madhatter308
CGN Regular
- Location
- Haliburton, ON
i give myself a 10/10
M14 sighting in Iraq
- Thread starter svt-40
- Start date
I'll bet he can pick off innocent Iraqi baby's at 800yds. with that bad-boy. The high-helmet is just to fool the "hodgies" into shooting above his actual cranium. In-so-far as the legality of it all; who cares; it's awesome! Every time I fill up my SUV I think of the sweet, sweet pain of all the living things that shall soon fuel my needless trip to the wilderness, where I will toss 6-pack rings, and lit cigarettes at small woodland creatures. Ahh, It's a wonderful life, and the pain and suffering really doesn't bother me. Now, if we can just melt a little more snow at the North Pole we'll be able to get rid of most of the Liberal Cities in the U.S.
P.S. That M-14 is so old, it probably killed "gooks" back in 'Nam first. Let's hear it for U.S. Army conservation of resources, eh?
P.S. That M-14 is so old, it probably killed "gooks" back in 'Nam first. Let's hear it for U.S. Army conservation of resources, eh?
- Location
- Pile of Bones, SK
His helmet IS to small. The damn headset should be able to fit easily under a properly sized helmet.
No offense, but when did any military issue proper sized gear? You make do. You Semper Fi. So the guy's cover doesn't fit; he's still out there; doing his job; and fulfilling his obligation; much respect to him. It's not like a K-Pot is going to stop a rifle round anyway.
Is "gooks" a racial epithet? A lot of American Vietnam Vets that later fought in Rhodesia used the term there as well; to the extent that the Rhodies themselves picked up on it. The "terrs" in Rhodesia were most defiantly not Asian. Also, notice that I used quotations to display that I was repeating the term, not selecting it as a representation of my own belief system. So wouldn't "gook" or even "Hajji's" (sorry for the mis-spelling there) be more reasonably looked upon as a mildly derogatory colloquial OPFOR designation rather than a slur? "Injuns", "Messicans", "Japs", "Frogs", "Limeys", "Huns", "Ivan", "Canuks", "Yankees", "Reb" etc. also falling under the same heading, and/or examples of? You know, there was a time when being called a "Yankee" in the southern U.S. was an invitation to a fist fight, but it didn't make it a racial epithet. Then again, with all the killing that goes on in warfare, I'm sure being mildly insulted is the least of the enemies worries. Thanks for the rating btw. It was a definitely done as a goof to point out the futility of worrying about the "legality" of war (as if war actually had rules; it does not. It's the worst that human-kind does to itself [But you're never going to stop it. It's part of the human experience], and while some would like to think that it has rules; they are just fooling themselves. In fact, trying to apply rules to it just prolongs it; thereby making it more ""inhumane"" in my opinion. War should be brutal, quick and total in order to lessen it's aggregate horror; or at least I think so at any rate.) Ultimatly, everything we have, from roads to idealism to reason to freedom was payed for in blood. It's the normal state of history. I'm glad you liked it.
P.S. That M-14 is a piece of junk. I'm ashamed that our fighting men are screaming out for .308 caliber rifles and our sorry government can't seem to place an order with Springfield or even DSA to give them what they need. I know for a fact that our guys are taking FAL's and M1 Garands, and other 30-06 and .308 rifles off of insurgents and using them. I have it from a Command Sargent Major currently based in [OPSEC] that his guys are crying havoc for anything that shoots 7.62x51 or better. They are fighting in Cinder Block/hardened sand, and Steel Rebar constructed towns, and even the .77grn .223's don't penetrate those structures like the 7.62x39 does. The X51 does it even better. Hats off to that dude in the photo, and I just wish he was humping a new M-14 instead of having to make due with that piece of crapola. It makes me ashamed that my tax dollars are being spent to force a man into that situation; he should have the best. God knows we've payed enough money to get it to them. The corruption that is going on in the US is the real crime. It will never happen, but wouldn't it be nice if that was a fat-cat CEO in a suit forced to stand out there in the burning heat with that ancient rifle. A boy can dream...
