BF2S Forums When the G36 vs M16 argument went too far

Amdi Peter wrote:

AK-74 > any other rifle.

fixed

Give them M14's. or better yet M468's At least that gun chambers a proper round 6.8mm instead of a shitty 5.56.


Or they should adopt a bull-pup...QBZ any one lol?

Last edited by GR34 (2009-03-30 19:23:16)

1stSFOD-Delta wrote:

SAS seem to really like M4s and M16s. Besides MP5s, I see more pics of SAS guys with M4s than any other weapon.

But srsly... If you look at the average british commando, you see them carrying either SA80s or G36C/G36 rail versions. Tad hypocritical, ur name is that of the unit that REQUESTED a replacement for the M4...

[youtube] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIRerGVrEeg[/youtube]

Not the best source, I know, but you see a G36C.

GR34 wrote:

Amdi Peter wrote:

AK-74 > any other rifle.

fixed

Give them M14's. or better yet M468's At least that gun chambers a proper round 6.8mm instead of a shitty 5.56.


Or they should adopt a bull-pup...QBZ any one lol?

Lol?

Several countries have been using them for years. Nice idea in principle as long as you have the weight distribution right. See the new Israeli service rifle for a nice example.

fermatx wrote:

Let's take a nice SANE semi-unbiased look at this topic...

M16/M4:

Direct-impingement gas operation.
M16A1 jammed a lot in Vietnam. M16A2, slightly better. Still jammed in Iraq. M16A4, high confidence, but still some jams. 1964–present, 45 years. adoption rate: ~1.8 countries/year
M4A1, jammed a lot in Iraq. Lower confidence. Performed the worst in a dust test.
Currently, the M16 is in use by 15 NATO countries and more than 80 countries world wide.

And just for lolz

"As a full length battle rifle, the M16 is seen as an offensive weapon by the civilians, non-governmental organization (NGO) personnel, and CPA personnel with whom the CA teams work in meetings and in street contacts. This often sends an unintended and undesired hostile message from the teams. In contrast, an M4, with its more compact size, is likelier to be viewed as a more defensive weapon and less intimidating."

G36/HK416:
Piston Gas Operation
Almost no combat record of jams. Better than M4 on dust test. Used by 34 countries worldwide. 1997–present, 12 years. Adoption rate: 2.8 countries/year.
Also used by most "Elite" units (SAS, SBS, KSK, 1st SFOD, etc.). Successfully used by these units, on various raids in Iraq and Afghanistan.

My interpretaton:
The G36 is a better weapon. I think most people here who have served with the M16/M4 prefer it because they were trained with it and are comfortable with it. Good for them. However, due to the fact that the M16 uses a direct impingement gas operation, it jams more easily, and is therefore less reliable. Cleaning WILL solve this problem. But the fact that the "elite" units use the HK weapons puts an interesting spin on this. One would assume that they would have a lot of time to clean their rifles. If the M16/M4 was truly better if it was cleaned regularly, why don't they use it? 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...

Whew... Long... Post....

G36 and HK416 are completely different weapon systems.
Externally, the HK416 looks like an M16A4.
Internally, the HK416 theoretically shares more in common with an M16 than a G36.
G36
HK416

"However, due to the fact that the M16 uses a direct impingement gas operation, it jams more easily, and is therefore less reliable"
Most of the jamming issues with the current M16 are due to damaged magazine feed lips.  Same exact magazine that the SA80, HK416, M4, and M16 all use.  Direct gas system makes it get hot & dirty quicker than a piston system but that's not the reason for jams on an M16/M4 primarily.  An HK416 with a suppressor will jam more frequently than an M4 with or without a suppressor (ask Norway...)

"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.

"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.

"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)

"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.

And, for all of the good press HK gets (much of it deserved, admittedly), the G36 is very much an improved AR-18 system.  Just like the HK416 is an AR-18/M-16 synthesis.

