m4,m16, or Ak47

[rangerzrock]

what assault rifle out of these three does every1 think is the best...for me it would either be the ak47 or the m4 probably the ak47. but the ak is good for recovery and power the m16 is kinda junk when it comes to durability and power, the m4 is ok, the ak47 has best recovery and power and is more rugged than the others. so i pick ak47

[ozzi-solja]

actually, i wouldn't use any of them. ak's are great, yay whoopie doo, but they're structurally ****e... cheap russian imports from 50 years ago. and the m16's and m4's have plastic parts made by ****ing toy companies.

[rangerzrock]

then whut's u'r assault rifle of choice? the ak ain't THAT bad it's bulky though and loud too that's what stinks bout it. :cool: :cool: :cool:

[ozzi-solja]

sorry dude, didnt realise i hadn't picked one. out of those three definately the later model M16's, like the A2 or something. otherwise, out of any rifle, i would have to side with the German G36 or whatever its called these days

[rangerzrock]

kk got it.....:cool:

[darkwinter]

what assault rifle out of these three does every1 think is the best...for me it would either be the ak47 or the m4 probably the ak47. but the ak is good for recovery and power the m16 is kinda junk when it comes to durability and power, the m4 is ok, the ak47 has best recovery and power and is more rugged than the others. so i pick ak47


Do you not even take caliber to be a factor? Your choices are the 3 most spoke of rifles in the world.

Plus best recovery... If you did research upon these things more thourghly(yes its spelt wrong) you would find that some of the references say that the accuracy after the 1st shot is questionable.

The 6.8 cartridge used in a rifle made by the Barrett company would be my choice... I can't think of the name of the rifle in question...

But the Army was looking into utilizing the 6.8mm cartridge.

[rangerzrock]

ok get this straight... i know how to spell but whenever typing then the kool thing to do is spell stuff weirdly example: laughing out laud (lol) rolling on floor laughing (rofl) and so and so. and i know the cal.'s and mag's and mm.'s of these FIREARMS not weapons a weapon can mean anything from knives to baseball bats. ya i know the stuff i was just asking don't make such a biggie bout it :cool:

[ozzi-solja]

on top of that, if you do make a spelling mistake, the NORMAL thing to do is delete and re-spell the word, not highlight and inform everybody that you have spelt it incorrectly, thats a blonde thing.

back to guns anyhow... doesnt matter what the hell it is, if it shoots bullets it hurts

[rangerzrock]

well i just spell wrong it's a habbit of mine but ya guns r guns lol

[sealteam6]

on top of that, if you do make a spelling mistake, the NORMAL thing to do is delete and re-spell the word, not highlight and inform everybody that you have spelt it incorrectly, thats a blonde thing.

back to guns anyhow... doesnt matter what the hell it is, if it shoots bullets it hurts



Amen to that. You cant really ask this question, its too vague, because they are all used for something different (M4 for covert ops, AK47 for rebels who cant make their own, M16 for use agains the rebels) In terms of best overall, the G36 is prob the best because it can be converted to be used for many different things. But at least the M16 has a grenade launcher

[rangerzrock]

uhmmm one thing ozzi, a gun doesn't always hurt, it KILLS, and i thought i saw some m4's with grenade launchers being used by the special forces, oh well if not then i'll have to look closer to the gun to find out what it is (because online they always have the wrong names so u can't find out what's an m4 or not cause they'll call m4's m16's so ya) :cool:

[royal marine]

that ozzie is starting an argument....anyway.....the ak-47 is an old cheapy rubbish insurgent weapon made by kalishnikov and very unreliable and unaccurate......it is not good at all....and the m16 is an immense assault rifle whick kicks arse ....even tho im british i admit...and the extra stuff u can add on to it are really cool like m203 grenade launcher and infrred scope and many other cool comparibles...while the m4 is a smaller version which is NOT used by special forces and has an unsifficient muzzle velocity so therefore there is no competition.....m16 by far (and 1 correction...the m16 is the standard issue for spec ops

[rangerzrock]

the ways to dignify weather it's an m4 or not is to look at the chamber, stock, muzzle, forestock. :cool:

