Carlos Hathcock interview Part 1 of 3



Carlos part 2 of 3


Carlos part 3 of 3


Great interview. each are about 9 minutes long.

Take the time.

Semper Fi Carlos.

Marine Corps Legend. The entire city of Virginia Beach mourned when he died there (I was TAD/TDY there at the time). He commanded some huge respect of everyone he encountered. Some nice footage here.

Like most masters, he was as very calm man. He gets my respect.

Question for you guy's what was the name of the rifle that the M-14 evolved from?

Well I guess no body knows, the answer is. T-44 during the 60's.

Coachman.... I missed the question the first part of the involution of a M-14 was a T-37 which was a M-1 with a BAR- Clip then the final part was a T-44 then the M-14 during the 50's.

Your right SULLY!, the T-44 grew from the T-37 and was tested during the 60's and now we have the M-14.

the M16 is harder, better, faster, stronger. The one drawback though was that it would rust like no other.

never used the m-14...just did the qual in basic with the m16 and now i only use the m4...im thinking about looking into the m14 though

Capacity is an awful point to make. Ever heard of extended clips?

I'd prefer an M1 Carbine over an M16. I'm biased because I own an M1, but .30car vs .223, guess.

quote:

Originally posted by patoloco:
Marine Corps Legend. The entire city of Virginia Beach mourned when he died there (I was TAD/TDY there at the time). He commanded some huge respect of everyone he encountered. Some nice footage here.

I remember when he died. Used to live there. Nice place btw.

Bump

...223 really is an ineffective cartridge. They only practical thing about an m4-sig556 type weapon, is that they're lightweight...and for extended patrols, that could be a lifesavor....but thats about it. only the ss-109 62 grain is going to have a real effect on people...and even that isnt enough (or recomended for many ar-15 barrels)

Have to disagree with the comment or statement that the .223 really is an ineffective cartridge.

Live with a weapon first, then speak with authority about it.

Not sure where you are getting your information, but the 5.56 has held us in good stead for several decades already, and will continue to do so moving forward. While I personally prefer the 7.62 round and the M-14 as my weapon of choice, deploying with one and humping enough ammo to keep it fed properly is another story altogether. The M-16 family of weapons is easier to support all the way around. Another plus is our Allies are using the same ammo.

A single well aimed shot, kills. This has been proven time and time agin, even with the 5.56.

As much as I loved the M-14 and disliked the M-16 Gunny is right.

I guess the answer is Urban warfare.I knew a lot of Marines after the Battle of Hue said that the M-16 would have been welcome in the fight.I had the misfortune of the Matel Toy before it was perfected I to chose the M-14 but I did not have to pack one.One thing I never could figure out was the SAW isn't a 7.62.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: SULLY1,

If you get a chance read"TRIGGER MEN"by Hans Halberstadt.
He is former Army enlisted who,interviewed current Army and Marine Corps snipers.Good read.
They discuss the the different grains of 5.56
They all swore by the MK262 77 grain bullet from Black Hills.The 62 grain issue bullet did not have the stopping power to keep a terrorist down permanently.

The gunny is correct (as usual). The people that I have talked to who had to hump both weapons, said that the advantage of the M-16 was weight. As far as the ability to kill -- we are still doing well on that count.