It is going to be a long Fall Gunny. I am sure he speaks with that TV and movie experience that so many seem to have.

quote:

Originally posted by HarryP:
It is going to be a long Fall Gunny. I am sure he speaks with that TV and movie experience that so many seem to have.

HAHA it say a lot about someone who judges someone before he knows anything about them.

anyways....
Yeah gunny
USMC
During the crucible I hurt my back pretty badly and when I went to medical back down at MCRD I was told that I was going to be discharged after my surgery. A year later I cannot lift more than 50 pounds. a lot of stuff in between medicaly wise but anyways....
I tryed to rejoin into the navy but The doctors down at M.E.P.S. turned me down. so You can say that I'm just a wannabe I honestly don't care.

anyways....
But Doesn't the USMC scout and/or the Army use the m14. Hey gunny straight out for distance what would you prefer?
then what would you prefer close distance being 400 yrds.

garcia

hey you gave it your best shot! Kudos for that. Too bad about getting a medical.

Your not a wannabe as you at least tried.

Thanks for answering my questions.

As for the M14? Most units keep a few of them around and leave it up to the individual on weapons choice.

Personally I prefer the M-14 over the M-16 mostly because I have always liked the wooden stock. Never really liked synthetic stocks on weapons. As for range and hitting what I aim at, I hit the target in the black consistently at 1000 yards with both. Firing the M-14 one knows that they have just fired a high power rifle. With the M-16, I don't get that feeling, mostly just the noise of the spring compressing into the stock. Not very satisfying. When it comes to humping a rifle out in the field, then this is where the M-16 really comes into play. Much easier to tote around. Each weapon has good points and bad.

My favorite rifle, is the Remington model 700.

quote:

Originally posted by thegunny:
garcia

hey you gave it your best shot! Kudos for that. Too bad about getting a medical.

Your not a wannabe as you at least tried.

Thanks for answering my questions.

As for the M14? Most units keep a few of them around and leave it up to the individual on weapons choice.

Personally I prefer the M-14 over the M-16 mostly because I have always liked the wooden stock. Never really liked synthetic stocks on weapons. As for range and hitting what I aim at, I hit the target in the black consistently at 1000 yards with both. Firing the M-14 one knows that they have just fired a high power rifle. With the M-16, I don't get that feeling, mostly just the noise of the spring compressing into the stock. Not very satisfying. When it comes to humping a rifle out in the field, then this is where the M-16 really comes into play. Much easier to tote around. Each weapon has good points and bad.

My favorite rifle, is the Remington model 700.

I do not know to many people who like wood stocks. I personaly like the wood stocks, but it has to be aged. synthetic is cool too. I like both but like wood over synthetic.
you like the Remmington model 700 eh?
take a look at the rifle i bought just the other day.
http://palpatine.chez-alice.fr/Page13/page13.htm

I wasn't aware that the m16 a2 could be accurate at 1000 yrds. wow
*note to self, don't piss off the gunny.*

A realted topic:

http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=853

the M16 owns the m14 in fire bower and reliabilaty the m14 wheighs wat like 25bls the m16 i think weighs like 9 pounds idon't know i will ask my brother he is an ative duty mraine in iraq right now

geez, another pup weighs in

yep I guess that 25 lb M-14 guess that was the reason I always picked up that BAR

Hey,
I teach entry level straight out of college punks in military arms and equipment. Our big joke is that they can't tell an F-16 from an M-16. At least we don't have THAT problem.

quote:

the M16 owns the m14 in fire bower and reliabilaty the m14 wheighs wat like 25bls the m16 i think weighs like 9 pounds idon't know i will ask my brother he is an ative duty mraine in iraq right now

i think this is the 2nd time i heard someone said that the m16s 5.56 round, which people have reportedly stood back up after being hit right on by it, is more powerful then a 7.62 round?

I don't care I will still take the M-14/A1 over your mattie matel any day.

quote:

Originally posted by cyclone71:
the M16 owns the m14 in fire bower and reliabilaty the m14 wheighs wat like 25bls the m16 i think weighs like 9 pounds idon't know i will ask my brother he is an ative duty mraine in iraq right now

spoken by one that has never fired or even likely, even held one or the other weapons.

He doesnt know crap about the M16s reliability either. I've only heard bad about the M16s reliability and when ever i hear someone mention the M14s reliability, it was never an insult. Pretty much, the only reason they got rid of the M14, was because it wasnt good on full auto and the
weight was to much. I do believe i heard like 1980s or 1990s, not sure, the marine corp requested to have the M14 back in the service.

bcuz i' sa mraine i leke dots of firBOWER!!!

shut up cyclone ur basically TARDED

Cyclone71 although I don't agree with your post about the M-14 & M16 this is an open forum speak your piece as far as the vast experience of the other young posters I suggest you listen to these other Veterans.We have a Adminstrator to tell people to shut up.

I believe that the M-16 has come a long way. I served in Vietnam with the 1st Marine Division as a squad leader with 7th Marines, 1970-71. The M-14 had great knock down and kill power at any distance, but especially at long distances. You could go a few days without cleaning, drop it in the mud and it would still fire. Of course as Marines we cleaned our rifles everyday. The draw back was that you couldn't carry enough ammo (10 mags 18 rounds each).

On the other hand the M-16 A1 was good in close combat, and you could carry more ammo (35 Mags 18 rounds each). The drawback was that it jambed alot, and you had to keep it perfectly clean in order to make sure it fired. By the time I retired in 1991 we had the M-16 A2 heavy barrell. It seem like a great rifle never had any problems with it. I'm sure they got better years after.

What model M-16 are they using now if at all.



Me with my M-14, 3rd Marines Hawaii 1969.



Me with my M-16 Rifle Golf Company 2/1, Vietnam 1971.

Semper FI!

quote:

Originally posted by thegunny:

quote:

Originally posted by cyclone71:
the M16 owns the m14 in fire bower and reliabilaty the m14 wheighs wat like 25bls the m16 i think weighs like 9 pounds idon't know i will ask my brother he is an ative duty mraine in iraq right now

spoken by one that has never fired or even likely, even held one or the other weapons.

By the way; the M-14 Rifle weight empty 8.7 pounds, with full magazine 11 pounds. it was heavier than the M-16, but 25 pounds I would have needed a hepler just to lift and fire it!

oi sully chill bro i was flaming his spelling if ya didnt notice

Well least cyclone got the weight for an M16 bout right. Anyways, the M16 went through a crap load of stages and variants and versions before the actual M16, and even after that theres so many versions not only cause of problems but they're trying to build a family of weapons for thier military to standardize around it, in fact they tried repeatedly to replace the M60 with a MG variant of the M16 with no luck, and they eventaully stopped once the Minimi aka M249 SAW showed up. Colt isnt the sole corporation thats got the rights to mass produce the M16s in america though, right?