Is 3 shot burst considered automatic?

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
The three shot burst mode on an M16 is the semi-auto setting.

Nope. No such setting on an M16, unless it's modded. It's either semi or three round burst.

Wrong

Originally posted by: theblackbox
why would you want a weapon with a three round burst. the m16/m4 suck as a select fire weapon. the mp5 is only useful if you plan on fighting in close quarters in a urban situation. stick with something that works, like an old lee enfield 303, like the 1897 model. over 100 years old and still one of the best rifles as long as you can find the rounds to fire through it.

Wrong

Originally posted by: Zugzwang152

Link? I thought federal law prohibits automatic weapons outside of law enforcement and the military.

Wrong

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
The three shot burst mode on an M16 is the semi-auto setting.

Wrong

 

[theblackbox]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
The three shot burst mode on an M16 is the semi-auto setting.

Nope. No such setting on an M16, unless it's modded. It's either semi or three round burst.

Wrong

Originally posted by: theblackbox
why would you want a weapon with a three round burst. the m16/m4 suck as a select fire weapon. the mp5 is only useful if you plan on fighting in close quarters in a urban situation. stick with something that works, like an old lee enfield 303, like the 1897 model. over 100 years old and still one of the best rifles as long as you can find the rounds to fire through it.

Wrong

Originally posted by: Zugzwang152

Link? I thought federal law prohibits automatic weapons outside of law enforcement and the military.

Wrong

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
The three shot burst mode on an M16 is the semi-auto setting.

Wrong

please do tell. and please don't base it off your call of duty or battlefield 1942/2/2142 experience.
I'd like to know.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: TehMac

Nope. No such setting on an M16, unless it's modded. It's either semi or three round burst.

Wrong

Nope, I'm right. Now kindly piss off.


P.S. I was referring to the most current M16 in action, the A4.

 

[Bulk Beef]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: TehMac

Nope. No such setting on an M16, unless it's modded. It's either semi or three round burst.

Wrong

Nope, I'm right. Now kindly piss off.


P.S. I was referring to the most current M16 in action, the A4.

You are very wrong.

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: theblackbox

please do tell. and please don't base it off your call of duty or battlefield 1942/2/2142 experience.
I'd like to know.

Hah, no.

There have been 4 mass produced versions of the M16. The A1 and A3 fired either semi-auto or full auto. The A2 and A4 fire semi automatic or on three round bursts.

There are A4's and A3's still in use today, mostly in the Marines, the Navy, and Army National Guard and Reserves. Most active duty Army units carry M4's which fire semi-automatic or on 3 round burst. Except for the M4A1's which some spec ops units carry that will fire fully automatic.

There is also a Marine sniper variant, which I'm not to sure about. There is also another spec op variant which is piston operated, and I also am not sure how it can fire.

A three round burst would legally be considered an automatic weapon because it fires more then one round with a single pull of the trigger. They could be owned still by filling out the correct paperwork and waiting a few months.

The point of a three round burst is for far off targets when determining the correct distance might be difficult. You could aim at a mans mid section and the next two rounds will end up higher because of the barrel rising. If your arc is off, at least one of the bullets has a better chance of inflicting a wound.

And TehMac, you are wrong. You didn't say that you were referring to the A4, and that's a moot point because there are A3's in action. I've seen them with my own eyes.

 

[theblackbox]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: theblackbox

please do tell. and please don't base it off your call of duty or battlefield 1942/2/2142 experience.
I'd like to know.

Hah, no.

There have been 4 mass produced versions of the M16. The A1 and A3 fired either semi-auto or full auto. The A2 and A4 fire semi automatic or on three round bursts.

There are A4's and A3's still in use today, mostly in the Marines, the Navy, and Army National Guard and Reserves. Most active duty Army units carry M4's which fire semi-automatic or on 3 round burst. Except for the M4A1's which some spec ops units carry that will fire fully automatic.

There is also a Marine sniper variant, which I'm not to sure about. There is also another spec op variant which is piston operated, and I also am not sure how it can fire.

A three round burst would legally be considered an automatic weapon because it fires more then one round with a single pull of the trigger. They could be owned still by filling out the correct paperwork and waiting a few months.

The point of a three round burst is for far off targets when determining the correct distance might be difficult. You could aim at a mans mid section and the next two rounds will end up higher because of the barrel rising. If your arc is off, at least one of the bullets has a better chance of inflicting a wound.

