If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ABC)   US Army discovering that it's M-4 rifles are no match for the Taliban's more primitive, but longer range, weapons; a discovery previously made by the Soviets in the 1980's and the British in the 1830's   (abcnews.go.com) divider line 466
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

26348 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 May 2010 at 1:08 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



466 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-05-21 02:41:08 PM
God help us all if livingroom sees this thread.
 
2010-05-21 02:41:47 PM
All they need is more guys with either remington 700's or winchester 70's properly tuned and firing 30 cal or larger ammo. Or the scoped M-14. At long range it's quality over quantity of shots.

/if I ever had to fight in a place like that I would try to bring my model 70 or something similar
 
2010-05-21 02:42:24 PM
PC LOAD LETTER: This wins.

"Shoot to wound" does not apply
 
2010-05-21 02:42:40 PM
zato_ichi: I was wondering if any of you farkers could recommend a good entry level semi-auto or bolt action rifle for a left-handed shooter? It would be mainly for target practice, possibly deer hunting. I haven't shot a gun since Boy Scouts, but I got a friend who's trying to pull me in with him.

I'm mostly a pistol guy, but STAG makes a pretty good AR-15 pattern for lefties. I believe the S&W MP15 is also available with left hand extraction. The FN2000 has forward ejection so it's ambidextrous just not cheap. Most of the modern bolt actions might be available for left handed actions.

Are you left eye dominant or just left handed?
 
2010-05-21 02:42:40 PM
The M4 is fine for what it is designed for. The M14 was a better long-range rifle but otherwise the M4 is fine. The big problem is that American troops can't shoot well anymore, coupled with the Aimpoint-style sights. They just aren't as good as the good old front and rear sight setup.

The Kalashnikov is a POS. It's reliable, but inaccurate. Even the famed Dragunov is a POS. The AUG 77 is a POS. Couldn't hit squat with any of them and with my Tanner standard I can shoot a 2-inch group at 300 meters prone without a rest. For longer range work the Remington 600 is good.
 
2010-05-21 02:43:54 PM
IXI Jim IXI: Wow...the it's/its nazis must be out sick today...

I'll play...
it's
wrong

1980's & 1830's
wrong

Not contractions, and/or not possessives. Oh, and the original Big farking Gun, so to speak...:
halfmoth.com
 
2010-05-21 02:44:23 PM
Skleenar: Shabash, Huzoor!



Perhaps you might be interested in a few of our finest Jezzails?


Flashman is BAD-FARKING-ASS.

Well not really, he's a complete coward. But I still want a Flashman movie!

/learned more about afghanistan in that book than i should have.
 
2010-05-21 02:44:27 PM
Sgt Otter: meanyogurt: I believe the Army needs to break out the M14 again. Why reinvent the wheel, when the older model will work fine.

I own an Springfield M1A, the non automatic version of the M-14. Incredible weapon. Accurate as hell, rugged, and powerful. I cannot imagine firing it on auto, but US has done away with full auto fire most of the time, yes?

Fired a few 5.56 weapons, like a pellet gun by comparison.
 
2010-05-21 02:44:41 PM
One possible answer, designed in'58
img341.imageshack.us

/mine
 
2010-05-21 02:46:10 PM
Personally, I miss this old beast:

www.thefirearmsforum.com

Sure, it's not as compact and it's a little heavier than the AR15 derivatives, but it's super easy to field strip and maintain, easy to operate, and rarely jams even when dirty. Plus, the disadvantage of using 7.62mm in short range combat is not nearly as large as the disadvantage of using 5.56mm in medium to long range combat.
 
2010-05-21 02:47:19 PM
Tyrosine: Personally, I miss this old beast:



Sure, it's not as compact and it's a little heavier than the AR15 derivatives, but it's super easy to field strip and maintain, easy to operate, and rarely jams even when dirty. Plus, the disadvantage of using 7.62mm in short range combat is not nearly as large as the disadvantage of using 5.56mm in medium to long range combat.


