Lock 'N Load - M-14 versus M-16

[imarangemaster]

Thanks!!! Great clip. It is a Mail Call that I missed somehow. One thing he did not show is how hard it is to control an M14 on full auto (I tried one once, and it was all over the place). It also left out another fact that partially the decision was made to switch based on studies of WWI and WWII showing 95% or more of the rifle engagements were at ranges of less than 300 yards, usually less than 200 yards. Another factor in the decision was the ability to counteract hoards of AK47 toting Ruskies flooding out of BMPs in Western Europe. Soviet doctrine for everyone having full auto in an intermediate caliber was influenced German STG44 toting troops. Part of our decision was based on the Soviet switch.

I open country (like Afghanistan) I do think you need M14s. Urban (like Iraq and cities in Afghanistan) the 5.56mm works well. I do wish they would at least use 16" barrels, though, because there is a huge difference in effective fragmentation range between the two barrel lengths. 14.5" is only reliably fragmenting at 70-80 yards. 16" will fragment to 150 yards.

In my real life before retirement, I saw really, really dead people, with really big ugly holes in them from M193 hits (20 inch barrel). H@ll is populated with probably a million unhappy soles from the last 50 years who would dispute the "Poodle Shooter" moniker given 5.56mm.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[chuckfw]

One thing he did not show is how hard it is to control an M14 on full auto (I tried one once, and it was all over the place).

Amen to that!!! It's even worse if you try firing from the hip. Big time waste of ammunition, but it is a great experience to have fired the M14 on full auto.