I’m a Vietnam Vet. I served in the Marines in I CORPS. I did three tours over there. Finally, finally I have a sensible explanation of why the M16 had issues. I came close many times of being killed because the rifle jammed. Now I know why. Thank you for this video.
I 3/1 here Henry..69/70. 16 was junk. They made us transition from the 14 in I think it was March of 69...they pieced it till everyone was required. They actually were used from the army. Nothing but problems..ammo gave us fits.
What types of malfunctions did you guys see most back then? When I served, we mostly had issues with extraction rather than failures to feed even though we would, every now and then, get a double-feed problem - that was usually because of lack of maintenance though. The main issue I had with the weapon was the flexing of the receiver and thus the need of the bolt carrier to not only slide up that "ramp" inside but also to lock in with the eight lugs but to do that while the entire receiver is flexing and therefore it looks like a roller coaster especially when you fire on anything other than semi-automatic. Not to mention the direct impingement fouling the upper receiver after about three or four magazines fired. Don't get me wrong, I love the rifle even though on my deployments I was not armed with the M16A2 but with the M249 and then I was eventually issued an M4 while I was still an AB on the M240 before I was moved to the main gunner role.
I was with First Recon, A-3, at Chu Lai. We were issued the M16 sometime in early 1967, if memory serves. During my first patrol carrying the M16 we stopped on a hillside. We were being followed. I was the last man in the group, when I opened up the M 16 jammed almost immediately and I couldn't extract the shell casing. Two Marines flanked me and took on the fight. After extraction I got my old M 14 back. The M14 never failed. Thanks for explaining the problems with the M 16.
Emmet Band were you carrying the M16E1 rifle non Chrome line Chamber and Barrel, you have to clean that type of rifle after couple hours of use the carbon will build up on the Chamber bore, there was deliberate shortage of 223 cleaning kits in the Vietnam war many Soldiers, Marines, Air Force and Navy purchase there owned kits from private dealers ( a similar situation was notice happen in Afghanistan and Iraqi theatre operation early 2001 -2004 Miltary personal buying Kevlar vest from private dealers) the Marine start issue order in June 1967s to maintain there rifles, sad thing to see Government and Miltary officials not care about the well being of the men they command thanks for your services.
I didn't keep a journal but I think we were issued the M16 in early 1967. That would be prior to the resolution of the corrosion issue. I believe that the problem was the ball powder.
@@bjornsmith9431 A friend of mine had to get cleaning supplies from his dad who owned a gun store. That was for his M14 which only got used once for real. He was in Signal Corp on a hilltop in central VN and manning an important radio relay complex. He had to brush down his M14 every day with some forgotten powder/lube his dad would send. Changed the color of his M14 to silver. This dovetails the experience of another bud who was in the delta area. He had to clean his M14 twice a day to keep the rust down. He swore that gun would rust if you looked at it. FWIW he bluntly will tell you the M16 was a better rifle than the 14. He did 2 tours late 67 to enjoy Tet in Saigon/Delta, and 2nd one he transferred up to DaNang. He didn't see any legendary "rock apes" although there was plenty of scuttlebutt about encountering them in the jungle.
@@LuvBorderCollies yes, the M14 rifle wood would enlarge making it heavy for there users and mistline the Gun sight, the M14 was battle rifle, not Assault Rifle like A.K 47 in test with the M14 rifle the A.K 47 beat the battle rifle in time on target and slight control of the A.K 47.
As a Marine I had qualified with the M~14 and had never even heard of the M~16 let alone seen one until I arrived in Vietnam in October, 1967. I loved the fact that it was fully automatic, light weight and had a simple manual of arms. I immediately heard of the problems and how much the weapon was hated by the grunts. I witnessed failure to extract but only occasionally. The problem was apparently corrected in late ‘67 and by ‘68 we saw no further problems.
My uncle was E 2/3, 1967 Operation Buffalo and the Hill battles to name a few. Both he and his CO in his book details marines killed due to the M16 problems.
