs.
The Galil's end up often, but not always being used by the reserves and Civil Defense units.

AS FAR AS I REMEMBER FROM WHAT I WAS TOLD!!
So don't quote me on any of this.

My memory has been a b!tch lately anyway.

Galil's have been pushed aside for the American guns for a long time. The Galil came out to replace whatever they were using before the M-16, i think the FN FAL???
Anyway, the M-16 was chosen over the Galil because they were a good weapon and cheaper to buy for the IDF due to special agreements between America and Israel.
Galil's are still good rifles, and some were used as sniper rifles in the past, maybe still?

And like I said I think the Israeli made Tavor is going to be huge in Israel. It's a bull-pup design.

Sorry, I don't know anyone that has one. I guess most still use the CAR-15.;)
Personally I'd say the smart thing to do would be to buy the Tavur from Israel, but a whole heck of a lot of people would make big sticnk about it.

I'm not in the IDF, so if anyone has better/more accurate info, please post.


IMI Tavor:
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as30-e.htm
 
The desert environment has always been hell on the -16 (as well as many other weapons).

Preventative maintenance and education is the only cure (think $$ here).

When I was there. . .we were on mandatory cleaning cycles. The only way that you could skip a cycle is when you were actively engaging a target(s). Immediately after an engagement, and all was clear, we'd immediately take the weapons down (not the whole unit at the same time) and take care of business.

As far as the AK. Awesome weapon to a point. Wicked fire-power and built like a tank. But, hump that lead weight and the standard load of rounds for 8 to 16 hours in GCE with ruck. You'll appreciate the hell outta the -16 and keep your buddy clean(er) !
 
HK 91 uses NATO 7.62 and no gas system to foul.

Or alternatively go back to the M14. The 16 might be OK in a thick forest or jungle, but is inadequate for long shots. The 7.62 NATO/.308 is a far superior round to either the .223 or the 7.62 X 39.

Valmet is not an option, as they were bought out by Sako. I am not aware that they make assault rifles at present, but they are producing hunting rifles in Finland and shotguns in Italy under the name Tikka. They make fine guns under license from Sako for reasonable prices.
 
M14 is coming back in the Stryker Brigade as a Designated Marksman rifle. The whole M16 / M4 issue will soon be moot anyhow with the new XM8.
 
Originally posted by shgeo
HK 91 uses NATO 7.62 and no gas system to foul.

Or alternatively go back to the M14. The 16 might be OK in a thick forest or jungle, but is inadequate for long shots. The 7.62 NATO/.308 is a far superior round to either the .223 or the 7.62 X 39.

Valmet is not an option, as they were bought out by Sako. I am not aware that they make assault rifles at present, but they are producing hunting rifles in Finland and shotguns in Italy under the name Tikka. They make fine guns under license from Sako for reasonable prices.
Click to expand...

Story told short...
We Finns bought some AK-47's and made lots of improvements. Then Israeli's bought some Valmet RK 7.62" form us plus machines to make their Galil's with improvements in their terrain and climat. Finns continued to make RK 7.62's untill we bought s*itload of AK-47's from China. Then Army desided that RK 7.62 was too expencive to produce so it was discontinued.
Sako still makes exelent "military" rifles, like the TRG serie.

Read this link:
http://guns.connect.fi/gow/M95.html

Juha
 
I was lucky enough to find a used Valmet 412 O/U 12 guage shotgun at a good price 12 years ago. I have not used any other shotgun since then.
If their assault rifle was made as well, I believe the great reputation they had was well deserved.
 
Originally posted by Geraldo
RWS-The Mini-14 is nowhere near as durable as it's big brother.

FullerH-Don't put much stock in Hackworth's opinion of the M16. He has never quit crying about since Vietnam. That and he's always pretty pessimistic, if not apocolyptic, about everything. Just read his predictions about combat in Iraq, all were wrong.
Click to expand...

By "it's big brother", I assume you mean the M-14. The M-14 was dropped as a standard weapon for a number of reasons, not least being that it was virtually uncontrollable in automatic fire. It was also too vulnerable to damage from bent barrels, especially when used by paratroops, according to my brother-in-law who was issued one in the 82nd in the early 1960s. For more information on both the M-14 and the M-16 adoption and the problems with both in VietNam, may I suggest The Great Rifle Controversy: Search for the Ultimate Infantry Weapon from World War II through Vietnam and Beyond, by
Edward Clinton Ezell, Hardcover, November 1984, now out of print but available from used-book searches.

Please also see the following site, which contains the meat of the testimony before the Ichord Committee which held hearings on the M-16's problems in VietNam. The testimony includes extensive commentary on the Army's treatment of the weapon by Gene Stoner, its inventor. These hearings resulted in Rep. Ichord, a lont-time friend of the military, saying that the Ordnance Department's handling of the M-16 was tantamount to criminal negligence.

Geraldo, if you will look at the article, you will find that it was not written by Hackworth, but by another individual. You may not like Hackworth, but he has many supporters in the military and his site has much in it from others beside him. In this case, what the author has to say jibes with much that was reported elsewhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top