Firearm Forums - Arms Locker banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,382 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Over the past few weeks, I've been discussing the CAR with people I know who have actually used the Commando series M16 in combat around the world. Here are some comments:

From veterans of the Vietnam war:

"I liked the XM-177 the best for short range. Beyond 100 yards the gun is useless though. It was designed for tunnel clearing and a personal defense gun in a vehicle."

"I used one on patrols on a few occasions. The gun had cycling problems a lot and it got fouled faster than a full sized M16. It was a very intimidating weapon though."

This one is particularly interesting. It is from a SEAL that served during that time:

"When we first went in country, we used Thompsons and some other older designs. Then some dick got us issued the shorties with can's on them. They were God awful to shoot due to the ammonia smelling gas discharge from the ejection port. The gas would make your eyes water to the point where you could barely see to shoot. Finally, we were able to get rid of those pieces of shit and get some decent subguns. I carried a Sten for most of the rest of my tour."

From guys that have served more recently:

"A couple of guys came strolling in one day with the new M16A2 Commando's on their sides. They swaggered around with them until the first insurgent strike. They were immediately put on back guard detail during the fights to get anyone that slipped up close. The guns were useless past 50 yards."

"I was issued the Commando when I first hit the ground in Afghanistan. The gun is fabulous for close quarters battle. I think the only gun that can rival it is the Krinkov. When **removed for security reasons** found the cave entrance, all of us armed with the Commando's were sent to secure it until demolitions could be brought in. The fight was hard but close. The Commando rocked. By the time the demo guys got there, we had littered the ground with brass."

"Our detail was tasked with guarding **removed for security reasons** during a walk through inspection of one of the hot zones. An IED went off stopping the lead vehicles and we came under ambush. As body guards, we used a variety of weapons including the UZI, M16 shorty, and P90. All performed decently but we had to wait for a chopper to give us medium to long range support. Thankfully, the Iraqi's picked a poor spot to hit us at. We didn't lose anyone but we couldn't break the stalemate until the Apache rolled in."

And here is my absolute favorite:

"Neat gun but the cyclic rate goes up so much suppressed that it won't feed reliably and it jams like a son of a bitch."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,279 Posts
I will take comments from men who know about such things over the suppositions of a blowhard like andy any day.

RIKA
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,890 Posts
Hard Rock said:
"When we first went in country, we used Thompsons and some other older designs. Then some dick got us issued the shorties with can's on them. They were God awful to shoot due to the ammonia smelling gas discharge from the ejection port. The gas would make your eyes water to the point where you could barely see to shoot. Finally, we were able to get rid of those pieces of shit and get some decent subguns. I carried a Sten for most of the rest of my tour."
:laugh01: :laugh01: :laugh01: :laugh01:

Prefers a STEN to the POS shorty!!

Priceless.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,277 Posts
I told you a 9mm carbine was a better pick. At least the sten gun man knows he has a 9mm sub gun. The 10" POSCAR guy 'thinks' he's hot until the shit flys.

Notice one said how it was as real good CQB gun, but all he mentioned was the 'we had littered the ground with brass.' He didn't say he had bodies littered on the ground, just brass.

Nuff said. We all know the 10" CAR isn't worth the effort. Just a gunkid fantacy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,815 Posts
DJetAce said:
I told you a 9mm carbine was a better pick. At least the sten gun man knows he has a 9mm sub gun. The 10" POSCAR guy 'thinks' he's hot until the shit flys.

Notice one said how it was as real good CQB gun, but all he mentioned was the 'we had littered the ground with brass.' He didn't say he had bodies littered on the ground, just brass.

Nuff said. We all know the 10" CAR isn't worth the effort. Just a gunkid fantacy.
Sooo, what else did you expect ... ? You know NUTTY JOHN would rather lie than tell the truth, when the truth would be more dramatic!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,026 Posts
A semantics point, if I may, so we can be clear on our definitions. As far as I know:

A “Commando” is a 10” gun

An “XM177” is a 11.5” gun

An “M4” is a 14.5” gun.

A “CAR-15” is a 16” gun.

We tend to throw the “CAR” label around, meaning any "sub-20-inch” AR, and need to remember that a 16” gun has 60% more barrel than a 10” gun; that’s ballistically VERY relevant in a rifle. Same difference between an 18” .308, and a 11.25” .308, which I hope everybody would agree is a VAST difference.

I admit I’m as lax with the labels as anyone. I call mine “CAR’s”, when one’s a 16” and one’s a 14.5”.

Just rambling & babbling….
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
the win white box 55 gr is 2950 with a 16" barrel. :) anybody who "thinks" that you lose 100 fps per inch of barrel, with REAL 5.56 loads, is an ignoramus. Some of the new Lake City stuff is right at 3000 fps, from a 14.5" barrel, with boattailed 62 gr ball. The fact that you, and your sources, are 10 years or more out of date does NOT alter the facts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,382 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
John,

The Commando was the "pet" name of the shorty. It became a non-standard nomenclature for the 10.5, 11.5 and the 12.5 inch guns including the XM177 which is a model designation created by COLT and the US Army. The M4 designation is specific to a certain type of 14.5 inch carbine. It must have the step down for the M203 launcher mounting on the barrel. The CAR-15/CAR is a generalization of the series of M16's and AR15's that have a shorter barrel than 20 inches and a collapsable stock.

Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,026 Posts
My main point is the grouping of anything less than 20” into the same category when comparing. The 10” and 16” AR’s are as different as a 12” Contender and a 20” bolt-action in .308 would be.

That’s all I was getting at; the tendency to lump them all together.

FWIW, I once had an 11.5” Olympic that was stamped “XM177” as well. (Thing sucked, btw. :( )
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
8" of barrel, Contender action and 4 lbs of wt make a LOT more difference than 4.5" of 223 barrel makes. the TC kicks like a sob, and it's a single shot You are talking a loss of probably 300 fps in the 308,l and it's already a low velocity rd.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,277 Posts
John in AR, and thus I say 10" POSCAR or 11.5" POSCAR to designate the POS weapon gunkid likes. He keeps mentioning velocities from 14 and 16 inch barrels cause he knows the 10" and 11.5" POSCARs arn't worth shit!

His fantacy always compares 'match' ARs, and then he want's you to carry a 10" POSCAR. He lives in the twilight zone.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top