I got to Vietnam Aug 1970. By then, the bugs had been worked out. I found the rifle to be superb in every way. The one area that it seemed the AK-47 had an edge was the size of the cartridge. The bullet would go trhough telephone pole! .... It (AK-47) was reliable as hell from jump. But, I fell in love with the M-16. Now my nephew 50 years later, has an AR-15. The M-16 ws light , easy to carry, had the kit in the stock, and , in a pinch, you could fire it non-stop for hours and hours. I never had one single problem with it. To this day, tho, I crack up thinking how one cartridge is the tool to completely disassemble the rifle. Plus, since the ammo was a tad smaller, you could actually carry more rounds. I always found ways to carry 2 or 3 more magazines than the others. But, there was a special sound theAK made, and when you heard it, you knew shit was gonna get real ... cuz it seemed they NEVER go into a fight unless they had the advantage. And by 1970, we all knew it was corrosion and a lack of chroming. None of us had any illusions. But I came home and had to listen to the bulshit the civilians had been fed. I loved that rifle then and love it now. It got wet, muddy, hundreds of rounds sometimes between cleanings... never a single problem. I always felt sorry for the poor saps the army sent into combat with a POS that rifle was at first.....through NO fault of the rifle itself. The freakin army .... sigh...
I agree the M16 is a great rifle...Sound like the Army did wt they could do to make the rifle fail...Look at them now with the M4 doing nothing to up grade it when the whole can see the civilian AR 15 M4 is way better they rather save money then save lives....Thanks for letting the people know
Yo that was a great lesson in the M16 rifle that a lot of still today don't know....l always love the M16 l got the AR 15 tho the M16 they sell for alot money now....Thank you for Service
I don't know what kind of telephone poles you were shooting or what they were made of but an AK round won't "Go through one", not anyone I've ever shot before, maybe if it was an old discarded phone pole that the power company threw away and has been sitting on the ground rotting for 50 years. I've never had a US .30, 7.62MM, 7.62×39, or a 5.56 go through a phone pole. Just because an AK round is .30 cal in diameter doesn't mean anything, it's a medium capacity case that lacks the power of either a US .30 or a 7.62mm and under penetrates compared to either one of those, it's anemic compared to them.
@@CCs.p.i He was there when they first got them, they were underdeveloped at that point and William Macnamara was responsible for pushing them on the troops in that state, he wanted the M14 replaced with the M16 because M16's were so much cheaper to produce and as Secretary of Defense he was trying to cut costs in the military. But the original poster is correct, by the time he got there in 70 all the bugs had been worked out, the one's issued in 70 were the same one's issued when I was in the Army in the early/mid 80's, they were accurate and performed flawlessly. My M16 in basic training in the early 80's had a six digit serial number and was marked XM16E1, making it a Vietnam era manufactured weapon but one that was made late enough that the bugs had been worked out, it fired perfect 40 out of 40 scores on the qualification range and earned me a trophy for highest scoring shooter in my basic training class. The problem with the earliest one's were that they didn't have chrome lined chambers and bores and the early ammo issued with them burned very dirty causing the cases to be stuck in the chambers and were difficult to clear in the heat of the moment, once they chrome lined the chambers and bores and issued proper ammo the problems with them dried up and they turned into the first class weapons that they are today.
I have watched a lot of documentaries about the Vietnam war. A lot of them stated the problems with the rifle but never really truly stated what was wrong with the rifle so I thank you for your detailed description of the failures
My father was at the Chosin reservoir in Korea he prepared me well for infantry school when I enlisted in the US Army in 1980 I learned a lot from men like you and my father Semper Fidelis there sir You are still doing well alive and kicking Experienced combat veterans taught me how to be a better soldier Peace out from the left coast 2022
@garrettdalton3543 How do you feel about the Army today? I have family who served going back to Revolution-era militias, but I have severe doubts as to exactly what ends my efforts would go toward if I were to join in current times.
