Vietnam era M16... Very cool firearm.

The 1:12" twist on those Norinco pencil barrels is probably the best feature. Works very very well for 55gr ammo and its practically the best dedicated 5.56mm twist you can find for 22LR conversions (which usually need a 1:16").
 
Very nice! Love the old school rifles. Whish Brownell were selling their clones here. I have all the parts now to build my rifle, just waiting for a few more parts to get here. Will post when i am done build.
 
Ditch the hand guards !
I've built lot's of early clones . still have most of them
Triangle hand guards are not that hard to find , the triangle end cap is a little harder to find .
Plus you need to re & re the FSB which can be a pain but can be done .
Just remember they are tapered pins

N74TeUMl.jpg

abpRVjcl.jpg

Styti8vl.jpg
 
Great, now I have to order one.

What strikes me most about this configuration is how light they are.
Compared to my modern ARs, they feel almost half the weight.
 
umdiddly said:
Did the first M16s have forward assist? or was that added because of vietnam?
Click to expand...

Technically, actual "M16" rifles do not ever have the forward assist, regardless of when they were made. The M16 was the official rifle of the Air Force, and they insisted on having no forward assist. They only changed this attitude with the adoption of the M16A2 in the mid 80's.

Conversely the Army insisted their rifles must have the forward assist. The rifles made under contract for them were designated XM16E1 or M16A1. And yes, they had the forward assist from day one, before the first US combat troops ever officially entered Vietnam.

Of course the US had all kinds of unofficial involvement in Vietnam before they officially sent in combat troops, and there was lots of use of commercial AR-15 rifles by special forces, military advisors, and the CIA, and these did not have the forward assist.

The Marines and Navy didn't much care one way or the other about the forward assist issue, and when they needed rifles they bought whatever was coming off the line that day, which of course was usually Army rifles, but not always.
 
BattleRife said:
Technically, actual "M16" rifles do not ever have the forward assist, regardless of when they were made. The M16 was the official rifle of the Air Force, and they insisted on having no forward assist. They only changed this attitude with the adoption of the M16A2 in the mid 80's.

Conversely the Army insisted their rifles must have the forward assist. The rifles made under contract for them were designated XM16E1 or M16A1. And yes, they had the forward assist from day one, before the first US combat troops ever officially entered Vietnam.

Of course the US had all kinds of unofficial involvement in Vietnam before they officially sent in combat troops, and there was lots of use of commercial AR-15 rifles by special forces, military advisors, and the CIA, and these did not have the forward assist.

The Marines and Navy didn't much care one way or the other about the forward assist issue, and when they needed rifles they bought whatever was coming off the line that day, which of course was usually Army rifles, but not always.
Click to expand...

Wrong
The Air Force was the first to adopt the AR platform but it was the AR15 NOT the M16 .
The M16 was a modification of the AR15 that the US Army adopted .
Neither the AR15 or M16 had a forward assist .
The forward assist came about as a result of the Army changing to ball powder in the 5.56 cartage .
Ball powder burned dirtier than the powder the cartage was originally loaded with & what Stoner designed the rifle around .
Not to mention the Army never issued cleaning kits with the M16 in Vietnam
 
#1bcshooter said:
Wrong
Click to expand...

I stand by my post. Yours is rife with obvious errors.

When a US service type classifies a weapon it gets an 'M' number. The Air Force could not adopt a rifle under the code "AR15", it had to get an "M" number, and that number was M16.

The US Army never, ever adopted the M16. They bought 601, 602, XM16E1 and M16A1 rifles, but never the M16. Specifically because they wanted a forward assist on all issue rifles, based on experience with the Garand.

The US Army took delivery of 85,000 XM16E1 rifles, with forward assist, in 1964. The US 173rd Airborne entered combat in Vietnam in March 1965 armed with brand new XM16E1s. They all had forward assists. This was months before the first batch of ball powder loaded ammunition was delivered, and almost 2 years before the negative jamming publicity of the winter of 1966.

All of this is easily researched.
 
BattleRife said:
I stand by my post. Yours is rife with obvious errors.

When a US service type classifies a weapon it gets an 'M' number. The Air Force could not adopt a rifle under the code "AR15", it had to get an "M" number, and that number was M16.

The US Army never, ever adopted the M16. They bought 601, 602, XM16E1 and M16A1 rifles, but never the M16. Specifically because they wanted a forward assist on all issue rifles, based on experience with the Garand.

The US Army took delivery of 85,000 XM16E1 rifles, with forward assist, in 1964. The US 173rd Airborne entered combat in Vietnam in March 1965 armed with brand new XM16E1s. They all had forward assists. This was months before the first batch of ball powder loaded ammunition was delivered, and almost 2 years before the negative jamming publicity of the winter of 1966.

All of this is easily researched.
Click to expand...

Time to redo your research .
Mine came from Eugene Morrison Stoner & several documenters & books on history of US weapons
 
My god the amount pseudo-facts bouncing around....


Just watch this video before posting any statement about the M16:

 
I have found stuff to mount a scope on my DA556.

The loose stuff box is a magical box, i found a Burris 3X9X40 BDC, i found a mount for a carry handle that i cut, i found rings… Et voila

DSC00547_zpsc2k6fam2.jpg


DSC00548_zpsjwdnvt86.jpg
 
Pre-ordered this book from Amazon months ago. Only two more weeks to go:

Misfire: The Tragic Failure of the M16 in Vietnam Hardcover – Jul 26 2019
by Bob Orkand (Author), Lyman Duryea (Author)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom