GunBroker.com Message Forums
Review our Posting Guidelines
GunBroker.com Message Forums
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?   Trouble / Can't log in?

 All Forums
 GunBroker.com Message Forums
 US Military Veteran Forum - Gulf Wars
 Weapon of choice
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

wildeman.7.62nato
Junior Member

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 01/25/2009 :  2:26:49 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by jsuggs

I am glad to see that there are some objectionable people on here that can express there opinion without using insults. I really wanted to see how you would react to me bringing the subject up more than anything.

To change the subject Did you see where over 44,000 recrutes were denied enlistment last year due to being overweight? What is going on that over 1/2 of the US is overweight?



Hey I always try to be professional. Except when talking about the current administration. Which leads me to the fact that this country has gone soft. It's more important to have piece of paper saying you went to school for four years than to actually have expirience. They say that it's wrong to tell a kid he's fat. Instead we want to artificially make kids feel good about themselves. Telling kids that winnings not important, it's about doing your best. In the real world, outside of the US the losers die. Second place is a body bag. I don't see any need to lower standards. I feel that the Amry command is comprimising the safety of those who are already serving.

Semper Fi
Go to Top of Page

jsuggs
Junior Member

121 Posts

Posted - 01/25/2009 :  3:41:52 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
It makes me miss the days of the cold war, where it was always us against them. Back then winning was everything, and the US would do whatever it took to win. I agree with you about lowering the standard, it will get people hurt. Look at the increase in stress fractures in the military over the past 5 years. If you cant run without falling over you should not be there. Last week on the news I saw a segment about becoming a Dallas cop. There PT requirements are a joke 4 push ups, 15 sit ups, and a 1.5 mile run in 18min. We need to get back to teaching kids that winning is important and parents need to take the video games away.
Go to Top of Page

wittynbear
Advanced Member

4919 Posts

Posted - 01/25/2009 :  6:45:13 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by jsuggs

It makes me miss the days of the cold war, where it was always us against them. Back then winning was everything, and the US would do whatever it took to win. I agree with you about lowering the standard, it will get people hurt. Look at the increase in stress fractures in the military over the past 5 years. If you cant run without falling over you should not be there. Last week on the news I saw a segment about becoming a Dallas cop. There PT requirements are a joke 4 push ups, 15 sit ups, and a 1.5 mile run in 18min. We need to get back to teaching kids that winning is important and parents need to take the video games away.


I couldn't agree more, I hate vidoe games. I am normally a very level headed person but video games tick me off. I get caught by my wife all the time yelling at the video game or punching or throwing it across the room. I finally quit and say screw it I'm going fishing. I do much better at things that I actually do with my hands, or using tools to do things. I think its a generation thing, we had an atari when I was a kid but were only allowed to play it if there was nothing on TV, all the chores were done and all homework was done. Even then it was like space invaders, frogger, and a word game that scrambled rge words and you had to guess it. I maybe played 24 hours a year, now kids play video games 24 hours a day. Kids can't even complete basic tasks today, when was the last time you seen a kid pull weeds, edge a sidewalk with a shovel, trim bushes, rake the leaves, mow the grass, rake the cut grass, and wash off the sidewalks on a saturday morning. When was the last time you seen a kid paint his house, wash and wax the family cars, or even take out the trash. Now kids don't have to do anything but sit around and play video games. Kids now expect an allowance for cleaning their own rooms. When I was a kid your allowance was food and a place to stay. Now kids expect everything and give nothing, they think they can mouth off to adults, run through stores, and treat their parents as their equals. When I was a kid if I gave my parents a dirty look, yelled in public, or got in someone's way in a store I would have got my butt worn out. If I would have mouthed off I would have been picking myself and my teeth up off the floor. The standards for everything have been relaxed because people think the standards are to difficult for children to achieve and when they fail it might damage their little self esteem. Forget picking yourself up and trying again, oh heck no, it has to be made easier so that anyone and everyone can succeed the first time. Then you wonder why the military has become to quote Geico "So easy a caveman can do it."


Go to Top of Page

Repoman
Starting Member

USA
15 Posts

Posted - 07/16/2009 :  3:41:26 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
My weapons of choice would be the Colt M4 and for a sidearm the Star 30M.


