Jump to content

M16 Vs Thompson


Recommended Posts

I don't want to turn the focus on the M-16 but it's time for my two cents.

 

Personally I think the biggest cause for jaming is excessive oiling or the type of oil used in lubricating. It would seem in a desert enviorment a teflon coating, ceramic, or some type of dry lube would really be the ideal choice.

 

Second I feel adopting the AR-10 .308 caliber would add to the overall knock down power of the weapon. I dont think any rifle is really designed to be fired from inside a vehicle.

 

Lastly having no first hand experience with the M-4 I have to ask if they shortened the gas tube or went to a spiral wound around the barrel. As most people who play with this weapon know the disadvantage of the shorter barrel lengths is the gas tube issues and subsuqent reliability issues that it creates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hmmm...The M16? first of all, the main "problem" that the Stoner design is that horrible Swedish "Lungman" derived gas system, that introduces high tempratures and carbon into the bolt carrier! Through a gas tube that is very susceptible to carbon build-up and heat loss, causing low, uneven gas pressures and cleaning nightmares!

 

The spiral wound gas tube is a interesting attempt to fix the problems inherent in the gas system, it truly is a wonder that the military has stuck with this design for as long as they have...

 

Also, the caliber, the 5.56x45 is actually not too bad, it is the bullet that is often the problem here as the Geneva-convention prohibits any "expanding" bullet in signees of the convention army(s) firearms this is a problem that the Russians sub-verted in their design of the 5.45x39-for their "version" of the modern infantry rifle, the AK74...The bullet, (with a hard steel penetrator) has an engineered in air-space in front of the penetrator that destabilises the bullet causing it to yaw when it hits the target causing debilitating wounds and therefore one or two shot stopping ability, that our bullet..design..sadly lacks...the original XM15/AR15/M16/M16A1 had 1 in 7 twist barrels that didn't allow the bullet to stablise fully allowing slight amounts of bullet yaw to occur and greater wounding ability. But at a cost: accuracy so we went to the 1 in 9 twist to stabilise the bullet for accuracy!

 

As for the Mattel toy appelation, the regular army troops when seeing their first AR15's in 1964 supposedly said out loud to the passing troops:Hey, look at their Mattel rifles! or something to that effect, refering to of course, their toy like looks compared to the (at the time) issue M14!

 

And yes, the AK47 etc. is ugly etc....BUT..IT WORKS ALL THE TIME! any firearm that works all of the time has been designed by a genius. And yes, the AK47 is a "knock-off" of the MP44! Infact, the first version of the AK was-infact-made out of steel stampings just like the MP44!

 

 

With all due respects to John T Thompson, I thought that he suggested the creation of a small portable machinegun, a "submachinegun" and he assembled the groups of people that ultimately went on to design the submachinegun that was named in his honor....

 

 

 

I just had to say something...!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MP40,

Attempting to diminish John T's contributions to the firearm that bears his name, simply because he did not labor away as a machinist/designer, is the hight of absurdity. Those few men in history who have the vision to assemble the proper personnel who can make a reality out of a dream are what a civilized society considers innovators.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Authur not on your life, would i even attempt to diminish John T Thompsons legacy, it is a fact that he is not the designer of this firearm..The fact that he brought these talented people together for his vison of the "trench broom" is his never dieing contribution to all of the fans of the Thompson! Because, with out his vison and his dedication to his dream, we would be dimnished....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

""""Designed by a genius, nay a gun deity (and there are so few of them, John Moses Browning being another - call me a heretic, but one and two hit wonders like Kalashnikov and Thompson and Garand are not"""""

 

What else did Stoner design that has been adopted by the military? I am just asking, I don't know. However comparing Stoner to John Browning is like comparing Billy Ray Cyrus to Johnny Cash.

 

I don't have an M16 (I do have a lower Ar15 without an upper), but I will tell you why I am adverse to the AR/M16 class of weapons:

 

1. Gun is simply not reliable without extreme care.

2. I believe that the lack of forward assist and the brass deflector were originally design flaws.

3. The civilian version is simply too expensive, pre or post ban. (Not to mention FA)

4. The magazines are too expensive

5. The ammunition is too expensive

6. Accessories are too expensive

7. They are not too useful for killing deer, bear, or turkeys. (There are better choices)

8. That damn ching sound you get when firing one.

9. I’m sorry, but I think that round is crap no matter what they do to it.

 

It does offer the following in my opinion:

 

1. Versatile gun. You can shoot MANY calibers and configurations. (Shrike, MG34 config, 9mm, 45, 22lr, A1, A2, M4, etc...)

2. Great for varmints and coyotes

3. It looks sexy. Not near as much as a Thompson does, but still sexy.

4. They will always be in demand, even if the military drops it.

 

 

I am sure I will end up with one some of these days; I just have not been too serious about it. If the right one comes along at the right price I will pick it up. No hurry.

 

Quick question: Does anyone have both the Stug 44 AND the FA AK-47 for a good comparison for us; I have never heard that one.