P.P.S. Then again, he is practicing "Eco-Killing" there. Think of all the poor trees that he, and others like him are saving by using recycled death instead of creating new ones. I'm just glad to know that some Americans in theater are looking after their "Carbon Footprint" as they go about their daily chores of slaughtering "innocent" insurgents, and "genteel" Jihadis. At least the woodland creatures are better for it. Slim Pickens would approve; "Gawd Bless Americahh!" (and also you Maple Leafs that stand with us; thank you)
P.S. That M-14 is a piece of junk. I'm ashamed that our fighting men are screaming out for .308 caliber rifles and our sorry government can't seem to place an order with Springfield or even DSA to give them what they need. I know for a fact that our guys are taking FAL's and M1 Garands, and other 30-06 and .308 rifles off of insurgents and using them. I have it from a Command Sargent Major currently based in [OPSEC] that his guys are crying havoc for anything that shoots 7.62x51 or better. They are fighting in Cinder Block/hardened sand, and Steel Rebar constructed towns, and even the .77grn .223's don't penetrate those structures like the 7.62x39 does. The X51 does it even better. Hats off to that dude in the photo, and I just wish he was humping a new M-14 instead of having to make due with that piece of crapola. It makes me ashamed that my tax dollars are being spent to force a man into that situation; he should have the best. God knows we've payed enough money to get it to them. The corruption that is going on in the US is the real crime. It will never happen, but wouldn't it be nice if that was a fat-cat CEO in a suit forced to stand out there in the burning heat with that ancient rifle. A boy can dream...
P.P.S. Then again, he is practicing "Eco-Killing" there. Think of all the poor trees that he, and others like him are saving by using recycled death instead of creating new ones. I'm just glad to know that some Americans in theater are looking after their "Carbon Footprint" as they go about their daily chores of slaughtering "innocent" insurgents, and "genteel" Jihadis. At least the woodland creatures are better for it. Slim Pickens would approve; "Gawd Bless Americahh!" (and also you Maple Leafs that stand with us; thank you)
Last edited:
Okay, can we get back to the M14 discussion here ?
Let's leave the MICH helmet sizing and comms to the Gear forums, shall we?
Peace be to journey,
Barney
I take the blame for creating this monster.
As Barney said......let's get back to M14s, M14 pics and etc.
Look on the positive side; at least it's a bit different than usual. Variety is the spice of life, eh? At any rate, sometimes the most interesting paths are the crooked ones. Perhaps we'll pull out some interesting Operational stories involving the M-14 this way. It's s web board after all; one can always bypass the thread. I added a paragraph about my feelings on the original photo above; just FYI.
P.S. Do any of you Canadian Guys that are still serving use the FAL in theater? A-stan is especially needful of such rifles. Hilltop to Hilltop, etc.
P.S. Do any of you Canadian Guys that are still serving use the FAL in theater? A-stan is especially needful of such rifles. Hilltop to Hilltop, etc.
Last edited:
- Location
- WMU247 near Edmonton
No FN's / FAL's
The previous liebral government had those all chopped up, except those that were going to musumes and such (around 100-200 IIRC)
The previous liebral government had those all chopped up, except those that were going to musumes and such (around 100-200 IIRC)
http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/English/2_display.asp?product=96
Parker-Hale Model 82 in 7.62mm according to the Canadian Armed Forces website. (C3A1 official designation)
Last edited:
Thanks for the link. So there is not a semi-automatic Marksman option for Canadian Forces in 7.62x51? I'm sure that's a fine Sniper Rifle, but it seems like there is a serious hole left in the Canadian arsenal if that is all that is available. Man, I thought our guys had it rough having only ancient M-14's to fall back on. That's rough. I would have thought they would have let you guys keep at least a small quantity of FAL's in reserve. It's a shame they took them away, and yet did not provide an alternative to fill the gap. But there is bureaucracy for ya. No matter what country you live in; you can always count on that.
Last edited:
Asked a friend I went through ISCC with. (I'm not a sniper, never been one. He has been for many years in PPCLI)...
Macmillan Tac-50(LR)
Timberwolf .338 LM (MR)
AR10T (SR)
Seems to me that the governing mentality towards purchasing modern equipment has dramatically improved.
I never asked him about the C3. Is it still in the system?
Linked photo...
Macmillan Tac-50(LR)
Timberwolf .338 LM (MR)
AR10T (SR)
Seems to me that the governing mentality towards purchasing modern equipment has dramatically improved.
I never asked him about the C3. Is it still in the system?
Linked photo...
Last edited:
I'd like to formally apologize to you fine Canadians for the Stoner Rifle Platform. If an AR-10 is all they'll give you then so be it, but you guys once had FAL's, and because of big-business interests from my country; now you do not. Yeah, an AR-10 will shoot .308, but what it replaced in your arsenal was better (FN-FAL). The US has been trying to polish that turd of a design for 40 years. It's all bright and shiny now; still a turd. LOL.
You'd have to explain that.
I carried a FN in the late 80s and it was ass - even the arsenal rebuilds.
