M16/AR-15 Clones

[pmulcahy11b]

Do you guys have any idea of how many M16/AR-15 clones are out there? I've stopped putting them on my pages because of the repetitious nature of doing so. It's boring. I'm actually thought of putting up a special page for M16/AR-15 clones. but I think it would be no fun to do so. Sheesh!

Rant over.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

There's just too many of them to keep up with all of them.
My thoughts are that basically, the M16/AR-15 entry should just list the basic weapon and its stats and mention the most well known companies that offer clones (and the name of the clone).
I'd only list separate entries if there was a significant difference like say one version was more prone to dirt screwing up the mechanism or say it had a free-floating barrel and so on.

[Snake Eyes]

Ditto SSC's rec. I think it would be a waste of your time and considerable talent to bother with the insignificant nuances of all the AR-family clones, unless there is really some compelling non-cosmetic difference that needs to be underscored - especially since the game mechanics really aren't granular enough to take into account most of those subtleties.

[HorseSoldier]

Further agreement. I would only bother listing versions that do anything particularly special or unique. Like SnakeEyes said, the game mechanics can't really distinguish between a Colt or a Bushmaster or a Noveske or whatever, no matter how much electronic ink owners may spill debating the merits on various websites and such.

[B.T.]

Paul!

Complete agreement! I tried to figure out the main models. But over the years there have been so many variants of the original design (M177, Colt Commando, M653, M733, to name only the most prominent variants, that I use the stats of the M177 for in the game!) that it is nearly impossible, to list them all.

I think it would be very time consuming, difficult, and not worth the afford!

[copeab]

Originally Posted by Snake Eyes

Ditto SSC's rec. I think it would be a waste of your time and considerable talent to bother with the insignificant nuances of all the AR-family clones, unless there is really some compelling non-cosmetic difference that needs to be underscored - especially since the game mechanics really aren't granular enough to take into account most of those subtleties.

Even in GURPS (3e) which allows more variance in weapon stats, most 5.56mm weapons have virtually similar stats to the M16 (long barrel) or M4 (short barrel). The only stats that really vary are cost (which doesn't matter in most games) and weight (which tends to be a small variation).

[Canadian Army]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

There's just too many of them to keep up with all of them.
My thoughts are that basically, the M16/AR-15 entry should just list the basic weapon and its stats and mention the most well known companies that offer clones (and the name of the clone).
I'd only list separate entries if there was a significant difference like say one version was more prone to dirt screwing up the mechanism or say it had a free-floating barrel and so on.

I agree

[rcaf_777]

Our good friends at Wikipedia say that there are about 28 versions and clones that claim to based on the M16, thses seem to main ones, I am sure there are other in limited numbers

[Legbreaker]

What they said.

[waiting4something]

Yeah, I think that I wouldn't get to indepth with all the different clones out there. AR's are like AK's the variants and possiblities to mix and match most parts of one with another are endless. I would maybe note that some are not interchangable in certain areas. Like the non-law enforcement/military only Colt AR-15's that had larger holes in there receivers so you could only use Colt's parts. Or how some of the later Colt Match Target series had a auto sear block pinned in them to prevent you from putting in a auto sear. I would only add this because it makes the weapon less convertable to auto fire. Or if someone in the group is not a machinist who can make spare parts, it becomes worthless, if parts get damaged, lost, or worn out.
On a side note it's funny how the artist for the original Twilight 2000 Small Arms Guide used a Colt SP-1 for his model of a M-16A2 (atleast I believe he did). You can see the SP-1 written on the reciever and the front take down pin on the lower receiver has a screw instead of just the push pin.

[Snake Eyes]

My project for the winter is to build an AR chambered in .458 SOCOM. I'm sure there's no shortage of opinions on that.

[HorseSoldier]

The M4 and M16A4 used by the conventional US Army and USMC respectively both retain the three round burst (tech fixes for training problems are always dubious to me). The M4A1 used by SOCOM is full auto, as is the M16A3 issued in limited quantities by the USN (and the SPR as well). The Army is finally starting to switch over to the M4A1 for non-SOF units within the last few months.

[waiting4something]

Originally Posted by Snake Eyes

My project for the winter is to build an AR chambered in .458 SOCOM. I'm sure there's no shortage of opinions on that.

Yeah, here's my 2 cents get a reloader, or plan on having a nice wall piece. I know a guy who has a .50 Beowulf AR and that's what he found out. The ammo is rare and cost like 4 bucks a shot. It's cool for close up stuff and will kill anything on this earth I'm sure. But, I would avoid rounds like those unless you are going to use them on living things. The ammo just cost to much for shooting paper. That's what stopped me from getting one. Impressive rounds, but good lord that's a lot of money to punch a hole in a paper target.

[HorseSoldier]

I had to set down and read the article three times. In the quest for a more lethal round, Colt, the premier firearms maker, actually is trying to sell a rifle that will have the PBI loaded down with a second barrel, and a set of different mags in a different caliber.

The PBI mostly rides these days in up armor humvees or MRAPs or whatever (and yet they get so very upset when I point out that the US Army should probably roll the 11 series MOS's into 19D, since they're just dragoons . . .). A lot of our ODAs rolled with multiple uppers for their M4s, since those were purchasable at the unit level with op funds, but I doubt the Big Army would spring for everybody in an infantry unit to have multiple caliber components for their weapons and don't think it's likely that they'd ever select 7.62x51 for theater wide use or anything. Where I do think they'd get some economy of scale would be common parts shared between general service rifles and DMRs/sniper rifles, as well as reducing retraining requirements for guys transitioning from general to specialist weapons (rather like the M4/M110 allows at present).

My project for the winter is to build an AR chambered in .458 SOCOM. I'm sure there's no shortage of opinions on that.

I've been thinking that one in 458 in an SBR format (12" barrel) would be a great bear gun for up here in Alaska (Teppo Jutsu has one on their website with an even shorter barrel if I remember right). Ammo price would be way up there like waiting4something said, but you could build relevant muscle memory shooting 5.56 (and since the lower would be the registered SBR and you can specify multiple calibers on the paperwork, a matching 12" 5.56mm upper would be good to go) and just do a little familiarization with the big bore rounds to get a feel for how the recoil effects handling and split times and such.