The M-16A1 was a very good weapon. I carried one in the US Army infantry during the mid eighties. It is very reliable as long as you keep that ejection port cover snapped shut when you’re not shooting, and a bit of oil on the bolt carrier. Do those two things and it will not let you down; mine never jammed once, although I have to admit that I never used mine in combat, only peacetime range qualification and field exercises. My only complaint about the M-16A1 is that I am left handed, and it would spit hot brass in my face. That sucked. The built-in brass deflector starting with the -A2 model was an essential improvement; the utility of the rest of the mods/upgrades of subsequent versions can be debated but the -A1 was definitely not very friendly to us left-handed troops.
Regarding all of the Vietnam Veterans messaging you and telling you that the M16 was trash, or otherwise, you might want to be aware that you're being trolled by, probably video game players and the like.
My Dad, and all 4 uncles, carried the M16 in Vietnam. They all loved the rifle. They never said anything bad about the M16. Especially how effective the cartridge was. My Dad had a good story of a Vietcong getting shot in the foot. Devastating. I carried the exact same M16s for the 1st 10 years I served, until we got M16A2s, then M4A1s. 🤠
The problem was not the rifle. It was the ammo. The rifle was developed with IMR powder. The military brass changed the powder to a round granular. It had a different burn rate and it wasn't clean burning which caused fouling. Colt, H&R nor GM Hydramatic, the original contractors, didn't know about the powder change. The problem made them look incompetent. The army brass didn't want what the considered a toy. They wanted a large caliber rifle. So they knowingly or unknowingly sabotaged the new rifle. When McNamara found out about the fraud he ordered the Springfield Armory close. Who knows how many died due to the saboteurs.
FN was not an original manufacturer of the M16. They didn't get a contract until 1988 to make M16A2s. When it comes to the powder, the M16 was designed to use very clean burning, IMR extruded powder. Ordnance had quite a bit of spherical (ball) powder on hand. The ball powder gave the 5.56 higher velocities. But it's pressure curve was different, causing higher port pressures. And, it also burned dirty. The higher port pressure increased the cycling rate, which increased parts wear & bolt bounce. The latter inducing malfunctions. Colt was able to diagnose the issue and changed the buffer to compensate. On the government side, non chrome barrels rusted in the humid, Vietnam climate. Cleaning issues were exasperated by the dirtier, ball powder. Chrome lining the chamber & bore, plus a return to IMR powder, fixed the remaining issues. Or so I've heard...
It was the ammunition manufacturers who stopped using the IMR 4475 powder..They couldn't meet chamber pressures while meeting velocity requirements..The military would not drop the velocity requirement..Ball powder could meet this, but it had a higher port pressure..Stoner or Armalite never had or gave any port pressure spec to Colt so the military allowed ball powder, even though it had not been tested thoroughly.. The crime was they let Colt do their inspection cycle rate test using the original IMR powder and then a newer IMR powder when IMR stopped producing the original 4475.. They allowed this even though they new the troops were going to be using ball powder..
@@richardlahan7068 The reason they didn't chrome line the bore was because the DOD was following Stoners statement that he saw no need to change the chamber..The military did want the chamber to be chrome lined, but the DOD was afraid the military was trying to delay the adoption even further so they declined a chrome line chamber to be adopted....
No problems with the M16 series in my 23 years of service during qualifications, live fire exercises, and combat from the Panama Invasion 1989-90 and Iraq 2006-08 with the M4 which is the carbine version of the M16 service rifle. I built my own retro build M16A1 and shoot it for the memories of Basic Training, Infantry School, and the units I was with before the M16A2 and later M4.
The issues the M16 had early on in Vietnam came down to no chrome plated chamber and barrel, both later corrected. Also what can only be described as sabotage by Army Brass, who switched the powder in the cartridges from IMR to Ball Powder and the lack of cleaning kits and training, which is a criminal act during a war. BTW the bolts had an issue of the chrome flaking off, due to poor application in the XM16 and the Army went to a phosphate coating, which works just fine. The forward assist was and is completely unnecessary and it was forced on the design by the Army Brass.
The M16A1 was designed to use ball powder, resist chamber and bore corrosion and increase the extractor strength..The brass was also improved by having a hardness spec..The other problem (besides the increase in carrier velocity) with the early ball powder was also the amount of calcium carbonate that was added to neutralize the acids in the recycled powder from old WW2 artillery shells...They are still using ball powder today, but it can only have .5% calcium carbonate in the mix..
Dude that had his sling on the sight post was ahead of his time. Delta started to do that much later. The purpose was so the rifle wouldn’t hang upside down carrying it on the sling. If you do have the rifle slung and facing right side up😂 hands on the stock and pistol grip, well now you have this awkward ass sling running to the bottom of your rifle. In conjunction with running the sling to the front sight post they’d also run it wrapped around the stock and not in the sling loop. In more murder times they did this with the A4s but used the green tape to keep the sling in place, that’s why A4 stocks had green tape on them.