[ozzi-solja]

what arguement have i started now?? i cant see any. the fact that a gun hurts? didnt think of that as much of an arguement.

irrelevant anyway

in response to ak's being crappy and cheap... damn right their cheap, but they aint that crappy. compared to the new version M16's and anything H&K they are inreliable, but they are just the right thing for the people who use them. Easy to reload, highly mobile and small enough to hide in a briefcase and/or robe is just what the average Mohammed needs in order to commit an act of terrorism.

most American weapons are far too bulky. but what they lack in mobility they sure as hell make up for in accuracy and reliability. besides, the aim of the coalition forces is not to look incon****uous, but to look too scary to **** with.

[royal marine]

er......get ur facts right the AK-47 is dated and too old and yes rangerzrock thats obvious what u said cos upgrades u always do that......AK-47 has been upgraded like 3 times andthe bullet is not enought to keep u down.....just look aon any weapons website...the ak is crap...i would know at my marine cadet unit we HAVE an AK-47

[ozzi-solja]

oooh aaaahh... scary!!! I'm freakin out man!!! you have a real life AK-47... WOW man!!! thats soooo cool!!!

i couldnt give a ****, duh, i said they were ****e weapons, but they're cheap and easy to get a hold of, so any Mohammed can get one and use it.

do you really think that just because Mr Husseini has a sixty year old gun its not gonna hurt anyone?? dont make me laugh!

make all the upgrades you want on your guns, the terrorists/insurgents/Al-Queda are quite happy with their AK's.

[royal marine]

u are 1 saaaaaaaad prick hu dont know his thumb from from his dick...........if u came to england wth that attitude u would have the **** bullied out of u......get a life(ooooooh ahhhhhhhh LOL WEIRD)

[rangerzrock]

uhhh royal i actually agree with ozzi on this point, and i think ozzi is in the ozzi forces so, i wouldn't be critisizing the military......ya :cool:

[sealteam6]

Ozzie is right because if you think about it sophistication often has nothin to do with it, think about this a pistol is much less sophisticated than a sniper rifle, but at close range they are equally lethal, what some of you are saying is that we shouldnt let the insurgents use aks, why not? the only problem is that the AK 47 is still the most powerful assault rifle around, they make big holes in ya :eek:

[ozzi-solja]

thanks guys, ranger, i'm not in the forces yet... im an officer cadet, just not getting paid enough yet...

royal, i apoligise for offending your British sense of pride, i realise that you guys have a lot of it, and it isnt something to be messed with, BUT you are showing signs of being jsut like js, such as extended words that take up nearly a whole line, and entire messages filled with complaints and insults.

by the way, if i had the **** bullied out of me in britain because of my attitude, well that would say mroe about Britain than it does about me. congrats on digging a whole and burying yourself.

but PLEASE can we get back to the topic at hand... TRUCE perhaps royal??

i've used an ak (as well as the M16, AUSTEYR, and a heap of 'farmers rifles')also, i thought they were pretty stong weapon, but the ultimately flimsy design was not made to handle the ammunition t used... far too much kickback to be used effectively.

American and EXPECIALLY British rifles (of which i cant remember the name of, i think LordBarker told me at one stage) are build for the ammo. they are heavier weapons, and therefore and take the force of the ammunition being fired.

but like i've said, it doesnt really matter. you can be in possesion of an entire arsenal of weaponary, and still be popped off by a crazy man with a 9 mill

[royal marine]

yer truce aussie its just that when some people who say that the brits are crap and all that it gets my blood boiling thatsall.......and yer it does not matter a whole lot about what weapon u have cos they all kill its just the 1s which have advantages over otherl...for example a 9 millimetre handgun agains a M60 support weapon...COME ON...(i bet ranger does not have clue what we are talking about its too advance for him LOL)

[ozzi-solja]

im glad we have reached an agreement. response from ranger??:D

[royal marine]

no he wont respond hes just glancingwith his jaw reaching the ground cos of how too much advanced this is lol

[ozzi-solja]

watch it, i might piss myself laughing again lol

[royal marine]

:eek: sorry...look he aint even answering

[sealteam6]

Heheh rangers arent known for their smarts, lol, and :eek: go piss somewhere else man

[royal marine]

errrr shut up mate...yanks are so weird arent they ozzie

[royal marine]

if everyones wondering why im answering so much lately its cos im so bored

[sealteam6]

errrr shut up mate...yanks are so weird arent they ozzie


We learned from the best (eg. the Brits) :cool:

[royal marine]

have u been to britain or aussie...obviusly NOT if u would of come here u would have everyone glancing at you....loads of americans are at our school and they have no friends cos they are religous (typical for america) weird dorks

[Harrington]

i would say M16A2 :D

[MX8]

i would say M16A2 :D

yeah, the .50 caliber does punch a serious hole in their brain, if you aim it on their head correctly, lol.

Well, AK-47 in my experince is very inaccurate, but they pack a powerful punch- they're slow but powerful. If teh terrorist mastered using AK-47, I wouldn't underestimate them because they know how to use it properly. Once they know how to use it correctly, we're pretty much screwed.

However, I believe that MX8 will replace M4 and M16 because they're exteremly lightweight and extremely accurate, and not to mention that MX8 is very deadly. It will be replaced in the near future. I am sure the terrorist will get ahold of it if they kill a marine and grab teh gun. However, they won't have the capability to produce one, because they don't have the factory to produce one.

Let me back up regarding to AK-47. AK-47 doesn't really have a good quailty because it wears out so fast! If you constantly fire it, you will happen to see the wood thingy that clamps on the rifle will fall off because of the heat produced from the barrel, thus it will fall off. Indeed, they're very easy to reload and almost without any probelms. That's why insurgents right now are becoming more increasily sophisciated because they're able to adapt their own tatics. The only thing is that we need to re-invest in newer technology and to counter insurgents adaptness, and be able to expliot their weakness. Insurgents refuse to go face-to-face with marines because 90% of the time they run away. Insurgents rather hide and ambush to expliot their weakness and making them vernurble (spelling, but don't dik about it) to it. I know this is off the topic, but I feel that this's important for me to discuss it. There are two ways to expliot insurgents from my observation- insurgents mustn't know marine's presence and conduct a surprise attack. One thing that really pissed me off is that the media is telling the insurgent what's marine plan ahead of time. That's why insurgents are able to retrieve that kind of information and able to counter the marines just in time. If we suppress the media, then we will have 80% of the chance to confuse them and conduct missions to capture them without their knowledge that the marines are there. Second option, but requires extensive training and courage- place a special operative unit to expliot the insurgents and to reveal their plan. Unlike the concept of splintercell, it's merely impossible to conduct a lone wolf mission, UNLESS someone is from the same race, then the chances are higher, but the insurgents can be so suspecious at times- no wonder why we are seeing some beheading vidoes of CIA agents. As long the special forces are keeping it discreet without getting spotted, the chances that Al-Zaraqwi might get caught. Marine almost got him, but they were being too noisy and they were alerted and escaped from marine's wrath.

Anonther thing that CIA pisses me off is that they drive a black chevy explorer (I think that is correct) out of nowhere in Iraq and all of the sudden, BOOM! or ambushes. CIA and marines need to stop and think "well we need to use a car that all Iraq has right now, so it would be difficult for insurgents to track and capture the CIA". That would be a wise move, but that never happened. I would presume CIA thinks if they're black, then they're badder. Well, I hate to see their head decapitated, lesson learn pal; see ya in heaven. Well, I did saw a video of a CIA agent who's an Iraqis and they beheaded him. I tried to find every single reasons why they captured him. Finally I realized the sole reason, he was dirving a black chevy and because of that, it made so obvious to the insurgents, I guess CIA learned it lesson as well.


I am sorry if I went off topic, but I am just expressing my thoughts.

Oh and also, I think MP5 is the top choice for urban warfare. They're so accurate, fast, and deadly. Espcially if you add a suppressor and sub sonic ammuniation. It makes the accuracy shoots up in the air and even more deadly, but that's reserved for Team Six I guess (Navy SEALS).

