« Syria, North Korea, Iran? What are US Intentions? | Main | Turkey, Syria and Israel? »

27 April 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

anna missed

There's a lot to admire about the M16 (& probably the later M4)- that also account for what folks dislike about it. Small, light, and toy like are when used in its designed context - combat - are flexible and formidable assets.

Was offered a 45 when I carried an M60, and turned it down because of the weight. But if you really want to talk about an inferior infantry weapon, then look no farther than the M60. A real piece of crap, that.


Back in the late 50's early 60's, I knew a Virgina state trooper who hunted squirrel with a standard issue .38 special, 5" barrel. He made his own loads, so I am not sure what type of projectile he was using for this.

He thought it sporting to attempt to "bark" the squirrel.

He was successful most often and I dined on many "barked" squirrels.

Link To The Technique.


From another old soldier: I love the M1911. Was always able to shoot it well, and—something I haven't seen here—it may have something to do with having bigger hands. I've heard that folks with smaller hands had more of a problem with it. I don't know about that, but I do know I liked it a lot.

I'm a guy who spent a career in the Army from the 60s to the 80s and I've never fired an M16. Bet I'm one of the few who can say that, but what it also means is I can't judge it. I have heard more negative than positive, most of it having to do with the weapon not taking as much abuse as, e.g., the M1. I did qualify expert with the M1, M14, M1 carbine and .38 snub nose (try that one).

In Vietnam, I carried variously a .45, .38, carbine, shotgun and Thompson. The Thompson—off the books of course—was hands-down the finest individual weapon I ever had. At least for my purposes. IOTM it could be very useful in Iraq. It is made for combat in cities. Why did they ever get rid of it? That was a rhetorical question of course.


Wesley Clark beat Colin Powell in an officer's target shooting competion at Ft. Carson - Powell had a new 9mm Beretta and Clark the 1911 Colt .45.

Cold War Zoomie

From personally viewing the number of deer hanging head down from our backyard trees per season, & squirrel skins drying out back, brother Pat is by any standards a superb shot w/a rifle.

With all due respect, the true measure of an outdoors man is the number of these flushed into a burlap sack during the wee hours of the morning...

Wily Little Critters

And the number of these mounted on the wall...

Watch Out for That Rack - It's Lethal!


Here in Texas Game Wardens will set up automated deer decoys within shooting range of highways to entrap hunters who are too gung ho to obey the law against shooting from highways. Usually when they cite a hunter the malefactor tends to become belligerent, but not in this case. For these trigger-happy dolts the worst punishment is to have their hunting buddies find out that they shot a fiberglass deer. Some people can be so unforgiving . . . and unforgetting.


it reminds me of a renowned prize of hunters in Southern Germany, the Wolpertinger.

Walter P. Lang


You may perhaps have heard of the wily Jackelope? pl

Neil Richardson

To DeLudendwarf:

My boy did his first tour as a PL with the 15MEU last year and thought a lot of the M4 controversy had more to do with personnel than a structural design flaw. The USMC now mandates that company grade/ field grade (up to 0-5s) and SNCOs carry M4s. He didn't think much of the M9s but he felt a lot of the pistols had worn out parts. Same with SAWs and when he could he tried to scrounge up an extra M240 team when he went out on patrols. As far as the "effective range" of M4 is concerned, the answer seems "it depends." The question probably depends a lot on the usually rancorous debates on 5.56 vs 7.62 as well as .45 vs 9mm. From his experience with the 15MEU since they were doing a lot of house-to-house search in al-Anbar so close quarter battle requirements would mean that the weapon's reliability and lesser recoil meant more than the lethality of a 556 round vs 762 IMHO. It seems most know how to double tap center mass properly at 250 to 300 range with enhanced optics. Whether that's enough to knock a man down probably depends on the size as well as whether he's wearing some sort of armor.

