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

[John Kepler]

Well, here we go again, "the AR is always going to be the more accurate platform" Well, only a SMALL number of us are going to the national matches, BUT a Large number of us got a free set of clothes, and a free rifle for several years, (though we had to give it back) Now These are the folks who will be doing the remembering, not a much smaller number of target shooters.

Yep.....and more and more of those folks, like my son the E5, think of your "old iron" as nothing but quaint relics of a by-gone era....and the AR as what a rifle is supposed to be like. Don't look now, but they's more of them these days than us! My son will also tell you that based on HIS combat experience, the AR is MORE than capable of "punching holes in people"...I always thought so too!

As for the rest.....John, I'd rather have a capability and not need it than need a capability and not have it. Besides, as long as I can hit a 10-Ring at 1000 yds with a Service Rifle....I want rifle that can too!

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.

[Former Cav]

Yep.....and more and more of those folks, like my son the E5, think of your "old iron" as nothing but quaint relics of a by-gone era....and the AR as what a rifle is supposed to be like. Don't look now, but they's more of them these days than us! My son will also tell you that based on HIS combat experience, the AR is MORE than capable of "punching holes in people"...I always thought so too!

As for the rest.....John, I'd rather have a capability and not need it than need a capability and not have it. Besides, as long as I can hit a 10-Ring at 1000 yds with a Service Rifle....I want rifle that can too!

Don't forget, those of us "on the front end" back in 1964 to 1970? (whatever year in the 70's) had an M-16 that was shooting 55 grain bullets and had the 1/12 (or maybe 1/14) twist barrel.
I have personally been point man and have shot the enemy and KNEW I had hit him as he was "dancing" and he turned on me with his 30 caliber AK-47.
There are papers about the idea was to wound and injure the enemy soldier as you tied up 4 to 7 comrads to take care of the wounded soldier. Unfortunately, the battle field is not an air conditioned office in the pentagon and the enemy soldier you just hit is high Pi$$ed at you and is going to do his best to take you with him. Furthermore, the other 4 to 7 guys are shooting at you and are NOT taking care of their fallen brother. They did however drag the body off of the battlezone if they had time.
Now...with all of the civilian development, the Military are shooting a 68/69 grain bullet and I believe that they are even getting 77 grain bullets.
John, do us a favor and ask you son what the weight of the bullets are that are available to today's soldiers. I do know that they have a designated marksman who has the good old M-14 (7.62 Nato) in some units.
One thing you can't argue is that their close combat sights are lightyears ahead of what we had. ditto for their night vision devices.
Bob

[ROCK]

Yep.....and more and more of those folks, like my son the E5, think of your "old iron" as nothing but quaint relics of a by-gone era....and the AR as what a rifle is supposed to be like.

That's probably true in most cases but opinion doesn't change the effectiveness of the old rifles. The only current assault rifle made of both wood and steel, that triggers the 'cool factor' with the young generations, is the AK47.

In the future, any new rifle, to be accepted by the current generation, has to have the 'menacing look' with a bunch of add ons hanging all over it. They could never go backwards and issue anything like the M1 without a major drop in morale. That is, unless you install some cool features like they have been doing with the M14. Some of those M14s appear very modern to todays troops, many of whom don't realize how old that design is.