The mounting solution for PVS2/NVS scope was ass. A dodgy piece of s**t refit over the half-length breach block cover. Accuracy was as M1A is now; Lukewarm. An average Infantry shooter could qualify to level 3 in the "shoot to live" program with it (la qualification system later replaced with the PWT at SARP to the C7/C8/C9 platforms -- f**k knows what its called now.) When I look back on it and recall it fondly, it is not for its rock solid performance but for the "African Savannah Warrior Wannabe" nostalgia that went with it. Hand to god, when you shouldered the FN and patrolled with it, you could almost picture yourself there -- even if you were only in deepest darkest Wainwright, AB.
Never fired an AR10T. But by all accounts though, its an accurate, reliable winner. I think KevinB/BigRed/and a few other higher speed guys here here might have played with the SR25, and could probably differentiate the two. I could eat popcorn while they did that.
The FAL, being now prohibited here, looks cool and chicks dig it because it is as rare as the Northern Canadian Wolpertinger.
*edit. My wife just summed it up nicely.
Last edited:
Ok, below is my basic reasoning for the statement.
____________________________________________________________
The Stoner Design is inherently unbalanced and tends to want to wobble side-to-side, especially if optics are mounted on top, and the gas system is legendary for failure in harsh conditions, or even on a beautiful spring day.
The FN-FAL is probably the most well balanced .308 Battle Rifle ever made, and with a sand cut carrier tends to operate reasonably well under sandy/harsh conditions.
ALSO
The instantly adjustable Gas Regulator system, and heavy recoil spring in the buttstock of the FAL makes for the most comfortable to shooting .308 Rifle that I have ever shot.
I own and shoot regularly a DS Arms DSA-58 (FAL), a Springfield Armory M1A (M-14), and until recently owned a PTR 91 (HK G-3). I find the FAL to be the most accurate of the lot (especially with a medium contour barrel) taking into consideration ergonomics, balance, recoil, comfortably, and quality. Yes, it is heavy, but that's what 18 year old bodies were built for. Many a young man has learned to deal with that aspect of it successfully (The Rhodesians used it to a high level of success under brutal conditions). At least it's not a B.A.R. Think of how much smaller men from WWI were, and they humped the B.A.R. pretty ok. A FAL is nothing compared to a B.A.R. both in weight, and recoil.
I personally have never fired an AR-10, but I have owned 2 Rock River Arms AR-15's in my lifetime, and while they were nice varmint guns, I found them to be cantankerous, anemic, unbalanced, and difficult in comparison with almost any other rifle--in any caliber--that I have owned. I got rid of them, unloaded my .223 ammo stock, and have never looked back. Now days I mostly shoot either .308 or 7.62x39 and I have no complaints what-so-ever.
The bottom line, in my book, is that the Stoner Platform is a sporting rifle, not a weapon of war. Many people share this assessment, and many of them have been forced to carry the Stoner into battle. I trust their judgment, and my personal experiences don't lie to me either. The Stoner was, is, and always shall be a Mcnamara inspired political weapon, and if you ask me that guy has more blood on his hands than Stalin. Now the Portuguese used an early version of the AR-10 during their Bush Wars, but information on how it fared has eluded me so far. I'd be interested to hear how it did though.
In regards to the current "War on Terror" I know that many US troops beg, borrow, and steal any .308 caliber rifle that they can get their hands on, including captured insurgent rifles, and including many 50 year old FAL's. I have it on good authority from a friend of mine that a few of his guys are humping FALs over there. Think of what that means. That means that many US troops would prefer a beat up, ragged out, 50 year old FAL or M-14 over a brand new M4. I'm sure Canadian needs do not deviate much from US ones in theater. Yes they are old designs, and yes, they are heavier than a Stoner Platform, but they work; they do what they say they will do, and when your life is on the line, no amount of "technically speaking" anything is more valuable than an old rifle that will save your life when the chips are down. The FAL did that; ###y beast that she was.
Regards
P.S. I'm in Texas so the Canadian laws don't apply to me. Just FYI.
____________________________________________________________
The Stoner Design is inherently unbalanced and tends to want to wobble side-to-side, especially if optics are mounted on top, and the gas system is legendary for failure in harsh conditions, or even on a beautiful spring day.
The FN-FAL is probably the most well balanced .308 Battle Rifle ever made, and with a sand cut carrier tends to operate reasonably well under sandy/harsh conditions.
ALSO
The instantly adjustable Gas Regulator system, and heavy recoil spring in the buttstock of the FAL makes for the most comfortable to shooting .308 Rifle that I have ever shot.