:p

[sealteam6]

YOU BET IT IS!!


Just kidding but we are the ones who use it most

[sealteam6]

have u been to britain or aussie...obviusly NOT if u would of come here u would have everyone glancing at you....loads of americans are at our school and they have no friends cos they are religous (typical for america) weird dorks


yes i have been and thats really stupid to say that all yanks are religious its hardly true, the ones at yer school are just missionaries, man that was the woorst stereo type ive ever heard

[royal marine]

yer thats right they were missionaries :rolleyes: ...and yes the HK MP5 is good for urban warfare but its not good for all around warfare...mp5 is use by spec ops only like SAS and SBS.....andwhats so good about m16a2....all it is an m203 grenade launcher on the bottom which is extremely inaccurate...even though we put it on our sa80s now :rolleyes: ....

[royal marine]

are u in the navy seals

[ozzi-solja]

humorous misquote - 'there's nothing wrong with me, everybody else is just ****ed up'

yes, americans are rather strange, but so are brits in a lot of cases. hell, you probably think the same of Aussies. i would expect nothing less.

I've never actually used a MP5, so my experience with modern spec ops rifles is limited, if not non-existant.

but you mention the M16A2 with the M203. hell, i've never heard of an 'accurate' grenade launcher, as far as i know you really dont have to aim with the bastards, just make sure they go far enough away so as they dont blow the user away.

[rangerzrock]

do you guys mean the mp5a4? mp55d5? mp5sk(compact)? :cool:

[sealteam6]

are u in the navy seals


yeah well kind of, i am currently in the basic training phase, before i officially become one, i have just started...and damn its hard, but the mp5 is a sweet gun, it is amasingly fast and dead accurate

[Harrington]

i want to be in the Navy SEALs when i get out of high school!! could you give me some tips.. and how fit should i be?
i still have 2 more years.. :o

[MX8]

i want to be in the Navy SEALs when i get out of high school!! could you give me some tips.. and how fit should i be?
i still have 2 more years.. :o


Yeah, trim your fat and exercise daily. You won't regret it..

[Harrington]

haha.. i have no fat actually. i was wondering more along the lines of how much miles i should be able to run and maybe how much lbs i should be able to lift. i can run 6 miles right now, but i dont think that is good enough

[sealteam6]

thats great man and it is an impressive accomplishment...you have to be really fit to join, for example there are swimming requirements such as swimming a mile aginst the current in 10 min flat. you also have to have a good lung capacity, and parachuting is a good skill to have too. you also have to be able to benchpress at least somehinglike 250 lbs maybe only 200
you can check out the full requirements on their website

[royal marine]

yer the royal marines selection course is EXACTLY like navy seals except seals do more swimming......and rangerzrock...mp5 classes all mp5s ...yer theres been loads of updates on it mate

[sealteam6]

well maybe thats why they call them SEALs :cool:

[royal marine]

but it is a bit of a humiliation having our marines as god as your seals.....shouldnt US marines rise up to be as good...they do have the same name....they were made to be the same....seals were made to be as good as SBS but no chance..lol

[Blighty]

Im slightly offended, what do we all think of the SA80 A2?

[royal marine]

i think that we should go back to the SLR which we used against the argentinians in the falklands

[torspo[fin]]

Im slightly offended, what do we all think of the SA80 A2?

what i have heared.. its jolly good. As long as you are sitting in a tea table with it..
and you don't manage to drop it or something similar.. :rolleyes:

[royal marine]

if u think its good then u have no military brains at all....the bullets are tiny and it has an unsuficient muzzle velocity

[torspo[fin]]

if u think its good then u have no military brains at all....the bullets are tiny and it has an unsuficient muzzle velocity


sarcasm sarcasm...

nope.. i think its not too good.. accurate it might be tough.. but thats about it.

