November 12, 2005
Carnival of Cordite #38
A Special Veteran's Day Edition is up, including a little post I tossed together. Check it out.
Hand-in-hand is a Report From A Marine In Iraq from Never Yet Melted that spends some time discussing weapons the Marines use.
Perhaps it isn't much of a shock, but the M-16, M-4, and SAW get ripped for constant jamming and having pathetic ballistics. Really? A prarie dog cartridge isn't up to snuff for killing bad guys?
Who knew?
Interestingly enough, the favored firearms in Iraq are modern versions of throwbacks... but I'll make you click over to find out which ones are being redeployed en masse.
I never have had very much respect for the US Army’s selection of weapons chambered for calibers .38 (9 mm) and .223 (5.56 mm).
I’ve carried revolvers chambered for the .38 Special, and semiautomatic pistols chambered for the .45 ACP and 9 mm Parabellum. Between the three, I would certainly prefer the .45. However, the government model 1911, manufactured by the lowest bidder, was not terribly accurate, so anything outside knife-fight range was pretty iffy. My personal choice would be a single action double stack magazine auto-load pistol chambered for the .400 Corbon. The 9 mm Baretta is only superior to the 1911 because you have basically two 9mm rounds to one of the old .45. But it will take both of those rounds to get the same impact, so it is very limited. If I were to deliberately employ a handgun in an offensive role, I would settle for nothing less than a .44 magnum revolver; much more reliable than jam susceptible autos. Lighter weight and more ammo does not always translate to more dead enemy, especially when they are hopped up on dope. It takes a hard hitting round to take them out of action.
I thought the Army had lost it when they traded the M14 for the M16. Yeah, I recall the .223 being one of the old wildcat cartridges that Remington industrialized as a “varmint” cartridge. It came about to compete with the .220 Swift and .22-250 varmint cartridges. The .223 just never had the range or the energy of the hotter Swift and .22-250. If it wasn’t that good against varmints, how could it be better against a man than a .30 caliber? I truly loved the old .30 US or .30-06. It had an effective range of 1,000 yards. The last military rifle chambered for the ol’ 06 was the M1 Grande. It was replaced by the M14 chambered for the 7.62 NATO or .308 Winchester. Not a bad trade off; lighter weight and slightly more ammo for the weight at a cost of 200 yards in range. The M14 was a magazined version of the M1; actually a very reliable weapon. Not as susceptible to jamming as the M16. I think we made a big mistake departing from the 7.62 and apparently our troops in the fight feel the same way.
When I flew Hueys in Vietnam, I wore a Colt Diamond Back .38 revolver (personal weapon – a no no) and hanging from the seat armor plate was a Winchester Model 1897 12 gauge riot gun with OO Buckshot shells and an M14. I’m the type guy that brings a .44 magnum to a knife fight. I simply hate being out gunned.
A Korean war vet I knew always swore by the BAR, in .30'06. We don't use hardwood stocks anymore, with all these reinforced polymers, so that should save some weight. I just can't see sending someone into combat with a rifle firing a caliber, the .223, that you wouldn't depend on to take down a white-tail with a single shot.
Posted by: Tom T at November 12, 2005 02:59 PMI'm also of those that falls in the "bigger is better" camp.
My personal sidearm is a lightly customized "Pistola Sistema "Colt" Modelo Argentino 1927, Calibre 11,25mm," a perfect copy of the Colt 1911A1 circa 1927. Its lightly modified with some Wilson Combat and Ed Brown parts, and I keep mags loaded with Glasers and Hydrashoks.
Mine is actually something of a tackdriver, or at least it wants to group tighter than I can shoot it.
Like Old Soldier and the Korean War vet Tom speaks of, I am a huge fan of the .30-06. Powerful and accurate witha wide range of loadings, it is one of the best rounds ever created, IMHO.
I had to sell my M1 Garand a few years ago, but as a new member of the GCA, (which I highly recommend), I am considering another one as my next long gun purchase.
I'd like to see the SCAR-Light chambered for 6.8 SPC at least be tested for general issue now that the XM-8 is canned, though the SCAR-Heavy versions are more to my liking.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at November 12, 2005 05:19 PMOf all of Wisconsin's hunting regulations, the only one goofier than allowing the .223 for deer is having a season and license for snipe hunting.
I have just read, off the grocery rack, however, of a development which makes the M-16 less flawed. A new manufacturer with a new patented gas actuation machanism less vulnerable to gumming up. Looks like all you swap is the upper reciever.
