M16 versus AK: an assessment from Jane’s

[RikWriter]

Read "Black Hawk Down" to see what some of the SF and Rangers think of the .223. An AR was high on my wishlist until I read this book. Its still there but not at the top anymore.


If you read the book CAREFULLY, you would see that the Sammies sometimes shrugged off 7.62x51 rounds from the M60s too...it was a function of them being whisper thin, wearing loose clothes and being high on drugs, not of caliber.

 

[MeekAndMild]

They totally ignored US/Russian night vision technology. News reports coming in have been discussing a lot of night raids. Given Gulf War results IMHO aimed fire from NV equipped M-16s will be especially telling.

 

[Correia]

Madmike, the SAS would prefer a pointy stick over the crappy SA80.

 

[mwv4]

I was'nt saying it was the M16, just the round used.

 

[rock_jock]

I've read that the problem in Somalia was the barrel length of the M4, namely the 11.5" barrels were not generating enough velocity to properly fragment the bullet at the cannelure, thus drastically reducing the secondary wound channel and limiting its effectiveness.

 

[Christopher II]

rock_jock:

14.5", but you're right. Past about 150-200m, the 5.56mm round loses the velocity that causes it to fragment on impact. Out of an M4, its effective range drops even further, down to around 75-100m.

If you get the idea that I'm a .308 fan, you'd be right, although a skilled rifleman would likely be well-served with whatever he picks up.

Keith J:

Not that I distrust you (for all I know you could be the DCM Service Rifle National Champion,) but I'd like to see some of these coffee-can lids you've perforated at 400m. I'm more of a pistol person than a rifleman, but I've shot a few DCM matches and seen what a good competition shooter can do at 300m. Keeping every shot within a 6" circle at 300 yards, iron sights, is no trick.

YMMV, IMHO, yadda yadda yadda...

-Chris

 

[shucks]

BALONEY 223 "isnt effective beyond 150m

it is LETHAL to 1/2 mile, bud, out of 20" m16 barrels. So maybe it's "only" lethal to 750 yds with the 14" M4, so what? thats FIVE TIMES your estimate. MOST battlefield hits are random, often they are richochets and frags, and they are rarely immediately lethal, regardless of caliber or load, because they are PERIPHERAL hits. A 308 that pierces the leg or arm is NOT any more effective than the 223 that does the same. VERY few INTENTIONAL, chest hits are obtained beyond 100 yds, because troops use COVER and DARKNESS, they DODGE, and they fire BACK, but to "think" that the 223 is ineffective at 200m is bogus. If you really think so, I challenge you to do much of ANYTHING after taking such a hit to the chest, besides lie there, whimper for your mother, and moan-scream.

 

[Foxy]

I don't think they were using M4 carbines in BHD - BHD occured in Oct 1993, and the M4 wasn't adopted until Aug 1994.

 

[Christopher II]

Right, Hardin. Anything you say.

- Chris

 

[ronin308]

I'm 100% behind Chris here about the .223 performance. The .223 needs at least 2800 fps to fragment. Which is as he said, about 75-100m from a shorty barrel. So after that distance, what you essentially have is a poor penetrating, non-fragmenting, 55gr. .223 caliber solid. Not too impressive...

Dan