Go to Top of Page

Repoman
Starting Member

USA
15 Posts

Posted - 07/16/2009 :  3:52:16 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
duplicate


Edited by - Repoman on 07/16/2009 3:54:28 PM
Go to Top of Page

xarmcav
Starting Member

USA
4 Posts

Posted - 07/22/2009 :  02:13:16 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Inside of 1500 meters it's hard to beat a 120mm sabot and the MA DEUCE has proven to be a very formidable weapon
Go to Top of Page

osiris69
Starting Member

USA
10 Posts

Posted - 07/31/2009 :  09:24:13 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I carried the M-16 around for about 10 years...we should never of gave up the 7.62! The put down power alone was worth it. Lets go back to the M-14 or to an M1A
Go to Top of Page

82nd airborne infantry
Starting Member

USA
12 Posts

Posted - 09/07/2009 :  3:00:30 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by git_r_done

The M-16 has to tight of tolerances for out in that sandy part of the world. If you can't keep it clean on a regular basis (and in combat you can't). That is why I have allways fely the U.S. needed to develop something more like an AK for the military. It can get dirty and keep on going bang every time you pull the trigger.
One shot has it right with the M-60. When I was there the 60 performed very well with very minimal jams. But the 60 doesn'y have the tight tolorances the 16 has either.
When I was there I had more fire power on my truck than I could ever use. Between me and my co-driver we had M-16, M-60, M-203, two AK's, with the ammo for all of it, plus 2 cases of gernades. So we were ready for what ever was thrown at us.





WOW... now that's impressive. As an active duty infantryman ( Aco 3/505. 82nd airborne) I only carried a SAW..1 weapon and 4 grenades... I guess I should have been a reservist truck driver... an M16, 203, m60 2 ak-47 and an entire case of grenades. Jesus you would need a truck just to carry all those weapons....BS comes to mind
Go to Top of Page

wildeman.7.62nato
Junior Member

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 09/07/2009 :  11:37:52 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by 82nd airborne infantry

quote:
Originally posted by git_r_done

The M-16 has to tight of tolerances for out in that sandy part of the world. If you can't keep it clean on a regular basis (and in combat you can't). That is why I have allways fely the U.S. needed to develop something more like an AK for the military. It can get dirty and keep on going bang every time you pull the trigger.
One shot has it right with the M-60. When I was there the 60 performed very well with very minimal jams. But the 60 doesn'y have the tight tolorances the 16 has either.
When I was there I had more fire power on my truck than I could ever use. Between me and my co-driver we had M-16, M-60, M-203, two AK's, with the ammo for all of it, plus 2 cases of gernades. So we were ready for what ever was thrown at us.





WOW... now that's impressive. As an active duty infantryman ( Aco 3/505. 82nd airborne) I only carried a SAW..1 weapon and 4 grenades... I guess I should have been a reservist truck driver... an M16, 203, m60 2 ak-47 and an entire case of grenades. Jesus you would need a truck just to carry all those weapons....BS comes to mind




I guess the philosophy is if you can't truck it, mess it. Or something like that. Not my personal mantra but hey, what ever.

Semper Fi
Go to Top of Page

hooligan1seven
Starting Member

USA
46 Posts

Posted - 11/03/2010 :  2:08:04 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
It's not that you can't use "hollowpoint ammo", it's that you (law abiding countries) are not allowed to use fragmenting or expanding ammunition. We could theoretically legally use polymer tipped rounds as long as they did not expand or fragment. The Russians got around this with the 5.45x39 by having a hollow cavity under the tip of the round, inside of the copper jacket. Causing the round to deform and tumble when it strikes something.

quote:
Originally posted by ruger41

i have a question about the ammo you guys use these days. i know under the Geneva Convention you aren't supposed to use hollowpoint ammo--but are you allowed to use polymer tipped rounds?


People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. by George Orwell
Go to Top of Page

SGMBalz
Junior Member

409 Posts

Posted - 04/13/2011 :  3:40:10 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
.223 remington, or 5.56 mm Nato. It was designed for shooting varmints like ground hogs. Most humans, even Vietnamese are quite a bit larger. Anything else?