Like the way you think
 
2010-05-21 02:48:16 PM
cefm: This boils down to a pretty simple question of tactics, and matching your force deployment and equipment to meet the need. The M-16 and M-4 were designed under the assumption of a modern military engagement, in which a soldier's standard rifle wouldn't be needed at longer range (artillery, tanks, aircover, and heavy weapons would handle it) and at the shorter distances what was needed is for a squad to be able to put a lot of rounds on target in a short amount of time. The M-16 and M-4 are very good at what they're designed for - and by the way are far superior from an accuracy standpoint than the AK-47 when you're talking about range.

But it is an extremely elementary insight that the Taliban wouldn't be engaging in stand-up firefights out in the mountains and countryside. Why would they? Of course they'll be trying to shoot from cover and at range, and for any commander to send his troops up into the mountains to essentially hunt billy-goats with a short-range weapons is pretty stupid.

Tactics is all about "how will the enemy try to fight us?" and "how do we want to fight the enemy?". Since you can't take away the mountains, then you might as well figure out how you're going to fight in them.


Well said, but there is another aspect. The M-16 was introduced during the cold war. Our DOD assumed that we would be fighting another army.
When a soldier is wounded, not only is he out of the battle, but so is at least one other who takes him to safety. Wounding is, therefore, as good as or better than killing.
Is the .223 round deadly? Yes, but not as much as the 7.62 NATO. Is it more effective in battle? Maybe, if only because of the additional ammo carried. Is it as good for long range shooting? No.
 
2010-05-21 02:48:21 PM
slowmuse.files.wordpress.com

he tried to warn us... land war. asia.
 
2010-05-21 02:49:27 PM
fromskytonothing: Gdalescrboz: Thats why they have something called snipers if we engage over 1k feet, which we arent because the insurgents arent capable of accurate fire at 1000 ft. Keep doing that thing you call "journalism" ABC.


The hell they aren't. We saw insurgent snipers armed with 7.62 X 54R Dragunovs in the Anbar and Ninevah provinces at least twice a month. It got to the point where unless we were being directly engaged, we kept our heads below the HMMV turret. Keep doing that thing you call "talking out your ass".


The article that they were referring to dealt specifically with Afghanistan, Iraq is a different animal.
 
2010-05-21 02:50:24 PM
skillett: mine.

/thats an ak-47 at the top
//Why yes I am a gun nut. never had much use for 5.56 NATO
///Vietnam vet


Isn't it a little risky making your gun collections visible to the U.S. Government? I mean, they could collect all kinds of data so that the President could come to your homes and take away your 2nd Amendment rights.
 
2010-05-21 02:51:18 PM
Well, the Brits were on the right track in the late 1940s with the .280 British (7mm MK1Z) and the Bullpup EM-2 rifle, but then the good old USA forced the 7.62 x 51 mm as the standard NATO round. Which was too powerful for a light assault weapon, so we then forced NATO to adopt the 5.56 x 45 mm. So now we're inventing things as an improvement on the 5.56 like the 6.8 SPC and the 6.5 Grendel, which are basically....the .280 British.

USA! USA! USA!
 
2010-05-21 02:51:45 PM
I've always wondered why our armed forces are so bullpup resistant.

the excuse is still "more guys have to die/retire" before they change. as is, there is still a spring in the Stoner design that extends back into the stock.

Probably the reason is money than anything else. They don't want to spend money on new gear and training.
 
2010-05-21 02:51:58 PM
knightofargh: zato_ichi: I was wondering if any of you farkers could recommend a good entry level semi-auto or bolt action rifle for a left-handed shooter? It would be mainly for target practice, possibly deer hunting. I haven't shot a gun since Boy Scouts, but I got a friend who's trying to pull me in with him.

I'm mostly a pistol guy, but STAG makes a pretty good AR-15 pattern for lefties. I believe the S&W MP15 is also available with left hand extraction. The FN2000 has forward ejection so it's ambidextrous just not cheap. Most of the modern bolt actions might be available for left handed actions.