I was a sophomore in high school in 1965 when I started hearing problems about the m16. I read and saved as many newspaper and magazine articles as I could find, and did my jr & senior theme papers on this very subject. At that time I did not know about the change in the powder nor did I know of the lack of chrome plating. I did know the cyclic rates were too high causing cook off's which would render the gun out of service. The lack of cleaning kits and lube was also made known. Fifty some years later I learn of the powder being switched causing the high cyclic rates (no mention of cook off's though which I thought strange), the lack of chrome plating and a cleaning kit and some parts changes/upgrades. This was criminal. To this day we still have the forward assist which I have used on several occasions and it will only get you deeper into trouble. If you bolt does not go fully into battery forget the forward assist and extract the round. We should always give our men and women the best.
Thank you so much for all your channel's content. In Vietnam I was issued an XM16E1. I was very pleased to shed the M14 for something more realistic in Vietnam's environment. But, I was also made aware of some of the problems of the "16", which no one really understood at that time. Fortunately, being raised with some kind of firearm in my hands almost daily, I knew about cleanliness and reliability. So, fortunately, I was pretty well served by my rifle. My first cleaning kit was homemade from a 3-foot length of brass brazing rod, a toothbrush and a shaving brush. Later we got proper kits. Sometime after the Tet Offensive I was handed an XM177E2 (629) for a short time. I cannot put into words how much confidence (real or imagined) that carbine gave me. In the 1980s, after the service I opened a small gunsmith shop and in short time was building AR-15 rifles with mil surplus parts from the various distributors - all pre-ban. Needless to say, over the past 35-years or so, I have become intimately familiar with the fit and function details if that superb platform. Despite how much I've learned about the AR-15 family, I have had only a passing knowledge of the history of the rifle, Mr. Stoner's team and particularly all the stuff that happened at Colt. I have been binge-watching your channel and currently very interested in the JFK series. I have your Armorer's book which sits by the workbench which I use to explain things to customers. I want to thank you for all you do for the serious fans of the AR-15 platform. Have a great 2022 and glad to see that you're healthy again and shed the tree-cutting body armor.
Some comments: I was issued my first AR-15 (we did NOT call them M-16's at the time) in either December 1963 or early 1964. They replaced our M-2 Carbines. I was on a 5th Special Forces Group A-Detachment in III Corp at a place called BuDop. The rifles were delivered by a full bird Colonel flying around in a fancy Caribou aircraft. Only Caribou I ever saw with a couple of rows of passenger seats forward in cargo bay. Wish I could remember his name. As I remember he was from R&D at Ft. Belvoir and split his time between Belvoir and Vietnam. The original rifles were Colt Armalite rifles, steel mags, NO forward assist and I don't REMEMBER a dust cover. Ammo was specific with a specific propellant specified by Colt. We DID clean our rifles, unlike a lot of the draftee types that came later. I am told that most of the problems came when Congress decided to buy a different propellant from Dupont in Delaware. There are those who suggest that this was a political decision. Using the prescribed ammo and keeping them clean, they performed well for us. And yes, we got shot at and we shot back! We did not fully load mags, probably because most of our 700 strong Steing Montagnards were armed with M-3's and Thompson's and it was believed that problems occurred due to fully loaded mags in those weapons and we wanted to play it safe.
I read your post you left a year ago. You said "the draftee types" referring to soldiers other than yourself. Better than two thirds of all those that served in Southeast Asia were not drafted but enlisted of their own free will. Most of all the marines sent in 65 were volunteers as were most of the regular army sent before the Tet offensive in 68, also volunteers.
One of my uncles went to VN to help test the first batch of Hueys along with the SF. That was in 1962. I just recently found out about the 1962 deployment and not from him. He was super tight lipped about his work in '62. I found a stack of 8mm films of "sightseeing" and flying Hueys. They were still in their mailing boxes "APO San Francisco" 229th Av Btl, 1962. If it weren't for that discovery I'd never known about it. He took his work very seriously.