 

Jr

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What can be gained by comparing a firearm (the 1921 TSMG) made before the development of TV, Jet aircraft, computers, nuclear weapons, space flight, and lasers, with a another gun (M-16) made after all of these technological advances? You might as well compare the Spirit of St. Louis to the Concorde. Considering all these advances in technology since 1921, you might think the M-16 would be an innovative marvel of design. It isn't.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Easy gents. I knew that one or two hit wonder thing would raise a few hackles. I was jest funnin' (sorta) http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/wink.gif You guys are so easy. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif That Billy Ray Cyrus comparison be fightin' words, though.

 

Gene Stoner designed the AR10 which really should have been adopted instead of the M14. We wouldn't have all this 5.56mm debate going on. Such is not life.

 

Okay, a quick Gene Stoner design discussion (besides the numerous designs that did not get adopted or put into series production). His designs were hindered greatly by timing, politics and the military's NIH syndrome.

 

AR-5 Air Force survival rifle (very limited Air Force purchase)

AR-7 popular little take down .22

AR-10 - big damn M16 (should have been our rifle - Portugal and Sudan bought some) which evolved into the AR-15 (nothing further needs to be said)

AR16 which evolved into the AR18

Stoner62 which evolved into the 63/63A (Navy SEALS and Marines in VN)

 

He also designed the 5.56mm round. I would not want to get hit on any part of my body with a 5.56mm round.

 

Okay, so none of his designs are perfect, but neither were John Moses Browning's nor Kalashnikov's. They all have detractors. I'm not a big fan of the AR15's dirty gas tube system, but he did it to reduce weight. Stoner is still a genius (Billy Ray Cyrus....harumph http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/mad.gif ). The AR15 was revolutionary for its day (1958). Sad thing is (although I like the M1A/M14 on semi), in 1957 (in spite of all of the technological advances), the US military adopted a gun that was based on John Garand's early/mid 1920's design, the M14. It was rather uncontrollable on full auto.

 

Just a clarification, the earliest AR15's had a 1 in 14 twist. The M16/16A1 had a 1 in 12. The M16 went to Vietnam without cleaning equipment or proper maintenance instructions. The powder used was the wrong type (over Stoner's objections). I hate to think ordnance types wanted to see it fail so they deliberately did this. Jessica and company hadn't cleaned their rifles in days (if you believe the press) and the lube the military issues sucks for desert climate.

 

MP44 vs AK47. MP44 just sits there and vibrates on FA. Slower ROF. The handguard do get warm on sustained fire. Gloves help. The AK bucks and climbs. It is rather obnoxious on FA. The little reinforcement pins in the handguards heat up on sustained fire and will burn the bajeebers out of you. Again, gloves help.

 

The AK, 1911, Hi Power, 1917/1919 BMG, Ma Deuce, BAR, and TSMG do qualify as classics in my book (so does the M16).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Waffen, oops my bad! the 1 in 14 and 1 in 12 are rarely quoted in my books that i have available..
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, the M-14 is not uncontrlable on full auto; I have that on personal athority of two viet nam vets and my own experiance. I will however say if your small and don't have upperbody strenght it is not for you.

 

The AK is no marvel, it's a STG44/45 with the gas system barowed from the SKS. Manipulation of the selector is awkward and noisy, and while it is in the running with the top 5 most reliable guns on the planet it's not overly original or innovative

 

The 16- has the WORST opperational system know to man for a combat rifle, that it has lasted this long when there were nice things like the Rhino gas conversion system I don't know. Their accurate rifles or can be made to be but the 1 in 9 twist and the SS109 bullet were the wrong way to go. the old M185 broke at the canliture and that is where it's lethality came from. 1 in 14 was changed to 1 in 12 twist so as to improve long range accuracy in cold climatic conditions. Field preformace of the SS109 from Mogadiu to Afganistan says it pokes pencil sized holes and keeps going. The M4 is worse as it lacks the initial velocity the 20" barrel gave it.

 

The current military doctrine holds it that 1 wounded man removes 3 from combat, one wounded two strecherbearers. I've never gotten to shoot one but the Ar-10 would have been closer to the right rifle, the magazines however IMHO SUCK. Aluminum has no place in something critical like a feed lip. An Ar-10 with overbuilt magazines like an AK-47 and an ar-180 gas system would give anything a run for its money for reliability and leathality would not be questioned.

 

BB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Top five reliable guns. Have to put the 1911A1, M1 Thompson and the Uzi in there with the AK.

 

By uncontrollable wrt to the M14, I meant ability to keep full auto fire on human sized targets beyond 15 yards. The average shooter can't do this with a stock rifle. The E2 stock and muzzlebrake(sp?) helps. Semi it's great, but it's failing as an assault rifle was its cartridge, length, weight and lack of controlability on full auto (at least for the average troop - Marines are different- waiting for the next sheit storm over this comment http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/smile.gif )

 

Guns are like women. Variety makes them nice. Blondes, brunnettes, redheads, tall, short, thin, chunky http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/tongue.gif They all have quirks about them,b ut for the most part, they are nice to look at, nice to hold, and fun to play with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You go bro!

