Will the AR-15 be fondly remembered like the Garand?

[Bob Womack]

It's the furniture...

Possibly.

I'm a baby boomer. I grew up surrounded by the M1. It was in every war movie. My GI Joe had an M1. The rifle was surrounded by nostalgia. And besides, in its own ugly duckling sort of way, it was/is beautiful and features lovely walnut furniture.

I grew up in the Vietnam era. The M16 was on TV every evening. I was young enough that I had no idea of the teething problems with the rifle. When I went to get a high-power rifle to teach my boys, it was between a CMP Garand and a newly built AR-15. I found a deal on a tack driver AR but it wasn't USGI and it didn't have the cache' of a Garand. Oh, the sight picture is better and it was probably more accurate, but it looked and felt like a confounded rocket. Has anyone come up with wooden furniture for the AR?

I think it is the furniture.

Well, I've got both now and can tell you the Garand is a young man's rifle: It's heavy. You need considerable upper body strength to hold it up for any length of time. But I love it. When you have one in your hands, you know you are holding a substantial weapon. I'm not sure that at 52 years old I'd want to schlep it all over a continent. From a purely weight standpoint, if I had to pack a single rifle now, I might want the AR. BUT, the Garand is a snap to clean. Because the AR "craps and feeds in the same place," it is a pain to clean. Other than that, it is very practical.

So perhaps, as an avocational shooter, I'm swayed by the furniture. But I like both of 'em.

In the case of competition shooting, perhaps what drives the bus is whoever is the hottest hotshot armorer just discharged from the Army or Marines.

Bob

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.

[John Kepler]

It's the furniture...


In the case of competition shooting, perhaps what drives the bus is whoever is the hottest hotshot armorer just discharged from the Army or Marines.

Bob

Nope! It's the basic engineering. The AR is ALWAYS going to be the more accurate platform due to it's design/engineering.

Besides, the first thing you do to make a consistently accurate rifle is to toss the wood into the fireplace and replace it with some flavor of plastic/composite....even the stuff that sorta looks like wood (laminates) are primarily plastic, or as close to it as the materials people can make it without going to 100% synthetic materials. Wood is something pretty you sit on, not make a firearm out of...just go to a real marksmanship competition and you'll be able to count the "pure wood" furniture on one hand! IMHO, a "pretty" target is infinitely preferable to a "pretty" rifle....in over 45 years of active shooting, most of it in some flavor of competition, I have YET to see a target that was the least bit impressed by the appearance or pedigree of the firearm shooting at it!

[Maury Krupp]

Remembered by who? (whom?) And for what?

I'm sure some GIs who carried the M16 will remember it fondly. Especially those who were in a tight spot and used an M16 to get out. There are other GIs who feel the same way about an M1. Or M14, or carbine, or 1911, etc.

I'm equally sure that some GIs won't remember the M16 fondly. Especially those who were in a tight spot and had an M16 just make it tighter. Just like there are GIs who never cared for the M1. Or M14, or carbine, or 1911, etc.

There will be competition shooters who will fondly remember the AR-15 as the rifle they used to win a match or earn leg points. Just as there are shooters who may recall a particular "tack driver" Match Rifle they had at one time.

Some may think fondly of the AR-15 for its inherent accuracy or simplicity or how easy they are to work on or how cheap they are to feed.

But I also think there's a little bit of "apples vs oranges" in the original question.

Are we talking about M1s vs M16s or M1s vs AR-15s?

A USGI M1 is the real deal. There is an undeniable history attached to each and every rifle. We may not know what that history is but it's still there. The actual rifle -not just the design- really has BT-DT in the hands of Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, Coasties, and even a few Airmen.

None of the above applies to a commercial AR-15. Or to a commercial M14 or even one of the commercial-copy Garands. At least not to me. A CAI, Lithgow, or SA, Inc isn't a US Rifle, Cal .30, M1; it's just another rifle. No more special than any other rifle or even a shovel I might buy at Sears or Ace.

For me and maybe some others that's a critical difference.

So I'd say the answer is probably "Yes" but by different people, for different rifles, and for different reasons.

Maury

[M1Tommy]

.............snippage........

I have YET to see a target that was the least bit impressed by the appearance or pedigree of the firearm shooting at it!

I wondered when that annoying fact was going to surface... but grudgingly agree.

Don't the active duty folks now call the A2's "muskets"???

Tommy