M16 Charging Handle

[Kiwigrunt]

That's what they're taught in basic training. We un-train that once they get to their unit because simply charging the weapon will clear the vast majority of stoppages, making it adequate and much quicker when seconds count.

That may perhaps be weapon dependent. A double feed may not always be cleared simply by cocking. The only stoppages (apart from the most common one, empty) I have had, and far to often to my liking, on my SL8 (G36) is an empty not flying out fast enough and jamming itself fairly solidly in the ejection port, which is on this weapon perhaps a bit too narrow.

The Steyr does not hold the bolt open after the last round is fired, nor does it have a bolt release. So for that reason we have to look at the ejection opening while pulling back the cocking handle. The exception here is for those good at counting rounds fired, which I admittedly never was.

[SethB]

As Ken said, packaging and materials seems to have a lot to do with it.

The upper receiver has always been a forged piece of aluminum. Originally, they were 6061, but in 1968 that was changed to 7075. Cutting a hole in the side does two things. It weakens the receiver and it opens it up to dust. As it stands, the CH placement makes for a weapon with fewer openings, and since there is no CH on the bolt you can use a dust cover. The AKM and variants are examples of weapons that can't be fired while the dust cover is closed.

As for Stoners later designs, he had already given up any rights to his direct impingement design and so had to pioneer other ideas. I don't think the AR 18 is much better than an AR 15.

It should be noted that the AR 15 was originally much more expensive than its competitors. Since CNC machining has gotten cheaper, that price advantage has flipped. M16s are downright cheep compared to other 1950s designs.

As for malfunction clearances, I was taught (outside my current employment) to ensure that the magazine is seated, roll the weapon until the ejection port is down and run the charging handle once. This will clear about 90% of all malfunctions. If that doesn't work, lock the bolt back, clear the action with your fingers, run the bolt three times and reload the weapon.

[jtan163]

]
As for Stoners later designs, he had already given up any rights to his direct impingement design and so had to pioneer other ideas. I don't think the AR 18 is much better than an AR 15.

I'm not sure that Stoner had any rights to give up re the direct impingment design.
I believe direct impingment had been used designs prior to Stoner's the AR series, e.g. Ljungman AG42, so I am not sure that Colt could really have precluded him using it again if he so desired.

[SethB]

The Ljungman was nowhere near as refined as the Stoner system. In Stoner's system, the bolt is pushed forward by gas, unloading the bolt and rotating it at the same time. This is what makes such small lugs successful. Piston guns require a lot of work to keep the load even on the lugs.

[jtan163]

The Ljungman was nowhere near as refined as the Stoner system. In Stoner's system, the bolt is pushed forward by gas, unloading the bolt and rotating it at the same time. This is what makes such small lugs successful. Piston guns require a lot of work to keep the load even on the lugs.

I don't follow what you are saying - I thought that with most Stoner weapons - as with most, if not all, auto/semi auto small arms the bolt is pushed FORWARD (assuming the front is the muzzle, which I do) by a spring and backward via gas.

[SethB]

The weapon unlocks by pushing the bolt forward. This unloads the lugs. And it is why piston operated weapons have had issues with lug breakage in the past.

[Ken White]

Bolt CARRIER backwards -- but before the carrier moves, the gas flows in to the rear cavity and expands, pushing the bolt forward very slightly for a fraction of a second to unload the jugs and ease unlocking and rotation (caused by the beginning rearward movement of the bolt carrier camming the bolt counterclockwise). LINK.

The three little rings on the bolt (inside the red goose egg on the picture below...) are effectively piston rings to enable that.

[gute]

Thanks for the replies.

[Schmedlap]

That may perhaps be weapon dependent. A double feed may not always be cleared simply by cocking.

There are probably better videos out there, but this is the first that popped up (fast forward to 1:15). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TqLnBd1udM

This is more or less what I was describing. And yes, probably weapon dependent. My only experience (other than familiarization fires) is with firearms typically used by the US Army.