And TehMac, you are wrong. You didn't say that you were referring to the A4, and that's a moot point because there are A3's in action. I've seen them with my own eyes.

i have no experience with the a3 or a4, as those were introduced well after i left active duty, so i can not and will not comment on them.

you still haven't explained why the enfield 303 isn't as capable a rifle as either as i pointed out. so i don't get what you are talking about. Having carried an A1 and an A2, used the M14, mp5 and several other issue rifles, i still prefer the 1897 enfield as a military rifle. it's reliability, dependibility and accuracy put it up as one of the greatest combat wepaons ever made. No, it's not an automatic, but here it goes:

The three round burst is a failed attempt to compensate for the poor arms training and accuracy of the modern rifle. While the M16 can be an accurate rifle, the poor training and time spen honing those skills has meant trouble ever since it's inception.
I guess the modern infantry concept of point, spray and hope, i could tell you some great stories about friendly fire during training exercises with national guard/reserve units from the north and midwest during their arteps because they relied on select fire and panicked and made a mess of things.
Nothing beats good training and a single shot rifle.
So if you feel i am wrong, i am still waiting for you to elaborate.

I still stand by the point the select fire weapons of the modern military don't stand up. Handing a cripple a crutch doesn't make them any less of a cripple. just a little more mobile.

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: theblackbox
why would you want a weapon with a three round burst. the m16/m4 suck as a select fire weapon. the mp5 is only useful if you plan on fighting in close quarters in a urban situation. stick with something that works, like an old lee enfield 303, like the 1897 model. over 100 years old and still one of the best rifles as long as you can find the rounds to fire through it.

Suuuuure. I'm going to trust somebody on ATOT over my father who was an infantry officer for 5 years.

Full auto is fine for having people keep their heads down but good luck actually hitting what you're shooting at with any hand held weapon. It will jump around too much and over any appreciable distance the chance of actually hitting what you're aiming at is pretty low. The whole idea behind shooting in bursts is to re-aim after each burst.

To just lay down fire their are other better weapons. The M50 comes to mind.

 

[theblackbox]

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: theblackbox
why would you want a weapon with a three round burst. the m16/m4 suck as a select fire weapon. the mp5 is only useful if you plan on fighting in close quarters in a urban situation. stick with something that works, like an old lee enfield 303, like the 1897 model. over 100 years old and still one of the best rifles as long as you can find the rounds to fire through it.

Suuuuure. I'm going to trust somebody on ATOT over my father who was an infantry officer for 5 years.

Full auto is fine for having people keep their heads down but good luck actually hitting what you're shooting at with any hand held weapon. It will jump around too much and over any appreciable distance the chance of actually hitting what you're aiming at is pretty low. The whole idea behind shooting in bursts is to re-aim after each burst.

To just lay down fire their are other better weapons. The M50 comes to mind.

wow an infantry officer for five years... i didn't ask you to trust my opinion. this is my opinion. i am not a fan of select fire in the form of three shot burst or full auto. did the enfield reference not suggest that?
i have no clue what you are talking about. the enfield is a single shot rifle, at least last time i checked.
for full automatic, look to the m249, since it can use m16 mags and is able to be carried fairly easy. It's high rate of fire and the fact that it can scavenge ammo makes it one of the best automatic weapons. i know people will disagree, but when you have one in your squad and you have it to help you, you quickly see it's worth.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: Bulk Beef

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: TehMac

Nope. No such setting on an M16, unless it's modded. It's either semi or three round burst.

Wrong

Nope, I'm right. Now kindly piss off.


P.S. I was referring to the most current M16 in action, the A4.

You are very wrong.

WWYBYWB?

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: theblackbox

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: theblackbox
why would you want a weapon with a three round burst. the m16/m4 suck as a select fire weapon. the mp5 is only useful if you plan on fighting in close quarters in a urban situation. stick with something that works, like an old lee enfield 303, like the 1897 model. over 100 years old and still one of the best rifles as long as you can find the rounds to fire through it.

Suuuuure. I'm going to trust somebody on ATOT over my father who was an infantry officer for 5 years.

Full auto is fine for having people keep their heads down but good luck actually hitting what you're shooting at with any hand held weapon. It will jump around too much and over any appreciable distance the chance of actually hitting what you're aiming at is pretty low. The whole idea behind shooting in bursts is to re-aim after each burst.

