AR-15 556

[Katz]

Picked up a used one....got to shoot it yesterday....my only AR experience.....but I am very impressed....now that allusive pc9 carbine 8)

 

[daveg.inkc]

Katz do you reload? With the 1:8 twist, these like the 62 gr and up.

 

[Katz]

Katz do you reload? With the 1:8 twist, these like the 62 gr and up.

No I don't reload....why 62 or bigger?

 

[daveg.inkc]

My experience with Mini 14. AR 556 is that I get great accuracy with M855 NATO rounds, reloading with the same bullet,62 gr Green tip, 69 -77 gr HPBT Sierras. And I use a variety of powders. Just what I prefer to shoot. These heavier projectiles tear my steel targets up. More energy. I weld and repair them often! Find M193-55 gr. And buy a box of M855-62 gr. see how you like them. Wal-Mart, Bass Pro carry them. Lake City Plant is here in Independence, MO.

 

[Jeepnik]

Good range toys, but never something to bet one's life on.

 

[daveg.inkc]

Good range toys, but never something to bet one's life on.

What? My AR 556 is very accurate. Very reliable. You don’t own one?

 

[Jeepnik]

Good range toys, but never something to bet one's life on.

What? My AR 556 is very accurate. Very reliable. You don’t own one?

I own one. It was a gift from my boys. They wanted to convince me that they are much better than the M-16 (original) that tried to get me killed. Funny thing is the eldest did his third tour in the middle east in Afghanistan. He found out the puny 5.56 just wasn't right for that terrain. He "found" an M-14 (just like I did) and was quite happy with it.

Funny how history repeats itself and proves facts that folks have forgotten.

 

[lgriff1968]

Good range toys, but never something to bet one's life on.

What? My AR 556 is very accurate. Very reliable. You don’t own one?

I own one. It was a gift from my boys. They wanted to convince me that they are much better than the M-16 (original) that tried to get me killed. Funny thing is the eldest did his third tour in the middle east in Afghanistan. He found out the puny 5.56 just wasn't right for that terrain. He "found" an M-14 (just like I did) and was quite happy with it.

Funny how history repeats itself and proves facts that folks have forgotten.

"Good range toys, but never something to bet one's life on."
This statement is half right by objective evidence, and half subjective.

Today's rifles and ammunition are certainly not the same originally issued and carried in Nam. I love(d) the M-14 too (USMC 1964-68 3rd MarDiv), but find the rifles and round are more then I want and need for personal self-defense today. Military combat and hunting are different. The referenced jungle and desert combat, each present their own unique environmental and situational conditions (as does hunting) which may or may not, be relevant as to whether a particular rifle or round is adequate to bet one's life on. Realistically for me this means home defense, but possibly something else such as encounters with vicious/feral animals while woods walking, fence running and livestock/crop husbandry.

One should chose a firearm and caliber for a particular use, considering individual facts and circumstances, and examples representative of the choices commonly recognized as sufficient for a particular task(s) by enthusiasts and private/governmental entities. Civilian active self-defense, by its' nature is combat, and, may have its' own unique extremes in environment and conditions, but most are not representative of military combat situations. I submit the statement and conclusion that the rifle and round should be discounted as an adequate civilian self-defense platform is based on personal preference and bias, not fact, logic and modern evidence. Theoretically, I bet my life every day on a lessor round, the 9mm.

Regards.

 

[gunzo]

Today's rifles and ammunition are certainly not the same originally issued and carried in Nam. I love(d) the M-14 too (USMC 1964-68 3rd MarDiv), but find the rifles and round are more then I want and need for personal self-defense today. Military combat and hunting are different. The referenced jungle and desert combat, each present their own unique environmental and situational conditions (as does hunting) which may or may not, be relevant as to whether a particular rifle or round is adequate to bet one's life on. Realistically for me this means home defense, but possibly something else such as encounters with vicious/feral animals while woods walking, fence running and livestock/crop husbandry.

One should chose a firearm and caliber for a particular use, considering individual facts and circumstances, and examples representative of the choices commonly recognized as sufficient for a particular task(s) by enthusiasts and private/governmental entities. Civilian active self-defense, by its' nature is combat, and, may have its' own unique extremes in environment and conditions, but most are not representative of military combat situations. I submit the statement and conclusion that the rifle and round should be discounted as an adequate civilian self-defense platform is based on personal preference and bias, not fact, logic and modern evidence. Theoretically, I bet my life every day on a lessor round, the 9mm.

