Me talking about movies and stuff.

[ArmasTermin]

Desert_Fox_Rommel

I'd think the opinion of the soldiers whos lives depend on the weapon would be more important than some armchair general. Sadly we all know that common sense and logic are two important things that our government is incapable of comprehending. Having some issues with handling the weapon is much more desirable than a weapon that will most likely jam when you need it properly functioning the most.

I actually think I saw one of them jamming in the movie while while watching. Might have mistaken or it might have been staged, though.  

[Desert_Fox_Rommel]

OberFeldwebel

Desert_Fox_Rommel

I'd think the opinion of the soldiers whos lives depend on the weapon would be more important than some armchair general. Sadly we all know that common sense and logic are two important things that our government is incapable of comprehending. Having some issues with handling the weapon is much more desirable than a weapon that will most likely jam when you need it properly functioning the most.

Yeah, I suppose.
So what are the soldier's reviews on it?

I think I saw it on Weaponology. They were talking about how the soldiers hated the jamming. My uncle definitely hated the M16 for that very reason and he served in nam. If I recall he mentioned he was one of the last units trained with the M14 and he preferred that over the M16.

Armas: Just about all guns are capable of jamming. The frequency of jamming is what I meant. I'm sure 14's can jam, but my uncle told me that the 16's jammed far too often.  

[Fresnel]

Desert_Fox_Rommel

OberFeldwebel

Desert_Fox_Rommel

I'd think the opinion of the soldiers whos lives depend on the weapon would be more important than some armchair general. Sadly we all know that common sense and logic are two important things that our government is incapable of comprehending. Having some issues with handling the weapon is much more desirable than a weapon that will most likely jam when you need it properly functioning the most.

Yeah, I suppose.
So what are the soldier's reviews on it?

I think I saw it on Weaponology. They were talking about how the soldiers hated the jamming. My uncle definitely hated the M16 for that very reason and he served in nam. If I recall he mentioned he was one of the last units trained with the M14 and he preferred that over the M16.

Armas: Just about all guns are capable of jamming. The frequency of jamming is what I meant. I'm sure 14's can jam, but my uncle told me that the 16's jammed far too often.

Yeah, because they were poorly manufactured and the GI's were told they didn't need cleaning. It was logistics, not design.  

[Desert_Fox_Rommel]

Fresnel

Desert_Fox_Rommel

OberFeldwebel

Desert_Fox_Rommel

I'd think the opinion of the soldiers whos lives depend on the weapon would be more important than some armchair general. Sadly we all know that common sense and logic are two important things that our government is incapable of comprehending. Having some issues with handling the weapon is much more desirable than a weapon that will most likely jam when you need it properly functioning the most.

Yeah, I suppose.
So what are the soldier's reviews on it?

I think I saw it on Weaponology. They were talking about how the soldiers hated the jamming. My uncle definitely hated the M16 for that very reason and he served in nam. If I recall he mentioned he was one of the last units trained with the M14 and he preferred that over the M16.

Armas: Just about all guns are capable of jamming. The frequency of jamming is what I meant. I'm sure 14's can jam, but my uncle told me that the 16's jammed far too often.

Yeah, because they were poorly manufactured and the GI's were told they didn't need cleaning. It was logistics, not design.

Well poorly manufacturing them and not issuing cleaning kits still made it inferior.  

[Fresnel]

Desert_Fox_Rommel

Fresnel

Desert_Fox_Rommel

OberFeldwebel

Desert_Fox_Rommel

I'd think the opinion of the soldiers whos lives depend on the weapon would be more important than some armchair general. Sadly we all know that common sense and logic are two important things that our government is incapable of comprehending. Having some issues with handling the weapon is much more desirable than a weapon that will most likely jam when you need it properly functioning the most.

Yeah, I suppose.
So what are the soldier's reviews on it?

I think I saw it on Weaponology. They were talking about how the soldiers hated the jamming. My uncle definitely hated the M16 for that very reason and he served in nam. If I recall he mentioned he was one of the last units trained with the M14 and he preferred that over the M16.

Armas: Just about all guns are capable of jamming. The frequency of jamming is what I meant. I'm sure 14's can jam, but my uncle told me that the 16's jammed far too often.

Yeah, because they were poorly manufactured and the GI's were told they didn't need cleaning. It was logistics, not design.

Well poorly manufacturing them and not issuing cleaning kits still made it inferior.

So a Bugatti Veyron with no gasoline is inferior to a fully-fueled Yugo? The problem lay with the military and Colt, not with the design of the gun or Armalite.