To just lay down fire their are other better weapons. The M50 comes to mind.

wow an infantry officer for five years... i didn't ask you to trust my opinion. this is my opinion. i am not a fan of select fire in the form of three shot burst or full auto. did the enfield reference not suggest that?
i have no clue what you are talking about. the enfield is a single shot rifle, at least last time i checked.
for full automatic, look to the m249, since it can use m16 mags and is able to be carried fairly easy. It's high rate of fire and the fact that it can scavenge ammo makes it one of the best automatic weapons. i know people will disagree, but when you have one in your squad and you have it to help you, you quickly see it's worth.

:roll: So being in charge of urban combat training for a few brigades has no bearing on this? Wow, I never would have guessed!

I'm going to admit I didn't read your whole post because honestly you're sounding like a troll. You're right a single shot gun is better for most situations but you're coming across like an arrogant idiot. Tone it down a bit and maybe people will read what you write.

 

[theblackbox]

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: theblackbox

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: theblackbox
why would you want a weapon with a three round burst. the m16/m4 suck as a select fire weapon. the mp5 is only useful if you plan on fighting in close quarters in a urban situation. stick with something that works, like an old lee enfield 303, like the 1897 model. over 100 years old and still one of the best rifles as long as you can find the rounds to fire through it.

Suuuuure. I'm going to trust somebody on ATOT over my father who was an infantry officer for 5 years.

Full auto is fine for having people keep their heads down but good luck actually hitting what you're shooting at with any hand held weapon. It will jump around too much and over any appreciable distance the chance of actually hitting what you're aiming at is pretty low. The whole idea behind shooting in bursts is to re-aim after each burst.

To just lay down fire their are other better weapons. The M50 comes to mind.

wow an infantry officer for five years... i didn't ask you to trust my opinion. this is my opinion. i am not a fan of select fire in the form of three shot burst or full auto. did the enfield reference not suggest that?
i have no clue what you are talking about. the enfield is a single shot rifle, at least last time i checked.
for full automatic, look to the m249, since it can use m16 mags and is able to be carried fairly easy. It's high rate of fire and the fact that it can scavenge ammo makes it one of the best automatic weapons. i know people will disagree, but when you have one in your squad and you have it to help you, you quickly see it's worth.

:roll: So being in charge of urban combat training for a few brigades has no bearing on this? Wow, I never would have guessed!

I'm going to admit I didn't read your whole post because honestly you're sounding like a troll. You're right a single shot gun is better for most situations but you're coming across like an arrogant idiot. Tone it down a bit and maybe people will read what you write.

sorry if it comes off as arrogant, maybe passionate is what i am, and i'm trying to convey my experience. Maybe i'm not too internet forum savvy, but i still stand behind what i think.

i'll have to work on my forum etiquette i reckon.

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: theblackbox


you still haven't explained why the enfield 303 isn't as capable a rifle as either as i pointed out. so i don't get what you are talking about. Having carried an A1 and an A2, used the M14, mp5 and several other issue rifles, i still prefer the 1897 enfield as a military rifle. it's reliability, dependibility and accuracy put it up as one of the greatest combat wepaons ever made. No, it's not an automatic, but here it goes:

The three round burst is a failed attempt to compensate for the poor arms training and accuracy of the modern rifle. While the M16 can be an accurate rifle, the poor training and time spen honing those skills has meant trouble ever since it's inception.
I guess the modern infantry concept of point, spray and hope, i could tell you some great stories about friendly fire during training exercises with national guard/reserve units from the north and midwest during their arteps because they relied on select fire and panicked and made a mess of things.
Nothing beats good training and a single shot rifle.
So if you feel i am wrong, i am still waiting for you to elaborate.

I still stand by the point the select fire weapons of the modern military don't stand up. Handing a cripple a crutch doesn't make them any less of a cripple. just a little more mobile.

Hmm, enjoy riding in a Humvee or Stryker with an enfield as opposed to an M4. Or better yet, have fun clearing a room with a bolt action rifle. We are not fighting people in the forest right now.

I've argued several times on this forum that a fully automatic "assault weapon" is less deadly then a semi-automatic one in most situations, so I'm not arguing with you there. I don't use 3 round burst on my m4.

As for the m249, my company had the collapsible butt stock and short barrels so they were even sweeter, especially for CQB. M2's and M240B's on the trucks.

I do own an enfield rifle, but have not shot it yet, as I inherited it in sad shape.

Just a guess, but were you were in the service in the 90's?

 

[Squisher]

All this gun talk from you gun guys is just making me wet down there.