I arrived in Vietnam in April, '69. I was a scout/sniper with the 3rd Marines sniper platoon.On my first op I carried the Remington 700 sniper rifle. I learned from that that I wanted nothing to do with a bolt action rifle that held 5 rounds loaded one round at a time because most of the fights were at night. After that I carried an M-14 until the 3rd Marines were pulled out in September. I loved my M-14 because I trusted it. I was transferred to the 5th Marine sniper platoon. I wanted another M-14 but they said they didn't have any magazines so I was issued an M-16. It would not fire two times in a row without hitting the forward assist. And I cleaned it within an inch of it's life. I used a toothbrush on the locking lugs, a chamber brush and a bore brush, lots of patches in the bore and chamber. I disassembled the mags and cleaned them. No luck. Finally I got an M-14 to finish my tour. I've never figured out why my M-16 wouldn't work. (It was the original M-16 with the three pronged flash suppressor.) Maybe you have some idea what the problem was with my M-16. PS. My opinion of the AR has gone way up after watching a number of your videos.
From what I can see all the problems with the M16 revolve entirely around massive corruption and what can only be called psychopathic greed within Ordnance Corps. Reminds me of the Mk 14 torpedo.
You stole my thunder. Mark 14 was a wake-up call for the US Navy. There is a long dark history of US ordnance bureau corruption and incompetence that goes back to even before the Civil War. BTW: It may interest you to know the Chief of the US Naval Bureau of Ordnance, who initially blame the Mk14 torpedo malfunctions on incompetence of the submariners and caused some of them to be cashiered, was promoted and later placed in charge of the US atomic bomb test at the Bikini Atoll.
When sophisticated ordinance is too expensive to train with I think you are asking for trouble . I am thinking of the Javelin ATM which costs more than the Tank it is designed to kill I also think the Stinger is in the same situation too expensive to actually fire !
Sir, I don,t know your name but I can tell you I was a Vietnam veteran and I was raised on a farm in Louisiana and if we didn't,t hunt at times we didn't, eat. I used an early m16 & had some problems, but I was issued a second one from the armored in 1968 ,and believe it or not with the cleaning kilt never , l repeat never had a problem with it, but I cleaned it religiously. Thank you for your program. Kudos!!!
BJ Tourere thankyou for telling us the truth. My dad was retired Army and did 2 tours and said the same thing. Thank you for your service in our great country !!!
I know what you mean because I did 16WEEKS in Tiger Land and we had to clean are weapon all the time. They should have known when they first tried the M-16 at Fort Polk.
If you did 16 wks you must of been a repeat cause Tiger Land was only 8 wks of AIT training for 11B or 11C then Vietnam after a 30 day leave. I was a instructor on the demolition range from late 67 through 68. Co.B 1/2 1ST Inf Div. 66/67.
@@ozadarter I forgot to tell you that this was 1973 as part of the mercenary volunteer men the lives called us. You Nam guys called us stupid. By the way I was 11B. From there went to Cazy-Ass West Germany but that is another story.
"BJ Tourere" First thank you for your service ! May i ask years you served using the M16 both when it was not correct and when you had no troubles with it. I know some of the "Stick" IMR powder was used in a lot of rounds that i am pretty sure WITH CLEANING STOPPED THE ISSUES
I was a combat cameraman in Vietnam filming Med Evacs from the I-Corps area out to USS Tripoli. A Med Evac helicopter landed on the ship's flight deck and as the wounded were being lowered on the elevator to the triage area, a Gunny Sargent began slamming his M-16 on the deck destroying it and cursing it. Every M-16 in his unit had jammed leaving the sniper with an M-14 as the only marine with a functioning weapon... Obviously, my motion picture footage of that event was conveniently lost...
@HH I am thinking that it was some time in 1967. I spent 26 months total in-country in 3-month periods from 1966-1972... I often don't remember the exact year that I was on any specific assignment.
@ Richard Crowe: Every Marine combat veteran of Vietnam that I have ever met - and I have known perhaps half-a-dozen or so over the years - hated the M-16 and loved his M-14. Stories like that one, the one you described, give me greater understanding why that was/is the case.