" This here, sure is a fine shooting army gun" Alvin C York
Question: How do you starve a liberal? Answer: hide his food stamps under his work shoes!
Go to Top of Page

JTacticalFirearms
Starting Member

USA
10 Posts

Posted - 04/18/2011 :  11:46:50 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
M14 or M240B.

Infantry leads the way!
Go to Top of Page

nards444
Flaming Liberal

USA
4436 Posts

Posted - 04/18/2011 :  9:59:09 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by JTacticalFirearms

M14 or M240B.



I am no fan of the 5.56 or M4 but i wouldnt trade it for a M14 and full combat load, you can keep that. M4 design with some modifcation and a 6.5MM rd would be perfect. the days of a combat rifles that weighed 10-12 lbs are over, no need to have 30.06 and 308 rds either they are overkill. A study done after world war II found that most soldiers were shot and killed within 75 yards
Go to Top of Page

SGMBalz
Junior Member

409 Posts

Posted - 04/19/2011 :  03:38:43 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by osiris69

I carried the M-16 around for about 10 years...we should never of gave up the 7.62! The put down power alone was worth it. Lets go back to the M-14 or to an M1A


Bro, I am with you. The M-16 is a perfectly fine weapon, for ground hogs and such. but it is a SOB to Clean, I mean time consuming and you had better know what you are doing. In the desert, it is less than desirable. I carried an M-14 in Ranger School, no one else knew how to use or clean it. Man that thing would just keep shooting no matter what. Took me 20 minutes to clean it as clean as a whistle, when I graduated. Over an hour later, other rangers were still cleaning weapons.





" This here, sure is a fine shooting army gun" Alvin C York
Question: How do you starve a liberal? Answer: hide his food stamps under his work shoes!
Go to Top of Page

wildeman.7.62nato
Junior Member

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 04/19/2011 :  10:46:39 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by SGMBalz

quote:
Originally posted by osiris69

I carried the M-16 around for about 10 years...we should never of gave up the 7.62! The put down power alone was worth it. Lets go back to the M-14 or to an M1A


Bro, I am with you. The M-16 is a perfectly fine weapon, for ground hogs and such. but it is a SOB to Clean, I mean time consuming and you had better know what you are doing. In the desert, it is less than desirable. I carried an M-14 in Ranger School, no one else knew how to use or clean it. Man that thing would just keep shooting no matter what. Took me 20 minutes to clean it as clean as a whistle, when I graduated. Over an hour later, other rangers were still cleaning weapons.



I like the M1A or M14. It's to bad they're so expensive and so is the ammo. They aren't as modular but some of the stock systems out there really bring them up to date. Vltor and Troy Industries make a pretty good upgrade.

Semper Fi
Go to Top of Page

JTacticalFirearms
Starting Member

USA
10 Posts

Posted - 04/21/2011 :  10:43:43 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I've used the suppressed M4/M203 with 4x ACOG to engage 900meter pop up targets on Ft. Carson's 1000m sniper range. I'm sure the 5.56 had no real stopping power at that range but the projectiles travelled that far and had hits within 4-5 rounds. The only problem with 5.56 is stopping power. Have seen an insurgent hit 10 times and still be crawling away.Admittedly he looked like total hell though. The 5.56 had him thoroughly wounded but didn't finish the job. Match 7.62 has the ability to end your life in one well placed shot and does mighty fine on bones and muscle/organs. Have gone black on match M14 ammo during a running firefight/ambush and had to switch back to an M16 from a QRF HMMV driver in order to have a weapon with plenty ammo to finish clearing a village and the rest of the mission. The problem with the M240B is finding guys that don't complain when humping 800 rounds. Lovely to have as much ammo as you can physically carry. PS - never go black on ammo. You never know whats waiting for you around the next corner. Also, to run and shoot the M240B from the shoulder you need to be a sexual tyrannosaurus.......like me...(Spitting dip).

