What's the worst gun?

[critic22]

i would have to say that the french world war I machine gun the Chauchat or show show was the worst, it have a very high frequency of jamming and was made out of non interchangeable parts its metal wore out very quickly and due to poorly made ammo bullets would even explode in and outside of the chamber.
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:HfdLonXLCZwrAM:http://www.gunsworld.com/french/graphs/chauchat.jpg&t=1

 

[Major_Tom]

Romanian AK.
When you want to fire - it jams, when you don't want to fire - it empties it's magazine. Also if you gently tap the stock it will break. How did they manage to fuck up an AK clone?

 

[brodie21]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

I was reading The Zombie Survival Guide by Max Brooks yesterday and that is damn near word for word his opinion on it...

Edit: Ninja'd XD

he probably used the same sources that i read

 

[Canid117]

The Klobb, obviously. Did you ever use that thing?


What do you mean it's not a real gun?! I seen it in goldeneye!

You mean this?

It is actually a Czech made submachine gun called the ?korpion.

 

[brodie21]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

I see you read the zombie survival guide, because thats an exact qoute from it.

OT: Alot of people have already said the desert eagle and im going to have to agree with them on this one.

pretty much. i also dont like the heavy machine gun the japanese used in WW2

 

[CpnBeef]

The cream pie gun from Bugsy Malone, for anyone not familar with this bizare film kids get killed by CREAM TO THE FACE

 

[brodie21]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

Those problems have all been fixed. Now it is an exemplary military rifle. As for what was wrong with the M-14 well... too expensive... too heavy and the recoil is just fucking awful on that fat bastard. Though it supposedly works beautifully as a sniper and semi-automatic battle rifle.

Worst gun? Desert Eagle, that thing is horrifically impracticable. Too heavy, nasty recoil, the bullets are too big and it has a horribly limited magazine capacity.

i was referencing the original m16, but currently it is probably far from an exemplary military rifle, else why are they replacing it with the ACR? as for the m14, the semi auto battle rifle is what it was designed for, punch big holes in your targets. the auto setting was just for suppressing fire on the occaision that you didnt have an LMG available

 

[brodie21]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

It's since been fixed though. Several times. Pretty sure that the M16 A4 (the most recent version) has most of the creses ironed out.

i know, i was just referencing the original. but i dont see what was wrong with the m-14

It was too light for its relative heavy ammonition. And it lacked a pistol-grip.
Both things that made it uncontrollable when firing full-auto.

it had a pistol grip, and it was meant to be a semi-automatic rifle.

 

[brodie21]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

It's since been fixed though. Several times. Pretty sure that the M16 A4 (the most recent version) has most of the creses ironed out.

i know, i was just referencing the original. but i dont see what was wrong with the m-14

Fair enough.

And I suppose the M14 is pretty big, heavy, fairly useless when fired on automatic. Plus the 7.62mm rounds take up a lot of room compared to 5.56mm so you can carry less ammo. Also I think that the wooden stocks tended to warp in the jungle which a bad effect on the gun's acuracy.

Far be it from me to say, being neither an expert or a soldier, but the M14 is probably better off in it's current role...

as i have stated before, ( not in this or the quoted post) the m- 14 was based off the m-1, which was designed for accurate shooting when that was the name of the game in ww2, if wooden stocks did not warp in the jungles of the south pacific then why would they in vietnam? and as for ammo-i guess you have a point, but 7.62 rounds are not all that much bigger than 5.56, and the difference might be made up with the increased stopping power. all i was saying was that why did they switch over to something completely new and not stick to what worked? especially in the middle of the war

 

[Canid117]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

Those problems have all been fixed. Now it is an exemplary military rifle. As for what was wrong with the M-14 well... too expensive... too heavy and the recoil is just fucking awful on that fat bastard. Though it supposedly works beautifully as a sniper and semi-automatic battle rifle.

Worst gun? Desert Eagle, that thing is horrifically impracticable. Too heavy, nasty recoil, the bullets are too big and it has a horribly limited magazine capacity.

i was referencing the original m16, but currently it is probably far from an exemplary military rifle, else why are they replacing it with the ACR? as for the m14, the semi auto battle rifle is what it was designed for, punch big holes in your targets. the auto setting was just for suppressing fire on the occaision that you didnt have an LMG available

There are no official plans to replace the M-16 and M-4 series of rifles. Competitions have been held but no replacement has ever been chosen and the United States military hasn't even placed any orders for the ACR as far as I am aware (someone has been playing too much MW2 it seems). The M-16 does its job very well and the M-4 does its job pretty well(There have been reports of reduced stopping power on the M-4 but it still kills people). They are considered very good weapons by the people who are actually familiar with them. The M-14 was designed as you said to deliver accurate shots with full auto being used for suppressing actions but the problem with that is that almost All fire in a combat scenario is suppressing fire. The ammunition is too heavy for what it would be used for and so a new weapon was designed using a round that was better suited for the majority of small arms use in a warzone. The M-14 just doesn't work as well for that purpose as the M-16 because the recoil is awful so it is very difficult to keep the volume of fire going where it is supposed to go and you will run out of bullets faster because you just can't carry enough to maintain the fire that you need to maintain.


