Quote Originally Posted by 120mm View Post
Really, there were/are only two reliability issues...Second, there was/is the lack of training on how to make the system work.
though I'd say three issues with the third being the bolt closure device. Failure to train and over maintenance are still with us...

All that said re: the weapon, the capabilities of the ammunition are the major problem and that has always been true.
The AR works quite well when dirty, despite mythology to the otherwise, but it does like lubrication. The AR does not like worn out or damaged magazines. It's ergonomics are phenomenal in comparison to the M14.
All true and as I said, "...Handiness, ease of training and other factors give the M16 an edge but it flat loses on stopping power and reliability (for the early editions)." Handiness equating to ergonomics but not to phenomenal. Ease of training not equating to what actually occurs -- and that, too, is part of the reliability and lethality capability problems.
The M14 was an unergonomic, poorly designed, poorly executed, unreliable piece of junk which has somehow gained a halo of perfection by those who used it "once upon a time". It's open action, tinker-toy magazine link-up and awful stock makes it a crappy weapon.
A little hyperbolic but I broadly agree. It was not a great weapon on several counts but I do not nor do I know of anyone who awards it "a halo of perfection." It was a tool, it was adequate, no more. The FAL would have been a better choice -- though it also had some problems. Nor is the M16 / M4 series particularly good.
The weapons procurement system succeeded in shoving it down the throats of the military after it accepted the FN-FAL as the superior rifle, and almost succeeded after the military accepted the M16 as a superior rifle.
Same guys that tried to kill the Sharps, Spencer and Gatling. They also, at the same time they foisted the M14 selected the M60 over both the MG3 and the MAG. Unfortunately given all the current day machinations, it appears they're still alive.
The M16 in all it's guises is far superior in reliability by any objective measure. And it has sufficient and even superior lethality, provided the user does his/her job.
We can disagree on that. The various improvements over the past 45 years have made the gross reliability of the 16 family about on par with the M14. The basic problem with lethality is one of practical range capability exacerbated by the fact that the user is sometimes unable to do his or her job properly in combat. The M16 / M4 series are adequate. IMO, that's not good enough.