this is for any of you gunfreaks outhere

the political pressures to get the m-16 aside..
it didn't go through the rigorous testing that systems go through nowadays..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jkp1187

Looks really nice. I just hope that all of the "neat" features don't make it a bear to handle in the field. Weren't there a lot of problems with the M-16 when it was first put into service?

---

The original M16 was the proverbial p.o.s....

The M16A2 is actually pretty reliable, if you keep it clean. Still, I'd rather put my life in the graces of a G36 or AUG (except for that friggin' mag release; could it get less ergonomic?) My reaction is much the same with the Beretta M9; I'd rather trust myself to a Kimber .45, an H&K USP in the same, or a Walther P99 in .40.

"P.O.S."???

P.O.S = Piece Of [censored]

AUG.. ugh..
sidearms.. people have various preferences on what they like..
mines mission specific..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfe

AUG.. ugh..

---

I find it shoots great, and the bullpup makes it much easier to use in house-clearing than an M16. But that damned mag release is awful.

we've found the small weapon makes you expose more of yourself during cqb... no thanks..
the mag release is a issue this weapon has had for some time..
the scar series is far better for cgb than the steyr..
heck i'd radther have the 249short -para to the rest- in cq than the aug,or the m16-