Are you left eye dominant or just left handed?


Super-duper left eye AND arm :) My right side is as coordinated as Hasselhoff after he takes his "medicine".
Thanks for the info, I'll check those out when I get home..
 
2010-05-21 02:53:17 PM
dittybopper: It's not the length of the gun that's the problem, it's the caliber.

You don't know what you are talking about.

Moving to the shorter barrel drops the projectile velocity by between 500-800fps on the .223 round. That drop in speed effectively shortens the range of the rifle versus an 18/20" version by nearly half. Not only does the range suffer, but accuracy in general drops. The bullet spread on my M4 firing LC ammo at 100 meters is about 4-5" from a bench. My 20" AR15 can put them in a group under 2" from the same distance and using the same ammo.

Reissuing M16A4s will double their range.
 
2010-05-21 02:54:45 PM
My gun prOn:

i22.photobucket.com

i22.photobucket.com


On my wish list:

i22.photobucket.com
 
2010-05-21 02:58:24 PM
upload.wikimedia.org

The EM-2

upload.wikimedia.org

From left to right: 6mm SAW, 6.5 Grendel, 6.8 SPC, 7mm Bench Rest, .280/30 British, 7mm-08, 7mm Second Optimum (Liviano), .276 Pedersen, .308x1.75", 7.62x51 NATO.
 
2010-05-21 03:00:00 PM
zato_ichi: Cool, gun thread.

I was wondering if any of you farkers could recommend a good entry level semi-auto or bolt action rifle for a left-handed shooter? It would be mainly for target practice, possibly deer hunting. I haven't shot a gun since Boy Scouts, but I got a friend who's trying to pull me in with him.


How about a top-ejecting lever action?
 
2010-05-21 03:00:02 PM
zato_ichi: Super-duper left eye AND arm :) My right side is as coordinated as Hasselhoff after he takes his "medicine".
Thanks for the info, I'll check those out when I get home..


Those were 5.56X45mm off the top of my head since I've been shopping for one recently. Some of the classics like the Garand are pretty ambidextrous as well. For semi-auto you are going to want to look at bottom or forward ejection as well as left hand conversions. Good luck.
 
2010-05-21 03:01:18 PM
Oh Afghanistan, will anyone ever learn not to fark with you?
 
2010-05-21 03:01:18 PM
vossiewulf: This just in- carbines and full assault rifles are different things and aren't equally capable in all environments.

Assault is a behavior, not a rifle. Please don't feed the media.
 
2010-05-21 03:01:22 PM
dittybopper: How about a top-ejecting lever action?

Good call. Is anyone making one currently? I've always wanted a lever action but the last I saw was from circa 1876 and had a $45k price tag.
 
2010-05-21 03:04:26 PM
FlashHarry:

didn't the brits finally get the bullpup right (after much trouble) with the SA80?


That is one fun playtoy.
 
2010-05-21 03:05:59 PM
zato_ichi: Cool, gun thread.

I was wondering if any of you farkers could recommend a good entry level semi-auto or bolt action rifle for a left-handed shooter? It would be mainly for target practice, possibly deer hunting. I haven't shot a gun since Boy Scouts, but I got a friend who's trying to pull me in with him.


Mini-14 variants are very popular 'first guns' - they're cheap, accurate, and you can get one in lefty. .223 isn't expensive ammo, either.

// and it's based on the civilian version of the M14 everyone in this thread is creaming over
 
2010-05-21 03:08:53 PM
D.Slinger: vossiewulf: This just in- carbines and full assault rifles are different things and aren't equally capable in all environments.

Assault is a behavior, not a rifle. Please don't feed the media.


Uh. No. An actual small caliber, select-fire, military rifle is an assault rifle.

The name was coined to distinguish them from the larger caliber "battle rifles" like the M14 and FN-FAL.
 
