bobalis
New Member
TM M733 upgraded, KSC glock 19, BH crossdraw vest OD
Posts: 735
|
Post by bobalis on Nov 9, 2003 19:39:17 GMT -5
I can assume that some Spec Ops would use AK variants or the same weapons that their enemies are using so that why it would be a lot harder to tell who did the spec ops mission.
|
|
Munkee
New Member
I'm gunna roll around on the floor for a lil bit KAY?!
Posts: 190
|
Post by Munkee on Nov 9, 2003 20:23:54 GMT -5
yeah, the M16 and variants of it are the standard military issue rifle for the US. The mp5 is usually for swat and cops, i dont think SWAT uses m4's. Im not bashing M4s cuz they kick ass! I want one soooo bad. If i cant talk my parents into it in two weeks, im going to come up with the cash on my own.
|
|
|
Post by xaos on Nov 11, 2003 15:44:47 GMT -5
A spec ops soldier will use whatever firearm he feels fits the task at hand best, be it an M4, AK, MP5, or whatever. "Standard Military Issue" doesn't apply to them.
As far as weapons used by SWAT/ERT (emergency response team) units, it depends completely on the department. Some use MP5 series weapons, others use M4s, and I'm sure there's some that use completely different weapons. For them, unlike (for the most part) the military, cost is a very serious concern when considering weapons.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Walrus on Nov 12, 2003 16:22:56 GMT -5
Macomb county's sheriff's department swat used g36k M16s, remington shotguns, and MP5 .40
Pistols range from Glocks (all variants) to USPs to Colts
|
|
destrukto
New Member
Armalite Hater!
Those who swear by armalites have never owned an AK
Posts: 625
|
Post by destrukto on Nov 12, 2003 22:49:07 GMT -5
When I think of the M16, I remember holding the mag in the gun so the action would actually cycle properly, I remember the hot gas from the fired round being spit back into my face, I remember what happened when I dropped it in the sand, I remember charging the weapon repeatedly trying to get the last 5 or 6 shots to feed into the chamber, and I remember seeing a spent shell somehow get jammed in the gas tube.
I have all these "wonderful" memories from my experiences with the M16, and using an airsoft M16 will bring back all those lovely memories, so I have my reasons for bashing the M16. The M16 is by far the most overrated assault rifle in the world
|
|
minimaster
New Member
Clark Kent my ass
Posts: 136
|
Post by minimaster on Nov 12, 2003 22:54:24 GMT -5
I have to agree with Destructo, I've always felt that way about the M16 series also, to me there are so many other guns I'd rather have than any of the M16's available. But hey thats me.
|
|
|
Post by Munin on Nov 13, 2003 10:32:06 GMT -5
The only misfeed I've ever had with an AR-15 rifle was when I was using a friend of mine's (new) plastic composite magazines. Being new, they weren't quite broken in yet, and fit pretty tightly in the mag-well. I inserted it until it stopped, but it was actually about a quarter inch low - just high enough that the bolt would catch the round, but not high enough for it to seat correctly into the chamber, leading to misfeeds. Slap, rack, bang, problem solved. Smooth sailing from there on out.
Understand that the first incarnation of the M16 was a pretty touchy beast, but since then a lot of improvements have been made to the design. Yes, it requires more maintenance than an AK-47, but it also performs better in terms of accuracy, both in initial shot placement and follow-up shots.
|
|
destrukto
New Member
Armalite Hater!
Those who swear by armalites have never owned an AK
Posts: 625
|
Post by destrukto on Nov 13, 2003 20:00:46 GMT -5
Comparing the accuracy of the M16 to the AK47 is like me comparing my .22 to my 30-30. The .22 is more accurate overall, but the 30-30 is only capable of a certain degree of accuracy because it uses a much larger bullet.
.22 = groupings the size of a dime
30-30 = half dollar
In the end I will always stand by the AK as my weapon of choice. To me the M16 is more or less a very expensive club with which to hit somebody.
What good is all that accuracy when you pull the trigger and nothing happens??
|
|
|
Post by Ballista on Nov 13, 2003 20:23:05 GMT -5
The Stoner is a complicated design, and must be treated as such. If you're too much of an oaf to keep your M16 in proper working condition, you can go ahead and have your cheap ass Kalashnikov. Just stay out of my nation's army.