 

[theblackbox]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: theblackbox


you still haven't explained why the enfield 303 isn't as capable a rifle as either as i pointed out. so i don't get what you are talking about. Having carried an A1 and an A2, used the M14, mp5 and several other issue rifles, i still prefer the 1897 enfield as a military rifle. it's reliability, dependibility and accuracy put it up as one of the greatest combat wepaons ever made. No, it's not an automatic, but here it goes:

The three round burst is a failed attempt to compensate for the poor arms training and accuracy of the modern rifle. While the M16 can be an accurate rifle, the poor training and time spen honing those skills has meant trouble ever since it's inception.
I guess the modern infantry concept of point, spray and hope, i could tell you some great stories about friendly fire during training exercises with national guard/reserve units from the north and midwest during their arteps because they relied on select fire and panicked and made a mess of things.
Nothing beats good training and a single shot rifle.
So if you feel i am wrong, i am still waiting for you to elaborate.

I still stand by the point the select fire weapons of the modern military don't stand up. Handing a cripple a crutch doesn't make them any less of a cripple. just a little more mobile.

Hmm, enjoy riding in a Humvee or Stryker with an enfield as opposed to an M4. Or better yet, have fun clearing a room with a bolt action rifle. We are not fighting people in the forest right now.

I've argued several times on this forum that a fully automatic "assault weapon" is less deadly then a semi-automatic one in most situations, so I'm not arguing with you there. I don't use 3 round burst on my m4.

As for the m249, my company had the collapsible butt stock and short barrels so they were even sweeter, especially for CQB. M2's and M240B's on the trucks.

I do own an enfield rifle, but have not shot it yet, as I inherited it in sad shape.

Just a guess, but were you were in the service in the 90's?

to give you an idea, we were still planning on the concept of tank war in fulda gap when i was in the service. todays wacky combat wasn't even a thought.
80's, 87-93.
The saddest day of my life was when they took the m151a2 out of service.( oh, and when they made us put the netting on the m151a2 for safety. i hated those net doors) I went up to chaffee and saw the vast disposal lot of the old jeeps.(if you had the inclination at the time, 50 bucks and your active duty id could get you an old jeep of your choice, you just had to get it off the lot.) While the humvee did offer more protection, nothing beat being able to hide the m151 in the bushes and drive up and down steep river beds. being able to flip it, and then just turn it back over, being able to carry a tow bar and easily bring back an injured jeep.
Our first humvee was uncomfortable to say the least. i guess i'm just old school.
Same with the m113. i was sad when the bradley took over. I always loved the profile of the 113. I wish they would have taken them, shoved a 105 in the front and made a breaching tank out of them.
Don't get me wrong, in a room clearing or urban situation, nothing beats the mp5 in might opinion, well besides a well placed grenade I'm sure the m4 is also capable in this respect, but as a rifle i think it would be a poor choice due to barrel length, the fact that it is gas operated and a poor modification of the m16 gas system.
I was not aware there was a piston version, the military needs to go to another system of rifle, the m16 is just a little too long in the tooth.



on the saw....the first time i was involved with a jump with one (i didn't jump with it, part of our squad) i fell in love with it. up to that point, my experience had been with the m60 ( i know, rookie, right) and seeing it in action brought a sparkle to my eyes.
If there was one wepon i could own as a civilian, that would be it.

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: theblackbox


sorry if it comes off as arrogant, maybe passionate is what i am, and i'm trying to convey my experience. Maybe i'm not too internet forum savvy, but i still stand behind what i think.

i'll have to work on my forum etiquette i reckon.

You bring up good points, just tone it down a little. You've got to remember that people only see what you write, it's hard to tell if you don't mean it harshly or are joking.

 

[xSauronx]

Originally posted by: theblackbox
the military needs to go to another system of rifle, the m16 is just a little too long in the tooth.

the military, iirc, last year had a rifle from H&K that they were ready to buy, but because the bidding process didnt go as some manufacturers wanted (or maybe there wasnt one, i dont remember the details of it all) the military had to cancel the deal.

 

[TallBill]

The H&K 416
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_&_Koch_HK416

Some units have em, but I'm not sure how widespread they are. The probabem with the mp5 is that the m4 is better suited as a multi-role weapon. It can reach out and touch someone at 600 meters, and it can be used to clear a building, and it can fit in a truck. It may not be the best at any of its roles, but overall it's decent.

I would like to see a transition to the 416 though, cost is definitely a factor.

 

[theblackbox]

Originally posted by: xSauronx

Originally posted by: theblackbox
the military needs to go to another system of rifle, the m16 is just a little too long in the tooth.

the military, iirc, last year had a rifle from H&K that they were ready to buy, but because the bidding process didnt go as some manufacturers wanted (or maybe there wasnt one, i dont remember the details of it all) the military had to cancel the deal.

was that the xm8?

