View Full Version : M16, the ultimate infantry rifle

December 16, 2008, 09:38 PM
Who would want an M16 at Bastogne?

December 16, 2008, 09:47 PM
The same people who would want a Garand for clearing buildings in Iraq.

Death from Afar
December 16, 2008, 09:49 PM
Hmmm...a thread on the merits or otherwise of the AR family. Thats new.

To answer your question- yes, that would be me.

B. Lahey
December 16, 2008, 10:01 PM
A WWII M16 would have been a hell of a thing...

All steel, wood stock and pistol grip. Heavy, but so were all the other rifles and MGs. It would probably end up looking like an extra-goofy BAR type deal.

If you could teleport modern materials back to that time, I bet they would have had plenty of use for the M16. The M2 carbine was well-liked as far as I know, and that's kind of the same concept.

December 16, 2008, 10:07 PM
If my only options were weapons of the era or a M16, the choice is easy. M16

If I had other options of modern military rifles I would not go with the M16. I have many hours with an M16 and I personally don't like it. I've had a few too many FTF and FTE's. My own personal opinion is that a weapon with a forward assist is a big clue not to go with that weapon. It's like paying extra for a car with two engines because they first might not start when you need it to. I've never had a use for a forward assist on any of the other military rifles I've fired.

What would I choose? TAR-21... a little payback from the future :D

December 16, 2008, 10:07 PM
Well I don't think they were doing a lot of 1000yd shooting and from my reading many of the Germans we're carrying the Sturmgewehr. An M16 in 6.8 SPC would have been a pretty good match for that in thick woods.

December 16, 2008, 10:16 PM
i'd want m240s and m21s and they can keep the colts cause berettas suck, they did have something better in the day:D

but yeah i think an m14 may do the trick, detachable mag, powerful, not wimpy like .223, low maintenance, walking around in the snow with no real buildings isnt good ar-15 maintenance weather.

December 16, 2008, 10:26 PM
I'd take an M-16A2 in that situation. Mine worked fine in Afghanistan (and yes, I did use it), and it works fine here in Iowa in the winter. In fact, I haven't had a malfunction that wasn't due to bad mags in mine--and I've been using one with blanks and live ammo for seven years.

AR/M-16 threads are getting to be just troll chow. And those of us who have operational experience usually get ignored. Love it or hate it, my M-16A2/M203 worked fine when I needed it. So did those of the men in my squad.

Don't want one, don't get one. Just don't try to talk me out of mine.

December 16, 2008, 10:54 PM
I'd personally go for an RPG-7 w/plenty of rockets. There are bigger things to worry about than infantry.

December 16, 2008, 11:06 PM
Did they even have 5.56 back then? Because without it I would stick to the
M1. A 30-06 M16 might be cool though, in a ridiculous way.

December 16, 2008, 11:26 PM
Me, me! Can I get the M-203 with that?

My dad and two uncles never talked much about that time. Dad was in the Navy in the Pacific. His brother (Marine) stormed Normandy. Mom's brother went in at Anzio.

This was gut and grind close warfare. IMHO the M-16 would have been an enhancement in this context for every element it was designed for.

December 16, 2008, 11:28 PM
So what is the point of this thread again? :rolleyes:

December 17, 2008, 12:03 AM
So what is the point of this thread again?

I think its just "revenge" for the AK lover's thread a few days ago.

For as long as the AR and AK exisit, people will fight over which is better.

I think both are equal good for their designed purposes (which are different)

December 17, 2008, 12:18 AM
I just decided if we had to have a constant ar v. Ak thread I would put a new spin on it. I meant the situation, not the technology. SO you aren't the only one with modern weapons.

S I chose an actual battle that most knew something about and wanted to see what people would throw out.

So cold you have to run the guns dry b/c the oil was solidifying
ice.snow everywhere.
a lot of long range shooting.
Terrible supply lines.
No real rear area like are found in most situations today,

December 17, 2008, 12:39 AM
We will see how long this one lasts before in degenerates into the standard AR vs Ak/whatever flame war. Just the way you started the thread makes it clear you want to start another BS AK vs AR thread. As with all the other threads on this subject, I very much doubt anything new will be brought to light in this thread.

Ignition Override
December 17, 2008, 12:40 AM
How about the need for flames?
Some winter clothing would have been much better.
It was one of the coldest winters on record in Belgium etc. And German 88mm shells hitting trees near foxholes sometimes made the point moot.

In 1940, being adapted to very bitter conditions helped the far outnumbered Finns beat the much larger Soviet forces.
When you are from the much warmer Ukraine, shivering with your platoon next to a very bright fire, the stealthy Finns in the woods could have used other rifles.
A .223 might have worked. Many Marines west of Danang, Vietnam called them "mouseguns".
Citing (Lt.) Philip Caputo, "A Rumour Of War".