Regards.

Good brain food right there.

 

[Jeepnik]

Honestly, for what I needed it for, a good ole Thompson would have been better. They performed very well in the Pacific during WWII.

 

[22/45 Fan]

Katz do you reload? With the 1:8 twist, these like the 62 gr and up.

My Ruger American and Ruger Gunsite Scout, both in .223/5.56 and with 1:8 twists like 55 grain bullets just fine. They are particularly fond of Sierra 55 gr SPBT and group at or under 1 moa.

I think the concept of "overstabilization" using a fast twist with lighter bullets is a bit obsolete as modern bullets are much better made and more concentric that they were in the past.

 

[hickoryhillbill]

Jeepnik when I read your post I laughed out loud. My son and daughter are both active Army and asked me why I didn't have an AR. I tell them M16 don't like me it tried to get me killed several times. Mini 14 and 30, JRA m14 and H&R M1 garand is whats in my safe. Love the action.

 

[lgriff1968]

Jeepnik when I read your post I laughed out loud. My son and daughter are both active Army and asked me why I didn't have an AR. I tell them M16 don't like me it tried to get me killed several times. Mini 14 and 30, JRA m14 and H&R M1 garand is whats in my safe. Love the action.

Remember guys, Katz says he is a first time AR platform owner. I would venture to say he does not have a safe full of firearms that he "loves". We all have our preferences and opinion(s), as well as means.

hickoryhillbill - your colorful repartee is not useful or relevant in a discussion/review of modern, current day Armalite platform rifles. If you want to discuss the history of the problems that occurred and remedies made (chrome chamber, powder change, forward assist etc.), or in particular, your personal experience(s), that would be more informative and useful for the young enthusiasts to the genre. Those of us who lived it, know what the problems with the rifle(s) were, as well as the problems with operator care/maintenance.

I too like the Garand platform rifles, but that is not the issue; my AR556 is reliable, and more useful/practical for my current day purpose(s).

Regards

 

[hickoryhillbill]

Good for you MOPREPPER .God bless you

 

[Jeepnik]

Jeepnik when I read your post I laughed out loud. My son and daughter are both active Army and asked me why I didn't have an AR. I tell them M16 don't like me it tried to get me killed several times. Mini 14 and 30, JRA m14 and H&R M1 garand is whats in my safe. Love the action.

Kids have no since of history.

 

[Jeepnik]

Jeepnik when I read your post I laughed out loud. My son and daughter are both active Army and asked me why I didn't have an AR. I tell them M16 don't like me it tried to get me killed several times. Mini 14 and 30, JRA m14 and H&R M1 garand is whats in my safe. Love the action.

Remember guys, Katz says he is a first time AR platform owner. I would venture to say he does not have a safe full of firearms that he "loves". We all have our preferences and opinion(s), as well as means.

hickoryhillbill - your colorful repartee is not useful or relevant in a discussion/review of modern, current day Armalite platform rifles. If you want to discuss the history of the problems that occurred and remedies made (chrome chamber, powder change, forward assist etc.), or in particular, your personal experience(s), that would be more informative and useful for the young enthusiasts to the genre. Those of us who lived it, know what the problems with the rifle(s) were, as well as the problems with operator care/maintenance.

I too like the Garand platform rifles, but that is not the issue; my AR556 is reliable, and more useful/practical for my current day purpose(s).

Regards

Wow, such a kind and gentle way to respond to another member. Heck, I said about the same thing earlier in the thread. I suppose my opinion of the M16 is just as invalid as Bill's.

Then again kids always know more that older guys with actual experience. Well, that is until they actually get some experience.

 

[lgriff1968]

Jeepnik when I read your post I laughed out loud. My son and daughter are both active Army and asked me why I didn't have an AR. I tell them M16 don't like me it tried to get me killed several times. Mini 14 and 30, JRA m14 and H&R M1 garand is whats in my safe. Love the action.

Kids have no since of history.

That is an interesting observation, although rather broad and vague. Young men and women today, deserve an unbiased, objective, contextual presentation of history. If used, anecdotes and one-liners should be of historical significance/value, in context and free of hyperbole.

The "kids", of 50 years ago, participated in the making of the evolutionary history of the Stoner platform. Then, and now, young men and women have participated in the history and development of the longest running regular issue military small arm in American history. It is currently used by domestic police forces and many foreign police and military forces.