I admit I know far less about small unit tactical considerations than I should but for those with infantry background in RVN, did you have as much trouble with CAR-15s? Despite its reputation, I never had a problem with M16A1s during quals, but for those of us in armor we worried more about the M68 main gun and M2 .50 cals which were splendid weapons (and M3A1s that were just worn out). One final point I'd like make is that M4s are carbines. In WWII and in Korea a lot of people were complaining about the range and lethality of M1 and M2 carbines. In fact some have claimed that the rounds had trouble penetrating ChinCom infantry who were wearing quilted winter clothing. Granted in the age of counterinsurgency, the distinction between combat arms and support is blurred but I wonder how much of this M4 debate has to do with keeping weapons clean? I recall the 507th Maintenance Co. had jammed M2s which I found remarkable considering they knew they were going into a fight after crossing the LD.


As a medic, my only issue with the M1911 was the weight compared to the small capacity of the magazine. Seven rounds wasn't much time between magazine changes, and the rounds themselves are heavy as hell for a pistol round.

But I'd have traded the thing for an AK-47 in a heartbeat. Pistols are nice toys, but as the commentor above noted - if you need one in combat you're in BAD trouble.


I think that it depends on where you fight. The Brits on the Falklands happily traded their old Sterling SMG for captured FN FAL that were far more suitable for the vast open plains down there. I don't think you want to carry that long, bulky thing, however good a rifle it is, through urban combat (or in the jungle), that apparently requires less range, and that suggests a handier SMG-ish weapon with relatively controllable full automatic fire.

I fired the G3 on full auto, a fine rifle. I didn't hit much, but probably posed a hazard to low level flight over the base. It was fun, we called it the 'Mexican unloading'.


I first heard of the 'Jackelope' here on SST, and you can take credit for so contributing to the education of a foreign audience on american wildlife. I myself am a notorious ignoramus - it needed Bugs Bunny to introduce me to the Doo-Doo Bird, the Tasman Devil and the skunkus amourus francus.

I certainly will take care to add a Jackelope to my future trophy collection, once I have tracked down a Wolpertinger.

Cold War Zoomie


Hmmmm. Someone's had a few too many liters of Hacker-Pschorr before the hunt.


as the thread has already moved to the less serious thing in life, let's return it to the important things. Like beer.

I consider beer a distinct part of German food (with bread, sausages and ham) and, to my great delight, the exploration of my country in this respect never ceases to surprise and amaze me.

While Hacker Pschorr is a distinguished brewery (and in my view probably Munich's best), what the people in Munich order when they drink beer is usually "A' Helles!" (a beer light in colour [only], and Hacker Pschorr's [and Munich's] standard - Munich's bottled favourite being Augustiner Helles; highly recommended). Hacker Pschorr's other beers, especially their 'Starkbier', 'Maibock' and 'Bockbier' and also their 'Weissbier' are excellent as well, just (partly quite) different. The Oktoberfest beer is a special brew, only brewed for the Oktoberfest, and not available for the rest of the year. The strongest beer would be the beer brewed in Munich for the 'Starkbieranstich' on the Nockerlberg on Ash Wednesday. It is in strength like wine, and sweet (like Bavarian beers in general) and quite nutritive (think of drinking bread; nevertheless, it is no reason not to eat, in fact, not eating in this setting is an act of supreme folly, for practical reasons as much as for culinary ones). Considering the fact that it is served in 2 litre glasses (4-1/2 pints) - the 'Maß' - one doesn't need to wonder about the inevitable consequences of it's consumption.

Thinking of it, it could serve as an explanation for the sightings of Wolpertingers. But then, the phenomenon is neither seasonal, nor limited to Munich, indeed, it appears to be more at home in rural areas, which, thinking of it, probably have intriguing beers as well. If that isn't a route worth exploring ... who knows, maybe I'll find myself a Wolpertinger.


Having been trained with both the M1 Garand (Danish Army, 1992 - better believe it :-) ), the HK G3 and the CA Colt (Diemaco) C7 Flat Top, I'll take the M1 anytime for range shooting with the built in iron sights; if I can get a weapon that isn't completely worn out that is.

As far as practical infantry purposes goes, I'll take the C7 each and every time. The G3 is heavy and sports a pretty hefty recoil kick due to the weight of the lock being kicked back and forth way above the weapons' center of balance.