Viet Nam 1969 173rd. Airborne. Issued M16A1 with tear drop forward assist, chrome chamber but not bore, black carrier and bolt, trapdoor butt plate and no cleaning kit. Several of us shared a kit and used copious amounts of LSA. Rifle never failed me... ever. Smoked a lot from excess oil. It saved my life.
LsA... the very name brings back memories of that smell. And shaking up bottles of separated oil. Not to mention that nice pearly colour and consistancy.
Viet Nam '69 & '70 25th Inf Div Air Mobile M16A1-Same same as you Chuck - except I got a cleaning kit - and I used it meticulous and regularly. Never failed me once. My company was called 'contact charlie' and my platoon was selected as the point element for the Cambodian invasion for the Div. It got a lot of use. I was asked to carry the '79', and I did for awhile, but couldn't wait to get my '16' back.
God bless you sir, and all the brave service men and women from present and past conflicts. My dad, Jim Whetzel was also 173rd Airborne over there chewing on the same dirt as you at roughly the same time. He was a RTO on many of the patrols that he participated in. Sadly, he passed away over 5 years ago from prostate cancer, no doubt contributed heavily to by Agent Orange exposure. I miss him very much.
As a US Army veteran 1969-1972 I DI appreciate this. February 1969 we were the first cycle through Fort Gordon to get the M16’s. No bolt assist. I only had 2 times where I had to eject a round that undoubtably did not seat all the way. It was raining, just below freezing and red clay and sand everywhere. I loved the way it shot. Country boy from Mississippi that had been hunting since he was 6 years old with a weapon like that and how could I not fire expert? Joined the NG 1974-1983 and fired the A1 with not a whisper of a problem. I spent 3 years in tanks where I fired the 45, M-60 and 50 cal. I had heard of problems in Nam and was told LBJ wanted them real bed because Lady Bird had a good size interest in Colt. Still don’t know that for sure. I am going the get a few of these books and make sure my friends that went to Nam see this.👍🇺🇸🤙😃
I shot a perfect score during rifle qualification Ft Gordon August 1969. My DI just scratched his head and asked me how did I do that. I told him the targets were big - hard to miss. I too was a country boy from Mississippi. Grandfather gave me his Remington Speedmaster 241 .22 when I was 6 years old. Still have it. I was captain of the rifle team at Columbia Military Academy in the 8th grade. I carried a M16A1 in Nam. No problems with it.
I was in the Marine Corps from April 74 to April 78 and of course issued the M16 from duty station to duty station . I was stationed at Camp Pendleton , Okinawa and 29 Stumps , therefore 3 different M16's . I had no issues with the 16 , you just had to keep it clean as with all weapons . It was a very accurate rifle especially at 500 meters during qualification . The 5.56 was a pretty mean round with nasty characteristics . To make a long story short the M16A1 was a hell of good rifle in my opinon .
My rifle in Desert Storm was a M16-A1. I remember thinking I'm glad I had full auto and not the 3 round burst. That might be the last war the M16-A1 saw not that I was the only one with it.
I fell in love with this gun as a kid. I had a fit to get a Mattel toy M16 around 1968 or 1969. When we played army the kids with the M16 were superior. As soon as I was old enough I bought a real AR 15, I own 3 today. Great video!
Jeff Walker The CEO of TH-cam is Susan Wojcicki (a Jew). TH-cam is a subsidiary of Google. Google LLC and its parent company, Alphabet Inc. are owned by cofounders Larry Page and Sergey Brin. Larry Page is the current CEO of Alphabet and Sergey Brin is the President. They are both Jews.
