Paging ARMY, TP, TSC, etc.

[Triangle]

Thought you guys might want to check this out.
I thought it was pretty neat.
Found at http://www.rhinelandarms.com/
http://www.rhinelandarms.com/57/pics/57proto2.jpg
http://www.rhinelandarms.com/57/pics/57shorty.jpg
http://www.rhinelandarms.com/57/pics/57proto5.jpg




The AR57 rifle is designed for use in any climate and ready for the most extreme use you can give it. Sand and mud will normally clog and jam most rifles and carbines yet have very little effect on the AR57 due to its simplicity and strength. The AR57 is more than a challenge to any SMG, carbine or military rifle in the areas of accuracy, ergonomics, reliability and durability.

Designed as a upper that can be attached to any M16/AR15 lower, it is not dependent on the lower for reliability of ejection or accuracy. The AR57 features ambidextrous cocking handle and magazine release levers with brass ejection out the bottom of the magazine well. The barrel is free floating for improved accuracy and includes a standard M16 flash hider.

Note-for LEO and Gov't models- call for more information.

[Steelrat]

Reminds me of the P90, which isn't a good thing. The feed system seems overly complex. Also, I am not a huge fan of the 5.7 round, in large part because of the cost and limited availability.

This strikes me as a solution in search of a problem. I'll stick with my 5.56.

[edweird]

wow that guy has a terrible website.

I dont have alot of faith in this manufactuer yet, I would need to shoot his uppers at a minimum first. Also im not really digging on the G36ness that they seem to be desperatly going for. I have friends who swear by the 5.7x28 round but I am partial to not paying 25 bucks a box for plinking.

[warbeak2099]

Militarily speaking, anything larger than the 5.56 is a godsend. That puny, glorified .22 round can't put down a hardcore insurgent as well as say a 7.62 AK-47 round. Marines are actually picking up AK's and AN's. The M16 needs to go and something with a more effective round needs to come in it's place. Whether it's this system or the H&K HK16.

[grEnAlEins]

Whether it's this system or the H&K HK16.
Isn't the HK416 a .223 :confused: 5.56 by 45 => .223 Rem, right :confused: I believe this is the same round as the Colt rifles and carbines.

[BeaverEater]

Id rather stick with the good accuracy of the M16 compared to the horrible accuracy of the ak47. The only thing the AK has over the M16 is reliability. The pros and cons of each type of ammo is arguable.

[Lohman446]

Militarily speaking, anything larger than the 5.56 is a godsend. That puny, glorified .22 round can't put down a hardcore insurgent as well as say a 7.62 AK-47 round. Marines are actually picking up AK's and AN's. The M16 needs to go and something with a more effective round needs to come in it's place. Whether it's this system or the H&K HK16.

Source?

[Steelrat]

Militarily speaking, anything larger than the 5.56 is a godsend. That puny, glorified .22 round can't put down a hardcore insurgent as well as say a 7.62 AK-47 round. Marines are actually picking up AK's and AN's. The M16 needs to go and something with a more effective round needs to come in it's place. Whether it's this system or the H&K HK16.

Do you even know what you are talking about?

First of all:

http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/5333/203220nato20calibersfl1.jpg

See the tiny one on the left? That's the 5.7mm. See the significantly larger one to it's right? That's the 5.56mm. It's a full-on rifle round, whereas the 5.7 is more of a large pistol round.

Yes, it'd be nice to go to a 6.8 SPC or 6.5 grendel, but the 5.56 isn't really that bad a round. I feel sorry for any Marine who picks up a POS insurgent AK. I hear people talk all kinds of crap about AK's, but their only advantage is the ability to function with crap maintenance. With normal maintenance, the M-16 can be just as reliable, and is vastly more accurate. Marines train their soldiers to be riflemen, not to spray n' pray with an AK. Need something hard-hitting for building entries? Get a semi-auto shotgun, nothing will beat it.

Any what the hell is an HK16? Are you talking about the H&K M16? If so, it's just a normal 5.56 mm M16 made by H&K with some nifty H&K diopter sights and steel magazines. The FN SCAR is 7.62 would be a nice rifle, but any change to a larger caliber is going to need a lot of infrastructure change, and will probably have to wait until current hostilities are over, or winding down.

