More than a rifle: How a new 6.8mm round, advanced optics will make soldiers, Marines a lot deadlier

[PleasantValley]

You missed my point. The AR-15 was not used by the military, but it is still part of the same class (M-16) of weapons. It doesn't make one bit of difference if a mall shooter uses an AR-15 or an M-16. The result is exactly the same if a bump stock is used on the AR-15, which it has in many of the worst mass shootings. Throwing semantics into the argument does not change it. The AR-15 is still officially listed as a military grade weapon.

They are no longer listed as military grade weapons.
My apologies for not finding a link for you.

 

[PleasantValley]

The FN FAL was originally designed to take the .280 British... that's why I brought it up.

It was also designed for the 7.92 Kurtz.

I love my FAL but am waiting for my suppressor. With the 16 inch barrel I have on mine, my wife said she thought i shot off a cannon in the backyard and was ready to dive on the floor.
I only fired a few rounds to have it function with ball and get it tuned in.
Now i am developing a 150 grain load at about 2300FPS.
That should do anything i ever want to do with it.
Then I will make another dot on my gas selector of a different color for the new load.
DSA did not put numbers on theirs.

 

[PleasantValley]

BTW have you ever shot an FAL? what do you think of its recoil impulse compared to say the M14or the G3 (The HK 91)

I fired both and would give the FAL the nod in overall handling, fast target acquisition, lower bore axis, and ease of magazine reload in the rifle.
To me, recoil was there, but I was always having so much fun, it was not that noticeable in either.

Like you, I would give the M14 marks for long range accuracy, and a much better trigger pull, but it always felt clunky and ungainly.
Completely the opposite of the M1 Garand it came from.
That baby is a dream to point shoot from the hip, or any other position. It is a natural.
The very second time i shot mine I hit two clay pigeons set on a dirt berm at 20 paces from the hip.
I was as surprised as anyone.

The older you get, the better you used to be.

 

[TurtleDude]

It was also designed for the 7.92 Kurtz.

I love my FAL but am waiting for my suppressor. With the 16 inch barrel I have on mine, my wife said she thought i shot off a cannon in the backyard and was ready to dive on the floor.
I only fired a few rounds to have it function with ball and get it tuned in.
Now i am developing a 150 grain load at about 2300FPS.
That should do anything i ever want to do with it.
Then I will make another dot on my gas selector of a different color for the new load.
DSA did not put numbers on theirs.

I have a Browning Import FAL (late 70s) a DSA and an South American Springfield Armory Politically correct version. the SA actually is the most accurate.

 

[Cordelier]

It was also designed for the 7.92 Kurtz.

I love my FAL but am waiting for my suppressor. With the 16 inch barrel I have on mine, my wife said she thought i shot off a cannon in the backyard and was ready to dive on the floor.
I only fired a few rounds to have it function with ball and get it tuned in.
Now i am developing a 150 grain load at about 2300FPS.
That should do anything i ever want to do with it.
Then I will make another dot on my gas selector of a different color for the new load.
DSA did not put numbers on theirs.

Fair warning here... I'm not exactly what you'd call a gun enthusiast or collector - I'm a gun operator. For me, it's just a functional tool to do a job.

 

[TurtleDude]

Fair warning here... I'm not exactly what you'd call a gun enthusiast or collector - I'm a gun operator. For me, it's just a functional tool to do a job.

I am a high level competitive and professional shooter. we see guns the same way.

 

[Rich2018]

Sounds a bit like the .280 universal round Britain tried to persuade the USA to go with after WWII


The USA knew better of course and insisted NATO stick with the 30 caliber (7.62mm) round. Only to go to 5.56mm after the rest of NATO had moved to 7.62mm.

 

[Wiggen]

when was the last time an active shooter used a military issued rifle?

Just a matter of time until some gun dealer gets his hands on them and sells them. Oh, they'll be rendered 'safe', of course, but the store next door will send you a kit to convert it to it's maximum level of death.

