As we enter the 21st centruy should U.S. armed forces find a better suited replacement rifle? Not to dwell on my caliber thread, I see the M16 as getting out dated and out classed by Soviet/Russian rifle technology. I still want to see a significant replacement, such as the Barrett M468.
Should the M16 be replaced?
- Thread starter Sgt.Banes
- Start date
Dont you realize the 468 is just a ar/m16 based rifle with a arms sirs rail? Its basically the same gun. How is the us getting surpassed by the russians? There gun that is currently fielded is nothing but a down calibered ak47 called the ak74. They do have some other models that they have built but nothing thats been fielded in any numbers and there still based off the ak47.
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
Apart from bull pup, a rifles a rifle. The M16 is a great weapon, but an intergrated 5.56mm and 20mm/40mm auto loading grenatde launcher like CIWS or ACIWS seems to be the way to go. However there is no real change in the way the nuts and bolts of the rifle operates. Theres is a reason that the front line russian rifle is a down calibered and slightly modified version of a late 1940's design. Because what was good then is still good now, apart from caliber. I dont think the needs of the infantrymen will change all that much in the forseable future as far as the weapon is concerned, apart from new calibers/ammunition, until man portable directed energy systems such as HEL's are practical. So i dont see any real need for a replacement for the M16, maybe just some modifications if its deemed nesessary. Unless the advantages of the bull pup design (just shorter overall length with the same barrel length) are deemed worth the cost of R&D for a new design, and the cost of an army wide replacement.
Last edited:
If I had to go into combat again, I would have to pck up an m-16. Only one reason; I am more familiar with it then any other rifle.
The most important thing that I would like to change, aside from calibur, is the system itself. the gas tube might be simpler that a piston and rod, but it vents gas and carbon straight into the chamber, and this is NOT good.
The most important thing that I would like to change, aside from calibur, is the system itself. the gas tube might be simpler that a piston and rod, but it vents gas and carbon straight into the chamber, and this is NOT good.
some unit have already switch some of their M16 for older guns in iraq. the reason being the urban combat and all doesn't offer much advantage for the M16. those older guns, less accurate and range can hit insurgents hidding behind thick cover in close quarter combat due to their powerful rounds.
:nutkick
really interesting to know...
:nutkick
really interesting to know...
I find that interesting - what are they replacing them with.some unit have already switch some of their M16 for older guns in iraq. the reason being the urban combat and all doesn't offer much advantage for the M16. those older guns, less accurate and range can hit insurgents hidding behind thick cover in close quarter combat due to their powerful rounds.
:nutkick
really interesting to know...
I think what he was trying to say is that in some units they have designated marksman and there using the m14 that shoots the 7.62 cartridge. This is usually only one soldier out of a platoon sized unit. There has been no wide scale replacement of the m16/m4. As a matter of fact everytime the army gets a bug up there butt to replace the m16 they cant seem to find anythying thats mutch better and stay with what they have.
What they should do, is to replace the upper recievers of the exististing guns with a piston style gas system. Colt already has a gun called the le1020 that intergrates a piston system and a rail system all in one. HK416 is basically the same idea and would be viable also.
What they should do, is to replace the upper recievers of the exististing guns with a piston style gas system. Colt already has a gun called the le1020 that intergrates a piston system and a rail system all in one. HK416 is basically the same idea and would be viable also.
THe M-14 over the m-16 in close combat?!?
You might want to check that. Unless they are trying to shot through brick walls, the M-14 is not what you would want in an urban fight. 20 rounds, difficult to hold steady in full-auto, long and heavy... this is one area where the M-16 is clearly the better gun.
You might want to check that. Unless they are trying to shot through brick walls, the M-14 is not what you would want in an urban fight. 20 rounds, difficult to hold steady in full-auto, long and heavy... this is one area where the M-16 is clearly the better gun.
We do use a M14 variant called M21 for snipers, I do not know if these have been phased out of front line service or not, maybe one of the ground pounders on the forum would know.THe M-14 over the m-16 in close combat?!?
You might want to check that. Unless they are trying to shot through brick walls, the M-14 is not what you would want in an urban fight. 20 rounds, difficult to hold steady in full-auto, long and heavy... this is one area where the M-16 is clearly the better gun.
I dont need to check anything I have friends that have came back from the sand box and they had designated marksman in there units that were issued the m14 and no its wasnt the m21 sniper rifle. Its a fact there using them just google it and im sure you will find some info on it. Alot of them have put different stocks like the sage and kitted them out with scopes , aimpoints and eotechs..