EDIT: Don't forget that, with the AK's, you are stuck with a 7.62x39 round, which isn't nearly as powerful as the NATO 7.62x51. The 7.62 Nato shoots a 150 grain round at about 2820 f/s, producting an energy of 3602 joules. The 7.62x39 shoots a 125 grain round at about 2300 f/s, producing an energy of 2111 joules. The 5.56 shoots a 55 grain bullet at about 3300 f/s, producing an energy of 1743 joules. The 7.63x39 is closer to the 5.56 than the 7.62 Nato. Sure, bullet diameter and design plays a role in effectiveness, but so does energy.

One of the reasons the 5.56 is having issues is because of the M855 round. That round is designed to penetrate, and doesn't produce a large wound channel. There have been reports from non-military personnel in Iraq who are allowed to use jacketed hollow-point rounds, which the military cannot use. The 5.56 JHP rounds have been VERY effective, due to the spectacular damage the rounds cause when hitting people.

[grEnAlEins]

Any what the hell is an HK16?
I assumed he meant the HK416, which still shoots the 5.56 by 45. You should have put up a pic of a .22LR too, so he could see the difference between .223 Rem (glorified .22 :rolleyes: ) and .22LR...

Oh and I got another small question for ya...

[Steelrat]

I assumed he meant the HK416, which still shoots the 5.56 by 45. You should have put up a pic of a .22LR too, so he could see the difference between .223 Rem (glorified .22 :rolleyes: ) and .22LR...

Oh and I got another small question for ya...

Right, the HK416 is just an M16 with a piston-system, diopter sights, and steel mags. That's what made his claim so wierd, it shoots the same ol' 5.56 round. And you are right, bullet diameter means nothing without noting the weight of the round and it's velocity. .50 DE is a world apart from .50 BMG, as an example.

[Nick E]

What is the giant one on the right? The 4 on the right, look huge compared to the rest of them, but mabe it's because i'm not holding them looking at them.

[Steelrat]

What is the giant one on the right? The 4 on the right, look huge compared to the rest of them, but mabe it's because i'm not holding them looking at them.

From left to right:


5.7mm
5.56mm x45 (M16 round)
7.62mm x51 NATO (M14, FNFAL, HK91)
.50 BMG (Browning Machine Gun)
20mm x102 (used in M61 gatling gun, among other things)
20mm x 139
25mm x 137 (used in the M2 Bradley fighting vehicle)


Those big ones will ruin your day. Some new HUGE rifles actually use small 20mm rounds, if you can believe it. And you thought .50 rifles were big...

[Army]

Militarily speaking, anything larger than the 5.56 is a godsend. That puny, glorified .22 round can't put down a hardcore insurgent as well as say a 7.62 AK-47 round. Marines are actually picking up AK's and AN's. The M16 needs to go and something with a more effective round needs to come in it's place. Whether it's this system or the H&K HK16.
yeah, ok...sure.

How about putting down the Xbox controller and stepping away from the HALO?

As soon as you go get a reality clue, you can come back and play our game :rofl:

[Lohman446]

I know I know.

Lets go from a reasonably effective, controllable round that allows one to carry a large quantity of ammo to... oh lets say a 30/06 or something. Surely having a bigger round would outweight the benefits of lighter recoil, equipment weight, and quantity of ammo carried :rolleyes: oh... wait

Our soldiers use steel core bullets. Going from .223 to a .30 caliber whatever would prove to have very little overall effect on the wounding characteristics of the round. Regardless of what the designers of HALO think.

[SCpoloRicker]

Militarily speaking, anything larger than the 5.56 is a godsend. That puny, glorified .22 round can't put down a hardcore insurgent as well as say a 7.62 AK-47 round. Marines are actually picking up AK's and AN's. The M16 needs to go and something with a more effective round needs to come in it's place. Whether it's this system or the H&K HK16.

http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/3921/inettoughguytm2.jpg

[edweird]

5.56 is a glorified .22 round eh?

M-193 ball fired out of a AR-15 VS Level IIIA body armor on a box of clay(test was set up to evaulate ballistic penetration though level IIIA armor, clay box was used to graphicly demonstrate dynamic impact and expansion)

http://www.theboxotruth.com/images/16-11.jpg

http://www.theboxotruth.com/images/16-12.jpg

[Steelrat]

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/9178/tspielevencopyaa4.jpg

[Triangle]

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/9178/tspielevencopyaa4.jpg


Why didn't you just make the 5.6 louder?