You guys are losing the gun debate, but you just haven't realized it yet. Once the NRA gets cut off from it's source of Russian money, the end will come even quicker. You could have had reasonable restrictions, but you decided to be absolutists. My heart aches for you.

 

[danarhea]

The AR-15 and the M16 both use direct impingement.

No, an M-16 uses a gas piston. An AR-15 is in the M-16 class, but there are differences. The M-16 class is a misnomer, since an M-16 and an AR-15 have some differences. Both are based on the M-10, which Colt bought the patent to in the 1960's. M-16's were used beginning in Vietnam, but most of those have been replaced by the M-4. And, since the patent ran out on them, everybody is making AR-15's now. Mine is a Mossberg, which got into the game late, but makes an excellent one. I got it because of Mossberg's reputation for their craftsmanship with shotguns, which used to be the only things they manufactured. Just a couple of things I don't like about the Mossberg. 1) The safety is a little awkward to get to, and 2) The butt stock is a bit uncomfortable. Other than that, it's a great rifle. I like it better than the Bushmaster.

 

[RF667799]

No, an M-16 uses a gas piston. An AR-15 is in the M-16 class, but there are differences. The M-16 class is a misnomer, since an M-16 and an AR-15 have some differences. Both are based on the M-10, which Colt bought the patent to in the 1960's. M-16's were used beginning in Vietnam, but most of those have been replaced by the M-4. And, since the patent ran out on them, everybody is making AR-15's now. Mine is a Mossberg, which got into the game late, but makes an excellent one. I got it because of Mossberg's reputation for their craftsmanship with shotguns, which used to be the only things they manufactured. Just a couple of things I don't like about the Mossberg. 1) The safety is a little awkward to get to, and 2) The butt stock is a bit uncomfortable. Other than that, it's a great rifle. I like it better than the Bushmaster.

I've handled, disassembled, repaired and fired literally thousands of M16s of at least a couple variations. To say that M16s have a gas piston as a general rule is incorrect. There are some modifications of the Stoner system that use a gas piston.

 

[danarhea]

I've handled, disassembled, repaired and fired literally thousands of M16s of at least a couple variations. To say that M16s have a gas piston as a general rule is incorrect. There are some modifications of the Stoner system that use a gas piston.

NOTE: I always chuckle a little when I think of the "Stoner" system.

 

[RF667799]

NOTE: I always chuckle a little when I think of the "Stoner" system.

Eugene system wouldn't have the same ring to it.

 

[Cordelier]

I am a high level competitive and professional shooter. we see guns the same way.

I don't think that's exactly the case, though, Turtle.

I'm not trying to turn this thread into some emotional 2nd Amendment debate or anything (and if it does turn into one, I'm gone)... to be perfectly frank, I'm trying to make an honest effort to understand "gun culture" but I just can't wrap my head around it. My grandfather was a big gun collector - I think at one point, he had the largest collection of Parker shotguns in North America (American Rifleman did an article about his collection back in the 60's). He always had guns in every corner of his house, was always wheeling and dealing and trading guns with other collectors from all over the world. But I can only ever recall actually shooting with him a couple of times. I'm sure he used to shoot more than that... and he probably did more shooting in his younger days before I came along. But I'm also pretty sure that he probably never shot the vast majority of the guns he did own. So what was the point? I can understand the appeal of a well-made instrument.... the right feel, the right machining.... everything crafted just so. There's a visceral appeal there. I get that. I also get the satisfaction of long-range and competitive shooting - doing the math and breaking down the factors that have to be compensated for to make the perfect shot.

When I look at a gun like an FN FAL.... I appreciate the work that went into it's design - you've field stripped them, you know what I'm talking about. I also appreciate the fact that you can crawl through 500 yards of SP&C and it still works like a hot damn. It can take a licking and still keep ticking, as the saying goes. And it's very good at doing what it was designed to do... which is kill and wound large numbers of people. It's a beautiful, disgusting tool. I loved shooting them... I wish we could have had them issued to us - but I'd never buy one... because it's purpose isn't one I have a use for anymore. When I see one, I appreciate what it can do... it's just not something I'm going to do.