-= http://world.guns.ru/assault/as22-e.htm =-


In conclusion, I cant say I know what went wrong when the SA-80 was made, the design in theory would appear to be of near kalashnikov simplicity, maybe it is all the fault of the famous British trade unions? For a modern assault rifle, the SA-80 is uncomfortable to carry (especially concerning the position of the ****ing handle and its desire to slip into bruising your arm on long tabs), the rifle is too heavy for its size (it even has a weight in the forward hand guard to balance the weapon), and its reliability and general durability are sub-standard to an alarming degree. I have had the mis-pleasure of seeing people breaking off warn top covers and seeing trigger mechanism housing pins falling out near at will. On the other side of things the rifle is marvellously accurate on the range, and so long as it is kept near 100% clean and well oiled it will perform well. However everybody other than the MoD seem to realise that keeping a rifle perfectly clean when in a muddy trench for extended periods of time when it is pissing it down with rain drops the size of hamsters heads isn't exactly practical, the rifle 556 is hardly of kalashnikov quality. Back to the other hand, the various sights for the rifle are all durable and of high quality (I have never heard of a SUSAT getting broken), maybe those chaps at Enfield were making a target rifle after all? In my opinion, although the SA-80 is not as bad as some make it out to be, it is in Britains best interest to replace it with a real rifle asap, maybe keeping the SUSAT's and bayonets. The reason it has gone down so poorly with those who have to use it is probably due to comparing it with the previous issue SLR, whereas the SLR was a lion, the SA-80 is a ****roach (an annoying bugger which you cant get rid of). I would hate to think how our casualties might have looked if we had adopted the SA-80 before the Falklands conflict of 82.

[StealthCloakedWarrior]

Has anyone else noticed (on news on TV) that if a guy has an AK he will nearly always be pointing it up in the air and shouting, yet the guys with the M4's etc. always hold them in a manner that suggests they have been trained in firearms safety. Spooky huh?

[kardiff]

The British army are the most respected army in the world, this could be down to the fact the British army is trained at a much higher level than most other armies around the world, and that includes the USA.

We have soldiers that are so highly trained we don’t even need to give them any weapons, they will still manage to do the job. Also just because Hollywood has made the US Navy Seals to be legends doesn’t mean they actually are... The British SBS would clean the floor with them. No doubt.

However royal marine you should know one of the biggest traits of the British army is not acting like other armies around the world. I.e. you give people respect and keep your head down. You’re never going to make it far sorry unless you change your attitude.

However keeping with the current topic M4 is the best gun and the M4M is my fav. (in computer games, lol)

Kardiff

[royal marine]

yeah sorry but ive stopped that now...and i totall agree with you kardiff.....the SAS could complete a mission with their bare fists...its the way they are trained....if you have seen the rock (a film) sean connery plays an SAS guy and hes 1 brutal nutter.....and the film was made by americans

[sealteam6]

The British army are the most respected army in the world, this could be down to the fact the British army is trained at a much higher level than most other armies around the world, and that includes the USA.

We have soldiers that are so highly trained we don’t even need to give them any weapons, they will still manage to do the job. Also just because Hollywood has made the US Navy Seals to be legends doesn’t mean they actually are... The British SBS would clean the floor with them. No doubt.

However royal marine you should know one of the biggest traits of the British army is not acting like other armies around the world. I.e. you give people respect and keep your head down. You’re never going to make it far sorry unless you change your attitude.

However keeping with the current topic M4 is the best gun and the M4M is my fav. (in computer games, lol)

Kardiff


That actually is not true, the seals may be over hyped, but they have without a doubt the most brutal training program in the world (well maybe with the exception of the ghurkas) and besides they are specialized for navy work, such as the retaking of a boat

[royal marine]

HA now that is funny......first of all gurkhas training programme is just as hard as our royal green jackets because they are infantry....even thoughour infantry is just as hard as the US marines and again the SAS have the hardest training programme in the whole world......now youve gotta be stupid to argue with that....if you want im gonna tell you the whole training programme from a book........not to mention they train with live ammunition and have to remember a 20 long number after vigorous exercised for days long......they have to run away from search dogs and SAS corporals al the way to SCOTLAND and are not aloud to break in interrogation and must get away any possible way in virtual interrogation...if you get caught you get beaten the crap out of you.....ill say much more if you want .......just read a book....seroiusly this is not bias dribble any american will accept the fact that SAS do have the hardest training in the world