[grEnAlEins]

:spit_take :rofl:

[Steelrat]

Bwahahahahaha!

[edweird]

a friend also showed me this weekend that 5.7x28 still uses 5.56-5.57 diameter projectiles(AKA 5.7 is a marketing ploy), they (FN) even recommend to useing 5.56 cans(suppressors) on FN 57's and P-90/PS-90 as we use on our AR-15's

/5.7x28 is still a nice fast pistol round, no doubt about that.

[93civiccpe]

My opinions. The 5.7 x 28 round is a great round for the FN Five Seven pistol, and fun to shoot in that p90, but I feel its real advantage is as a pistol round. It gives you a good round that actually penetrates body armor which is what it was designed for. Plus, you can get hi-cap mags for the Five Seven making it a nice firearm for anyone going against armored opposition.

As far as the m16/ak47 debate, I've used and like both. I did a lot with my AK47 and had it so that it felt like you were shooting a .22 when you fired it. Not much of a kick at all. Then I took a Russian Saiga rifle (basically a beefed up ak design that shoots the .308 round) and did similar mods and got it firing with little recoil as well. It is a fine weapon, but I always had much better accuracy with an AR-15.

I know a lot of requested a larger round than the .223, but the .223 was a very well thought out round. If a .223 round hits a bone when it enters the body it bounces all around in the body tearing a lot up. I've ready many stories where they've found someone who was shot in the shoulder and the exit wound was in the lower extremeties. Back in the day a lot of our troops used the 30-06 round which is a great round, and when it hit it would usually knock the victim on their back and they would die.

Why would our military ever go away from this round?? Because if I shoot one person on a battlefield and he dies, I've taken one man out of the battle. If I shoot one person with a smaller person and have it rip around through them, then they are left there screaming. This does a few things.. first, it puts fear especially in younger soldiers who see it, and get their mind off of the battle. Second, you usually have one or two men who run to try to drag them to safety. Now you've taken a few people away from the firefight instead of just one. The logistics behind it make sense.

When it comes down to situations where you want a "one shot one kill" result, look at the round used. Overwhelmingly the #1 calibur of choice for national sniper rifles is the 7.62 x 51 round (also known as the .308). It is an excellent round.. I've dropped three deer this year and long ranges (one 400+ yards) with this round in match grade ammo. The russians used a slightly longer cartridge with a similar projectile for their early sniper rifles (mosin nagants) which used the 7.62 x 54. That also is a great round you can buy cheap in bulk now. I don't see there being a change in caliburs for the military anytime soon though. There has been more research and time put into creating the m16 than any other rifle out from what I've been told. It has been modified through the years to fix the problems they've had and making it a really reliable and pretty easily maintainable rifle. The fact that every one of our marines have to qualify by shooting a paper target at 500 yards with the ironsights/peepsights and they say it's simple to do so is pretty impressive. If you have a chance, go look at what 500 yards looks like.. it's a darn good shot with ironsights.

Anyways, that's just my 2 cents.

[devildog]

to the guy who said we pick up ak's over there and shouldnt use the 5.56..... wow

dont speak of things you know nothing of. :rolleyes:

[Steelrat]

to the guy who said we pick up ak's over there and shouldnt use the 5.56..... wow

dont speak of things you know nothing of. :rolleyes:

It seems Mr. 5.56-sucks abandoned the thread after getting his butt e-kicked.

[Recon by Fire]

Just wanted to say that all AK's are not created equal! If think the AK is so inaccurate move out to the 300m mark and we will test your theory :rofl:

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b70/doublenot7/CX-4%20Storm/DSCF0003.jpg

5.7 sucks purely for cost alone! It is also a pistol caliber not what you expect to replace a rifle caliber with. It has its place I guess, but as a main battle rifle is not it!

5.56 is battlefield proven, it works!

[kosmo]

I think the AK accuracy myth is because of people not being any good with the shorter sight radius on its iron sights compared to ar15s. Ive got some Bulgarian SF friends that hit sillouette(sp?) targets at 800 meters using a short barreled AKS with iron sights. Never thought Id see anything like that, but they were pretty friggin good at it.

edit: That, and the wildly varying quality of a lot of the old ak's. Get a good one though, and theyre really good.