Now, if i had to own an m16 variant, i would love the hk416. i am a big fan of the G36 (yes i know, but come on.) and think that even though it is a gas rifle, i would be glad to try it out.
i always liked their slogans:

in a world of compromise, some don't

 

[xSauronx]

Originally posted by: theblackbox

Originally posted by: xSauronx

Originally posted by: theblackbox
the military needs to go to another system of rifle, the m16 is just a little too long in the tooth.

the military, iirc, last year had a rifle from H&K that they were ready to buy, but because the bidding process didnt go as some manufacturers wanted (or maybe there wasnt one, i dont remember the details of it all) the military had to cancel the deal.

was that the xm8?

that may have been it, but that was cancelled in 2005. my timeline was off

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Bulk Beef

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: TehMac

Nope. No such setting on an M16, unless it's modded. It's either semi or three round burst.

Wrong

Nope, I'm right. Now kindly piss off.


P.S. I was referring to the most current M16 in action, the A4.

You are very wrong.

Actually, he's correct.

The ONLY fully auto M16 version besides the A1 was the A3 and it was VERY limited. So limited, I never saw an A3 when I was in the army.

The A2 and A4 models are semi and 3 round burst only.

some good info here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M16_rifle#M16A2

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: tranceport
Just so you guys know..

The ATF will charge you $200 for stamp that allows you to own a type 2 firearm. This includes full automatic weapons made before 1986, noise supressors, and other misc items of this nature. I have a few friends with full auto weapons and I also have a friend with a noise suppressor for his ar15.

Getting the tax stamp just involves some paperwork and some money. It is also true that most of the fully automatic weapons such as a m16 or a mg42 are pretty costly. I have seen m16a1 for $10,000. I have seen mg42's for $40,000


Here is an auction link to a mg42. This is a WW2 era fully automatic machine gun. http://www.gunbroker.com/Aucti...tem.asp?Item=117123644
Here is an auction link to a m16-a1. If you look at the 3rd picture you will see m16a1's have only 3 selections. Safe, Semi, Auto. (s1a) http://www.gunbroker.com/Aucti...tem.asp?Item=117106563

MG42 :drool;

Don't forget the huge ammo costs for something with that rate of fire.

Bet you would give a few WW2 vets a heart attack when you opened up...

 

[RichardE]

This thread gave me a stiffy

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Bulk Beef

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: TehMac

Nope. No such setting on an M16, unless it's modded. It's either semi or three round burst.

Wrong

Nope, I'm right. Now kindly piss off.


P.S. I was referring to the most current M16 in action, the A4.

You are very wrong.

Actually, he's correct.

The ONLY fully auto M16 version besides the A1 was the A3 and it was VERY limited. So limited, I never saw an A3 when I was in the army.

The A2 and A4 models are semi and 3 round burst only.

some good info here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M16_rifle#M16A2

Actually, he is still wrong. When I first quoted him there was no mention of the A4 model. There are unmodded M16's that fire full auto, so he is wrong. Simple as that. I can guarantee you that there are still A1's in service somewhere around the world as well.

 

[Evadman]

A friend of mine got back from Iraq about 2 years ago, and decided he wanted some guns. He bought a full auto M16A1 and a semi automatic BMG 82A1, he beat me to owning one.

 

[Bulk Beef]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Bulk Beef

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: TehMac

Nope. No such setting on an M16, unless it's modded. It's either semi or three round burst.

Wrong

Nope, I'm right. Now kindly piss off.


P.S. I was referring to the most current M16 in action, the A4.

You are very wrong.

Actually, he's correct.

The ONLY fully auto M16 version besides the A1 was the A3 and it was VERY limited. So limited, I never saw an A3 when I was in the army.

The A2 and A4 models are semi and 3 round burst only.

some good info here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M16_rifle#M16A2

Actually, he is still wrong. When I first quoted him there was no mention of the A4 model. There are unmodded M16's that fire full auto, so he is wrong. Simple as that. I can guarantee you that there are still A1's in service somewhere around the world as well.

Actually, I thought he was saying that M16s were either semi, or they were burst. Now that I've looked at the post TehMac was replying to, I see that he was actually saying something else. Still not quite right, but true enough of the A4 and A2.

As far as the Enfield goes - dude, put down the pipe. And let someone detonate an IED next to your Jeep. You'll change your mind right quick.