[best_ranger]

hah...haha....hahahaha....royal i state again of your bioust attitude, the seals, rangers, and the green berets are without a doubt have some of hte most greuleling training in the world, you can read your books taht where written by either a brit or some other european, either way it would only be 1 author, now compare that 1 author to the rest of the world, all an author can do is put his thoughts in writing and make a great book, but go to the troops themselves and onto the training field and you will see jsut how hard training is, believe me i would know i've seen the training live. as for my fav weapon, for a sidearm i'd choose the m4, for my fav pistol: the 92fs, fav missile: the tomahawk anti-sub missile., best tank: m1 abrams, fav assault helo: king cobra assault helo, fav fighter: fa18(it's a legend that will not be forgotten), fav bomber: b-52 stratofortress (one hell of a classic),

[royal marine]

kurush help me out here or maybe lord barker cos really these guys need to know what its like in the SAS....really you must be dumb to argue with me here...REAL DUMB and my SAS book called ghosts cos they operate like ghosts was written by john eckheart who lives in arizona and writes on special forces...he even says that they have hardest programme


maybe british and proud you could help me prove my point cos this is getting stupid argueing with SAS blokes
P.Smy other SAS book was written by someone who retired from SAS last year

[best_ranger]

kurush help me out here or maybe lord barker cos really these guys need to know what its like in the SAS....really you must be dumb to argue with me here...REAL DUMB and my SAS book called ghosts cos they operate like ghosts was written by john eckheart who lives in arizona and writes on special forces...he even says that they have hardest programme


maybe british and proud you could help me prove my point cos this is getting stupid argueing with SAS blokes
P.Smy other SAS book was written by someone who retired from SAS last year


what is this??? you are saying hta SAS acts like ghosts but the u.s specs don't????? we do too! now isn't that amazing!! ya sure SAS is hard but did you ever think that maybe there are OTHER units that are hard too??, like chee! sure we don't know what it's like there but then think again, you don't know what it's like in the u.s specs now do you?????

think before you say something,

[sealteam6]

Actually I am not being biased one way or another, the seals are the toughest, just go on their website and see for yourself just looking at the training schedule would make an SAS say "wow"

[js_mac]

Yes, you are being biased. You know nothing about what the SAS training actually involves. Hence, you're biased... you just think the seals look "awesome" so tell yourself they're the best.
The french foreign legion has the toughest training of any unit, and that is fact - those who argue are wrong.
The best, however, is the british SAS/SBS. If you really think the seals are better, you should take into account that the seals aren't even the best in the US military - one definitely superior regiment is Gray fox (aka task force 121) who were the ones that captured saddam hussein.
There is the fact that the SAS/SBS train the seals. That is fact - i've read and seen that on tv documentaries on many occaisions.
A good comparison is a reality TV show that was out here in the UK a year or 2 ago, where an ex-SAS soldier was let loose in a number of different of environments, and had to get to an RV that was a few days away for a certain time. There were 4 soldiers trying to stop him: 1 ex-seal, 1 seal and 2 royal marines (royal marines are about the same level as navy seals - they often did joint-ops in iraqi freedom). Needless to say, the SAS soldier whooped them... completely out-witted them.

[royal marine]

nice 1 js mac
also it definitely is true that SBS train ur selas cos evry june each year the navy seals taskteam 4 go to lympstone and are trained by royal marines and SBS ive even got a film on enlistment for royal marines where it shows royal marines shouting at the seals and leading them in a training exercise.....I SWEAR I AM DEFINITELY NOT LYING.....also it is the american-british alliance agreement that the equal regiment should fight as brothers in arms.....and guess what the royal marines and navy seals were alongside eachother when they landed in southern iraq.....and i know that from 1 series weve just had called 'fighting the war' and it shows brits in engagements in iraq
so dont say 'oh the SAS would say wow if they looked on seals website cos the SAS have the best respect and reputation because of how well they fight

[sealteam6]

Fine you know what this is getting really annoying because both units are really good, I was simply stating my opinion based on what i heard, so if you would kindly direct me to a website explaining what the SAS and SBS do for training, thank you