[SCpoloRicker]

God, I love RbF's drum-fed, folding stock, bignasty bayonet AK. :rolleyes:

[Steelrat]

I think the AK accuracy myth is because of people not being any good with the shorter sight radius on its iron sights compared to ar15s. Ive got some Bulgarian SF friends that hit sillouette(sp?) targets at 800 meters using a short barreled AKS with iron sights. Never thought Id see anything like that, but they were pretty friggin good at it.

edit: That, and the wildly varying quality of a lot of the old ak's. Get a good one though, and theyre really good.

You said the key words, SPECIAL FORCES. The short sight radius and generous tolerances of most AK type firearms results in a less-accurate firearm.

And Recon, that is NOT a garden-variety AK ;) But it's certainly one I'd want.

[Hexis]

Those shells on the right are so cute and lil.

155mm, now that's a shell:

<a href="http://www.visi.com/~mjb/m107_usafas.jpg"><img src="http://www.visi.com/~mjb/m107_usafas.jpg" width="278" height="305"></img></a>

Of corse you need one of these to fire it:

<a href="http://www.visi.com/~mjb/NLOS-C.jpg"><img src="http://www.visi.com/~mjb/NLOS-C.jpg"></img></a>

Or if 25 miles is too short range you can go with LRLAP:

<a href="http://www.visi.com/~mjb/LRLAP.jpg"><img src="http://www.visi.com/~mjb/LRLAP.jpg" width="320" height="227"></img></a>

But you better have a big pool in the back yard:

<a href="http://www.visi.com/~mjb/DDX-AGS.jpg"><img src="http://www.visi.com/~mjb/DDX-AGS.jpg" width="300" height="300"></img></a>

mmmm big guns.

[Steelrat]

Ewww, FCS! Make it go away!

[Hexis]

I miss Crusader, it was so much cooler.

[Army]

I know a lot of requested a larger round than the .223, but the .223 was a very well thought out round. If a .223 round hits a bone when it enters the body it bounces all around in the body tearing a lot up. I've ready many stories where they've found someone who was shot in the shoulder and the exit wound was in the lower extremeties. Back in the day a lot of our troops used the 30-06 round which is a great round, and when it hit it would usually knock the victim on their back and they would die.
Myth. Shoulder fired projectiles simply do not have the sustained kinetic energy to knock anyone down...or onto their back. Ancient rumor that refuses to die.

Why would our military ever go away from this round?? Because if I shoot one person on a battlefield and he dies, I've taken one man out of the battle. If I shoot one person with a smaller person and have it rip around through them, then they are left there screaming. This does a few things.. first, it puts fear especially in younger soldiers who see it, and get their mind off of the battle. Second, you usually have one or two men who run to try to drag them to safety. Now you've taken a few people away from the firefight instead of just one. The logistics behind it make sense.Another myth with no basis in reality or doctrine. All military small arms are designed to kill, nothing else. The "fog of war" will not allow precision placement of rounds to produce only a wound. Soldiers shoot to kill, it's how we train, and what we train for. The 5.56mm kills very well at all ranges the M16 is designed for.

When it comes down to situations where you want a "one shot one kill" result, look at the round used. Overwhelmingly the #1 calibur of choice for national sniper rifles is the 7.62 x 51 round (also known as the .308).It is a NATO round, which is one reason it is used, the other reason is it is quite accurate and energy efficient at ranges beyond the capability of the 5.56mm It is an excellent round.. I've dropped three deer this year and long ranges (one 400+ yards) with this round in match grade ammo You used non-expanding ammunition to hunt with? I hope you are a good shot, rather than just lucky. The russians used a slightly longer cartridge with a similar projectile for their early sniper rifles (mosin nagants) which used the 7.62 x 54.They still do. 7.62 Russian is still first line ammo for the former Soviet states. Still used in all their medium machine guns That also is a great round you can buy cheap in bulk now. I don't see there being a change in caliburs for the military anytime soon though. There has been more research and time put into creating the m16 than any other rifle out from what I've been told.Not really. The rifle was a deliberate design, rather than a modification of an existing design. As with all small arms the US has fielded, continuous evolution is normal. It has been modified through the years to fix the problems they've had and making it a really reliable and pretty easily maintainable rifle. The original "problem" was a change in powder type that was incompatible with the design. This was quickly remedied and the rifle was evolved to counter this fault, resulting in the A1 series. The fact that every one of our marines have to qualify by shooting a paper target at 500 yards with the ironsights/peepsights and they say it's simple to do so is pretty impressive. If you have a chance, go look at what 500 yards looks like.. it's a darn good shot with ironsights.

Anyways, that's just my 2 cents.
The M16 series is reliable, accurate, and tough. Ordnance does have a hard time listening to reason at times, but even they quickly conclude if a weapon does not work as required it will be replaced.

[Lohman446]

I doubt you shoot to kill, now you would be the expert. You shoot to remove from combat, be that by killing or wounding... Hence training to shoot towards center of mass rather than neck or head

I would never shoot to kill. I would shoot to stop the threat ;) My lawyer says so

[kosmo]

You said the key words, SPECIAL FORCES.

My point was that its not the weapon thats inaccurate, its the person.

[Army]

I doubt you shoot to kill, now you would be the expert. You shoot to remove from combat, be that by killing or wounding... Hence training to shoot towards center of mass rather than neck or head

I would never shoot to kill. I would shoot to stop the threat ;) My lawyer says so
I didn't worry about any lawyers in Iraq, so I shot to kill.....like all my other fellow Soldiers.

I also didn't call in arty to scare anyone, nor throw any grenades to see if they really do make the big fireball I see in the movies.

We shoot center of mass because we don't have the luxury of time to designate who gets a headshot or not. Front sight on the largest part of the target---pull trigger. Wounded combatants can still pull a trigger or set off a mine. We shoot to kill, period.

[Lohman446]

I didn't worry about any lawyers in Iraq, so I shot to kill.....like all my other fellow Soldiers.

I also didn't call in arty to scare anyone, nor throw any grenades to see if they really do make the big fireball I see in the movies.

We shoot center of mass because we don't have the luxury of time to designate who gets a headshot or not. Front sight on the largest part of the target---pull trigger. Wounded combatants can still pull a trigger or set off a mine. We shoot to kill, period.

Im going to question if your training is truley about shooting to kill or shooting to put down. Though surely it is not about intentionally wounding. Surely being trained to shoot center of mass is not the most effective way to train to kill is it?

[kosmo]

It is when not everyone in the military is a good enough shot to be able to go for headshots, especially under duress. When youve got a whole squad of soldiers nailing a guy in the chest at the same time, that guys not getting off the ground without a mop and a shovel.

[edweird]

shooting center mass with the 5.56 round is one of the most desireable ways to kill with it honestly. As much as the naysayers want to state about "ball ammo" not being hightech enough to kill BG's they compleatly fail to understand what the 5.56 projectile does once it leaves the air and encounters a dense watery mass such as a human torso.


The primary wounding mechanism for .223 and 5.56 ammunition is fragmentation. The primary factor in fragmentation is velocity.

http://www.mellner.com/Objects/Ballistics_Research/223_sm.jpg
http://www.btammolabs.com/tests/test%20images/6/frags.jpg

before you all get all weirded out on the 12 inches of penetration and think "well im not 12inches thick I will just avoid the fragmentaion unpleasantness with my skinny emo boy frame". When using properly chilled and prepared ballistics gel, it is commonly accepted that 12 inches of gel penetration is ideal. re: ammo-oracle again

The FBI protocols use 12 inches as a penetration minimum in calibrated ballistic gelatin and looked for consistent 12"-18" penetration as an ideal. As a general matter, major vessels and organs can be reliably damaged with 6 inches of penetration. Ideally, then, you want a wound profile that penetrates at least 12" and does most of its damage between 4" and 12" of penetration. Of course, its always more effective to leave entry and exit holes to encourage bleeding. Shot placement is always important as well.

http://www.btammolabs.com/tests/test%20images/6/overallS1.jpg
and the close up of the above fragmentation
http://www.btammolabs.com/tests/test%20images/6/closeups1.jpg

/cant tell if these pics will show from work cause the work interwebs are like tubes, and congressmen are doing all they can to fix that
//updated with new pics cause the home interwebs tubes are superior to the work tubes

[SCpoloRicker]

You broke the tubes edweird. :(

[Army]

Im going to question if your training is truley about shooting to kill or shooting to put down. Though surely it is not about intentionally wounding. Surely being trained to shoot center of mass is not the most effective way to train to kill is it?
Amazing.

You have had Army combat training then? Been to a combat zone? Been fired at and returned fire? Watched your buddies get hit and have been able to do nothing for them until the volume of fire has lessened enough to expose yourself?

Until you can answer any of these with a verifiable "yes", your ignorant statements just make you look silly.

[tsc]

..I haven't posted in FOREVER

(And no I haven't been searching my name, Army pointed this out to me. )

One question for everyone assuming that a central mass shot will only wound:

Do you think your juicy, blood-tacular abdominal cavity takes *well* to massive trauma?

It's not the bullet that kills you-- it's the hole in your vital organs.

[SCpoloRicker]

Holy crap! Hey tsc, how the heck are you?

[Lohman446]

Amazing.

You have had Army combat training then? Been to a combat zone? Been fired at and returned fire? Watched your buddies get hit and have been able to do nothing for them until the volume of fire has lessened enough to expose yourself?

Until you can answer any of these with a verifiable "yes", your ignorant statements just make you look silly.

Get off your high horse Army, I already acknowledged you were the obvious expert at it. However, one does not have to have been there or done it to look at it and make a consideration of it. Edweird at least can make his arguments civilaly (sp). Disagreeing with you does not automatically make someone an idiot.

"It just is I would know" is generally the mark of someone who thinks there an expert but really isn't. I know you know what your talking about, and you would do far better to educate than to berate people. I told you why I think what I do, its not an opinion entirely void of logic. Surely you would can make a far stronger argument than what you did.

[edweird]

I edited my above post with working pics this time...

as my // confirms, home interwebs tubes > work interwebs tubes

[billybob_81067]

I edited my above post with working pics this time...

as my // confirms, home interwebs tubes > work interwebs tubes

This I have to agree with, cause the pics from your home intertubes are way cooler than the non-existant ones from your work intertubes. :)

[grEnAlEins]

I edited my above post with working pics this time...

as my // confirms, home interwebs tubes > work interwebs tubes
Can the military use BTHP rounds? I thought that they were limited to fully jacketed rounds, so no HP allowed... I could very well be wrong here though.

[tsc]

Holy crap! Hey tsc, how the heck are you?

Good! Not really playing anymore, but oh well. Sup with you man?

[Target Practice]

Disagreeing with you does not automatically make someone an idiot.
It does if they're the "obvious expert".

[Steelrat]

Can the military use BTHP rounds? I thought that they were limited to fully jacketed rounds, so no HP allowed... I could very well be wrong here though.

No, FMJ only from what I know. I have even read about random inspections for unapproved ammunition. The M855 is the standard round, and it's a FMJ with a penetrator. Maybe special forces can use the good stuff, who knows?

The non-military folks over there are free to use JHP and BTHP, and have done so with great effect from what I have read.

*Please note that those who have played in the sandbox have more concrete information that I do.

[edweird]

No, FMJ only from what I know. I have even read about random inspections for unapproved ammunition. The M855 is the standard round, and it's a FMJ with a penetrator. Maybe special forces can use the good stuff, who knows?

The non-military folks over there are free to use JHP and BTHP, and have done so with great effect from what I have read.

*Please note that those who have played in the sandbox have more concrete information that I do.

the only mil-spec standard 5.56 rounds I have ever been issued are either Xm-193 or M855 ball FMJ rounds. Army and reconbyfire have infinate more feild experience than myself, so they would be the authority on whats actually comming down to the men who make a real diffrence.

[Army]

m118 Special Ball is allowed, despite being a hollowpoint (Sierra MatchKing). The main difference is, it is not a hollowpoint by design, but by manufacture technique. The bullet is not designed to expand, but to set the center of gravity further back for better accuracy. Impact with flesh causes the nose to cave IN, essentially creating a FMJ profile.

All other standard issue small arms ammo is FMJ.


Get off your high horse Army, I already acknowledged you were the obvious expert at it. However, one does not have to have been there or done it to look at it and make a consideration of it.

"It just is I would know" is generally the mark of someone who thinks there an expert but really isn't. I know you know what your talking about, and you would do far better to educate than to berate people. I told you why I think what I do, its not an opinion entirely void of logic. Surely you would can make a far stronger argument than what you did.
My answers were quite civil, but you first doubted my real life experience, then wanted to question my real life training. Nothing I have written on this thread is theoretical or open to "consideration". The M16 was designed to kill, period. I and my brother Soldiers have been trained to kill, period.