 

[PleasantValley]

I have a Browning Import FAL (late 70s) a DSA and an South American Springfield Armory Politically correct version. the SA actually is the most accurate.

I don't doubt that one bit.
I am, however, very jealous of those who can saunter out to a 500 or 300 yard range and bang away.
I used to really enjoy my issued 308 Garand at the range in Dam Neck while on the team.
...but with a transfer, also comes loosing my expensive government issued toys.

I remember my first .45 competition when they opened a crate of Federal match ball ammo and handed them out to us all like popcorn.
I was stupefied for a few seconds. Even then the stuff was like $20 a box, I think.

 

[PleasantValley]

Fair warning here... I'm not exactly what you'd call a gun enthusiast or collector - I'm a gun operator. For me, it's just a functional tool to do a job.

Then you already know your mind is the deadliest weapon you possess, and the guns are just hardware.
Few gun owners understand that and think they will fight to the death to keep in possession of that hardware.
For me, they can have them if a vehicle loaded with SWAT pulls up and demands my guns.
They can have my hammers and screwdrivers too. I know how to use them equally well.
They are just tools and can be obtained once again if there is a desperate need for them.

Mall Ninja Mode - OFF

 

[Cordelier]

Then you already know your mind is the deadliest weapon you possess, and the guns are just hardware.
Few gun owners understand that and think they will fight to the death to keep in possession of that hardware.
For me, they can have them if a vehicle loaded with SWAT pulls up and demands my guns.
They can have my hammers and screwdrivers too. I know how to use them equally well.
They are just tools and can be obtained once again if there is a desperate need for them.

Mall Ninja Mode - OFF

Well said. I agree completely.

 

[PleasantValley]

No, an M-16 uses a gas piston. An AR-15 is in the M-16 class, but there are differences. The M-16 class is a misnomer, since an M-16 and an AR-15 have some differences. Both are based on the M-10, which Colt bought the patent to in the 1960's. M-16's were used beginning in Vietnam, but most of those have been replaced by the M-4. And, since the patent ran out on them, everybody is making AR-15's now. Mine is a Mossberg, which got into the game late, but makes an excellent one. I got it because of Mossberg's reputation for their craftsmanship with shotguns, which used to be the only things they manufactured. Just a couple of things I don't like about the Mossberg. 1) The safety is a little awkward to get to, and 2) The butt stock is a bit uncomfortable. Other than that, it's a great rifle. I like it better than the Bushmaster.

Not wanting to argue with a fellow Texan. Remember when you, I and a young lady fellow Texan locked arms against a hater here? That is how it should be.

Hey, I remember when you posted a picture of you with it.
See ya on the range.

If you ever get into reloading, I have 100 rounds of my favorite recipe for you to shoot up and get you going. I am only about 5 hours away.
PM if you would like me to bring them down.
23.3 grains of 8208XBR powder, 75 grain bullet, and small rifle magnum primers.
About as awesome a load as you can get with an AR.

 

[RF667799]

I don't think that's exactly the case, though, Turtle.

I'm not trying to turn this thread into some emotional 2nd Amendment debate or anything (and if it does turn into one, I'm gone)... to be perfectly frank, I'm trying to make an honest effort to understand "gun culture" but I just can't wrap my head around it. My grandfather was a big gun collector - I think at one point, he had the largest collection of Parker shotguns in North America (American Rifleman did an article about his collection back in the 60's). He always had guns in every corner of his house, was always wheeling and dealing and trading guns with other collectors from all over the world. But I can only ever recall actually shooting with him a couple of times. I'm sure he used to shoot more than that... and he probably did more shooting in his younger days before I came along. But I'm also pretty sure that he probably never shot the vast majority of the guns he did own. So what was the point? I can understand the appeal of a well-made instrument.... the right feel, the right machining.... everything crafted just so. There's a visceral appeal there. I get that. I also get the satisfaction of long-range and competitive shooting - doing the math and breaking down the factors that have to be compensated for to make the perfect shot.

When I look at a gun like an FN FAL.... I appreciate the work that went into it's design - you've field stripped them, you know what I'm talking about. I also appreciate the fact that you can crawl through 500 yards of SP&C and it still works like a hot damn. It can take a licking and still keep ticking, as the saying goes. And it's very good at doing what it was designed to do... which is kill and wound large numbers of people. It's a beautiful, disgusting tool. I loved shooting them... I wish we could have had them issued to us - but I'd never buy one... because it's purpose isn't one I have a use for anymore. When I see one, I appreciate what it can do... it's just not something I'm going to do.

For some it's a tool and for others it's a passion. That doesn't just apply to guns. Different strokes and all that...

I operate heavy equipment. I would rather people have lower expectations when I show up on a job, but there's no getting around that I've earned a reputation as being one of the best at what I do. There's something I guess I could call a Tractor Culture in and around the construction industry. Co-workers sometimes can't get their heads around that I'm not really into that culture. Oh, I know various models of this and that and what I can do with them, but talking on and on about them or learning esoteric details about them doesn't interest me. I've turned down going to Vegas to Equipment Shows on the company dime. I don't particularly like tractors enough to bother myself. But neither does it bother me that others do like them.

Now I DO like motorcycles. I always try to have one or three in my garage. I don't ride much-haven't for years. A little over a year ago I acquired an '81 KZ1000. It has a 1075 kit and for a near 40 yo bike it's violently fast. I've put about 160 miles on it since I got it. Mostly I like to sometimes go out in the garage, put on some classic rock, open a cold beer or two and look at it sitting on it's lift. Maybe wipe it down. Start it sometimes. If the weather is really nice or I haven't done it in a while I might even put a dozen miles on it. At those times the beer waits until I'm back and I sit there listening to the aluminum and steel ticking as it cools.

When I first got that bike, my foreman at the time was a steam engine aficionado. He has a couple that are 100 years old or more beautifully restored. He's certainly a charter member of the Tractor Culture. At one morning meeting I was showing some pics of my new/old bike to a some of the guys and this foreman took a look too. "What are you going to do with that!?" he exclaimed.

Before I could say anything, one of the young laborers answered him. "What are you going to do with your steam engines?"

Everyone had a pretty good laugh and the foreman had to admit it was a good point.

So whether there is a point or not in this lengthy exercise, I'll just leave it at that and claim it as my own.

 

[braindrain]

No, an M-16 uses a gas piston. An AR-15 is in the M-16 class, but there are differences. The M-16 class is a misnomer, since an M-16 and an AR-15 have some differences. Both are based on the M-10, which Colt bought the patent to in the 1960's. M-16's were used beginning in Vietnam, but most of those have been replaced by the M-4. And, since the patent ran out on them, everybody is making AR-15's now. Mine is a Mossberg, which got into the game late, but makes an excellent one. I got it because of Mossberg's reputation for their craftsmanship with shotguns, which used to be the only things they manufactured. Just a couple of things I don't like about the Mossberg. 1) The safety is a little awkward to get to, and 2) The butt stock is a bit uncomfortable. Other than that, it's a great rifle. I like it better than the Bushmaster.

Not sure where you are getting your information from but it's wrong. The M16 operating system is exactly the same as a AR15 operating system. The bolt, bolt carrier, gas tube and gas block are all interchangeable.

 

[Rucker61]

No, an M-16 uses a gas piston. An AR-15 is in the M-16 class, but there are differences. The M-16 class is a misnomer, since an M-16 and an AR-15 have some differences. Both are based on the M-10, which Colt bought the patent to in the 1960's. M-16's were used beginning in Vietnam, but most of those have been replaced by the M-4. And, since the patent ran out on them, everybody is making AR-15's now. Mine is a Mossberg, which got into the game late, but makes an excellent one. I got it because of Mossberg's reputation for their craftsmanship with shotguns, which used to be the only things they manufactured. Just a couple of things I don't like about the Mossberg. 1) The safety is a little awkward to get to, and 2) The butt stock is a bit uncomfortable. Other than that, it's a great rifle. I like it better than the Bushmaster.

