M1 Or M16? Which Would You Trust?

[canes7]

In the question of which rifle you'd trust your life to.... In your eyes what is more reliable? The M16 platform or the Garand?

[Prince Humperdink]

I would trust mine with my life,and my families lives,however,if I were in Antarctica I may choose an M1917? I sometimes think grabbing my M14 clone may make more sense though as far as ammo capacity,and availability???

[Punch The Clown]

Canes posted this reply in another thread so I copied it here and made it a poll. This should be interesting.

[jak]

Since I don't own a M16, I would have to go with a garand. Besides, most of my ammo is 30-06.
I do agree with Ryan about the M14.

[Punch The Clown]

I'm leaning toward the M16, but to be totally fair we would have to compare Viet Nam era rifles to the M1's.

[canes7]

It's my belief that the M1 is a more reliable rifle than the M16. I almost said I'd trust the M16 platform more as ammo would be an easy pickup should the need arise. I soon realized that there is probably as much or more .30-006 laying around, just not "Garand specific" ammo. But if SHTF, who cares? Non-Garand ammo wont kill a Garand.

[Old Guard]

It's my belief that the M1 is a more reliable rifle than the M16. I almost said I'd trust the M16 platform more as ammo would be an easy pickup should the need arise. I soon realized that there is probably as much or more .30-006 laying around, just not "Garand specific" ammo. But if SHTF, who cares? Non-Garand ammo wont kill a Garand.

Ooopps, where would you find this, hardware stores, walmart, or LGS... But NOT KMART..?? Nearly all weapons are .223 0r 7.62x51...We gave up the .30 brownings years ago...back in 1970 for our guard unit..Isreal used them much longer....I would think,, Pick-up ammo would be .223.....IMHO....

[ordmm]

ASSUMING any rifle you choose would be reliable in the first place as why would you have a rifle your counting on and not knowing it's reliable no matter what kind it is......I go with the AR/M16. 30 round mags, better ergonomics. A 16 inch AR swings and handles really nice. The M1 is clunky and limited to 8 rounds and going to be hard to load if you lose the use of one hand/arm. AR is the all around winner in my opinion. And yeah...there's probably something to consider about "pickup ammo" I guess.

[musketjon]

Has to be the M1 as I don't /won't own any black rifles.
Jon

[Old Guard]

ASSUMING any rifle you choose would be reliable in the first place as why would you have a rifle your counting on and not knowing it's reliable no matter what kind it is......I go with the AR/M16. 30 round mags, better ergonomics. A 16 inch AR swings and handles really nice. The M1 is clunky and limited to 8 rounds and going to be hard to load if you lose the use of one hand/arm. AR is the all around winner in my opinion. And yeah...there's probably something to consider about "pickup ammo" I guess.

Correct about the loading and using the rifle with one arm..When I took my pistol permit class, our instructor added a little tidbit..what if you lost the use of one hand in a gunfight??He then showed us how to squat or sitdown and load a mag into the pistol..That thought had never entered my mind, losing a hand's use to reload?? About, Not have a reliable rifle?? maybe I'm a little paranoid, but a lot can happen to some of the best designs out in the world...Fouling seems to be easy to stop a weapon, whether it is powder, Mud, Blood or Just slop, and sand...How many times have I tapped a weapon magazine to be sure the bullets all feed well??

[Old Guard]

Has to be the M1 as I don't /won't own any black rifles.
Jon
Let us hope we can avoid using them for anything but target practice and getting a little wild game food..Do you own the universal rifle as in>22lr caliber??

[Orlando]

IMO one is no more reliable than the other but I would go with the M16 becuase of mag capacity and can carry more ammo

[Punch The Clown]

ASSUMING any rifle you choose would be reliable in the first place as why would you have a rifle your counting on and not knowing it's reliable no matter what kind it is......I go with the AR/M16. 30 round mags, better ergonomics. A 16 inch AR swings and handles really nice. The M1 is clunky and limited to 8 rounds and going to be hard to load if you lose the use of one hand/arm. AR is the all around winner in my opinion. And yeah...there's probably something to consider about "pickup ammo" I guess.

What about a Mini G or a BM59?