The lack of winter uniforms also helped doom many German troops on the Eastern Front.

December 17, 2008, 01:44 AM
AK -- for all the political, economic reasons there's 100 million of them out there. :D

Al Thompson
December 17, 2008, 03:34 AM
His brother (Marine) stormed Normandy.

No Marines in the European Theater. Check your facts. :)

Viking Josh
December 17, 2008, 07:42 AM
RedneckFur, I agree with you, both have thier strengths and weaknesses, so the best thing is to have both in your group, the AK's for the short-mid range, and the M16s for mid-long range.

Bartholomew Roberts
December 17, 2008, 10:14 AM
The American Rifleman just had a bio on a famous Finnish sniper. Apparently he killed most of his targets with a 9mm Suomi. I would have no trouble with an M16 in Bastogne like conditions - they are already used in colder environments on a regular basis. Alaska, for example.

However, if you don't want to use one that doesn't bother me in the slightest. I actually shoot my ARs instead of just reading about them on the Internet so I have confidence mine will work fine for me. If you don't have that confidence then use something else, the arrow is less important than the Indian.

December 17, 2008, 10:28 AM
Yes, the Finns had excellent success with the Suomi SMG. Most of their fighting was relatively close (< 100 yards) so a Finn in an excellent position with 70 round drums would reap a hell of a toll. Swedish Suomi has nice long barrel (over 12") and has very good accuracy out to 100 yards at least.

Oooooohhh, M16 chambered in 8mm Kurz (German MP44 round). Now THAT would be some fun.

December 17, 2008, 10:59 AM
M16, the ultimate infantry rifle

No, not really.

December 17, 2008, 11:49 AM
His brother (Marine) stormed Normandy.

No Marines in the European Theater. Check your facts.

He could have been one of the Marines assigned to the capital ships to give protection. There were quite a few of them.

December 17, 2008, 12:58 PM
yea supplies were low at Bastogne, as was ammo. the soldiers were in the foxholes almost costantley. I don't own either rifle so I cant say thing about their reliability. but from what ive read with the ar its 'if you take care of it it will take care of you'. well at Bastogne they might not have had the time or tools needed to maintain the ar. When the garand froze up the GI's urinated on it and it was good to go.

December 17, 2008, 01:04 PM
i think the m14 would be good, very little retraining since its basically an upgraded garand, and bring back extra colts for everyone without sidearms
mp5s and benelli m4s for trench clearing haha and barett 82s for vehicles and id love to see a stuka hit w/ a stinger

December 17, 2008, 01:48 PM
Why don't we just discuss "who would want a phaser in WWII?" :)

Mike Irwin
December 17, 2008, 01:57 PM
"No Marines in the European Theater. Check your facts."

You check your facts.

Marines were a small by very integral part of the European theater.


I can't find the citation right now, but if I recall correctly there were also some Marines who served as beach masters. By 1944 the Marines were THE experts on amphibious operations in the US military.

December 17, 2008, 02:08 PM
I guess I would take a phaser if the M14 were unavailable :cool:


December 17, 2008, 02:09 PM
I wonder how many of them would take the plastic AR you would try to hand them, as they walked in to Bastogne, and would leave their big 30'06 that is tried and true, made of wood and steel.

December 17, 2008, 06:38 PM
Not me, but I would take an AK-47.

December 17, 2008, 07:53 PM
Maybe you should ask this guy...I love my carbine, but in a full out battle, I would much prefer an M16...

Average Joe
December 17, 2008, 07:53 PM
I wouldn't want a rifle, where you had to shoot the enemy 3 times to put him down, I'd prefer the Garand in .30 cal .

December 17, 2008, 08:17 PM
anyone think a barett or that 20mm vulcan bolt gun would be sweet for taking out german vehicles?

Willie D
December 17, 2008, 08:30 PM
If I were at Bastogne I'd want smartwool socks, underarmor, really good gloves, waterproof outer layer, a blanket, and hot chocolate or soup.

December 17, 2008, 08:34 PM
handwarmer built into stock of my rifle

December 17, 2008, 09:56 PM
anyone think a barett or that 20mm vulcan bolt gun would be sweet for taking out german vehicles?
By that date the only thing that a 20mm could take out would be an APC. Those would be the least of your worries.

December 17, 2008, 09:58 PM
um at4 for panzers?

December 17, 2008, 10:09 PM
The same people who would want a Garand for clearing buildings in Iraq.
See with a Garand once you declare the building hostile you just shoot through it. No need to go inside.

December 17, 2008, 10:11 PM
I would want a radio and the ability to call in A10 Warthogs and helicopter gunships.

December 17, 2008, 10:14 PM
a b2 over berlin may end the war rather quickly

December 17, 2008, 10:21 PM
A few Predators would have been nice to have back then...


Art Eatman
December 17, 2008, 11:12 PM