FAIL: Why the M16 Rifle Was a Terrible Gun in Vietnam

[rangerrebew]

October 18, 2019

FAIL: Why the M16 Rifle Was a Terrible Gun in Vietnam

What happened?
by Kyle Mizokami

Key point: Although widely used, the M16 was not without its problems.
 

The M16 rifle is one of the most iconic weapons of the post-World War II era. American fighting men have carried the M16 in one form or another into combat for more than fifty years, from Vietnam to the present day. The story of the original M16, whose descendants the M16A4 and M4 carbine today fight in Syria and Iraq against the Islamic State, goes all the way back to the 1950s and the institutional soul-searching that came after another war—Korea.

In the aftermath of the Korean War, the U.S. Army took stock of its small arms arsenal. The Army’s M1 carbine, M1 Garand rifle, Browning Automatic Rifle squad automatic weapon and machine guns were all some variation on .30 caliber. The Army needed a new rifle and carbine, ideally a single weapon, but the data suggested that the lighter, slower .30 caliber round of the M1 carbine was less useful than the .30 and .30-06 rounds used in other small arms.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/fail-why-m16-rifle-was-terrible-gun-vietnam-89626

[sneakypete]

The encouraging feedback from these units, fighting enemies armed with the AK-47 assault rifle at close range, led the Army to a “one-time” purchase of 104,000 rifles, renamed the M16 and M16E1, in November 1963.

I may be wrong,but I seem to remember being issued and taken to the rifle range to qualify to carry a spanking new AR-15 when I reported into the Special Warfare Center at Bragg around Aug or Sept of 1964. It had the name "Armalite" on it,and no forward bolt assist like the later M-16's.

Maybe this was because it was a training command,and the army already had these in stock before Colt bought out Armalite and made modifications?