Need Some Good Info and Sources

Mud, jams, weight

File: go_for_aesthetic.jpg (285KB, 943x960px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 943x960px

>>35139277
>>35139290
Poop is the word I would use to describe these two posts. The m16 was originally shit in Vietnam not because of the weapon itself, but because of the ammunition that was issued. Either the weight of the bullet or the amount of boom boom in the cartridge was off. Enough so the operating system of the weapon was unable to fully cycle itself.

Rifle is fine. Bullet is Blyat.

>>35139277
>how shitty the original XM16E1 was back when it was first issued in Vietnam and before it was improved as the M16A1
Your facts are a little bit backwards there. The M16 came out first, without a cleaning kit and with ammunition that wasn't originally designed for it and had been cheaped out with shitty, dirty propellants. So the weapon tended to gum up, and without a forward assist the bolt getting stuck out of battery was too common. XM16E1 was introduced as a rectifying measure, forward assist was added with chrome barrel and bolt, as well as some other fixes. This was finalized as the M16A1, omitting the chrome bolt for cost savings.

>>35139517
Huh, thanks for correcting me there. I didn't even know they had a chrome bolt.
Thanks!

>>35139277
The problem was a combination of using the wrong powder without changing the gas system to account for it, non-chromed chambers, no cleaning kits to account for that, corrosive primers, and in general advertising them as "self cleaning rifles"

Also, production was rushed.

Now, having taken all that into account, you can say ARs are shit.

>>35139596
>production was rushed
Yeah that makes this era pretty spotty when it comes to definitive weapon varieties. Some changes were implemented gradually while some where practically overnight, and not all at once. There's no "this gun has this part" key that doesn't have exceptions and factory oddities in there.

Take, for example, the wall that was cast around the magazine release to prevent accidental button push. It was, technically, introduced in M16A1 but later XM16E1 models have it because that order went through first.

>>35139596
Thanks.
Also, I'll leave the opinioning to other people.

File: 2014-09-10 21.34.29.jpg (735KB, 2376x1234px) Image search: [Google]

735KB, 2376x1234px

>>35139346
>Rifle is fine. Bullet is Blyat.

>stupid fast twist
>stupid light bullets
>chambers weren't chromed
>no cleaning kits
the rifles were shit because the bean counters made them so.

File: AR 15.png (139KB, 1356x2087px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1356x2087px

>>35139596
>>35140043
Don't forget McNamara appeasing the bean counters by decreeing that single use disposable magazines be picked back up and re used. Which was itself a holdover of the disposable en blocs of the garand days, but jesus christ if you're going to do it then do one or the other. Either throw the mags away or spring for quality mags for your troops, your shit pot metal disposable mags WILL NOT magically work like a good mag and the numbers showed it

>>35139277
There is a guy on YouTube who worked for colt and is a historian cris barocci I think is how it is spelled he has way more info than we do . here is a special one

>>35141119
Holy shit, that's really helpful. Thanks!

>>35139277
>I think you guys know your shit.

/k is 90% meme-spewing retards.

Go to youtube and watch chris bartocci's video on the m16's growing pains. He used to work for Colt and is autistic as Fuck about the m16 and its variants.

>>35139277
XM16E1 was fine.
There were some transitional changes through the XM16E1's life, but the major differences between it and the M16A1 amount to
>Three-prong muzzle device replaced by the A1 birdcage, due to snagging in foliage
>Lower receiver reinforced at the front pivot and buffer tube, full guard added around the magazine release
>Edgewater style buffer replaced by the A1 style buffer
>Solid body buttstock replaced by the A1 type stock, which included a compartment for a cleaning it.
The problems weren't with the rifle, it was with bean-counting the cost of propellant and cleaning kits.

>>35139277
There were several areas where it was found lacking.