Great video! I just had a different experience I guess, my M-16 was not a good piece of gear. I was a 13A from 1990 - 1996, carried the same rack # M-16A2 for a year at a time. I was an Artillery FSO, carried an A2 and a 9mm Beretta. We had to qualify with both every year, but made trips to the range quarterly at least. Maybe mine was just worn, or maybe we were shooting ball ammo, but malfunctions were an everyday occurrence. The range NCOs walked up and down all afternoon with cleaning rods clearing misfeeds and failures to extract. I couldn't get through 2 magazines on 3 round burst without a malfunction, or a double feed which would shut down the range for a few minutes. We were trained to use the forward assist, and this rifle needed it! My rifle was kept remorselessly clean. I just didn't like to shoot the A2 because it just never worked very well. I was never so glad to get back to my howitzers.
My brother had issues with the badly worn M16A1 at McClellan. The rifles were bad but the magazines were in worst condition. So problems galore. That is not how instill confidence in recruits. Falls under spending a dollar to save a nickel. However when he deployed overseas he was issued a brand new M16A2 AND brand new mags....sweet dreams had arrived. A couple years my son-in-law had trouble with magazine bottoms falling off while shooting the M9. My brother mentioned that in Somalia about the awful contract of M9 mags. I guess the DoD boys were getting them replaced but they are still in the system.
Thanks for showing the details of the operation of the M-16 and the historical background. I was in the Army in 1969/70 and used the M-16, both the XM-16E1 and the M-16A1. In my experience the rifles were not sufficiently reliable, especially mine as it would jam unpredictably. This was in spite of my best efforts to keep it clean and in giving it good care. The forward bolt assist never once helped to unjam a rifle for me, as I always had to breakdown the rifle and clean it. When we complained to our officers about the problem they just read back the line they had been given from the brass above, that we were not maintaining the rifles properly.
I was in Vietnam in 66. USAF 22nd TASS at Binh Thuy near Can Tho. I suspect that the army or the ARVN were running low on M-16’s so 6 months into my tour I was required to turn in my weapon. So for 6 months I was on base and mingled with locals with no weapon of any kind. I guess it is amazing that now 55 years later that I am here.
I'm not a weapons aficionado but was interested in the topic, you present in such a great manner, even me as a non english speaking listener was able to fully understand the issue. Great stuff!
I served two tours in Vietnam. 2nd tour 69-70 I initially carried an AK-47. Later in 1970 USARV and MACV prohibited American and allied forces from using the AK because is had a very sharp report ( sound of fire). Because it had a individual report as that of our enemy it was forbidden because the report drew fire from friendly forces. So my last few months as the company commander Bravo 125th Signal Battalion, I carried the M-16 and the M1911A1. My driver carried theThumper M-79 grenade rifle and the M-1911A1.
excellent video!!! my late uncle was in nam he told me that when he was over there during his tour, his m16 jammed on several occasions, he thought it was due to the heat and severe humidity and the fact that he was not issued a cleaning kit for his m16, he was also told that the m16 was self-cleaning.
I’m learning a lot of things I didn’t know Ty, I got my colt sporter 37 year ago. My dad was a Korean War veteran, I want to thank all the veterans for there service.
In the military 1967-1973. You're right about the major effect being the morale. We heard about the jamming long before seeing the rifle. The Marines seemed to have less trouble with eject failures. I think more focused rifle training and fewer draftees. The only eject failure I had was the M2 using 1944 ammo.
You must be a teacher. I served from '66 to '67 with the M14. This video is the greatest tutorial on the AR 15 I have ever watched in my 73 years on this Earth!
@@6NBERLS ...certainly very comprehensive...don't think cleaning out the gas tube with a pipe cleaner was mentioned, though...i've usually found that to be helpful...
This is Hands Down the most Factually Sound Researched Material with Accurate Documentation as to why the M-16 had problems in Vietnam. Please Like This Video. Cheers!
you dont look like you served a day in your life -- you wear camo to look like a hardass- but you go on recon with me and ill betcha id find you before you know i was there?? then what ,,, it would be all over with . there would be just me left
@Terry Bruce I was there, Tonkin Gulf. Never knew so large a number of our KIA were so young. Such a long long time ago, far far away. 50 years last month we pulled acknowledge into Long Beach Naval Station. I certainly don't know what it was like nor understand about being out in the bush and these wanna be's running around with their camouflage & ARs don't either. Welcome home Mr. Bruce.