 

This a weird post tough I think maybe a comparison like a STEN or a TSMG , or a MP38 and a TSMG, but never the less it still is fun to see everyones opinion!

 

NOTHING can stop an AK! NOTHING! I have tried and I can not kill it! I can post a video of my friend trying to help me kill my post sample if someone can post it!

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately I can't ad any advice to the 16 part.

But when it comes to the quality and loss of quality to the Thompson family to me it's a sure sign of loss of true craftsmanship. The goal of the almighty dollar! Even today's super accurate machines are worthless without the skill of a dedicated operator with the desire to produce a quality product that he himself would be proud to place his name on.

 

Working retail for many years I've seen and sold many product lines that should have spent a little more time on the drafting board before production.

 

Thompson Example: The older Colt, AO Tommy's were made with machines that required a man to run. When you bought a replacement part you dropped it in and life went on.

Today's computer operated systems with so called superior tolerances require the hand fitting of replacement parts. Things haven't really gotten better, society has just dropped it's standards to accept inferior products.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VERN: You think Mighty Mouse could beat up Superman?

 

DUTCH: What? Are you cracked?

 

VERN: Why not? I saw the other day he was carrying five elephants in one hand!

 

DUTCH: You don't know nothing. Mighty Mouse is a cartoon. Superman is a real guy. No way a cartoon could beat up a real guy.

 

VERN: Yeah. Maybe you're right. Would be a good fight though.

 

Sorry, too much tryptophan. Oh, forgot. Urban legend.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AMEN CROW!

 

A machine is ONLY as smart as its operator!

 

CNC machines WILL repeat EXACTLY what the operator programs it to do, BUT if he is LAZY as 90% of Americans are today and does not program to the "mean" (a manufacturers term for to the middle) of the tolerances you have basically what Italy manufacturers!

 

EVERYTHING MUST be hand fitted!, hence no interchangeability!

 

OLD AMERICAN weapons are the BEST in the world!!!

Hands down!

 

The THOMPSON is a machinist’s nightmare and a collectors dream!

 

I consider myself a very good BEGINER machinist, and very knowledgeable in mass production! I would give my left pinky to spend 3 weeks in the Colt factory in the early 1920's seeing those guns being produced!

 

I can picture it: OLD brown and Sharpe Horizontal mills, (just like my number 2) rows and rows of them, each doing one operation , about 10 production pieces at a time what a sight to see, American manufacturing at its best!!!

 

If my spring factory EVER takes off to be what I hope it will be, I WILL buy a Mori Seiki CNC lathe and a Fadal VMC, THEN I hope to use my FFL/SOT to reproduce a REAL nice Semi Thompson ANYONE would be proud to own!

 

Guys if you could see the design I have I think you would ALL be in love!

 

NOW I must just do it!

 

Dave

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Dave,

 

Yes, not only the set up but constant rechecking to make certain everything is within tolerance.

 

Quality control!

 

If it doesn't make specs, it doesn't go out the door.

 

Its a sad state of affairs we live in. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/sad.gif

 

Let me know when your in production!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave,

Wow, this is getting more exciting every day!

I can just imagine what you would come up with!

keeep on doing!, Zamm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John in IN,

In an attempt to answer your question, I took it upon myself to do a side by side comparison of the M16 and TSMG on Thanksgiving Day. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/dry.gif

 

The M16 is actually an Oly/Sgw in M4A2 configuration firing 4 30 round mags loaded to 25 each. I did not note the ammunition brand or type. Weapon was suppressed by AWC Raider. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/huh.gif

 

The TSMG is an ex movie gun, Savage 1928A1 firing one xx mag, 3 xxx mags, and two L drums. Ammunition is Russian WWII surplus. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/huh.gif

 

Of course you realize the reliability test would be skewed by the fact that the suppressor caused so much fouling in the chamber of the M16 that it failed to function after just 80 rounds. The Thompson sailed through over 200 rounds without even a hiccup. In fact, one of the drums was a WH which would not, could not stay in the gun-the magazine latch wouldn't hold it. I held the drum in the 28 and it emptied the damn thing without a single stoppage. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/laugh.gif

 

By the way, the target was a pine log 4 foot in length, about a foot in diameter, propped in the upright position. The 5.56MM round went through with little problem. The old .45 kept knocking the tree over. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/ohmy.gif

 

Conclusion: Inconclusive-a great deal more testing will have to be done. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/wink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jay I would have to agree. I will go out tomorrow and try the same. I will have a 1928 savage and a WH '28 and my M1 Bridgeport. And for the other side, I'll have a Colt M16. I will have to try I should say, 1000 rounds of each? The impending target is yet to be decided. Maybe a evil pumpkin terrorist? Or that computer that keeps Fu-king with me. I'm just not sure yet. Or it 'tis the season maybe I can find a dreaded yard Santa ornament. Maybe one of my trusty fellow knights will come up with something by noon tomorrow. A report will follow. Who knows, a new video and with my new camera, new pix for the page.

And by the way was that at 25 yards, 50 yards or 100 yards?

http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/cool.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...