I think Goldwater's downfall was his willingness to use nukes to end the Vietnam War. Johnson won the election in a landslide popular vote.
What If the M16 Rifle Never Existed?
- Thread starter Mike H.
- Start date
I think Goldwater's downfall was his willingness to use nukes to end the Vietnam War. Johnson won the election in a landslide popular vote.
HayesGreener
Ronin
And Curtis "bomb them into the stone age" LeMay scared the Hell out of everyone, but Vietnam would have ended very differently
Biggfoot44
Elite
Here's the real discussion!
The handwriting was already on the wall since the 1940's for the rise of at least parallel use of some form of Intermeadate Cartridge . But the exact form was still in the air .
A full diameter , but smaller case , in the spirit of the 7.62x39 or 7.9x33 ? A medium bore , smaller case , somewhere between 6mm and 7mm diameter ? Or going whole hog in one swoop to .22 -ish bore ?
We know how it worked out , with USA being the 750 lb Gorilla of Military aid , and influencing NATO standardation . But the medium bore option never got full exploration , and if I had a clean sheet , that's where I'd start looking .
I trained with the M1, M14 and M16 (ok i'm old) and vastly preferred the M14 to the M16, which I thought was a bit flimsy, and didn't throw enough of a projectile at the bad guys. I grew up with the marksmanship/hit what you aim at mentality, where ammunition was a precious resource. Still think that. Of course I have a black rifle now, in 5.56 but might really prefer it in 308/7.62 (308 so I could use both).
M14 initial selection was complicated, probably dominated by "fight the last war" mentality including "ya gotta have a bayonet", use a 30 cal, but further complicated by the fact that with so many draftees in Vietnam, the ranks did not include many people with marksmanship and woodcraft skills. All this treated the soldiers and their rifles as disposable. And of course, in the jungle, long distance shooting was a rare thing; spray and pray. Although those tiny little 5.56 projectiles were easily deflected by foliage. They are mostly a wounding cartridge with its tumbling, which has an added benefit of weighing down the opposition to care for casualties. It may have been FMJ but it behaves like an expanding bullet in some ways.
The Germans had the STG 44 toward the end of WWII, shooting a 7.92mm Kurz cartridge a vastly superior mid to short range battle rifle to even the M1, given it's lighter ammunition and magazine feed. Kalashnikov stole the design; we should have brought it over along with the Operation Paperclip rocket scientists.
M14 initial selection was complicated, probably dominated by "fight the last war" mentality including "ya gotta have a bayonet", use a 30 cal, but further complicated by the fact that with so many draftees in Vietnam, the ranks did not include many people with marksmanship and woodcraft skills. All this treated the soldiers and their rifles as disposable. And of course, in the jungle, long distance shooting was a rare thing; spray and pray. Although those tiny little 5.56 projectiles were easily deflected by foliage. They are mostly a wounding cartridge with its tumbling, which has an added benefit of weighing down the opposition to care for casualties. It may have been FMJ but it behaves like an expanding bullet in some ways.
The Germans had the STG 44 toward the end of WWII, shooting a 7.92mm Kurz cartridge a vastly superior mid to short range battle rifle to even the M1, given it's lighter ammunition and magazine feed. Kalashnikov stole the design; we should have brought it over along with the Operation Paperclip rocket scientists.
The STG 44 design was essentially stolen by kalashnikov the the AK series. The cartridge was nearly identical, the STG44 used a 7.9x32mm and the AK went to 7.62x39; more powder I guess.
Yours is an interesting postulation. Uzi invented the sub machine gun in 1954 and in 1964 Heckler & Koch (HK) launched, what I think is the ultimate CQB rifle, the MP5 which is still widely used today.Hello all, here is today's article posted on TheArmoryLife.com. It is titled “What If the M16 Rifle Never Existed?” and can be found at https://www.thearmorylife.com/what-if-the-m16-rifle-never-existed/.
It’s interesting that both Colt and HK were both experimenting with polymer rifle parts during the same epoch. The 50’s and 60’s were ripe for advancement in firearms technology with essentially an entire generation of young men having served in combat.
During that same time period we saw a great deal of advancement in everything from electronics to construction before the global lull of the late 60’s and 70’s.
The 1980’s saw huge advances in military technology with M1 Abraham’s tank, Bradley Fighting Vehicle, HMMWV (Humvee) and of course Gaston Glock’s new innovation—the Glock 17 just to name a few.
Winchester67
Master Class
Interesting question. Dabbs is always a good read...he reminds me of, well, me. A professional small boy. Anyway, this is an interesting campfire question, a much needed respite from "45 vs 9mm" or "if you could only have one gun". If a fella could only have one rifle, a .308 M1A would be a solid North American choice. Anything I can afford to hunt will fall to a .308 and good bullets. But to the point of the article, I bet I would have never discovered the plinking fun that the .223 offers. Recoil does not beat up new shooters, but the .223 explodes two liter soda bottles filled with water, which is a key component to stressing the danger of firearms and the fun of reactive targets. I am glad I own an AR-15 but I am quick to admit the .308 is a far more useful round.
