M-14 or M-16?

Question

I prefer the M-14 over the M-16, any thoughts?

Answer 1

Each weapon has advantages and disadvantages. Many of them have been discussed here.

Advantage to the M14 -- longer effective range, greater stopping power.

Advantage to the M16 -- lighter weight, smaller rounds mean more ammo, higher cyclic rate of fire.

One of the most important factors in switching from the M14 to the M16 was the type of fighting that was/is involved, and at what range. Studies have shown that it is very rare for a soldier on the battlefield to notice and target an enemy at the far end of the effective range of the M14, and that more often the fight occurred much closer in. In this case, the M16 is better because it has a higher cyclic rate of fire and is just as effective at the ranges in question. And since the ammo is so much smaller and lighter, a soldier can hump far more ammo, thus being effective in combat for far longer.

Answer 2

By the time I joined the military, the M-16 had been in service for almost 30 years, although, (I have no experience to back this up, so my opinion only), I would prefer the M-14. It fired the powerful .308, or 7.62 NATO round, and, when it was first produced, it was created from the 20 year old design of the M1 garand sevice rifle. It is similar to a car in it's tenth year of production, by now, all of the kinks had been worked out of it, and made the M14 an outstanding weapon.

There are drawbacks, however. It is heavy, and yes, the ammunition is heavier also. Because of it's walnut stock, it is more expensive than the M16. But, because of the .308 and longer barrel, it has higher range an accuracy than an M16 would have in the hands of the same shooter.

In the end, cost efficiency won out, and while the M16 is an excellent weapon, I prefer the feel of a heavier rifle such as the M14.

Please keep in mind that I have no combat experience to back this up, but I do hunt a great deal, and also prefer a heavier rifle there as well.

Answer 3

I have Expert badge for the M-1. M-14, M-16 I prefer the
M-14,but a M-79 is even nicer for me

Answer 4

Evidently you've never had to carry one of those heavy sumbitches on a 20k road march, with full field pack and basic load. You'll start liking the M-16 a whole lot more after about 5-10k's...

Just try getting out of a HMMWV in a hurry with one of them. it's a hoot!

The M-14 is a great battle rifle, and it is much more terminally effective than the -16, but it's too expensive to replace parts for, harder to work on, and requires a fully equipped machine shop to repair. The M-16 is more modular, more versatile and much more ergonomic. It's also a more inherently accurate platform

Answer 5

I prefer a 30mm cannon mounted to the front of an A-10...
But as far as accomplishing the mission I prefer the M-16 it creates more wounded, which is the point in combat. Wound 1 and take 3 out of the battle (2 have to carry him and take care of him). I prefer the M-14 to hunt and target shoot. But, I just like all guns and like a tool they have their place and their purpose...you don't use a hammer to tighten a bolt, do ya?

Answer 6

I've never fired the M-16. We only used M-14's when I was in the Navy. When my ship sent me to a class to brush up on disassembly, cleaning, firing and stuff, I scored 95 out of 110 with the M-14. I liked it. Also liked shooting the Mossberg 12 Gauge, Beretta 9mm, and the M-60.

Answer 7

Well, the M-14 does have more knockdown power, but I prefer the M-16 over it. The M-16 holds more ammunition per clip, is more stable during automatic fire, and it is more suitable for attaching additional accessories such as the M-203 grenade launcher, infrared scopes, sniper scopes, tripods, etc.

Answer 8

m-16

Answer 9

The M-16. If they would get rid of the 3-round burst.

Answer 10

m14 is better at range, and stopping power. The drawback is that you can't carry as many magazines. This can be quite a disadvantage on the battlefield.