[Orlando]

The BM59 or M14 would be a real close second but with me the scales still tip towards the M16 as you can carry more .223 than 308 or 30.06 and still have a larger mag capacity

[Prince Humperdink]

why is there no option for "both",or "other"????? This survey is otherfirearmaphobic ;)

[MrTwistedFock]

I'd trust my life to the as issued M-16/AR-15 platform. Rifle version, not a carbine version.

But only with narrow, specific criteria. First, not in the national match AR-15 version, as the national match version is too heavy to lug around off a rifle range. The M-16A2 version with a fast twist heavy barrel would be my choice. Still lightweight. Mobility is important and a lightweight rifle is important.

Second would be the type of ammo I'd want to trust my life to. None of the traditional military M-16 ammo I'd want to rely upon. Id want to have a small stockpile of the non lead, copper/zinc Barnes Bullets 62 grain TSX in 5.56 or .223. Or Hornady GMX all copper zinc bullets, say 70 grain. These are .22 centerfire bullets that have terminal ballistics far superior to standard NATO M-16 ammo, similar to perhaps 30.30 lever rifle bullets. But with the recoil of a .22 centerfire rifle. These are the barrier buster .22 centerfire bullets that still kill someone if you shoot them thru car glass or a car door or thru drywall in walls. Good penetration and maximum expansion, break bones and the Barnes Bullets 62 grain TSX spreads out and makes a nasty, very violent killing injury.

I'd keep all the gadgets and crap off my as issued AR-15. Maybe for night use, add a radioactive, white tritium front sight. Keep it lightweight for mobility. Mobility in itself is a weapon. If youre shattered tired and fatigued from humping heavy crap in rough terrain and heat or cold weather, the perfect rifle is much less useful.

Keep it lightweight, move fast, use very lethal, high penetration/expansion civilian hunting ammo in thirty round magazines that can drop fast.

On the other hand, an as issued M1 Garand there is nothing wrong with. Service grade and above they are generally reliable if well greased. They are more durable, but higher maintenance IMO. With one of those Garand gear ported gas plugs, you can fall back on common 30.06 hunting ammo if you have to.

[mxlmax]

As much as I love all things Garand......my first choice for a "WTSHTF" rifle would be a M16 carbine type OR my M16A1 clone....light and simple. Second, a M14/BM 59. A pure survival rifle would be something like a 22 LR Henry AR7 or "Little Badger" type of set up. Here is hoping we never need it.

[jbkf1003]

Being in NY I am limited on my options.

But in the free world, an AR-15 / M16 would probably be a better choice than an M1, due to ergonomics, weight, accuracy, and mag capacity.

But the problem with civilian ARs are there are a lot of $700 rifles out there filled with commercial parts, built by God knows who. I would not 'trust' those the same as I would an all USGI M1 Garand, (assuming it has good in spec parts) where the parts went through multiple layers of QC.

You you have a real selectfire M16/A2 that would be different.

Being in NY, if I owned any guns my list of goto rifles would be:

Full Size Rifles:
1. A fulton armory M14 clone, with a 19.25" barrel, pinned/welded fake flash hider, built with in-spec USGI parts, with bandoleers of 10 round mags.
2. A M1 Garand built with mostly NOS parts, lots of enblocs
Only after these would I list an average commercial Ar-15, if I were 'allowed' to have one. But it would have to be a 20" for the added velocity of a round that relies on velocity.

Carbines:
1. Shuffs Mag-Fed Mini-G, with bandoleers of 10 round mags.
2. Tie M1 Carbine / Chinese Military Surplus SKS

Pistols:
They make pistols other than a 1911? In calibers other than 45acp?

Justin

[MrTwistedFock]

If you are willing to free your mind some from the thirty caliber rules mentality, the as issued AR-15/M-16 platform rules. IF and I say IF, you are willing to use non military surplus ammo. Specifically this all copper/zinc Barnes Bullets 62 grain TSX stuff. Hornady makes a version called GMX.

The terminal ballistics for Barnes Bullets TSX 5.56/.223 and Hornady GMX rounds is comparable to a 150 grain M1 Garand bullet, at much less weight and less recoil.

The only thing you sacrifice is range. You will never have the range you have in a thirty caliber, full rifle caliber.

The other downside is these kinds of bullets are expensive.

[jbkf1003]

If you are willing to free your mind some from the thirty caliber rules mentality, the as issued AR-15/M-16 platform rules. .


Blasphemy, pure blasphemy. ;)

Thanks for the info.. I may check out the TSX Stuff.