1. Magazine well was not strong enough, it fell apart easily under stress.
2. Cleaning kits were not issued with it to save money(it was seen as temporary solution so some pencilpusher figured out that they don't need cleaning kits).
3. The powder they've ended up using had different pressure curve(that is - by the time the gas reached gas port it had higher pressure than the gun was designed for) that made the timing of the gun go off(the rate of fire increased and due to buffer being to light for it, the bolt tended to bounce when getting into battery which caused the firing pin to not hit the primer well in full-auto)
4. Some stock cracking reports, they've changed the polymer a bit after while.
5. The innards of the receiver, both lower and upper weren't chrome lined(instead they've used some experimental magnesium thing who the fuck remembers all that shit) which caused them to rust faster(especially given that they've had no cleaning kits) which made problems like weak magazine well more prominent.
6. The flash suppressor, while reportedly very effective was easily cracked by the troops(they've used them to cut some cord or some shit, shouldn't have done it but the construction of it kind of invited that sort of use.
7. Sights. At first they've had adjustable 250/400m flip sight which was liked by the troops(for obvious reasons) but then some human fuckups in the procurement decided that it doesn't fit military use so they've changed it to hard-to-adjust sigh which started at 100 then had 200 and so on. You've had to use a bullet tip to change the setting.

>>35139277
http://www.m-14parts.com/M14toM16.pdf

>>35143075
Also in the A1 package - 30 round magazines. They never came to Vietnam though.

Aside from that here are the basic complaints military had that weren't fixed in A1 but were voiced while the Vietnam war still raged:
1. The barrel profile. Pencil barrels have troubles with wandering zeros and air cav and paratroopers were complaining that it was bending too easily(and in their usage it happened quite often).
2. No case deflector(as far as I remember), not a big deal but military wanted it either way.
3. Sights, again - they didn't like hard-to-adjust sights so they went for fully adjustable rear sight with both windage and elevation adjustment. No bullet needed to adjust them this time around.
4. The A1 birdcage flash hider kicked dirt from under the rifle, was modified slightly to fix it
5. Stock length was changed(most people say it was for the worse)
6. Handguard was deemed to be too slippery if somebody had sweaty palms
7. Complaints about soldiers dumping whole magazine on a single soldier - with the solution being restricting full auto to 3 round bursts in A2.

>>35143075
Half of this is made up or simply wrong. Magnesium doesn't rust for a start.
>There were several areas where it was found lacking.
>1. Magazine well was not strong enough, it fell apart easily under stress.
No. That's not a thing, it was never a thing
>2. Cleaning kits were not issued with it to save money(it was seen as temporary solution so some pencilpusher figured out that they don't need cleaning kits).
True
>3. The powder they've ended up using had different pressure curve(that is - by the time the gas reached gas port it had higher pressure than the gun was designed for) that made the timing of the gun go off(the rate of fire increased and due to buffer being to light for it, the bolt tended to bounce when getting into battery which caused the firing pin to not hit the primer well in full-auto)
I've never heard any mention of that, so you're gonna sources to back that up.
>4. Some stock cracking reports, they've changed the polymer a bit after while.
They were Bakelite to start, then plastic. Polymer didn't exist then.
>5. The innards of the receiver, both lower and upper weren't chrome lined(instead they've used some experimental magnesium thing who the fuck remembers all that shit) which caused them to rust faster(especially given that they've had no cleaning kits) which made problems like weak magazine well more prominent.
The magazine well is forged aluminum, and again, never weak.
>6. The flash suppressor, they've used them to cut some cord or some shit, shouldn't have done it but the construction of it kind of invited that sort of use.
It was a wire cutter and was designed to be. They were fragile though.
>7. Sights.
No.
>>35143075

File: Capture.jpg (84KB, 617x779px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 617x779px

>>35139277
>good reliable sources and information

Here's a good source,
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf

But you won't find good information on /k/.

>>35139346

This, they used ball powder instead of stick because it was cheaper and that didn't help coupled with no cleaning kit.

The rifle would have been alright if they started with the right ammunition and cleaning kits.

>>35143551
Bakelite was a type of plastic. All plastics are polymers. Youre retarded.

>>35143075
>>35143099

There is a lot in these posts that is wrong but almost right. I would say double check before using info from them op but there is a lot of fuddlore so someone else would just support it because they learned the same mistake.

>>35143585
From what I understand said ball powder was intended for 7.62x51 rounds but instead was used in 5.56, right?

File: 519-QZpsuvL[1].jpg (51KB, 375x500px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 375x500px

>>35139277