Actually, I bet you could take time to fuel up a Veyron and still beat a Yugo in the quarter mile.  

[Desert_Fox_Rommel]

Fresnel

So a Bugatti Veyron with no gasoline is inferior to a fully-fueled Yugo? The problem lay with the military and Colt, not with the design of the gun or Armalite.

Actually, I bet you could take time to fuel up a Veyron and still beat a Yugo in the quarter mile.

That's pretty much what I mean. One may have the potential to be better, but if the circumstances make it to where the one that is supposed to be better can not perform better then it is a worse choice. It's easy to fuel up a car when you're in a place where they can be fueled up, but in the jungle there aren't many gun shops selling 5.56 cleaning kits and if a soldier happened to have a kit left over from the M14 the brush would be too big for the barrel anyway. I guess they could try improvising a cleaning kit, but if they're not careful and/or they don't know what they're doing they can just make things worse. If there was a choice between fighting with a scimitar or a rifle that has no firing pin I'd take the scimitar.  

[Fresnel]

Desert_Fox_Rommel

Fresnel

So a Bugatti Veyron with no gasoline is inferior to a fully-fueled Yugo? The problem lay with the military and Colt, not with the design of the gun or Armalite.

Actually, I bet you could take time to fuel up a Veyron and still beat a Yugo in the quarter mile.

That's pretty much what I mean. One may have the potential to be better, but if the circumstances make it to where the one that is supposed to be better can not perform better then it is a worse choice. It's easy to fuel up a car when you're in a place where they can be fueled up, but in the jungle there aren't many gun shops selling 5.56 cleaning kits and if a soldier happened to have a kit left over from the M14 the brush would be too big for the barrel anyway. I guess they could try improvising a cleaning kit, but if they're not careful and/or they don't know what they're doing they can just make things worse. If there was a choice between fighting with a scimitar or a rifle that has no firing pin I'd take the scimitar.

At the time, in the situation, they sucked. But people carry on a forty-year-old feud that was fixed thirty-nine years ago to this day, and that's a big reason why the M16 is hated. It's bullshit, really.  

[Desert_Fox_Rommel]

My problem isn't with the use today. My problem is when they were used they did a piss poor job and those responsible just dragged their feet at resolving the problem. Poorly manufactured crap cost too many men their lives and risked more lives and when these issues were discovered it wasn't just fixed. I've met vets personally who claimed the gun still jammed too much even towards the end of the war when they had the cleaning kits.  

[Fresnel]

Desert_Fox_Rommel

My problem isn't with the use today. My problem is when they were used they did a piss poor job and those responsible just dragged their feet at resolving the problem. Poorly manufactured crap cost too many men their lives and risked more lives and when these issues were discovered it wasn't just fixed. I've met vets personally who claimed the gun still jammed too much even towards the end of the war when they had the cleaning kits.

The rocky transition sure as s**t blinded vets as to the better weapon. Remember, time heals all wounds, and memories get fonder the older they are.  

[Desert_Fox_Rommel]

Fresnel

Desert_Fox_Rommel

My problem isn't with the use today. My problem is when they were used they did a piss poor job and those responsible just dragged their feet at resolving the problem. Poorly manufactured crap cost too many men their lives and risked more lives and when these issues were discovered it wasn't just fixed. I've met vets personally who claimed the gun still jammed too much even towards the end of the war when they had the cleaning kits.

The rocky transition sure as s**t blinded vets as to the better weapon. Remember, time heals all wounds, and memories get fonder the older they are.

When you are given one weapon which works fine, then given another weapon that keeps jamming at the most inconvenient of times that's not something easily forgotten unless you have alzheimers. Had the weapons been manufactured properly rather than cutting corners to save time like the Soviets did so often and had the proper cleaning kits been distributed I wouldn't be so negative towards the switch from one to another.  

[Fresnel]

Desert_Fox_Rommel

Fresnel

Desert_Fox_Rommel

My problem isn't with the use today. My problem is when they were used they did a piss poor job and those responsible just dragged their feet at resolving the problem. Poorly manufactured crap cost too many men their lives and risked more lives and when these issues were discovered it wasn't just fixed. I've met vets personally who claimed the gun still jammed too much even towards the end of the war when they had the cleaning kits.

The rocky transition sure as s**t blinded vets as to the better weapon. Remember, time heals all wounds, and memories get fonder the older they are.

When you are given one weapon which works fine, then given another weapon that keeps jamming at the most inconvenient of times that's not something easily forgotten unless you have alzheimers. Had the weapons been manufactured properly rather than cutting corners to save time like the Soviets did so often and had the proper cleaning kits been distributed I wouldn't be so negative towards the switch from one to another.