I own and shoot regularly a DS Arms DSA-58 (FAL), a Springfield Armory M1A (M-14), and until recently owned a PTR 91 (HK G-3). I find the FAL to be the most accurate of the lot (especially with a medium contour barrel) taking into consideration ergonomics, balance, recoil, comfortably, and quality. Yes, it is heavy, but that's what 18 year old bodies were built for. Many a young man has learned to deal with that aspect of it successfully (The Rhodesians used it to a high level of success under brutal conditions). At least it's not a B.A.R. Think of how much smaller men from WWI were, and they humped the B.A.R. pretty ok. A FAL is nothing compared to a B.A.R. both in weight, and recoil.
I personally have never fired an AR-10, but I have owned 2 Rock River Arms AR-15's in my lifetime, and while they were nice varmint guns, I found them to be cantankerous, anemic, unbalanced, and difficult in comparison with almost any other rifle--in any caliber--that I have owned. I got rid of them, unloaded my .223 ammo stock, and have never looked back. Now days I mostly shoot either .308 or 7.62x39 and I have no complaints what-so-ever.
The bottom line, in my book, is that the Stoner Platform is a sporting rifle, not a weapon of war. Many people share this assessment, and many of them have been forced to carry the Stoner into battle. I trust their judgment, and my personal experiences don't lie to me either. The Stoner was, is, and always shall be a Mcnamara inspired political weapon, and if you ask me that guy has more blood on his hands than Stalin. Now the Portuguese used an early version of the AR-10 during their Bush Wars, but information on how it fared has eluded me so far. I'd be interested to hear how it did though.
In regards to the current "War on Terror" I know that many US troops beg, borrow, and steal any .308 caliber rifle that they can get their hands on, including captured insurgent rifles, and including many 50 year old FAL's. I have it on good authority from a friend of mine that a few of his guys are humping FALs over there. Think of what that means. That means that many US troops would prefer a beat up, ragged out, 50 year old FAL or M-14 over a brand new M4. I'm sure Canadian needs do not deviate much from US ones in theater. Yes they are old designs, and yes, they are heavier than a Stoner Platform, but they work; they do what they say they will do, and when your life is on the line, no amount of "technically speaking" anything is more valuable than an old rifle that will save your life when the chips are down. The FAL did that; ###y beast that she was.
Regards
P.S. I'm in Texas so the Canadian laws don't apply to me. Just FYI.
Last edited:
BTDT.
55 jumps before I finished. I have seen more FAL (C1A1) barrels bend on regular landings with equipment (both PELS and SARPELS) than I care to remember. I have never seen a C7 exhibit similar failure; crumpling like a cheap tent.
The C2A1 light automatic weapon was worse. You either would up with "big daddy" that would feed the family cat without stoppage, or (far) more likely a bolt action rifle that made you glad there were no wars in that era.
As to the reliability, like I say. Mixed bag. As a component weapon system in an overall inventory, the C7 has been performing admirably in combat. The biggest failures, to no one's surprise, have been the magazines. Always have been, and always likely will be the weak point. And if you don't care for your known weak point... shame! Weapon, whiskey, woman. In that order.
Nuff said.
Last edited:
Corpus,
I can say from first hand experience in four combat theatre of operations that the Ar15/M16/C7 series is doing just fine in combat. What happened in 1967 is not what is happening now. It is simply not an issue with todays rifle except for those who simply don't like the rifle. The rifle is killing bad guys and doing it well. It is like the 223 vs 308 or M14 vs M4 argument, you can go round and round on it. Do a search here and you will see combat veterans who have no issues with the system. It is doing the business. I have carried one for almost 4 years of my life overseas and had zero concerns. In fact I would have no concerns carrying one again overseas.
The AR10 is doing extremely well as a precision semi auto in combat. Again from first hand experience. So no need for apologies...it is doing the business in combat.
Cheers
Jeff
I can say from first hand experience in four combat theatre of operations that the Ar15/M16/C7 series is doing just fine in combat. What happened in 1967 is not what is happening now. It is simply not an issue with todays rifle except for those who simply don't like the rifle. The rifle is killing bad guys and doing it well. It is like the 223 vs 308 or M14 vs M4 argument, you can go round and round on it. Do a search here and you will see combat veterans who have no issues with the system. It is doing the business. I have carried one for almost 4 years of my life overseas and had zero concerns. In fact I would have no concerns carrying one again overseas.
The AR10 is doing extremely well as a precision semi auto in combat. Again from first hand experience. So no need for apologies...it is doing the business in combat.
Cheers
Jeff
