Comments on: New Combat Rifle Enters the Fray

By: Troy

Troy — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:25:20 +0000

Still don’t undrstand why we have not switched to the Barrett 6.8 REC-7 …must be a logistics problem with all the 5.56 out there,and the way we started to arm allied forces with the 5.56…rifle action of the M-16 is good enough…just needs a little more punch.

By: usmc2004

usmc2004 — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 16:28:51 +0000

I fought in operation phantom fury, the taking of fulujah, in november of 2004. The 5.56mm was great at the ranges we were engaging the enemy. I could fire my m16a4 more accurately and faster than the enemy with their ak47s. I personally saw one shot one kills through the torso. YES, a little bigger would be better, but mk262 mod1 77gr otm easily defeated our mostly unarmored enemy. Even the .308 can’t defeat that.
By the way, when working in a squad, we had 3 men with the m249 to provide suppression, and one to two m240g to provide penetration. Not to mention near instant artillery and 60 and 81mm mortars which were spot on.
Tactics today include a combination of arms, the 5.56mm being the lightest main weapon. I would of taken my m16a4 over any of the new mods for the m14.
Cpl Black
USMC

By: buddhadan

buddhadan — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 21:32:01 +0000

my son is in iraq last time we talk he complained about shitty ar-15 wants me to send him his remington 700 scope and ammo we load our own wonderif its possible to ship it to him doubt I was in corp for 12 yrs don’t have any contacts that could help any ideas my grandpa used to send my dad shotgun shells in veitnam long time ago

By: r pistol

r pistol — Sat, 23 May 2009 11:00:58 +0000

I agree with so many of you, I too carried the m14 and m16 in Vietnam C 1/5 Marines, 3 pucs while in country, 67–68 and saw much combat. The 14 put a man down with one hit. It penetrated brush, leaves and light cover such as 1″ thick wood and still would kill. The 500–600 yard range changed the dynamics of the enemy’s tactics as they were not effective with the ak 7.62x39 round unless within 250 yards. At400-500 yards, we owned them.
One startling proof happened in the summer of 67. I had a new clean m16 and spotted a single armed vc in the middle of a rice patty, appx 250 yards out. I shouted halt, he ran to a treeline parallel to me. I had a 17 round magazine with every third round a tracer(I learned to eliminate the tracers later). I began firing single shot and emptied the mag without a knockdown cursing my terrible aim and swearing I would somehow get in a few magazines of practice somehow to true my aim. I fired 3 more rounds and he went down. I ran to him and he was still alive and tossed a grenade between us which blew him up after I ran away. I studied his body and found that I WAS NOT MISSING, there were numerous entry and exit wounds. I swisscheesed him and he kept going with probably a dozen or more hits. Now I understood. One round would not stop a man with the 5.56 round… you had to get repeated hits. I was also attacked by a water buffalo once. the entire team (3) were firing and I was hitting the head and watching rounds richochet off his skull. Finally at our feet he fell… with about 100 rounds fired and innumerable hits at inside 100 yards.
The M14 fired clean or dirty, full of sand or mud, rusty or carboned. That Piston threw that heavy bolt back and when it came home to close that chamber that round went in. Innumerable M1 and M14 thumb injuries prove my point.
Screw the weight, if your life is on the line you don’t care about anything except a good reliable rifle to keep you breathing one more minute, one more day. Go back to the M14, the 7.62x51 round,put the 3 round option on it and fix the rise to the right tendency on automatic. You then have the battle rifle that rules the field, bar nome. Been There, Done That and too shot up and old to do It Now and know they won’t listen to a thing we say and more will die because of it.

By: Wm

Wm — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 22:08:36 +0000

The new Barrett 6.8Round into new Weapon.Ged rid of current weapon

By: Wm

Wm — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 22:04:11 +0000

I was in Viet Nam as well and the M-16 Light but as stated to fast it deflected of most things.And you had to fuss with keeping it clean. Get this new weapon into service A.S.A.P. we dont need more Jets and Ships we need Men with the right Equipment.And I say Men many of them no woman Grunts and you know the rest.

By: Munhsuh

Munhsuh — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 08:37:01 +0000

Long Live Brothers of Arm
God bless USA

By: PatMelbourn

PatMelbourn — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 19:14:59 +0000

77705256 Where does this retoric come from...a fool...idiot...or just plain anti everything type. -No,they should continue to give crappy M16/M4 series assault rifles to the "serf" soldiers & marines(because we have an endless "buttload" supply of both,thanks to the draft & "illegal" immigration") & continue to place the blame & guilt on said above "serfs" by blaming the stopages on them because "they don't clean them enough" instead of because the weapons are defective in the first place. But, this weapon here would be ideal for the Special Forces/Blackwater/Triple Canopy Praetarian Guards(you know,the people you can depend on to shoot civilians in the street during "civil unrest & emergencies").AND firing AK-47 bullets? Why the possibilities(& accompanying conspiracy theories) are endless here. Please stay constructive and on topic. This is extremely important to our "USA" future security.

By: Marcus

Marcus — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 05:42:33 +0000

I was in Viet Nam and carried most of the weapons at one time or another. M16, M14, M79, M60. There definitely is something to be said about the weight difference in a hot, humid place like that. But unless you have just leaves to shoot thru, the .556 won’t cut it. It deflects off of thick brush, shrubs, bamboo, etc… There is no saving that round for combat. A heavier and larger round is what is needed. Period. If you’ve ever thought you had good cover and were being shot at with AK’s you would know what I mean. So, go back to the basics and design the rifle around the cartridge.
Bullet weight should be from 120 grains up. Size anywhere from 6.5 to 7.62. Almost all bullets in the Communist block use bullets with a empty space between the tip of the bullet and the core to destabilize the bullet along with fragmentation. We should start there and improve on it.
The rifle should be heavy enough that on automatic fire the muzzle is controllable and stout enough to be used a club when needed. That leaves out the full size 7.62 Nato round as the rifle would be too heavy. It would take a BAR type of weapon to stabilize the muzzle with the round. Way too heavy. So, something on the order of the 7.62 x 39mm round and something similar to the AK47 rifle. Take it from there and make sure all the improvements work better in all cases than the AK47 and you have a real winner there.

By: Zeke

Zeke — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 00:40:13 +0000

I was in the Marine Corps from 1962 to 1965. We trained as counter insurgents. Okinawa 1963 to 1964, 2 Battalion, 9th Marines 3rd Marine Division.
I carried an M-14. Yes the ammo was heavy, but there was more emphasis about bringing down your target with fewer rounds.
I was in Okinawa but did not go in country. Years later I heard from my buddies who were there and how horrible it was.
Over the years I kept reading about the M-16 versus the M-14. I do not get the appeal of a weapon that fires a 55 grain bullet over a 168 grain bullet.
I bought an AR-15 5.56mm black rifle. I have fired it many times on the range at our club.
The energy of the bullets 7.62mm versus 5.56m differ greatly at long range.
My question is why did the Miltary not request that the 5.56mm rifle fire a heavier 5.56mm bullet(early in the war) of at least a 90 to 100 grain bullet?
Why not redsign the 5.56 to allow us to load a magazine of 100 grain bullets into the chamber?