BF2S Forums When the G36 vs M16 argument went too far

TehMyke wrote:

phishman420 wrote:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … USP_45.jpg

a challenger appears

http://www.pyramydair.com/blog/images/l … le-web.jpg

hai

Last edited by west-phoenix-az (2009-03-31 13:20:47)

War Man wrote:

Rdx-fx, go to defensereview.com and look up the 6.5x42mm and tell me what you think.

Sidsnot wrote:

AK-47 is by far the best gun in the world

I know what I'm talking about too, I've used it many times in different video games.

There is a big difference between real life and video games, come back again when you know what you are talking about.

west-phoenix-az wrote:

STG-556

rdx-fx wrote:

rdx-fx wrote:

"fermatx: But the fact that the "elite" units use the HK weapons puts an interesting spin on this. "
Not all of them are using the HK416, and precious few are using the G36.
US Special Operations seems to be moving away from the HK416.
The hand-built HK416's were great.  Parts compatible with 85% of the M16/M4 parts, accurate, reliable, dependable.
The production HK416's are having fits.  Proprietary civilian-grade parts (lower receiver, receiver extension, trigger/lower parts kits, etc), poor reliability (again, ask norway, and ask US Special Operations).
many many signs are pointing to HK falling on it's face for production quality, while prototype golden sample parts are still decent.

Sources plax? I'd be interested...

rdx-fx wrote:

"fermatx: One would assume that they would have a lot of time to clean their rifles"
Regular infantry has more time to clean their weapons than SF.  SF is generally very few people doing a very large job, with very little time to spare, in places where it's generally very inadvisable to have your primary weapon system taken apart.

You're saying spec-ops is on missions 24/7? And they have less free time than reg. infantry? I'd assume that reg. inf. would be on more patrols and escort missions, so they would have less time.

rdx-fx wrote:

"fermatx: If the M16/M4 was truly better if it was cleaned regularly, why don't they use it?"
They do.
They've developed the M4 into a replacement for the inadequate MP5, in the submachinegun role. (MP5 = 9mm pistol round)
They're also using a variety of accurized & improved M16 variants like the Mk 12 SPR, SDM-R, SAM-R, and others.
Also, the new army issue 'sniper rifle' is the M16-derivative M110 Semi-Auto Sniper System (Actually, it's an AR-10 derivative.  The M-16 is also an AR-10 derivative, If you want to be pedantic about it)

rdx-fx wrote:

"fermatx: To add, the M16's magazines probably are not causing the problem. Conversion kits exist and are in use for the G36 that allow M16 magazines to be used, and and problems have not been reported..."
Using good magazines, like the too-expensive HK improved magazines, high quality stainless steel magazines, magpul plastic magazines, or generally being a picky-ass when pulling magazines out of the armory mag box - and you won't have a problem.

rdx-fx wrote:

moderately useful as a automatic rifle. (referring to the M14)

rdx-fx wrote:

Regarding the 6.8 SPC:
I'll go with the 6.5x39 over the 6.8. (I've posted more about it elsewhere here)
The 6.5x39 outperforms the 6.8 in any metric you'd care to look at.  Wind Drift, kinetic energy, long range accuracy, bullet selection variety.
6.8 is 'a ton of powder space.. but .. oops, we forgot to leave room for the bullet.
6.5 has almost the same powder space (larger diameter makes up for loss of length), and a ton more room for proper bullet selection.
http://cardinalarmory.com/cardarm-pcart … vs_6.5.jpg

BUT I'd go with the 6.5x55 Swedish over the 7.62x51 or 6.5x39
http://www.65grendel.com/gallery/762N_7 … 5G_556.jpg
L to R:
7.62x51 NATO, 7.62x39 Russian, 6.5x55 Swedish, 6.5x39 Grendel, 5.56x45 NATO

CALL Newsletter 04-13 Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) CAAT II Initial Impressions Report (IIR) wrote:

In contrast, an M4, with its more compact size, is likelier to be viewed as a more defensive weapon and less intimidating."

RAIMIUS wrote:

TSI wrote:

G36k--mix of the two: fires "wounding" rounds faster, more accurate than M16/4. About as reliable as AKM, but more precise innards.

I'll agree with the reliability and fitting comment, but how does the G36 attain a higher Muzzle velocity, and where are you getting accuracy information from?

RAIMIUS wrote:

fermatx wrote:

RAIMIUS wrote:

I'll agree with the reliability and fitting comment, but how does the G36 attain a higher Muzzle velocity, and where are you getting accuracy information from?

Yeah, tbh, that accuracy info is probably BS. I never heard that and I argue for the G36.

RAIMIUS would use GUU-5/P if anything, a goo gun.

Eh, I'd like the GAU-8 or M61 series.
I do use an LMT AR-15 for competitions and "frankengun" M16s (dating back to the late 1960s) for some training.
Blanks out of a dirty M16:  With issued mags = M16 Bolt-action (aka how quickly can you perform SPORTS?)  With Magpul pmags = VERY reliable.

west-phoenix-az wrote:

fermatx wrote:

I'm surprised that US cavalry dosen't sell out their stock of side loading pmags, but they don't look that reliable either.

Side loading pmag?
Easymag?

GR34 wrote:

I have fired an AR-15 SKS, a Glock, m1911 a few shotguns and a shit load of .22's an .17's

Ioan92 wrote:

west-phoenix-az wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

There is no way in hell an M16 is more reliable than a G36.
I never shot them, but the internets agree with me.

Have you fired any guns?

Whats wrong with HKs advertisement?

No. I'm relying on teh Internets.

Ioan92 wrote:

loubot wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

No. I'm relying on teh Internets.

Concur, after spending 134 hours on Karkand, the G36 overcompensate the shooter's lack of skill.  The M-16 has it's own merits but is over shadowed by the G36 awesomeness. /Interntz

lel

fermatx wrote:

BTW, why is there a pistol with stripper clips in the background? Only pistol that I know that loads from strippers is the C96.