Infantry leads the way!
Go to Top of Page

JTacticalFirearms
Starting Member

USA
10 Posts

Posted - 04/21/2011 :  10:58:43 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
In Pat Sweeneys book, Tactical Rifle, he likened the M14 I used to a museum piece. Saying they were re re re re builds from the Vietnam era. Saying that the soldiers who were lucky enough to find and use them probably didn't realize how rare the last ones are to find and that most were destroyed during the Clinton era without being sold through the Civilian Marksmanship Program. Mine was a totally base model with a Leupold Mark 4 LR/T scope and harris bipods taped onto the front of my brown synthetic stock with a mono loc to hold on my PVS 14 up to my scope for night time engagements and I was proud to have and use her. Match grade ammo was hard to round up in theater though. The rifle worked fine on moving targets at night out to 500-600m. Had the PVS10 dy night scope too but its was too heavy and bulky to be mounted to the M14.

Infantry leads the way!
Go to Top of Page

JTacticalFirearms
Starting Member

USA
10 Posts

Posted - 04/21/2011 :  2:32:17 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Also don't forget about the 40mm grenade launcher on the bottom of the M4/M203. Those HE rounds are a blast. Great for blowing up lots of organic material out to a few hundred meters. Thats why the MK19 vehicle mounted grenade launcher also rates high in my book. Good amount of belt fed 40mm HE going downrange at any given time. You can imagine the psych factor of a foot soldier slinging those things around especially if you had a good 12-15.

Infantry leads the way!
Go to Top of Page

CbtEngr01
Advanced Member

USA
3441 Posts

Posted - 05/13/2011 :  12:49:08 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
M14. again
Go to Top of Page

bambambam
Advanced Member

USA
3949 Posts

Posted - 05/13/2011 :  08:18:33 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Do any of you military personel use FNH weapons? If so how do they work/ do you like them?
Go to Top of Page

wildeman.7.62nato
Junior Member

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 05/13/2011 :  4:36:32 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by bambambam

Do any of you military personel use FNH weapons? If so how do they work/ do you like them?



Yes, currently the M249 SAW and M240G or M240B are used by our military. The saw is alright, not my favorite, but the M240G is awesome. The M240G is a 7.62 belt fed weapon with a quick change barrel system that is pretty accurate. I love that weapon! The military was looking at the FN SCAR but I've heard they favored the ACR instead.

Semper Fi
Go to Top of Page

Wolf.
Senior Member

USA
2232 Posts

Posted - 08/16/2011 :  04:48:42 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by jsuggs


M4/M16A2 Light weight, light ammo, low recoil. To me the greatest advantage of the M4 is not its size, it is on of the only rifles that I have ever seen that from 0-300m you aim center mass of the target and you will hit it. A grate benifit for using it at night. As far as killing power as long as I hurt them bad enough they dont want to fight anymore I have done my job, but most people that bad mouth the 5.56 are people that have never seen someone shot with it, let alone someone hit twice in the chest at close range.
I think this pretty much hits the nail on the head as far as firefightng goes. OF COURSE knocking out the enemy and ensuring he doesn't keep shooting is of paramount importance, however, it is important to understand that if you leave the wounded enemy alive, it consumes the enemy's vital resources to administer to their wounded. This is a strategic consideration.

Naturally you don't want the "M1 Carbine syndrome" to develop, as in Korea, where those using the Carbine would shoot a Chinese soldier and as the force advanced the Chinese soldier would sit up and shoot the American troop in the back. It became SOP to put a couple more rounds in the enemy as you advanced to make sure you did not get shot in the back.

Fact is, however, the 5.56 round will leave a nasty wound and a center-mass hit is more likely than not to, for all practical puroses, put that unlucky sob out of the action.

Wolf.

"Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... And, we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people." -- Theodore Roosevelt
Go to Top of Page

wildeman.7.62nato
Junior Member

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 08/16/2011 :  08:42:07 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Right, ensuring that you overwhelm the enemy's support resources is great for fighting a large military that has the resources to exhaust. Now days WE end up caring for the enemies wounded. They leave them lying in the street or take them to a FOB and claim they were collateral damage from a US operation, worst that could happen is that they get detained, fed, and housed for awhile. 7.62 in an M1A or M14. Put 'em down for good.


quote:
Originally posted by Wolf.

quote:
Originally posted by jsuggs


M4/M16A2 Light weight, light ammo, low recoil. To me the greatest advantage of the M4 is not its size, it is on of the only rifles that I have ever seen that from 0-300m you aim center mass of the target and you will hit it. A grate benifit for using it at night. As far as killing power as long as I hurt them bad enough they dont want to fight anymore I have done my job, but most people that bad mouth the 5.56 are people that have never seen someone shot with it, let alone someone hit twice in the chest at close range.
I think this pretty much hits the nail on the head as far as firefightng goes. OF COURSE knocking out the enemy and ensuring he doesn't keep shooting is of paramount importance, however, it is important to understand that if you leave the wounded enemy alive, it consumes the enemy's vital resources to administer to their wounded. This is a strategic consideration.

