You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Effectiveness of Semi-auto fire vs. 3-shot burst?
- Thread starter scotjute
- Start date
Abominable No-Man
New member
It's been my experience that neither one is all that great in a
assault rifle. In the M16A1, the gun still jumps around, and unless
you're in really close, it's not going to do you much good. The
same goes for the 'A2, although you don't burn up as much ammo
with one trigger pull. In my past units, we were taught to use
aimed fire at long ranges and in close to use fast point-fire.
Usually, if you need full-auto, you need a lot of it, which translates
into SAW or GPMG.
ANM
assault rifle. In the M16A1, the gun still jumps around, and unless
you're in really close, it's not going to do you much good. The
same goes for the 'A2, although you don't burn up as much ammo
with one trigger pull. In my past units, we were taught to use
aimed fire at long ranges and in close to use fast point-fire.
Usually, if you need full-auto, you need a lot of it, which translates
into SAW or GPMG.
ANM
Double Naught Spy
New member
Both have advantages that may be situationally dependent. What sort of effectiveness are you talking about? Ability to drop targets, ability land shots on target, ability to provide suppression fire, or what?
The reason the current military version has a three round burst is because the brass was concerned that inexperience troops having full-auto would panic and unload their magazine in one long burst. Instead of providing sufficient training to make everyone proficient with a full-auto, they decided to "fix" the gun. In my lowly opinion, if they wanted a 3-round burst capability, add it to the gun along with the full-auto and leave it up to the user which mode to use. Then spend some money and get the troops trained.
After a gazillion dollars in ammo, I have gotten pretty good using my M16. Even though it is full-auto, I can get very accurate 2 and 3 round bursts using good trigger control and still have a blast hosing a full 30-rounder in one long spray (if you consider about 2 seconds long) if I want.
After a gazillion dollars in ammo, I have gotten pretty good using my M16. Even though it is full-auto, I can get very accurate 2 and 3 round bursts using good trigger control and still have a blast hosing a full 30-rounder in one long spray (if you consider about 2 seconds long) if I want.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Somewhere back in the '80s I ran across a gunzine article by a doctor, to the effect that several rapid hits from a full-auto pipsqueak cartridge is very effective. There is some sort of geometric progression of cumulative effect. Sort of a 1,2,4,8 instead of 1,2,3,4 deal. This is the reasoning behind the effectiveness of the Skorpion with its .32 cartridge and the Mac-11 with the .380.
Keep this in mind while thinking about fire discipline and not wasting ammo. I have known several people who were in small-unit field command positions in Vietnam who said that it takes a good deal of training and surviving several firefights to get the average guy to control himself, to not spray and pray and then run dry.
I've fired several magazines through an early M16, and to me the gun was quite controllable. I've not fired one with the three-shot burst setup.
So, just opinion: Seems to me that the three-shot deal would be easily controllable. Seems to me that the cumulative effect would apply.
Art
Keep this in mind while thinking about fire discipline and not wasting ammo. I have known several people who were in small-unit field command positions in Vietnam who said that it takes a good deal of training and surviving several firefights to get the average guy to control himself, to not spray and pray and then run dry.
I've fired several magazines through an early M16, and to me the gun was quite controllable. I've not fired one with the three-shot burst setup.
So, just opinion: Seems to me that the three-shot deal would be easily controllable. Seems to me that the cumulative effect would apply.
Art
Unkel Gilbey
New member
Semi auto is better...
We were trying one day at Rifle practice to see if there was any advantage in using the three round burst from a tight sitting position at the 200 yard line. The idea was to see if we could achieve three good hits at a decimal target using burst vice the regular semi-auto.
The best we saw was three perfectly aligned shots, strung vertically. The first shot was at point of aim, and the second and third were anywhere from 1 foot and 2 feet higher or more.
At the 500 yard line firing from the Prone w/3 shot burst, the third shot was usually off the paper (high). With my fingers wrapped over the top of the stock (not your usual prone position!) we were able to keep the shots closer, but it wasn't practical.
One the other side, during an ITT match, we've fired almost two full magazines at the 500 (semi auto only) and kept a majority of the rounds in the black of the silouette target. Serious Rapid fire!
So, maybe the burst is good when you're shooting from the hip in an urban situation, but at any distance, it's better to use the semi mode of fire.
And who needs full auto anyway? I've learned to milk the trigger with the weapon on 3 rnd burst so that the cyclic rate is still fairly high! Watch the brass fly!
Unkel Gilbey
We were trying one day at Rifle practice to see if there was any advantage in using the three round burst from a tight sitting position at the 200 yard line. The idea was to see if we could achieve three good hits at a decimal target using burst vice the regular semi-auto.
The best we saw was three perfectly aligned shots, strung vertically. The first shot was at point of aim, and the second and third were anywhere from 1 foot and 2 feet higher or more.
At the 500 yard line firing from the Prone w/3 shot burst, the third shot was usually off the paper (high). With my fingers wrapped over the top of the stock (not your usual prone position!) we were able to keep the shots closer, but it wasn't practical.
One the other side, during an ITT match, we've fired almost two full magazines at the 500 (semi auto only) and kept a majority of the rounds in the black of the silouette target. Serious Rapid fire!
So, maybe the burst is good when you're shooting from the hip in an urban situation, but at any distance, it's better to use the semi mode of fire.
And who needs full auto anyway? I've learned to milk the trigger with the weapon on 3 rnd burst so that the cyclic rate is still fairly high! Watch the brass fly!
Unkel Gilbey
in my experiences, unless its belt-fed i dont generally use auto or burst. i always favor semi-auto. the only good part of burst could be in some urban environments where contact is close enough that all 3 rounds hit the target. of course a trained soldier using auto can do the same thing.
The problem with full auto only is that even the best disciplined and trained troops have a tendency to loose a little trigger control when adrenaline is pumped into their bodies. People loose fine muscle control when their body is hit with the flight or fight instinct and what they wanted to be a 2-3 ends up at 7-8.