EDIT: Also in response to some of your earlier comments the M-14 does not come standard with a pistol grip. A Pistol grip is a grip that is separate from the stock and the M-14 only accepts one with heavy modification. The Ammunition for the M-14 may not sound much larger but there is a large difference.

Thats the 5.56 on the left with the 7.62 on the right and a 30-30 Winchester in the center. As you can see there is in fact a significant difference in size. The weight is also very different with the 7.62 weighing between 9 and 12 Grams and the 5.56 weighing about 4 grams. That may not seem like much but you are carrying hundreds of these things around and you can carry twice as many 5.56's as 7.62's. Are you starting to understand now?

 

[DefunctTheory]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

It's since been fixed though. Several times. Pretty sure that the M16 A4 (the most recent version) has most of the creses ironed out.

i know, i was just referencing the original. but i dont see what was wrong with the m-14

Fair enough.

And I suppose the M14 is pretty big, heavy, fairly useless when fired on automatic. Plus the 7.62mm rounds take up a lot of room compared to 5.56mm so you can carry less ammo. Also I think that the wooden stocks tended to warp in the jungle which a bad effect on the gun's acuracy.

Far be it from me to say, being neither an expert or a soldier, but the M14 is probably better off in it's current role...

as i have stated before, ( not in this or the quoted post) the m- 14 was based off the m-1, which was designed for accurate shooting when that was the name of the game in ww2, if wooden stocks did not warp in the jungles of the south pacific then why would they in vietnam? and as for ammo-i guess you have a point, but 7.62 rounds are not all that much bigger than 5.56, and the difference might be made up with the increased stopping power. all i was saying was that why did they switch over to something completely new and not stick to what worked? especially in the middle of the war

7.62 NATO rounds are much larger than 5.56. Weight wise, the 7.62 weighs twice as much as the 5.56 (9.7 grams to 4 grams) and is almost 40% longer (71.1 mm to 57.4 mm). To have a 210 round load out (Standard on person round count), 7.62 would weigh 4.49 pounds (Magazineless), and a 5.56 load out would weigh 1.85 rounds.

When you start thinking about how much ammo you'd have to take on extended scouting, roaming foot patrols, wandering the jungle, etc, you start to wonder: Do I want bigger, heavier ammo, or a shit load of ammo?

7.62 looks even worse when you start talking about light machine guns, too.

 

[SimuLord]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

It's since been fixed though. Several times. Pretty sure that the M16 A4 (the most recent version) has most of the creses ironed out.

i know, i was just referencing the original. but i dont see what was wrong with the m-14

Fair enough.

And I suppose the M14 is pretty big, heavy, fairly useless when fired on automatic. Plus the 7.62mm rounds take up a lot of room compared to 5.56mm so you can carry less ammo. Also I think that the wooden stocks tended to warp in the jungle which a bad effect on the gun's acuracy.

Far be it from me to say, being neither an expert or a soldier, but the M14 is probably better off in it's current role...

as i have stated before, ( not in this or the quoted post) the m- 14 was based off the m-1, which was designed for accurate shooting when that was the name of the game in ww2, if wooden stocks did not warp in the jungles of the south pacific then why would they in vietnam? and as for ammo-i guess you have a point, but 7.62 rounds are not all that much bigger than 5.56, and the difference might be made up with the increased stopping power. all i was saying was that why did they switch over to something completely new and not stick to what worked? especially in the middle of the war

7.62 NATO rounds are much larger than 5.56. Weight wise, the 7.62 weighs twice as much as the 5.56 (9.7 grams to 4 grams) and is almost 40% longer (71.1 mm to 57.4 mm). To have a 210 round load out (Standard on person round count), 7.62 would weigh 4.49 pounds (Magazineless), and a 5.56 load out would weigh 1.85 rounds.

When you start thinking about how much ammo you'd have to take on extended scouting, roaming foot patrols, wandering the jungle, etc, you start to wonder: Do I want bigger, heavier ammo, or a shit load of ammo?

7.62 looks even worse when you start talking about light machine guns, too.

Of course, if you're playing Fallout 3 a 5.56 round is weightless.

 

[DazBurger]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

It's since been fixed though. Several times. Pretty sure that the M16 A4 (the most recent version) has most of the creses ironed out.

i know, i was just referencing the original. but i dont see what was wrong with the m-14

It was too light for its relative heavy ammonition. And it lacked a pistol-grip.
Both things that made it uncontrollable when firing full-auto.

it had a pistol grip, and it was meant to be a semi-automatic rifle.

Arent we talking about this one?

Dont see any pistol-grip^^


Besides, full auto was the whole point. The M16 did have alot less stopping-power, but the new smaller round made it able to fire bursts or even full auto, with relatively great precision.

Instead the M-14 got the role as DMR.


I recommend this video for everyone interested.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lf6CxQh3YXA

I think its from Discovery or some other channel I'm not familiar with.