Justin

[Bhamm]

I fired my first M-16 in 79. I used to qualify with it out to 600 yards (USMC not Army) and it was very accurate. We would go to ranges that were 1000 yards and the instructors would say they were used for M-14s and M1's.

The M16/AR platform has huge advantages if you have faith in the 5.56 round. Some don't and I understand why. My only AR is chambered in .50 caliber so I enjoy benefits of the basic platform and a thumper round.

Don't ask me to pick only one, because if stuff ever hits the fan, I'm not leaving my home where all my shit is. Last Stand.

[Eli]

I would not carry a 5.56 - the cartridge is barely adequate select-fire and inadequate semi-automatic unless you have careful, aimed shots. My preference is 7.62, either a BM59 (if I'm feeling nostalgic) or a G3 clone (AK reliability, very good accuracy). The PTR-91 'GI' fits the bill nicely, economic initial purchase price, cheap magazines, inexpensive spares - although it's build like a tank!

Eli

[MrTwistedFock]

I would not want to rely upon any version of the AR-15/M4carbine/M-16 platform rifles using any of the issue rounds used by the U.S. military. I would not even want to rely upon the 77 grain Sierra MK262 round. Its a match rifle round, its not designed for terminal ballistics or to go thru barriers, sandbags, 4 by 4s, automobile glass or car doors, etc.

I dont believe the U.S. military is even a remotely credible source of info for individual firearms info, anymore. And I believe its been that way since the sixties sometime. Even the CMP Garand handouts you get at a Garand clinic mention that, individual marksmanship and weapons knowledge ceased to be a U.S. Army priority since the early to mid sixties.

The U.S.M.C. is the only branch that did not take that approach during and after Vietnam, going all the way up to current times. Still, I would not want to rely upon U.S.M.C. knowledge about individual weapons past say, the M-14 era. I would rely upon the U.S.M.C. marksmanship knowledge and skill sets still, but I would not want to follow the U.S.M.C. weapons they've chosen for individual Marines since the mid to late sixties, unless the Marine Corps ALSO changed out the entire M-16 ammunition supply they issue, switching over to something similar or identical to a Barnes Bullet 62 grain TSX. For everybody.

Modern military priority goes to expensive, big ticket, high tech weapons systems since the Vietnam era. Missile systems, drones, high tech aircraft, high tech tanks, high tech artillery rounds, anything that flies or moves on tracks or wheels or is fired out of at least a machine gun.

Not rifles.

Civilians and law enforcement have the option of using any ammo they want in their firearms and there is ammo around out there way superior to what the rank and file Army infantry or Marine Corps infantry guys get. Stuff like, the Barnes Bullets 62 grain TSX all copper/zinc bullets. Barnes Bullets even make them in 70 grain TSX. Its expensive ammo, but its whats issued to a lot of LEO to use in their issue AR-15s or M4 carbines these days and its issued for a reason...the stuff is wicked deadly. And you still get that ergonomic AR-15 package and minimal AR-15 recoil.

Guys are using Barnes Bullets 62 grain TSX to take whitetail deer and feral hogs with their AR-15s. Thats medium game, not small game or varmints. If a bullet can reliably take a big ole feral hog, I think its safe to say it can take out a human pumped on some stimulant drug or on narcotics, as well.

[TommyD11730]

The G3/HK91 would be my go to weapon. I love my M1s but each one has at one time had a FTF/misfire. My HK91 ove a lot of years has never ever done that. It's also the rifle I shoot most accurately though my little AR15 makes double taps a joke with almost no recoil. Guess at the end of the day it's what you feel most comfortable with.

[Old Guard]

The G3/HK91 would be my go to weapon. I love my M1s but each one has at one time had a FTF/misfire. My HK91 ove a lot of years has never ever done that. It's also the rifle I shoot most accurately though my little AR15 makes double taps a joke with almost no recoil. Guess at the end of the day it's what you feel most comfortable with.

I used to feel the same ways about the hk91, i had not gotten the proper assy or lube on the bolt and it was firing with out the bolt being properly locked..(blackened the entire cases)..Finally found it binding, fixed it and decided not to take it apart again..All in all a very tough weapon, recoil is a little stouter, and then it is 7.62x51 so you might have ammo supply problems in a pinch.. but there should be more of it than 3006 around? Carrying over 10 mags might be a chore...