What type of units are your friends from, are they National Guard, Resevists or Regulars.I dont need to check anything I have friends that have came back from the sand box and they had designated marksman in there units that were issued the m14 and no its wasnt the m21 sniper rifle. Its a fact there using them just google it and im sure you will find some info on it. Alot of them have put different stocks like the sage and kitted them out with scopes , aimpoints and eotechs..
They look like M21`s to me, they are using them for sniping duties, along with Remington 700 BDL`s chambered for 308 cal.I dont need to check anything I have friends that have came back from the sand box and they had designated marksman in there units that were issued the m14 and no its wasnt the m21 sniper rifle. Its a fact there using them just google it and im sure you will find some info on it. Alot of them have put different stocks like the sage and kitted them out with scopes , aimpoints and eotechs..
not sure if im supposed to link. If not mod please delete.
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/cavtroop4/aat?full=1
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/cavtroop4/aab?full=1
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/cavtroop4/aaa
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/cavtroop4/aaz
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/sgtsniper/aam
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/cavtroop4/aat?full=1
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/cavtroop4/aab?full=1
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/cavtroop4/aaa
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/cavtroop4/aaz
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/sgtsniper/aam
Looks like they have done some major upgrading to the M21`s, just goes to show that this rifle is still a trusted champion and can get the job done.not sure if im supposed to link. If not mod please delete.
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/cavtroop4/aat?full=1
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/cavtroop4/aab?full=1
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/cavtroop4/aaa
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/cavtroop4/aaz
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/sgtsniper/aam
Thanks for the pictures.
Looks like a nice upgrade, I wonder if you can get it on the civilian market.
Third guy back 82nd airborne with a straight up m14, no scope, no combed stock, iron sites only.
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/albums/82nd_Airborne_Division/82nd_101.jpg
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/albums/82nd_Airborne_Division/82nd_101.jpg
I think you can buy it . Of course the civy gun is called a m1a.. I think that new stock is actually made somewhere in northern michigan and is sold thru fulton armory. Got a friend who built one becuase he was in the sand box and saw alot of them and wanted to build one just like it..
A kid on leave from iraq came into the gun store where I go to alot and saw a springfield M1A on the wall and said cool his friend had one just like that in iraq. We asked him what optic he was using and he said it was issued without one and he was just using the iron sites. Of course the seals and sf have never really stopped using it.
Anyways It was tougher than I thought to find info on it. I did find several threads on the subject on other forums but I didnt link them because , well there just guys on the net just like me and if I need proof so would they and there was no way to confirm they were actually in the army .
A kid on leave from iraq came into the gun store where I go to alot and saw a springfield M1A on the wall and said cool his friend had one just like that in iraq. We asked him what optic he was using and he said it was issued without one and he was just using the iron sites. Of course the seals and sf have never really stopped using it.
Anyways It was tougher than I thought to find info on it. I did find several threads on the subject on other forums but I didnt link them because , well there just guys on the net just like me and if I need proof so would they and there was no way to confirm they were actually in the army .
Very interesting that they are using these with iron sights, I have a co-worker who is in the reserves and just came back from Iraq, he is combat infantry so maybe he can shed some more light on this topic for us.I think you can buy it . Of course the civy gun is called a m1a.. I think that new stock is actually made somewhere in northern michigan and is sold thru fulton armory. Got a friend who built one becuase he was in the sand box and saw alot of them and wanted to build one just like it..
A kid on leave from iraq came into the gun store where I go to alot and saw a springfield M1A on the wall and said cool his friend had one just like that in iraq. We asked him what optic he was using and he said it was issued without one and he was just using the iron sites. Of course the seals and sf have never really stopped using it.
Anyways It was tougher than I thought to find info on it. I did find several threads on the subject on other forums but I didnt link them because , well there just guys on the net just like me and if I need proof so would they and there was no way to confirm they were actually in the army .
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #20
Are you sure? Because from what I've studied it states that there are some modernize models that in can replace the AK-47. But I do acknowledge that there is no real need for a replacement on the Russians part.Dont you realize the 468 is just a ar/m16 based rifle with a arms sirs rail? Its basically the same gun. How is the us getting surpassed by the russians? There gun that is currently fielded is nothing but a down calibered ak47 called the ak74. They do have some other models that they have built but nothing thats been fielded in any numbers and there still based off the ak47.