Sld1959
Ronin
Yep...
HayesGreener
Ronin
I miss my MP5
Same here. For many years my opinion was why shoot a .22 caliber when a .30 caliber would work even better.
But then I got a reasonably good deal on an AR. And then I bought another one. But my go to rifle is still my SA M1A.
It is heavy and cumbersome in tight quarters compared to AR's. But it works and works well.
It will shoot through trees and block walls!
CCJ
Operator
perfect article!!! I do indeed believe the M14 never got the dues it deserved. I have never liked the idea of direct gas impingement systems such as what is used in the M4/M16/AR rifles (and even the AR-10), and .223 seems lacking as a serious combat round. They are quick and nimble to handle and easy to bring/stay on target... I will give it that.
Granted, the M14/M1A are large and heavy and some skill is required to manage the recoil. I have owned two of these in my time and they were a blast to shoot (pun intended). I have never shot a SOCOM 16 but it does look like a reasonable evolution to the modern expectation. I would love to own one of these... just for fun.
Granted, the M14/M1A are large and heavy and some skill is required to manage the recoil. I have owned two of these in my time and they were a blast to shoot (pun intended). I have never shot a SOCOM 16 but it does look like a reasonable evolution to the modern expectation. I would love to own one of these... just for fun.
Last edited:
I learned to shoot using an old Springfield 1903 to which had been added a Redfield Olympic 1/4 minute rear sight. In high school I shot competition matches with it and a glass bedded M1 Garand. With either weapon we fired 200, 300, 500 and 1000 yard targets....slow and rapid fire....in the offhand, sitting, kneeling and prone position. Using iron sights, smudge pots to darken the front sights and dope books, we could shoot some very impressive scores.
The M14 joined our ranks during my later high school years. It was our weapon when I joined the Marine Corps in 1966 but the M16 was starting to replace it. The early versions of the M16 got a lot of troops killed and it was universally hated until they ironed the bugs out of it and let us start cleaning the damned things regularly.
Today, at almost 80, I have several AR15 platforms with all the bells and whistles. Granted, it is easier on my old bones and joints to shoot than the 30.06 180 grain FMJ rounds of the '03 and the Garand and the 7.62 x 39 in my Zastava M70 ZPAP AK47. But, call me old fashioned, I still prefer the M1 and M14 to my Mattel Toy AR15.
The M14 joined our ranks during my later high school years. It was our weapon when I joined the Marine Corps in 1966 but the M16 was starting to replace it. The early versions of the M16 got a lot of troops killed and it was universally hated until they ironed the bugs out of it and let us start cleaning the damned things regularly.
Today, at almost 80, I have several AR15 platforms with all the bells and whistles. Granted, it is easier on my old bones and joints to shoot than the 30.06 180 grain FMJ rounds of the '03 and the Garand and the 7.62 x 39 in my Zastava M70 ZPAP AK47. But, call me old fashioned, I still prefer the M1 and M14 to my Mattel Toy AR15.
Winchester67
Master Class
Hans, I share your regret. The first machine gun I ever fired was a Columbia Police Department STAR team gun, and I fell in love. I could do remarkable things with that gun by the second magazine. However, in the late 80's I thought the price was too steep. So I didn't buy one, despite a Columbia Police Captain practically begging me to do so. Line forms on the left to kick me in the ass for being such a fool.
HansGruber
Ronin
No, it wasn’t.
The StG predates the AK by several years.
If anything, it’s the other way around.
HansGruber
Ronin
Uzi “invented the submachine gun” in 1954?
So, the MP38/40, Sten, Sterling, Reising, Thompson (in all its forms), M3 “Grease Gun, PPsh…all weren’t SMG’s?
Sld1959
Ronin
Lol i read that the opposite way, reading what i expected it to say, good catch. The Sturmgewer came first.
Last edited:
Sld1959
Ronin
Lol the Soviets with thier massive use of the submachine gun would have been disappointed to find out it did not exist lol.
I believe, if memory serves, the Bergman MP18 used in WWI was the first submachine gun. But I could be wrong.
Last edited:
Back at the end of WWII the British developed the .280 British, but the US insisted on a full power cartridge. Apparently, the Army did not understand the concept of "intermediary power cartridge." In the 21st century Remington developed the 6.8 SPC to try to replace the .223x45, but apparently it didn't properly catch on. The .300 Blackout was developed around the .223. By me, Browning/Colt Firearms should have developed a miniaturized BAR using a modified .30-30 in the 1920's. Later when the M-1 Garand was developed a .30-30 (modified) full auto variant should have been designed.
HansGruber
Ronin
The rim of the .30-30 would make it a poor choice. Better to design a rimless round for more reliable feeding.