4 ms·
> They do retain the bolt forward assist design, but anecdotally I've heard from some people who have actually used them in combat, so perhaps it's not as usele
by UncleEntity 8y ago
> They do retain the bolt forward assist design, but anecdotally I've heard from some people who have actually used them in combat, so perhaps it's not as useless after all.
Unless you can manage to keep it super clean and perfectly lubricated (which kind of counteract each other) you'll be using the forward assist now and again.
There's also a difference between perfectly clean and having used it a while where carbon builds up making it more reliable -- a lot less likely to need it after the third time through a live-fire exercise than pulling it out of the weapons room and heading down to the range.
> It was originally safe/semi/full, but M16A2 replaced full auto with 3-round burst. It's generally considered a failed experiment, and M4A1 walked it back to full auto.
We'd get yelled at if they caught us using 3-round burst because it was a waste of bullets. Each squad had 2 SAWs and each platoon had 2 M60s so they wanted the riflemen to try for precision fire (as opposed to "spray and pray").
I've spent too much of my life with an M16 it seems...
- int_19h 8y agoI'm generally amazed at how the 3-round burst as implemented in M16 even made it to a combat firearm, it's just so broken all around. Like the part where it never resets, and cycles even in semi-auto, so when you switch to burst, you never know if you're going to get 3, 2 or 1 rounds? Or, conversely, if you cut it off before the cycle is over, then the next trigger pull will just continue that cycle, with the same result? From what I heard, this even affected semi-auto accuracy, because the trigger pull would vary a little bit in different stages of the cycle, making it harder to get that perfect break. Do you recall anything like that from your personal experience?