Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AR-10 vs AR-15 in Vietnam

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AR-10 vs AR-15 in Vietnam

    There has been a lot of M14 vs M16 threads and even more M16 vs AK-47 threads continuing today. But I haven't seen anyone arguing the choice of choosing a sized down version, the AR-15 over the larger older brother the AR-10 in Vietnam. As much as I like the AR-15 and how I think it's a severely underrated weapon by people who only casually know about weapons, I feel that the AR-10 would have been a better suited weapon through Vietnam.

    The larger 7.62 round had greater power and more gas for the weapon to work with cycling the weapon, therefore making it capable of working through the fouling issues of a direct impingement system. The logic behind switching the 7.62 to the 5.56 was that more soldiers were finding that they were spraying into an area where they thought the enemy was. So the logic became more bullets=more kills. But I think the 7.62 would have been a more suitable spraying round because of it's ability to pass through dense wood and cover while retaining enough energy to kill something on the other side.

    The big problem was weight however, the original AR-15's were about six and half pounds where the AR-10's can weigh up to 9 pounds. But looking at it from a present day stand point, the M16's today weigh 8 pounds. A pound is still substantial, but I believe the extra 7.62 penetration power and reliability is worth it in the environment where mud, dirt, and dense jungle is expected. Either way it's an half pound improvement over the m1 grand.

    These are just my views and opinions, I kinda wanna ask the WAB community what they would pick in Vietnam if given the choice of AR-10 vs AR-15.

  • #2
    Not the quite right person to ask as phrased, but for the mission:

    The original AR-15 was well liked by the Vietnamese and otherwise who had nothing but positive things to say about it is my understanding. The Vietnamese being on average more slight of stature is also a factor. The problems in the transition to a militarized form were to a large extent intentional, by certain parties.

    There's also the problem of the simple quantity of ammo that can be easily carried being significantly less. Add onto that while I believe the 10 is supposed to be more controllable in full auto then the 14, a full auto 7.62 rifle at the end of the day is a full auto 7.62 rifle.

    With an FAL one of the videos I have had a group of people of Class 3s types demonstrating what weapons could really do. None of the could get more then one round to hit the target with a three round burst, even with strategies designed to intentionally take the kickback into effect to give you an idea how bad recoil management in full auto could be with one of the most popular examples of that type of rifle. That needless to say is not a problem with the 5.56NATO.

    Comment


    • #3
      What do you gain by going from the M14 to AR10?

      I can tell you what you lose.

      1. M14 was a proven system
      2. M14 was rugged
      3. M14 was familiar to our GIs

      Going from M14 to AR10 in the 1960s would make zero sense.
      "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

      Comment


      • #4
        Well we could pretend the AR10 won the competition that led to the adoption of the M14 for that alternative, despite such a thing being pretty much the definition of impossible, if we wanted to humor the intent of the thread.

        But, yeah the original AR10 really never caught on in sales. There were a few militaries that used them, but nothing compared to the G3 and FAL. Make of that what you will.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by gunnut View Post
          What do you gain by going from the M14 to AR10?

          I can tell you what you lose.

          1. M14 was a proven system
          2. M14 was rugged
          3. M14 was familiar to our GIs

          Going from M14 to AR10 in the 1960s would make zero sense.
          No argument here...BUT if the switch had to be made would the AR10 be a better alternative than the m16?

          I think the differences between a AR10 and a M14 were not worth making the switch. A different round was needed to reach the threshold of switching and the much ballyhooed .223 fit the bill. Our troops have been sent to war with a varmint round ever since.
          Removing a single turd from the cesspool doesn't make any difference.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by gunnut View Post
            What do you gain by going from the M14 to AR10?

            I can tell you what you lose.

            1. M14 was a proven system
            2. M14 was rugged
            3. M14 was familiar to our GIs

            Going from M14 to AR10 in the 1960s would make zero sense.
            Well the same arguments can be made for M14 vs AR-15. But AR-10 was about 2 pounds lighter, has AR ergonomics (safety selector ect), more controllable due to the inline stock and the buffer tube, and finally the AR-10 was about 5 inches shorter. From a analytical stand point, the AR had more of the features required for jungle combat which required a light, short, and fast to deploy weapon that was controllable on full auto. I love the M14 as much as anyone else for it's proven reliability and accuracy but it was long, heavy, and not the most controllable 7.62, which is not a suitable weapon for jungle combat. Hence why we switched from M14 to M16.

            Comment


            • #7
              Actually the reason McNamara got his fingers in it and started twisting arms basically boils down to Springfield Armory not meeting production requirements in the ramp up for Vietnam, which could be enough incentive to switch designs to something more easily produced.

              So with sufficient arm turning it is theoretically possible that the AR10 could have been slammed through in the ramp up for Vietnam. Afterall the AR is an American design from Fairchild, unlike those evil European designs. ;)

              Comment

              Working...
              X