I carried m16a1 for 4 years in the army. It had full auto capability. Had no issues with it. It never failed or jammed. It's issues were fixed after Vietnam. It was an awesome weapon in its time. I even shot it in army competitions for 4 years. I took 3rd place at nationals with this rifle. I have one of my ar's configured as an a1. And, where your sling is positioned has no bearing on anything. As long it does not impede your marksmanship, it doesn't matter. In combat its what you are comfortable fighting with.
I put a clip on both ends of my sling so I could take it off quickly and put it in my pocket. The sling tends to rattle around and makes noise. When you stack arms the middle rifleman tightens his sling just enough to slip the two rifle barrels on either side to slip thru and make a tripod.
The Model 604 was probably the best of the M16s. No forward assist. Chrome BCG. Very light. Very handy. Very slick rifles. I absolutely loved carrying them. 🤠
I qualified expert with a GM hydromatic M16 in the early 70s. It had a bore that looked like the craters of the moon. But would still wear out a 300 meter target! You could use the three pronged flash suppressor to break the wire around a case of C-rats.
My dad qualified expert with his in 66-67. He used to tell me about shooting a cutting edge off a dozer that was on the firing range. He said he could chip the edge off the blade and thought his M16 was great. He also qualified with the M1 and M14 when he first joined the Army. He liked all of them but said the M16 was just so much lighter to carry. He told a story about having to march with the M14 at port arms and when the sergeant would take the rifle out of their hands at the end of the march their arms would shoot over their heads.
Classic Colt Chrome BCG's are nice compared to the new retro ones , finally got a serrated carrier original for my XM16E1 and have a slick side for my 604
Nice video, nice rifle. I’ve seen lots of mostly carbines that have the sling attached to the front sight post. It helps keep the rifle upright when slung in front of the body. And for the poster seeking the ‘hump only’ (no forward assist), I THINK those may have been for the Air Force who didn’t want the F.A., so it was sort of milled off.
No there use to be a guy that sold the DoD stamps pre covid. To my knowledge the guy no longer makes them I know there was some buzz on the AR15.com about guy looking for the stamps for there A1s and A2s I wish they still were in production cause I’d get the smaller one for my A2 if I could.
This is an awesome video, thanks for taking the time to put it together, looking to do a hybrid build myself a morph of the following four; A1, A2, A3, A4 , from back to front : buttstock A1 length made w/ at least A2 or more modern stronger polymers and a fixed solid 'e-type?' strap mount (not swivel), a non glare phosphate manganese parkerized bolt BCG, A2 or A3 or A4 upper with either the built in carry handle or detachable carry handle, an A1 teardrop forward assist button, A3 marked lower for 'that auto look' stamp marked auto not burst (and an FRT trigger would be epic ! :D unsure if they're legal or deemed illegal now so I would hold off on this one until sure), A2 - A4 pistol grip, 30 round Colt mags with non-tilt followers, tick marked selector switch, A2-A4 Delta Ring, A1 triangle or A2 round Colt handguards again using those better A2 to modern stronger polymers , pencil ( any barrel profile thinner than the post A1 standard A2-A4 Gov profile) barrel in 1in12 (maybe 1in14) twist rate, chromed bore AND chamber, with a three prong flash hider (maybe the A2 half vented birdcage flasher depending on handguard), and one Colt black nylon sling ! I know part of all this is about the look and it shouldn't be but the other part is sheer function and purpose too. Wonder what you all would think of that hybrid mix; a solid idea or a complete mess ?. Any suggestions and feedback would be highly appreciated ! :D
Theres a lot to digest there…. So first off I think it’s a neat concept the only difference between the A2 and A3 is the A3 was full auto for the navy. Also if your looking for A1 furniture made in modern polymer get the PSA made stuff or brownells. It’s gonna be easier to find a M4/A4 flat top receiver. However whatever upper receiver you get make sure you have the correct feed ramps for the barrel your gonna get (example if you get a barrel with M4 feed ramps make sure you get a upper with M4 feed ramps) I would say not to go any slower then 1/12 there’s a reason we switched from 1/14 but 1/12 is a really good twist rate. You may want to just consider 1/7-1/9 for better availability and you can have more options for ammunition. I’ve thought about getting a trigger like that I think the FRT is illegal I wouldn’t even consider one. However there’s a few other options that are still aloud to be sold. I think Franklin armory still makes one. My only issue is they out run the bolt a lot then u have to reset the trigger not very reliable at least from what I seen but I think they can be cool. I think it’s a cool concept if you use a 3 prong flash hider you will get a ping every time you shoot I think it’s cool. Plus the 3 prongs are much better at flash hiding then the A1 or A2 bird cages.
