Which one do you guys think is better as a general service rifle? From what I read most of the books I have seem to put the G-3 above the other two as a general service rifle for infantry units. This is in terms of maintenance, accuracy in battlefield engagements, unit cost and reliability. Well all but cost can be hard to put a finger on due to individual training and of course we do have a guy named “M-21” here so I can only wonder what he would pick…
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
G-3 vs. FN-FAL vs M-14
Collapse
X
-
G-3 vs. FN-FAL vs M-14
To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew RidgwayTags: None
-
I have only used one of these weapons the FN and I have to say once you get used to it, it feels very natural, but it is a looooong weapon. I would think that a disadvantge in urban and jungle conditions. I used it extensivly during my limited military career. It was quite reliable, easy to strip (with a very convienient shotgun style break open.the version issued to us was semi-auto only (as I believe was the UK version also) although I did once fire the full auto version with 30 round clip and bipod, I found it most ungainly.
I would presume the HK, which was not so large was a little easier to handle, and would presume it to be fairly reliable ( however I do know someone who used one on a movie shoot several years ago and said they were continually having trouble with it jamming, but that could have no relation to the military version..
The M-14 is a joke, probably the shortest serving weapon in the US arsenal (maybe the Krag-Jorgenson) It went into service @1957 and was supplanted by the M-16 @1965Ain't No Rocket Scientists In The Firehall
Comment
-
All three are excellent weapons, but of course...i'm very partial to the M-14 series. :)
There is a 'new' US M-25 carbine version of the M-21 that is quite compact(for a full caliber rifle), and still has an effective range beyond 600meters with optics.
The M-25 is the new USA standard weapon for Sniper team spotters.
The FAL is VERY long, i agree.
The M-14 is no joke....it has never actually left service, and is still used today by most of the US military's elite units.
The M-16 'replaced' the M-14 primarilly because of the clamor to adopt a varmint round as the primary weapon of NATO forces.
Comment
-
To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway
Comment
-
You will note that i put the word new in brackets, ie 'new'.
What makes it 'new' is that it came out after i got out.
So to me...it's new.
Also, the M-25 was used only by select US SPECOPS during ODS. Now it's been adopted army wide, and that's fairly recent.
The M-21 has a 24.5" bbl, and the buttstock of the M-25 is 1" shorter than either the M-14 or M-21.
It is also a bit lighter as a result.
I've never shot a G3...but i've also never shot an HK that wasn't a top notch weapon. I'm sure it's quite good.
Comment
-
The FAL is VERY long, i agree.
The M-14 is no joke....it has never actually left service, and is still used today by most of the US military's elite units.
The M-16 'replaced' the M-14 primarily because of the clamor to adopt a varmint round as the primary weapon of NATO forces.Last edited by Kalvan; 01 Feb 04,, 21:32."It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." - Emiliano Zapata
Comment
-
Whoever started the clamor for the varmint round, there was still a clamor. ;)
Obviously, i prefer the 7.62x51 by a wide margin...though even that is on the light side for a sniper rifle.
.30-06 is better, among dozens of other cartridges.
It's funny that the .308 was adopted for mainly the same reasons as the .223, and that the .223 was just the next step on the 'easier to control and carry more ammo' bandwagon.
What good is carrying 500rds if you don't hit shit???
Comment
-
The M 21 is indeed quite a good weapon. The M-14 was found sadly lacking as an infantry weapon, thus its short tenure in the hands of amy and marine corps units. Supplying soldiers with a full auto version of the M1 did not acomplish the goal of modernizing the US army to a modern assault weapon.
Originally posted by M21Sniper
All three are excellent weapons, but of course...i'm very partial to the M-14 series. :)
There is a 'new' US M-25 carbine version of the M-21 that is quite compact(for a full caliber rifle), and still has an effective range beyond 600meters with optics.
The M-25 is the new USA standard weapon for Sniper team spotters.
The FAL is VERY long, i agree.
The M-14 is no joke....it has never actually left service, and is still used today by most of the US military's elite units.
The M-16 'replaced' the M-14 primarilly because of the clamor to adopt a varmint round as the primary weapon of NATO forces.Ain't No Rocket Scientists In The Firehall
Comment
Comment