At 50 meters I've emptied a 20 shot clip at full auto with the C7 and managed to keep 15 shots on a 3/4 full silhouette target - that's just plain impossible with the G3. What's the use of stopping/penetration power, if you don't actually hit the target?

As far as jams go, in my experience the C7 isn't any worse than the G3 with it's recoil loading lock. You can leave the G3 pretty much unattended for some time (better clean the rollers in the lock though), but you better hold on to the god dammed thing when you squeeze the trigger or else ... the C7 will merrily reload if the gas channel and the chamber is clean, even if you don't hold on to it as if clinging to a life raft in the middle of the Atlantic.

As far as pistols go I really don't have an opinion, the Danish armed forces use the P M/49 Neuhausen, identical to the SIG P210 - and it's a wonderful weapon. Never been close to a M1911.


CP: The G3 in full auto is a lot of noise and no effect. And a sore cheek.

1st shot might be on target, 2nd shot a near miss - from there on you're absolutely right Re: Low level flight :-)

Cold War Zoomie

CP - My three days spent at Oktoberfest in 1988 are a blur. Chances are I enjoyed at least 75% of the beers you mention. For some reason Hacker-Pschoor has stuck in my mind.

I wonder if there is some natural law to the effect that the longer men talk the more likely the conversation will settle onto booze, women, firearms, sports, gambling, or grilled meats.

Carl Osgood

Years ago, in the Air Force, I tried to qualify on the S&W 38 prior to going overseas. The gun they gave me to shoot with had had so many rounds put through it that parts were literally falling off of it. As you can probably guess, i didn't qualify.


If you believe Dr. Martin Fackler's scientific studies (see equation below) on stopping power, then the .45ACP has about 67% more than the 9mm. The .45 round is considerably slower, but it is much bigger and heavier. Some people choose not to believe in Fackler's studies. Of course this doesn't matter much to the pistol shooter who is interested in accuracy, under the theory of "First hit wins". I've seen shooters who were superb with one or the other; and have seen shooters who sucked with either. It's not the machine as much as it is the operator.

Stopping Power (SP) = momentum (mV) times cross-sectional area (A), or SP=mVA

With rifles the operator is also just as important, but some technical differences emerge. The 5.56mm rifle family (M-4/M-16) have higher velocity and flatter trajectories at short ranges (out to approx. 300 yds), and also have considerably lower recoil than western .30cal (7.62NATO or .30-06). The 5.56 thus are also easier to shoot, so they can be more accurate for the vast majority of barely trained riflemen who come from urban/suburban backgrounds with little training. But .30cal family has a much greater range (out to 1km) and still has stopping power even at that range. But they require training, skill and experience for the longer ranges. And even at the shorter ranges they require more training than the M-4/M-16. The latter are smaller and much cheaper to manufacture too. Though it has less bang for the buck, for mass warfare and mass production the M-16 family is a better buy - less bang but less bucks. (The M-16/M-4 family needs about as much care as the M1/M1A family, so that's a wash.)

Bias: My sensei was a Korea/Lebanon Marine so most of my training and field work is with the .45 (Gov't and Commander), and those are what I prefer. The 1911 is much more comfortable than the Beretta M-9 which hammers my hand too much with its sharp recoil. (And don't get me started on Glock - combat Tupperware.) Most of my buddies prefer the .45, but they're mostly old guys too. I think preference depends on what one trains on when young.


I hate the balance of a typical .45. It's nice and light to carry, but the firing chamber seems off-balance to me. Whenever I fire a round, my whole arm flies upward with recoil.

By contrast, a nice heavy .44 Magnum revolver also has a high firing chamber, but oddly enough, a very heavy gun always shoots more accurately for me. The recoil drives straight up my arm and the whole pistol stays right on target.

Of course, no one would mistake me for a skilled shootist.



; )

jon Stephens

I loathe the equalization of a normal .45. It's decent and light to convey, however the terminating chamber appears to be reeling to me. At whatever point I fire a round, my entire arm flies upward with pull back.

On the other hand, a decent substantial .44 Magnum pistol additionally has a high discharging load, however strangely, an overwhelming weapon consistently shoots all the more precisely for me. The backlash drives straight up my arm and the entire gun remains spot on.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad