3 ms·

I don't think recoil was the primary driver, actually. Weight was. This becomes readily apparent when you shoot a Kalashnikov side by side with AR15 (a civilian

by m0zg 8y ago

I don't think recoil was the primary driver, actually. Weight was. This becomes readily apparent when you shoot a Kalashnikov side by side with AR15 (a civilian semi-auto variant of select fire M16). A loaded mag for a Kalashnikov is over twice the weight of a loaded M16 mag. And you do need to carry a lot of ammo if you don't want to run out, especially for the AK which is much less accurate. Whoever designed the M16 realized that killing the enemy wasn't really necessary. Heavily wounded enemy is as good as dead.

azernik 8y ago
A Kalashnikov is already an assault rifle - it uses a smaller and lower-recoil bullet than the full-powered rifle cartridges that came before it. An American design that only copied the assault rifle concept would have probably had a similar-weight round to an AK. The M16's even lighter round was the result of a separate American innovation, the Small Caliber High Velocity bullet, which trades bullet size for propellant size. Even smaller bullet than the AK, but a flatter trajectory (hence the improved accuracy, helped along by the M16's interesting operating mechanism), and even lighter weight than first-generation assault rifles.
int_19h 8y ago
These do not contradict each other. They noted that for the same weight in ammo, it's better to hit the target with a burst three lighter bullets than with a single heavier one. But you also need lower recoil for that burst to be accurate, and M16 is very much designed around that (straight stock etc). The idea that smaller caliber was deliberately less effective on the basis that wounding is just as good as killing is a much later invention, and it only came about back when they switched from M193 to M855, which traded lethality for better armor penetration, and even then as retroactive justification. There's no evidence that this was ever a part of the design spec for any of the M16/M4 series, though, or any official military doctrine. Neither did Soviets consider it when designing AK74. In any case, when 5.56 ammo fragments - as the original mil-spec ammo was designed to, and recently redesigned to do again with M855A1 - it produces wounds far worse than mil-spec 7.62 NATO that preceded it: http://www.rkba.org/research/fackler/figure3.gif http://www.rkba.org/research/fackler/figure3.gif http://www.rkba.org/research/fackler/figure2.gif http://www.rkba.org/research/fackler/figure2.gif

by m0zg 8y ago

azernik 8y ago

A Kalashnikov is already an assault rifle - it uses a smaller and lower-recoil bullet than the full-powered rifle cartridges that came before it. An American design that only copied the assault rifle concept would have probably had a similar-weight round to an AK. The M16's even lighter round was the result of a separate American innovation, the Small Caliber High Velocity bullet, which trades bullet size for propellant size. Even smaller bullet than the AK, but a flatter trajectory (hence the improved accuracy, helped along by the M16's interesting operating mechanism), and even lighter weight than first-generation assault rifles.

int_19h 8y ago

These do not contradict each other. They noted that for the same weight in ammo, it's better to hit the target with a burst three lighter bullets than with a single heavier one. But you also need lower recoil for that burst to be accurate, and M16 is very much designed around that (straight stock etc). The idea that smaller caliber was deliberately less effective on the basis that wounding is just as good as killing is a much later invention, and it only came about back when they switched from M193 to M855, which traded lethality for better armor penetration, and even then as retroactive justification. There's no evidence that this was ever a part of the design spec for any of the M16/M4 series, though, or any official military doctrine. Neither did Soviets consider it when designing AK74. In any case, when 5.56 ammo fragments - as the original mil-spec ammo was designed to, and recently redesigned to do again with M855A1 - it produces wounds far worse than mil-spec 7.62 NATO that preceded it: http://www.rkba.org/research/fackler/figure3.gif http://www.rkba.org/research/fackler/figure3.gif http://www.rkba.org/research/fackler/figure2.gif http://www.rkba.org/research/fackler/figure2.gif