"As test after test showed that ball powder made the rifle fire too fast and then jam, the manufacturing company finally threw up its hands. Colt said that it could no longer be responsible for the M-16’s passing the Army’s acceptance test. It could not guarantee performance with the ball powder. One of the test requirements was that the rifle’s cyclic rate not exceed 850 rounds per minute, and six out of ten rifles were far above that when using ball powder. Don’t worry, the Army said, you can use whatever ammunition you want for the tests. But we’ll keep sending our ball powder to Vietnam. "
My father was a Vietnam vet and hated the M16 and all AR15s for a long time. It wasn't until I got my own and showed him how reliable it was that he started becoming a fan. Unfortunately, due to the injuries he sustained he couldn't share the joy of shooting a (reliable) AR15 with me, but at least now we know why he and so many other veterans of the era had so many issues with the rifle.
I wasn't in combat, being a UH-1 repairman in Germany, but by 71 the M-16's worked pretty damn well. I fired hundreds of rounds on the range and never had a single failure. I know that's not the same as combat.
I thoroughly enjoyed this documentary, one of the best I've ever seen. Thanks for posting it. I love getting into the technical specification and mechanics of anything, and I really appreciate your detailed, yet concise explanation and review of why specifically the M16 had issues. Thanks for the history too. Amazing video, it gave me something fun and informative to kill time. It never felt as long as it was. Why did youtube take it down? but I'm glad you put it back up.
Miss the M16A1. Class of 1972. Didn't have any issues with mine. In basic, i had one issue with the blank fire adapter. I left the port cover open low crawling. Got some sand in the bolt locking lugs. Lesson learned. Close bolt cover to avoid jams. Now I build them from scratch. Been looking at the A1, lately, remembering the days when I was 18-21. I think I need to build one, soon. I learned a few things I didn't know. Especially the firing pin.
I carried the same version from '75-'86 and my experience was the same. I used it in woodlands, deserts, and jungles with never a problem. In my opinion, the forward assist is a useless solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
@@unnamed_boi It's been a long time and it wasn't something important so my memory could be wrong, but my recollection is that they were marked Colt M-16.
Thank you for the excellent lecture on the evolution of the modern M-16/AR-15 rifle. My only comment is that it was unfortunate that the design changes had to occur based on battlefield problems where actual soldiers suffered from design flaws. Upside is what we have now is one damn fine rifle.
My grandfather is a Vietnam vet, and maybe he's an oddity, but he loved the m-16. He served on a river patrol boat and saw a lot of action and obviously a lot of water, yet with proper maintenance he never had an issue. After 5 years and 2 deployments with the 101st in Iraq, I can say, the only jams I ever saw were caused by gross negligence. It looked like this guy threw sand in the open receiver. The ar15 is plagued with myth and misinformation. Now the cool thing to do is not lube your rifle, or to just waste lube where you don't need it. I've seen a guy on youtube lube his trigger pins...on the outside...and he has almost a million subs. It's insane how difficult it is to get people to use common sense. The history of the m16 is tragic, but I'm glad it is redeemed, and its platform has gone on to become the pinnacle of modern firearms.
1974,Ft.Jackson,SC.....Issued M-16a1s....They worked fine,we were drilled to clean every part regularly,before they went back to arms room, inspected for proper cleaning and lube. CONFIDENCE high during service with the rifle. Renovations certainly improved it.
Thanks for the video. I have linked it to the Texas Gun Talk forum for a discussion on the rifle along with with your next video discussing the M-16A1 and A2 models. My experience in 1967-68 in Vietnam was the cleaning supplies were getting to the field and the Marines were learning more how to clean/lube it better. In my 13 months in-county I was issued two different types; 3-prong flash suppressor style and then the bird cage flash suppressor with chromed internals.