2010-05-21 03:10:07 PM
rikdanger: Kel-Tec has some nice stuff, including this bullpup 7.62:



/SUB-2000 owner, love that little beastie


I forget who it was (maybe Israel) but back in the 1980s someone was experimenting with a bullpup sniper rifle. One of the configurations they supposedly experimented with was one where they kept the overall length of the gun comparable to similar rifles but this in effect gave it a barrel that was about 18" longer. And though I have never fired a bullpup configured rifle I have heard that it is a more stable and therefore more accurate configuration because of the added weight around the breach, and also because the location of the breach makes it easier for the body to absorb and control the recoil.
 
2010-05-21 03:15:07 PM
knightofargh: dittybopper: How about a top-ejecting lever action?

Good call. Is anyone making one currently? I've always wanted a lever action but the last I saw was from circa 1876 and had a $45k price tag.


You could get a used Winchester M-94. Get one made before they went to 'angle eject' back in the 1980s.

Some other options include getting a new Henry or a Uberti, but those tend to be pricey (more than $1,000). They are based on older designs, but still work fine today. All the Marlins are side eject, so that's no good.
 
2010-05-21 03:15:26 PM
I'd like to try one of the Israeli Tavor models.
 
2010-05-21 03:15:27 PM
Mock26: rikdanger: Kel-Tec has some nice stuff, including this bullpup 7.62:



/SUB-2000 owner, love that little beastie

I forget who it was (maybe Israel) but back in the 1980s someone was experimenting with a bullpup sniper rifle. One of the configurations they supposedly experimented with was one where they kept the overall length of the gun comparable to similar rifles but this in effect gave it a barrel that was about 18" longer. And though I have never fired a bullpup configured rifle I have heard that it is a more stable and therefore more accurate configuration because of the added weight around the breach, and also because the location of the breach makes it easier for the body to absorb and control the recoil.


Walther had the WA 2000 back in the early '80s, but holy crap they were expensive.
 
2010-05-21 03:17:23 PM
Some good advice from all. Thank you farkers.

I totally forgot about lever-action rifles, so I'll check those out as well.

AS I said, I'm pretty gun dumb, and as I'm at work, I really don't want gun websites showing up on my history. I'll check these out for sure later.
 
2010-05-21 03:17:51 PM
RsquaredW: zato_ichi: Cool, gun thread.

I was wondering if any of you farkers could recommend a good entry level semi-auto or bolt action rifle for a left-handed shooter? It would be mainly for target practice, possibly deer hunting. I haven't shot a gun since Boy Scouts, but I got a friend who's trying to pull me in with him.

Mini-14 variants are very popular 'first guns' - they're cheap, accurate, and you can get one in lefty. .223 isn't expensive ammo, either.

// and it's based on the civilian version of the M14 everyone in this thread is creaming over


Errrm, if they are that accurate, why is this diagnostic target funny?

i45.tinypic.com
 
2010-05-21 03:18:25 PM
The difference between the 14.5 inch tube on the M4 and the 20 inch tube on the 16A2/A4 is significant.

Just going back to the 20 inch version makes the weapon much more relevant in the 300-500 meter range.

One of the most accurate general issue rifles ever issued to a rifleman...
 
2010-05-21 03:19:39 PM
Am I the only gun owner that doesn't take a bunch of pictures of my guns for Innertubing?
 
2010-05-21 03:19:42 PM
How about a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range?
 
2010-05-21 03:21:11 PM
dittybopper: Errrm, if they are that accurate, why is this diagnostic target funny?

snerk

I'll have to check out that M-94. What is it chambered in usually?

You are a wealth of knowledge regarding old school firearms.
 
2010-05-21 03:22:42 PM
Merkin Muffley: I always wonder what would have happened in the middle east if England hadn't continually screwed itself, such as posting Elphinstone to Kabul, and the awful handling of the events prior to the Indian Mutiny.

I approve of your handle.
 
2010-05-21 03:23:07 PM
The_Sponge: Regarding a recent thread on the politics tab, were you ever spit on when you came back to the U.S.? Do you know anyone who did? Some people were making the ridiculous assumption that it NEVER happened.

LOL. Why don't you put on a uniform and walk across a state university campus near you today and find out if that still happens.
 
2010-05-21 03:25:06 PM
Why is the term "muzzle velocity" so sexy?
 
2010-05-21 03:25:45 PM
PsyLord: How about a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range?

Just what you see on the wall behind me, bud.
 
2010-05-21 03:25:58 PM
The_Sponge: skillett: ///Vietnam vet


Off the subject:

Regarding a recent thread on the politics tab, were you ever spit on when you came back to the U.S.? Do you know anyone who did? Some people were making the ridiculous assumption that it NEVER happened.

/And thank you for your service.
//Fellow gun nut.


Here is something to consider: In 1971-75, all flights back from SE Asia were timed to arrive at Travis AFB, outside of San Francisco, at between 04:30 to 05:30 (that's before dawn). This way, returning troops could go thru customs and baggage inspection for the FOURTH time, and be bused over to SFO, and be out of the airport by 07:00, long before the Liberal war protesters could get a morning doobie and get out of bed. All the airlines had special flights scheduled, going all over the US, to clear out the airport.

It's a historical factlet that doesn't get much play, these days.

 
2010-05-21 03:26:22 PM
The M4 is fine. Anyone who say's otherwise is probably getting a reach-around from weapons manufacturers trying to score a big gov't contract.

7.62 and 6.8 are great for sniper rifles but the embiggened recoil hurts follow up shots.

The only change the M4 needs (IMO) would be to use a gas-piston system instead of DGI and get better magazine followers.

The "killing power" of the 5.56 is more than adequate - the problem lies in the bullet itself. The Army (and I assume everyone else) is using bullets designed to penetrate body armor. As a result, they over penetrate like a sonovabiatch and create a very small wound channel. 77 gr BTHP (Mk 262) for the win.
 
2010-05-21 03:26:43 PM
dittybopper: knightofargh: dittybopper: How about a top-ejecting lever action?

Good call. Is anyone making one currently? I've always wanted a lever action but the last I saw was from circa 1876 and had a $45k price tag
You could get a used Winchester M-94. Get one made before they went to 'angle eject' back in the 1980s.

Some other options include getting a new Henry or a Uberti, but those tend to be pricey (more than $1,000). They are based on older designs, but still work fine today. All the Marlins are side eject, so that's no good.


I have a winchester 1894 - it is a great gun, but hard to find at a low price nowadays for some reason. Marlin makes a top eject 1894 replica that runs around $800-1000 new in some versions.
 
2010-05-21 03:27:00 PM
OregonVet: The_Sponge: Regarding a recent thread on the politics tab, were you ever spit on when you came back to the U.S.? Do you know anyone who did? Some people were making the ridiculous assumption that it NEVER happened.

LOL. Why don't you put on a uniform and walk across a state university campus near you today and find out if that still happens.


Worse yet, a private university campus.
 
2010-05-21 03:27:17 PM
OregonVet: LOL. Why don't you put on a uniform and walk across a state university campus near you today and find out if that still happens.


I fail to see how that would prove or disprove whether or not some Vietnam veterams were spit on when they came back home.
 
2010-05-21 03:28:54 PM
The_Sponge: OregonVet: LOL. Why don't you put on a uniform and walk across a state university campus near you today and find out if that still happens.


I fail to see how that would prove or disprove whether or not some Vietnam veterams were spit on when they came back home.



Fark it....I shouldn't have been serious about that.

Besides, you have enough assholes pretending they were in the military...I don't need to be one of them.
 
2010-05-21 03:30:05 PM
doglover: I've always wondered how we could kill thousands of enemies over most of a decade and only lose 1000 of our own guys and somehow WE are at a disadvantage.

Simple...you spend trillions of dollars on doing it. When you have a whole platoon pinned down by a guy with a rifle you don't try and shoot back you call in Apache gunships to deal with it.
 
Displayed 50 of 466 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report