GR34 wrote:

Give them M14's. or better yet M468's At least that gun chambers a proper round 6.8mm instead of a shitty 5.56

Personally, if I had to have one rifle as my do-everything rifle, I'd go with an M14 in a JAE-100 stock, Krieger barrel, and S&B/IOR/NF/USO scope.

If they'd fix the teething issues with the M110, I'd go with that over the M14... but right now, the M110 isn't reliable enough, durable enough, and they're horrendously overpriced for what they are.


JAE-100 stock, in short, is the Accuracy International chassis system concept, done properly for the M14.  Aluminum block bolt-on chassis for the action, with a plastic skin bolted to the chassis, proper user-interface details (stock, grip, length-of-pull, etc), and a bunch of 1913 railing for toys/bling/accessories

M-14 does everything moderately well, but does nothing exceptionally well.
Adequate as a battle rifle, good enough as a designated marksman or sniper rifle, moderately useful as a automatic rifle.
But not a standout performer in any of the above categories.

The downsides to the M-14:

• Possibility of bending the op-rod under heavy use and/or field condition 'abuse'
• sharper recoil than an M16/M4
• M14 gas system is very picky about ammunition. (not so much an issue when in the military.. usually)
• Operator has to be exceptionally well-trained to properly maintain an accurate designated marksman grade M-14.  They are truly a black-art to get running well.  The average unit armorer isn't nearly well trained enough to properly tune a DM M-14.
• very expensive to get parts for.  Proper forged receivers are expensive and hard to get ahold of.  Springfield Armory is not the place to start looking...
• Too long to be an ideal door-kicker house-to-house entry weapon. (Then again, I was doing MOUT training door-kicker stuff while carrying an M-60 without too much difficulty.  Being 6'3" helps)
• Not as controllable on automatic as a smaller caliber 6.5, 6.8, 5.56x45, or 7.62x39R

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.


BUT I'd go with the 6.5x55 Swedish over the 7.62x51 or 6.5x39

L to R:
7.62x51 NATO, 7.62x39 Russian, 6.5x55 Swedish, 6.5x39 Grendel, 5.56x45 NATO

Mutantsteak wrote:

War Man wrote:

Also, the 5.56 isn't shitty, did you ever hear of the new brown tip round that is now available? I heard that round is deadly

Alot of bullets are

All of them are deadly.  As long as you can coerce them into hitting the right spot.

Shot placement >> all.

Unless, of course, you're using 12.7mm or above.. then any hit is good enough.

Locoloki wrote:

so which gun did he use?

found this on Wiki

"One hour later Dipendra returned to the party armed with an MP5K and a M16 and fired a single shot into the ceiling before turning the gun on his father King Birendra"

and some say, which makes more sense, he was upset about a marriage arrangement

I guess his M16 didnt jam after all

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepalese_royal_massacre

Last edited by Locoloki (2009-03-30 22:51:42)

Austeyr > all.

Bullpup + 5.56 = win

Getting back on topic:
Sux2behim
Shouldve gone Russian
/joke

Ioan92 wrote:

_Dominiko_PL wrote:

http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/micha … /Nuke2.JPG

win

http://room362.com/uploads/ion_cannon.jpg

http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/2610 … nblast.jpg

/thread tbh

Ioan m8 I like your style.

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.

HK Advertising = fail

Ioan92 wrote:

west-phoenix-az wrote:

HK Advertising = fail

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p123 … tising.jpg

Your comment is irrelevant.

Whats wrong with their advertisement?

Have you fired both of these rifles?

Last edited by west-phoenix-az (2009-03-31 09:07:55)

west-phoenix-az wrote:

Ioan92 wrote:

west-phoenix-az wrote:

HK Advertising = fail

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p123 … tising.jpg

Your comment is irrelevant.

Whats wrong with their advertisement?

Have you fired both of these rifles?

There is no way in hell an M16 is more reliable than a G36.

I never shot them, but the internets agree with me.


(adds fuel to the fire)