Does it fill the need(s) for all situations that may arise, no, what small arm does, or ever has? Today's M16/M4 platform(s), with modern optics and ammunition, is a reliable, durable and effective/lethal combination for defensive and most offensive combat application(s). In some offensive situations, it is often augmented by other "special" weapons. That is the nature of the beast. Will the current model(s) be replaced, probably, but not disappear.

Private self-defense by civilians is very subjective. Consequently, those new to any aspect of buying, owning and using a firearm, need current, objective information for this personal and serious matter.

Regards

 

[Jeepnik]

Kids also can't comprehend sarcasm either. Use what you prefer. I will use what I know works. Experience is truly the best teacher.

 

[lgriff1968]

Kids also can't comprehend sarcasm either. Use what you prefer. I will use what I know works. Experience is truly the best teacher.

I have never suggested you, or anyone else, use or not use one particular weapon or caliber,You sir did; “Good range toys, but never something to bet one's life on.” History and fact(s) say you are wrong in that statement.

If you had said; “Good range toys, but never something I would bet my life on”, that is an objective and honest statement.

Then above you state; "Use what you prefer. I will use what I know works.", how condescending!

You may very well disregard the weapon and platform for whatever reason(s) you want, that does not make it right for anyone else. Being far from kid status, I learned a long time ago that longevity in life and experience does not necessarily equate to being right. Enough of the old fart member measuring now.

Regards

 

[Jeepnik]

You sir did; “Good range toys, but never something to bet one's life on.” History and fact(s) say you are wrong in that statement.

Not my history and personally experienced facts.

 

[lgriff1968]

You sir did; “Good range toys, but never something to bet one's life on.” History and fact(s) say you are wrong in that statement.

Not my history and personally experienced facts.

You keep saying that but offer no examples or references. The ballistics and terminal effects of the 30.06 and the 308/7.62mm are well known and documented, as is the various 223/5.56 rounds.

The issue here is your personal history and experience(s) of the failure(s) of today's M16/M4 platform and ammunition when used as designed and recommended. Do not offer failure(s) to drop a bull moose at 500 meters and war stories of successes from 50-75 years ago. They are irrelevant in a current day discussion of today's rifle and round for self defense. The '06 and 7.62mm will kill, as will the 5.56.

Regards

 

[Jeepnik]

You sir did; “Good range toys, but never something to bet one's life on.” History and fact(s) say you are wrong in that statement.

Not my history and personally experienced facts.

You keep saying that but offer no examples or references. The ballistics and terminal effects of the 30.06 and the 308/7.62mm are well known and documented, as is the various 223/5.56 rounds.

The issue here is your personal history and experience(s) of the failure(s) of today's M16/M4 platform and ammunition when used as designed and recommended. Do not offer failure(s) to drop a bull moose at 500 meters and war stories of successes from 50-75 years ago. They are irrelevant in a current day discussion of today's rifle and round for self defense. The '06 and 7.62mm will kill, as will the 5.56.

Regards

Okay, here it is. 1971, a few folks decided to try and kill me and some others. The issued M16 (this was an original, not an A1) tore the back end off of a spent round and then tried to stuff a fresh round into the chamber. Even if the broken shell extractor had been around it really wasn't the time or place to try and use it. Fortunately, and older piece or ordinance developed by a true firearms designing genius, JMB, worked.

I got rid of the POS and found an M14 and never looked back.

My two go to firearms for anything serious are a Randall lefthanded 1911A1 and a Springfield Armory M1A Scout Squad.

 

[lgriff1968]

**************************************************************************************************************************************

If there was an original issue XM16E1 or early model M16A1 in service in 1971; that suggests additional problems besides this well documented failure.

An improved XM16E1 was re-designated M16A1 in 1967, so there should not have been a XM16E1 in combat in 1971. The XM16E1 had the charging handle under the carry handle and had no forward assist. The first designated M16A1 had the charging handle on the rear of the receiver, no forward assist and the chamber was not chromed. The early powder manufacturer could not provide the demand needed, so it was replaced early with a new, dirtier powder. In 1970, a newer WC 844 powder was introduced to reduce fouling. Some troops may have been issued this ammunition with the dirty 2nd gen powder in 1971. The early M16A1 did not have the improvement of a chrome chamber and barrel, so this combination, as well as documented inadequate care and cleaning, resulted in these failures. The combination of a chromed chamber and barrel, new powder, and issuance of instructions for care and cleaning, greatly reduced chamber sticking and fowling. The later M16A1 had the forward assist and chromed chamber/barrel.