Naturally you don't want the "M1 Carbine syndrome" to develop, as in Korea, where those using the Carbine would shoot a Chinese soldier and as the force advanced the Chinese soldier would sit up and shoot the American troop in the back. It became SOP to put a couple more rounds in the enemy as you advanced to make sure you did not get shot in the back.

Fact is, however, the 5.56 round will leave a nasty wound and a center-mass hit is more likely than not to, for all practical puroses, put that unlucky sob out of the action.


Semper Fi

Edited by - wildeman.7.62nato on 08/16/2011 08:46:57 AM
Go to Top of Page

braonan
Starting Member

10 Posts

Posted - 08/18/2011 :  07:08:05 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
My last tour in Afghanistan ended in Dec 2010, we rolled 4 to 6 MRAPs or a combo of MRAPs/MATVs depending on the mission and truck status. The primary weapons on the gun stations were M2s and 240Bs, we normally went half M2, half 240B alternating. The gunners also had 249s and M9s and frags up in the station and had easy access to the drivers M4/M203 directly below them. At least two trucks had AT4s in the gunner station at any time. We had a few Mk19s in our inventory and ammo for them but the ROE was tight on their use, so we usually did not take them. We had one M14 and a DM on each mission. We carried enough more than enough ammo for pretty much anything.

I liked my M4, wasn't happy with the EO Tech they gave me when my ACOG got busted but the M4 was reliable and accurate. There were times I wished it was a 7.62 but we had plenty of big rounds on the gun stations. We didn't have all of the toys that some units had, we didn't have the remote gun stations or miniguns (saw a SOCOM group rolling with one in a gun station) but we were heavily armed and could fight day or night (night vision and thermal).
Go to Top of Page

Jim Rau
Advanced Member

USA
4275 Posts

Posted - 09/04/2011 :  09:58:05 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
[quote]Originally posted by walther86

Yep..Janitors first, soldiers second!
[/quote
I am an 'old' soldier and I use to say if you learned nothing else in the army you could be a janitor!!!
That said, While I did two tours in the Big Green Latrine (RVN) I loved the 60 and the MA Deuce!!!
The units I was with did not have many problems with the M-16's. I think there were problems with the first ones deployed. This was due to two factors.
1. When they were first introduced they were supposed to be 'maintenance free', if you can believe that.
2. They were very sensitive to the pressure curve, which was determined by the powder used. Some manufactures just plain use the wrong powder, out of ignorance.

Self defence is an absolute and natural right. An armed society is not always polite, but it is A FREE AND SAFE SOCIETY! Keep your head down and your powder dry! J. Rau, Alabama

Edited by - Jim Rau on 09/04/2011 09:59:31 AM
Go to Top of Page

Viktor
Advanced Member

22344 Posts

Posted - 12/12/2011 :  11:01:59 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
M249. I do like the M240B, but it's too big to be successfully employed by dismounted troops. It's great for vehicles and fixed positions though.
Go to Top of Page

kdixon
New Member

USA
54 Posts

Posted - 01/11/2013 :  2:52:22 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
It seems alot on her like the m60, look at the way they operate the gas system end at the gas cylinder in from of the hand guard. M16 blows back into the receiver, dumping all that dirt in there, can't work very long with sticky oil and dirt. Also 6 lug bolt not good, the m1, carbine, 03 m14 had 2 lug bolts. If you look at the progression the mini 14 would have been the next logical gun, I would rather have any gun with a 2 lug bolt that dumps its garbage outside
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
GunBroker.com Message Forums © 1999-2017 GB Investments, Inc. All Rights Reserved Go To Top Of Page
Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.06


Visit GunBroker.com at: www.gunbroker.com
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the site's User Agreement
Site Map