Please find the word "piston" in the 232 page Army/USAF/USCG technical manual for the M16.

Please find an M-10 rifle that led to the M-16 adn AR-15.

https://archive.org/details/ArmyTechnicalManualforM16Rifle-Tm9-1005-249-23p

 

[Rucker61]

Not wanting to argue with a fellow Texan. Remember when you, I and a young lady fellow Texan locked arms against a hater here? That is how it should be.

Hey, I remember when you posted a picture of you with it.
See ya on the range.

If you ever get into reloading, I have 100 rounds of my favorite recipe for you to shoot up and get you going. I am only about 5 hours away.
PM if you would like me to bring them down.
23.3 grains of 8208XBR powder, 75 grain bullet, and small rifle magnum primers.
About as awesome a load as you can get with an AR.

Hornady 75 gr BTHP Match?

 

[Rucker61]

I don't think that's exactly the case, though, Turtle.

I'm not trying to turn this thread into some emotional 2nd Amendment debate or anything (and if it does turn into one, I'm gone)... to be perfectly frank, I'm trying to make an honest effort to understand "gun culture" but I just can't wrap my head around it. My grandfather was a big gun collector - I think at one point, he had the largest collection of Parker shotguns in North America (American Rifleman did an article about his collection back in the 60's). He always had guns in every corner of his house, was always wheeling and dealing and trading guns with other collectors from all over the world. But I can only ever recall actually shooting with him a couple of times. I'm sure he used to shoot more than that... and he probably did more shooting in his younger days before I came along. But I'm also pretty sure that he probably never shot the vast majority of the guns he did own. So what was the point? I can understand the appeal of a well-made instrument.... the right feel, the right machining.... everything crafted just so. There's a visceral appeal there. I get that. I also get the satisfaction of long-range and competitive shooting - doing the math and breaking down the factors that have to be compensated for to make the perfect shot.

When I look at a gun like an FN FAL.... I appreciate the work that went into it's design - you've field stripped them, you know what I'm talking about. I also appreciate the fact that you can crawl through 500 yards of SP&C and it still works like a hot damn. It can take a licking and still keep ticking, as the saying goes. And it's very good at doing what it was designed to do... which is kill and wound large numbers of people. It's a beautiful, disgusting tool. I loved shooting them... I wish we could have had them issued to us - but I'd never buy one... because it's purpose isn't one I have a use for anymore. When I see one, I appreciate what it can do... it's just not something I'm going to do.

No service rifle was designed to kill and wound large numbers of people.

 

[DarkWizard12]

AR-15's are part of the M-16 class of weapons, and just about as deadly. Only difference with an AR-15 is that it works by impingement.

No AR-15 you find at the gun store is military issue(unless, of course, it was made before the 1980's).

 

[danarhea]

Not wanting to argue with a fellow Texan. Remember when you, I and a young lady fellow Texan locked arms against a hater here? That is how it should be.

Hey, I remember when you posted a picture of you with it.
See ya on the range.

If you ever get into reloading, I have 100 rounds of my favorite recipe for you to shoot up and get you going. I am only about 5 hours away.
PM if you would like me to bring them down.
23.3 grains of 8208XBR powder, 75 grain bullet, and small rifle magnum primers.
About as awesome a load as you can get with an AR.

I remember posting that picture. I was wearing my glasses at the time. I also posted that picture on Facebook, and captioned it "Mr. Magoo Goes Hunting". It went viral. LOL.

 

[danarhea]

Please find the word "piston" in the 232 page Army/USAF/USCG technical manual for the M16.

Please find an M-10 rifle that led to the M-16 adn AR-15.

https://archive.org/details/ArmyTechnicalManualforM16Rifle-Tm9-1005-249-23p

The ArmaLite AR-15 is a selective-fire, 5.56×45mm, air-cooled, gas-operated, magazine-fed rifle, with a rotating bolt and straight-line recoil design. It was designed by Eugene Stoner and it is based on the Armalite AR-10 rifle.