Think about the described failure. With a stuck casing, the rifle attempted to extract to the point of separating the case head from the body (a problem sometimes in bolt guns), breaking the extractor, and then still picked up another round and attempted to chamber. Some say this suggests a robust internal operating system and not a design problem, but rather a combination of secondary issues that have since been remedied. Today, there is the choice of a gas piston impingement system, or the original direct gas impingement (DGI) system (SR556 v. AR556). Some choose the AR556 (DGI) as parts are more plentiful and cheaper; some find the system simpler to work on and a little more accurate. The piston system runs cooler and cleaner but may be somewhat less accurate (not an issue with many). If one buys the cheaper DGI rifle, he can purchase a piston driven upper and install it on the DGI lower. The modern day systems and ammunition work and are depended on worldwide.

Our choice(s) are our choices. Depending on circumstance(s), one can have too much gun, as well as too little, both can have unintended circumstances and results. It is great to live in a time and country where we have these choices in armaments, and individual responsibility for their use. John M. Browning rightfully has a place in firearms development history worldwide, as does Eugene M. Stoner.

Regards and Semper fi
USMC 1964-68 (3rd MarDiv 1966-67)

 

[Jeepnik]

**************************************************************************************************************************************

If there was an original issue XM16E1 or early model M16A1 in service in 1971; that suggests additional problems besides this well documented failure.

An improved XM16E1 was re-designated M16A1 in 1967, so there should not have been a XM16E1 in combat in 1971. The XM16E1 had the charging handle under the carry handle and had no forward assist. The first designated M16A1 had the charging handle on the rear of the receiver, no forward assist and the chamber was not chromed. The early powder manufacturer could not provide the demand needed, so it was replaced early with a new, dirtier powder. In 1970, a newer WC 844 powder was introduced to reduce fouling. Some troops may have been issued this ammunition with the dirty 2nd gen powder in 1971. The early M16A1 did not have the improvement of a chrome chamber and barrel, so this combination, as well as documented inadequate care and cleaning, resulted in these failures. The combination of a chromed chamber and barrel, new powder, and issuance of instructions for care and cleaning, greatly reduced chamber sticking and fowling. The later M16A1 had the forward assist and chromed chamber/barrel.

Think about the described failure. With a stuck casing, the rifle attempted to extract to the point of separating the case head from the body (a problem sometimes in bolt guns), breaking the extractor, and then still picked up another round and attempted to chamber. Some say this suggests a robust internal operating system and not a design problem, but rather a combination of secondary issues that have since been remedied. Today, there is the choice of a gas piston impingement system, or the original direct gas impingement (DGI) system (SR556 v. AR556). Some choose the AR556 (DGI) as parts are more plentiful and cheaper; some find the system simpler to work on and a little more accurate. The piston system runs cooler and cleaner but may be somewhat less accurate (not an issue with many). If one buys the cheaper DGI rifle, he can purchase a piston driven upper and install it on the DGI lower. The modern day systems and ammunition work and are depended on worldwide.

Our choice(s) are our choices. Depending on circumstance(s), one can have too much gun, as well as too little, both can have unintended circumstances and results. It is great to live in a time and country where we have these choices in armaments, and individual responsibility for their use. John M. Browning rightfully has a place in firearms development history worldwide, as does Eugene M. Stoner.

Regards and Semper fi
USMC 1964-68 (3rd MarDiv 1966-67)

Read your history. The USAF didn't get rid of it's last M16 until the sometime around 2000. Just because a weapon has been replaced doesn't mean they all were taken from inventory.

 

[lgriff1968]

You are deflecting with straw man. Not the same rifle from the 60's and 70's. Any older lowers were upgraded with newer uppers. BTW, do not have to read the history, my son is retired USAF (1991-2011); he was an armorer for part of his career. Agree to disagree.

 

[kmoore]

I have had a personal and up close M14 failure. 1 once ripped the head off the case and left the rest in the chamber as I was firing it.
But, really the M16 is like many items of military equipment. It started out with problems and been changed to fix them over the years like just about anything in inventory for more than a few years.