 

[Berethond]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

who the hell MELEES with a rifle? real life isn't halo dude, you stay far away from your enemy because chances are they have an MG nearby that will fill the air with more lead than a chinese factory.

<url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krav_Maga>The Israelis do. Ironically, they use the M-16 for it. And it works beautifully for them.

 

[HerrBobo]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

Almost word for owrd from The Zombie Guide to the Apocalypse.

My vote; any pistol bigget then .45cal is a waste of space.

 

[Atmos Duality]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

who the hell MELEES with a rifle? real life isn't halo dude, you stay far away from your enemy because chances are they have an MG nearby that will fill the air with more lead than a chinese factory.

Melees. Shocks. Etc. They do train you on how to strike with a rifle off of a charge, but heaven help you if you ever need to do that.

Unless you're toting an M16a1 (the first versions without the chromed rifling), I think you're in pretty good shape.

...Unless you're left-handed. Marine buddy of mine is a southpaw, and he's lost a fair bit of skin because his unit refused to issue him an M4 that has a right-side ejector.

 

[DefunctTheory]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

who the hell MELEES with a rifle? real life isn't halo dude, you stay far away from your enemy because chances are they have an MG nearby that will fill the air with more lead than a chinese factory.

<url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krav_Maga>The Israelis do. Ironically, they use the M-16 for it. And it works beautifully for them.

I want to learn Krav Maga. One of the most deadly martial arts around, and certainly the most brutal.

 

[Pyro Paul]

What's with all the hate on the Desert Eagle? Sure the .50 cal AE version is totally pointless as a sidearm, but the gun comes in like two other flavors (.44 magnum and .357 magnum).

Worst firearm in modern history: The M16/M4 and it's variants (not including the HK M416/417). Probably caused the deaths of more Americans than any firearm the enemy (if your in the US) ever used. Indirectly of course, but a jammed gun might as well be a bullet to the face.

And i'm also a little confused as to the hate on the XM8. The thing beat out all the other rifles in the US trials. That is to say, it beat the FN SCAR, Colt M4, and HK M416. Personally, I'd rather have a rifle that jams once every 10,000 rounds that one that jams ever time it see a speck of dirt or sand. (unless the issue is the NATO 5.56mm round, which is shit.)

ah ignorance.

the Desert Eagle is very prone to jamming because it is a gas operated system. 2 in 7 shots resulted in jamming when firing .44 when i observed it being fired on two diffrent occations. also the weapon has insane recoil even when firing .357 and .44 rounds. i've watched professional gunmen nearly smack themselves in the face because of its recoil...

it is an over hyped nickle plated sissy pistol ment to make some people feel bad-ass.


the M-16 is possibly one of the best rifles in production and is the standard of all professional armies. the flaws early in its life acctually have been proven to not be the fault of the gun at all, but instead with the powder of the cartrages it shot. you see the army decided to buy the cheaper bullets thinking it wouldn't make a diffrence. but the gun powder in these bullets caused additional build up in the rifle which lead to the stoppages. when proper ammunition was used with the weapon its stoppages where greatly reduced even though the damage to its reputation remains.


the XM-8 is a stupid and dangerious rifle.
yes, only 1 in every 10,000 rounds jam... but after those 10,000 rounds you're unable to use the weapon as the heat generated melted the surrounding plastic and fused the triggering mechanism into a solid mass preventing you from shooting. or it conforming to the magazine block preventing you from reloading. even with more tempered plastic builds it can not handle the heat and prolonged fire will lead to the weapon to melt in the users hands.

 

[JWAN]

The Army was mainly in Europe and they did have some company's for "sit and shit" duties but after the marines took an Island the army would move in and set up more permanent structures.

Part of that was because at the time, due to it's smaller size (than the US Army), reputation and traditional role(s), it was seen as 'wasting' USMC troops they couldn't spare putting them on garrison duty when the Army not only had the numbers to supply garrison troops but also that such duty had always been one of the Army's traditional roles.

Absolutely correct, at the start of WWII the NY police force had more manpower than the entirety of the United States Marine Corps.

 

[JWAN]

the M-16. considered the worst assault rifle in the world. any sort of melee with it would shatter the spring-loaded stock and the overly complex firing mechanism was a ***** to clean and jammed alot. the only reason it became the standard american infantry rifle was politics, "buy my gun and you get my vote". it was originally designed for MPs at stateside military bases

who the hell MELEES with a rifle? real life isn't halo dude, you stay far away from your enemy because chances are they have an MG nearby that will fill the air with more lead than a chinese factory.

Melees. Shocks. Etc. They do train you on how to strike with a rifle off of a charge, but heaven help you if you ever need to do that.

Unless you're toting an M16a1 (the first versions without the chromed rifling), I think you're in pretty good shape.

...Unless you're left-handed. Marine buddy of mine is a southpaw, and he's lost a fair bit of skin because his unit refused to issue him an M4 that has a right-side ejector.

Because the Army took all the damn M4's!
He needs to go back to the proud roots of the USMC
Beg
Borrow
Steal
Like my father and uncle