And yes, when it comes to killing people in war, you really DO have to have been there, or you really DON'T know of what you speak.

How about YOU get off YOUR "high horse" and reaffirm to everyone that YOU have acknowledged that I know of what I speak...me being an obvious expert and all.

[edweird]

m118 Special Ball

Bah, I knew that was a special circumstance ammo... I recognised it when you said Sierra MatchKing.

/somewhere on my home compy i have a copy of the JAG ruleing on using that ammo

[devildog]

"standard" training to shoot and kill the enemy, are to take 2 quick snap shots at center mass. you dont have time to aim for the head when bullets are coming at you.

you guys think the 5.56 doesnt do enough damage to kill on a body shot? have you ever seen anyone hit by one? have you ever seen the exit wound from a 5.56? its not pretty....

[Lohman446]

It does if they're the "obvious expert".

In reality my disagreement was left to asking questions more than making statements, I find it generally pretty effective at gaining knowlege :D

[Recon by Fire]

Center mass??? Oops! my bad....... :rofl:

[maxama10]

According to the History channell, when the insurgents are high on drugs(heroin, cocaine, addreniline) they are a lot harder to take down. Just a random thought... not taking either side.

Edit: No one has brought this up yet...
With the evolution of modern CNC machinery, the M16 can now be manufactured in micro plants. In the US, a number of manufacturers make modern M16 variants and many are indeed micro plant manufacturers. This is possible because of the high degree of automation that can be applied to the machining of the M16 receiver and upper, which are made out of aluminum.
The M16 appeared much later than the AK-47 and thus provided a platform that offered much more development potential than the AK series. Unlike the AK-47, the M16 continues to benefit from every advance in the CNC field, which allows more and more small manufacturers to make M16s and AR-15 rifles. While the M16 is made using aluminum and plastics, it can also be made entirely out of machined steel and wood, at the expense of adding some weight. Where the AK-47 relies on huge Soviet-style, state-run factories, the M16 is ideal for free economy production, spread among many manufacturers around the country, which ensures that it would be very hard for anyone to disrupt US M16 production in the case of a major conflict.

[HOMELANDEFENDER]

I'm just going to sit back and enjoy all this talk about Boolets :D

This thread is going real well with this Heineken I got in my hand - lol. CARRY ON ...


HLD...

[bleachit]

This has been a very informative thread.




and this made me major lol.




before you all get all weirded out on the 12 inches of penetration and think "well im not 12inches thick I will just avoid the fragmentaion unpleasantness with my skinny emo boy frame".

[punkncat]

:eek:

Some of you guys are really frightening.....

:shooting:

[Triangle]

Some of the posters in this thread have been trained to kill.
I respect, but I don't fear them. Neither should you.

[Recon by Fire]

It's the internet...as long as you don't set-up a date with an anonymous axe murderer, you should be fine ;)

Standard ball ammunition, please. Be creative and you will find yourself in some trouble.

Center mass because it's easier to hit and lots of vital organs there. Those cool headshots on 24 or The Unit are nifty, but try that while you are under fire, stressed, wounded, people around you dead or wounded, or just screaming as all hell broke loose, cats and dogs living together....you get the idea. There is enough trouble going on without trying to make the sniper team.

5.56mm does just fine, ask thousaands of dead insurgents :cheers:

[Triangle]

It's the internet...as long as you don't set-up a date with an anonymous axe murderer, you should be fine ;)

Standard ball ammunition, please. Be creative and you will find yourself in some trouble.

Center mass because it's easier to hit and lots of vital organs there. Those cool headshots on 24 or The Unit are nifty, but try that while you are under fire, stressed, wounded, people around you dead or wounded, or just screaming as all hell broke loose, cats and dogs living together....you get the idea. There is enough trouble going on without trying to make the sniper team.

5.56mm does just fine, ask thousaands of dead insurgents :cheers:

Hey dude, how's it going?
How's that Gravy assingment?

[Recon by Fire]

I've been back from there for about 1.5 months...been semi-retired and vacationing. Waiting on the call to leave again anytime now, missed a call to go yesterday even! Oh well... Next one is not so gravy :(