imported post
Weak 9mm wrote:
The original M-16 served in Vietnam too. It was "self cleaning" according to the folks that handed it out to soldiers. When Stoner heard about this he was like, "No wonder you guys keep complaining that it doesn't work when you need it." From what I understand later on some panel decided it was jamming because of using ball rather than stick powder, but I don't think the panel really knew what they were doing. Plus, I don't care what kind of powder you use, if you don't ever clean the AR design, it's going to start having problems after a while. Some guns do need to be cleaned regularly to function and wont work when filthy. Not to say the AR's are bad guns, but there are polymer pistols that will work in extremely filthy conditions. Things don't always have to be made of metal to be strong.
Today's polymers are extremely high tech. Do you complain that a kevlar vest is "plastic?" Would you prefer it to be woven steel? I sure wouldn't. Point being, people design things knowing the strength of a given material and use a safety factor to ensure that the parts will endure long periods of use. There's no excuse for any of today's pistols to be just falling apart or anything IMO.
It's not like a Glock or XD is made of bakelite. I love how people pick up a polymer gun and say it's "flimsy plastic" or something else along those lines simply because it feels lightweight. It's not like you can just bend it in half or something. But as far as functioning when filthy, that seems to be more due to the design of the gun rather than the materials. All of todays materials should be able to hold up to a decent number of rounds without significant wear, the design will often (But not always of course) be what dictates performance in harsh conditions. I see no reason why the 1911 wouldn't do well in harsh conditions (Although I'm no 1911 expert), but I doubt it really does any better than good polymer pistols.
When the XM16E1 reached
Vietnam with U.S. troops in 1966, reports of jamming and malfunctions in combat immediately began to surface. Although the M14 had a chrome-lined barrel and chamber to resist corrosion in combat conditions (a danger learned from WWII Pacific theatre combat experience), the M16/XM16E1 had no chrome-lined bore or chamber. Several documented accounts of troops killed by enemy fire with jammed rifles broken-down for cleaning eventually brought a Congressional investigation. Later investigations also cast doubt on the veracity of the original 1962 reports of the alleged stopping effectiveness of the 5.56 mm bullet, as well as criticism of inadequate penetration (in comparison to the
Soviet 7.62x39mm round) when firing at enemy personnel through light cover.
The XM16E1 was soon modified to the M16A1 specification. The revised rifle was finally given a chrome-lined bore and chamber to eliminate corrosion and stuck cartridges, and the rifle's bore and recoil mechanism was re-designed to accommodate Army-issued 5.56 mm ammunition.
The guys I knew who used them for real, to a man, loved them. Once the Cr lined bores came into play, although you couldn't leave them lying in the Klong, they were much better. The history of firearms is one of continuous improvement. Although I like stainless steel best, I have come to concede modern polymers have their place in weapon's mfg. Still, the old, time tested designs have something going for them, i.e., 1911, Hi-Power. Browning knew what he was doing.