War casualty statistics don't lie: the M16 beats the AK every time they meet in global conflict - even the earliest shitty jammer in Vietnam.
|
|
Andree
New Member
No one will fear me... How can you fear somthing that you have never seen,at its full potential
Posts: 464
|
Post by Andree on Nov 13, 2003 20:39:35 GMT -5
Wow... either you dont want guys with ak airsoft guns going into the army or were talking about real guns now... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Ballista on Nov 13, 2003 21:07:40 GMT -5
... Or maybe I was responding to the two posts above mine.
|
|
Lorenzo
New Member
Avtomat Kalashnikova
Posts: 155
|
Post by Lorenzo on Nov 13, 2003 21:12:02 GMT -5
Maybe the Ak has a bad record because of the people using it. Most were untrained(Arabs), small(VC), and shot it as a kamikazie weapon. Though the Ak round is slightly shorter than the m14 round, just compare an M16 being fired in single shot mode compared to an m14 in fully auto... Don't you think that there is an accuracy difference there? If the Ak is used properly, it is more efficient than an m16... its cut and dry.
Maybe the U.S. should use their brains more and get an Ak and chamber it for the 7.62 NATO round so they could have the best of both worlds...
edit: on accuracy, I have to admit that after two consecutive single round shots, the m16 is more accurate, mainly because of the barrel length, the recoil, and the gas operation differences(i think that would matter).
|
|
|
Post by luke213 on Nov 13, 2003 21:51:38 GMT -5
Now I don't have any exact figures but, the 7.62x39 round falls short much before the .223, and that is likly the reason behind the choice of caliber. Also at close range your going to do severe damage with either. So in reality lets not compair the catrige, but rather the gun.
AK = Made to shitty tolerances, though you can run it over and it will still fire, and as a result of the tollerances you can't expect the accuracy the M16 attains.
M16 = Precision rifle and as such it requires maintainece and also produces better groupings and further effective range.
Luke
|
|
|
Post by Munin on Nov 14, 2003 1:49:51 GMT -5
lorpicc, a 7.62x39 is more than just a "little bit shorter" than a 7.62 NATO (7.62x51). And in addition to length, the casing diameter of the 7.62x51 is larger, again leading to more gunpowder and hence more energy. You're talking about a massive increase in the muzzle energy in the larger round (1553 ft-lbs vs. 2650 ft-lbs), so comparing an AK-47 to an M14 just because the caliber of the bullet is the same is more or less ridiculous.
|
|
Lorenzo
New Member
Avtomat Kalashnikova
Posts: 155
|
Post by Lorenzo on Nov 14, 2003 21:04:03 GMT -5
Sorry, Munin, I couldn't find a better example, and I wasn't thinking at the time... As for the other arguments, the 7.62 russian is effective 200-300 yards. The 5.56 nato is effective 500 yards. 100-200 yards difference. Whoopie. There are rare instances where this range is even met. Desert maybe? Thats about it. Even if you are in range with an m16, and out of your ak47 range, i bet the m16 guy wont even touch you. 500 yards with iron sights is a tough shot. Even if you are out of range with your ak47, there are things called advancing and sniping. Use them. As for power of the cartride, the Ak blows out the m16. Say at 10 yards away, person A shoots person B in the stomach. If person A has an M16, most likely there wont be enough damage to keep that guy from firing back (flesh wound). Now put an Ak47 in Person A's hands. The initial wound would be about the size of a fist and the exit wound would be about the size of a 19" monitor (like the one in front of me ) Which would knock out your spine rendering every muscle in you body useless... I don't think you could fire your gun after that. Also, there are many accounts at close range that after being shot with a 5.56, the victim doesn't feel the bullet because of its small size and high velocity; thus making him still dangerous. As with accuracy... The Ak has a more powerful round than an M16, hence, more recoil, making it more prone to less accurate shots as you get beat up by the recoil. The M16A2 has a smaller 5.56 round which provides less recoil as stated above. The soldier get less beaten up (funny terminology, eh?) and therefore recovers from the recoil quicker and takes the second shot (or burst) accurately. The accuracy is only dependent on the recoil and the user; not the barrel (besides length), they are made with the same quality. Final thoughts... Destrukto was right about if the gun don't work, who cares about accuracy. The thing he was a little off on, was that an M16 wouldn't make a good club; The plastic stock break off, and has broken off because of some real-life melee attempts... Please, don't take any of this personally.... It's ok to have grudges with a certain firearm. These are just the facts, and I'm presenting them, mmmk?
|
|