Not my point. The people pining for the better days of the M14 have faulty memory. They DO remember the days of a good weapon switching to the bad weapon, but they can't make an honest comparison to the M14 and the M16A2 and later. The gap was too great for memory to serve well.  

[Desert_Fox_Rommel]

Fresnel

Not my point. The people pining for the better days of the M14 have faulty memory. They DO remember the days of a good weapon switching to the bad weapon, but they can't make an honest comparison to the M14 and the M16A2 and later. The gap was too great for memory to serve well.

Wasn't the A2 actually fielded in the 80's? After all the bugs are worked out then it worked well, but seriously the major bugs like that should be worked out before issuing it to troops rather than after issuing the weapons to find out what needs improvement. They should have had more extensive testing to find out what needs to be fixed and fix those problems before issuing the weapons to the troops. Hell just giving the soldiers one more year with the M14 while the M16 was refined would have made a world of difference and saved many men their lives.  

[Fresnel]

Desert_Fox_Rommel

Fresnel

Not my point. The people pining for the better days of the M14 have faulty memory. They DO remember the days of a good weapon switching to the bad weapon, but they can't make an honest comparison to the M14 and the M16A2 and later. The gap was too great for memory to serve well.

Wasn't the A2 actually fielded in the 80's? After all the bugs are worked out then it worked well, but seriously the major bugs like that should be worked out before issuing it to troops rather than after issuing the weapons to find out what needs improvement. They should have had more extensive testing to find out what needs to be fixed and fix those problems before issuing the weapons to the troops. Hell just giving the soldiers one more year with the M14 while the M16 was refined would have made a world of difference and saved many men their lives.

Dunno when the A2 was fielded, I just used it to denote the days when the M16 didn't suck.

Thing is, the poor manufacturing was likely a necessity thing, but they just didn't KNOW about the cleaning. They had to have the combat feedback before they could fully refine the gun.  

[Desert_Fox_Rommel]

Fresnel

Dunno when the A2 was fielded, I just used it to denote the days when the M16 didn't suck.

Thing is, the poor manufacturing was likely a necessity thing, but they just didn't KNOW about the cleaning. They had to have the combat feedback before they could fully refine the gun.

Car companies often test new vehicles simulating conditions the vehicle will go through and often times more extreme elements than what the vehicle would go through to make sure it is safe enough to use. The same could be applied to weapons. If someone thinks a weapon will never need cleaning then don't you think it wasn't checked thoroughly enough to make sure? It doesn't take much effort to put a couple hundred rounds of ammo through a weapon then check to see if the weapon is still clean inside. The only thing I can think of where shotty workmanship would be used is if you're too cheap to care about the risks or you need to get a lot of the product produced ASAP. The M14 was working well enough the soldiers could have kept using it while the M16 was tested under battle conditions at home to make sure it works. You don't need people with guns shooting at you to test to see how well a weapon works. Accuracy under stress isn't really necessary to determine if a guns mechanics will work properly.  

[Fresnel]

Desert_Fox_Rommel

Fresnel

Dunno when the A2 was fielded, I just used it to denote the days when the M16 didn't suck.

Thing is, the poor manufacturing was likely a necessity thing, but they just didn't KNOW about the cleaning. They had to have the combat feedback before they could fully refine the gun.

Car companies often test new vehicles simulating conditions the vehicle will go through and often times more extreme elements than what the vehicle would go through to make sure it is safe enough to use. The same could be applied to weapons. If someone thinks a weapon will never need cleaning then don't you think it wasn't checked thoroughly enough to make sure? It doesn't take much effort to put a couple hundred rounds of ammo through a weapon then check to see if the weapon is still clean inside. The only thing I can think of where shotty workmanship would be used is if you're too cheap to care about the risks or you need to get a lot of the product produced ASAP. The M14 was working well enough the soldiers could have kept using it while the M16 was tested under battle conditions at home to make sure it works. You don't need people with guns shooting at you to test to see how well a weapon works. Accuracy under stress isn't really necessary to determine if a guns mechanics will work properly.

I think the 'doesn't need cleaning' thing was an army SNAFU that never came from the manufacturers. The generals told the soldiers they didn't need cleaning with no evidence to back it up.

The M14 was a semi-only rifle though, in an age of full-auto warfare. Sure it COULD fire full-auto, but it was completely uncontrollable. It had a bigger round, but it didn't have the necessary firepower. Also, I blame Colt as usual. Because they're Colt.