@@THEPAGUNGUY Awesome thank you for your response here and input, much appreciated, yeah it's a lot of material there for sure. Good tip about the m4 feed ramps, important to remember, thanks, also that 'ping' sound I think is coming from cast over forged. My buddy has two M1As and a Socom 16, and the ones w the cast receivers the Socom and one of his M1As have this slight 'ping' sound with each round. It actually travels right through all hearing protection, through the ear plugs and the headphones combined. It gets kinda annoying after a while. His forged M1a receiver, like the Garand, doesn't have that ping sound. Thanks for your reply. one more about 12 vs 14, I'm only using 55grns or lighter like 52grns w this rifle, we all hear the 14 creates more damage than the 12 , 14 tumbling upon impact where 12 starts tumbling something like 6 inches in, etc, but is the 12 considerably more accurate than the 14 in your opinion, and travels farther out more accurately, etc?. any feedback would be great. This rifle is sort of that "Oh Cool , he has a 1in14 rifle" at the range and able to see what all the hype is about with coconuts and watermelons. Green Mountain makes those 1in14 barrels. And also VMax makes varmint rounds comparable to that whole 1in14 theory I guess. I hear those 45 grns Winchester Vmax rounds are Holy Sh*t factor. Lol. I also may not be ready to do a build yet, so many factors like you've mentioned with the M4 feed ramps you have to get right, might be best I save up and stick w a Colt AR15A4 . Thanks again. :D
@@THEPAGUNGUY Also I think Del-Ton makes a "lightweight full length barrel" , not quite pencil profile thinness but certainly less thick than the gov profile and uniform across the whole barrel, and probably can handle the heat a little bit better, but overall seems to create a better balanced rifle. I can't stand that idea of the thickened barrel past the front sight base when it did really nothing. Sure it may stabilize the barrel front end a bit with the wobble with the extra weight up front, and I bet that's why they added that extra buttstock length on the A2s since all the Gov profile barrels were already on order, turn it more into a precision rifle than combat. again, idk. holding the xm16e1 to m16 to m16a1 just feels right with the balance, especially the slab sides and without the forward assist, either the triangle or round handguards both are great, along w an A1 length buttstock, perfect ! I just like the A2 pistol grip better than the A1 grip, a simple swap out. the PSA A1/A2 hybrid build rifle you had in your prior videos especially in that intro was the bomb imo ! :D
You're responding to commenters. Just remember that the price of admission to the comments section is very, very, VERY low and actual knowledge or experience is not required to post comments.🤔
Had never noticed that 8:43 DOD stamp before! At first glance, it looks like a scuff mark or bit of glint. In any which case, the M16A1 (latest Colt 603) was fine apart from the 20-round magazine and pre-A2 polymer
Hi again PAGunGuy, another quick question for you: would you happen to know the name of those vintage AR15 upper receivers that don't have a forward assist, but have like an oval hump in the receiver in that area. Not necessarily Slick sides or slab sides , there is not forward assist but just a hump. and there's no brass deflector either. any info would be appreciated. Oh, I think Nodak Spud was remaking them for a while. It was a short run this type. I'm thinking of using one for my build. :)
I believe what you're thinking of is the Colt 605 upper AKA the original AR Carbine. Basically what it was is a XM16E1 upper but with the forward assist having being machined off. For reference the 605B also infamously lead to the developers mistakenly making the M16A1 Burst fire in Call of Duty: Black Ops as the 605B actually had a 4 way selector with burst being an option. The 605 was rarely fielded but was a vital step in the development of later AR Carbines such as the 607, XM117's etc etc. Famously later Bushmaster (Rest in Peace) would take this concept and introduce what was known as a Dissipator where you would have a full length FSB and handguard but have a carbine length 16" barrel (note the 605 had a 15" barrel which lead to issues with gassing) the FSB was also a faux gas block as the real gas block was put at a carbine length position on the barrel but it was hidden under the handguard. Overall the 605 is a relatively unknown but crucial part in the development of the AR Carbines that are so prevalent today. This site has some more details and photos of the 605 and other developmental/experimental M16 variants: pullig.dyndns.org/retroblackrifle/ModGde/CrbGde/605.html
Awesome ! Yes, that's it ! Great write up, Thank you. I want to do a build but with no forward assist or shell deflector. speaking of Bushmaster, I hope Windham Weaponry starts back up again or someone buys in and keeps them afloat. @@Z3roEXE
ACOG's and AimPoint's almost never die in real life. Optics have great hit probability and allow soldiers to focus on the threat, not the front sight post. All the Marines and Soldiers who thought optics were stupid, changed their minds after using them in combat conditions in Iraq and the GWOT era.
