Why does the U.S. Military still use the M16 rifle?
December 16th, 2010 by eranio
I know its been upgraded to the M16A4, but still the thing has been in service since 1961, thats 50 years of use, half a goddamn century. Enough is enough, when are they going to put down the o’l M16 already?
Posted in Military Rifles
December 16th, 2010 at 10:20 am
The M16A4 is primarily used by the Marine Corps. Most army units carry the M4 Carbine, while SOCOM and Airborne Forces carry M4A1s, SCAR-Hs, HK-416s, ACRs.
Yeah, why would you want to replace it?! It’s the perfect rifle, next to its weight and firepower (7.62mm NATO rounds are best suited for anti-vehicle roles. U.S. Soldiers in Iraq have complained that the M16′s/M4′s 5.56mm round has been faulty in stopping speeding vehicles carrying IEDs. This is a reason why the would replace the M16, but other than that its perfect.)
December 16th, 2010 at 10:20 am
Ever heard the saying "If it ain’t broke don’t fix it"?
Why get rid or something that works perfectly well?
December 16th, 2010 at 10:20 am
The m16 is one of the most trusted guns in the world other than the AK-47 it is very reliable and will not jam on you very often. It’s pretty simple to assemble and dissemble also, it is a cheap weapon and is easy to make so that is why the mili uses M16
December 16th, 2010 at 10:20 am
When we are good and ready! Your opinion is not worth a wooden nickel!
December 16th, 2010 at 10:20 am
Because it would cost a large amount of money to replace every single rifle currently used.
December 16th, 2010 at 10:20 am
In military nothing changes quickly, they got to have about 100 meetings to decide if they are going to have meeting on the subject.The last try was with the XM-8 but that got shut down because well who knows?
December 16th, 2010 at 10:20 am
I liked it. All you do is keep it clean and it works great.
December 16th, 2010 at 10:20 am
Now Logan Saputo Syndrome is spreading.
The short answer is that’s it’s still highly functional, still meets our needs, and it’s too expensive to replace en masse. With the Picatinny Rail System, we can throw all sorts of attachments on it to increase it’s effectiveness, and make it more customizable.
Besides, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. There are better weapon systems out there, but no demonstrated need to replace it. And replacing all the M16s/M4s would be ludicrously expensive, considering how wide spread it’s usage is (not just with us, but with many other militaries around the world).
Keep in mind the Navy still had M-14s when I first came in in 2006.
FYI, this is a touchy question around here because of some douchebag troll who asks this question 1749049023942389140 times a day.
December 16th, 2010 at 10:20 am
How about you be patient and relax? We stick to the military motto… "Hurry up and wait!"
December 16th, 2010 at 10:20 am
It’s the best choice because it’s economical, and it works!
December 16th, 2010 at 10:20 am
Easy cost
December 16th, 2010 at 10:20 am
its not realy an m16 anymore its an M4 carbine…the m16 sucks balls but the M4 aint so bad….why do we use it? because we purchased so many….personally i would rather have a P90 but since our military bought so many M4s we have to use them…they already have better guns…its all about money and politics….less about the effectiveness of the weapon…they could care less how good the weapon is because they have apachi helicopters and AC130 gunships for the hard jobs
December 16th, 2010 at 10:20 am
50 years is hardly anything – Britain kept the Brown Bess for about 130 years…
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.