Thank you, great video. I've learned more about the M-16 in less than a hour then in my entire 56 years. I carried and used this rifle for nearly 14 years as a Infantryman is the US Army with out any problems that I can remember. That is why I own a civilian version of it.
Thank you so much for reposting, this video is something I want to last forever to do this rifle justice. Awesome video still, just as good as watching it the first time. Hope you’re doing well and I’m very glad to see your channel is still around, you’re a valuable guy
When a bunch of academics, bureaucrats, and desk jockeys think they know better than Mr. Stoner you end up with an inferior rifle and people die. Whoulda thunk?
The rifle wasn't inferior the U.S. Ordinance Corps deliberately sabotaged the development of the rifle so it would fail, and be deemed "inferior". Then they deliberately sent these rifles which had not been properly tested in safe conditions to combat hoping that the people in charge would see the "error of their ways" and let the Army switch back to the M-14 rifle. We had to learn the bloody way what the rifle needed to be the effective weapon it was intended to be for the Army which would not have happened if the Military had properly tested the shit out of it like they do today for ANY potential weapon systems in their arsenals.
Eugene Stoner was a firearms design genius, without question, but that doesn't mean he did not make mistakes. He didn't design enough flexibility into his light rifle - the M16 - to handle the inevitable changes to the ammunition - nor did he chrome-line the chamber or barrel. He and Kalishnikov met, shortly before Stoner's death. It would be interesting to know what they talked about...
@@GeorgiaBoy1961 I do believe that Stoner's specifications always included the correct powder and chrome lining. It was the Army Ordinance Corpse that screwed up.
Ordnance has much to answer for, but the real villains in this drama, IMHO, are Defense Secretary MacNamara - an executive from Ford Motor Company who somehow got the idea that he understood war better than professional military men - and his whiz-kids, the guys with their slide-rules and main-frames who thought they could chart out a war by the numbers. Ludicrous. MacNamara pushed the M16 into the field too soon, before its bugs, problems and the inevitable teething problems could be worked out and solved. He also abruptly cancelled the M14 program, which was already up and running and would have been able to supply our forces with a service rifle until the newer design was sorted out. This episode was neither the first -nor was it the last - time our higher-ups have pushed a new and untried design into combat too quickly, but in this case, good men died because of the gross negligence involved. Stoner was a genius as a designer, but that is not the same thing as saying he was perfect. He should have included an adjustable gas block on the AR15 to allow the user to dial in additional gas flow to continue to operate the rifle when it was dirty, fouled or cold. Ideally, too, the rifle would have been robust enough to withstand changes in its ammunition without all of the malfunctions which occurred. It is probably not a realistic expectation that ammunition manufacturers and/or the military aren't going to change those at some point. The M-1 Garand, for example, withstood a change from M1 Ball to M2 Ball - the M-1 had been designed around M1 Ball 174-grain FMJ, during the 1920s and early 1930s, but when the armed forces switched to M2 Ball 150-grain in the late 1930s, the M-1 continued to perform well. Why? Because Garand's design was robust-enough and had enough flexibility and adaptability built into it to withstand changes in its ammunition.
@Terry Bruce - McNamara was a real piece of work, wasn't he? Johnson, too. The guy swore he wouldn't ask American boys to get in a fight halfway around the world in someone else's backyard - but then he went and did exactly that. I've been alive a long time and am still waiting for an honest politician to come along....
Thank you for this excellent video, Chris! Somehow I missed it until now even though I follow your videos and have your book Black Rifle II. I was in Vietnam 1968 and first had the M14 then the new M16A1 which sure was easier to lug around. It was great seeing your retro builds on the table and comparisons. I've watched your videos about them also. Funny thing, even though I was US Army and my M16A1 always was reliable I bought the Brownells BRN-601 retro version of the early US Air Force pre-M16. It's just so simple and different plus I have to tip my hat to the USAF and General LeMay for fighting hard to buy this fine rifle. I don't remember seeing a mean green jungle machine (gun) in 1968 but I have one now! Well semiauto...
This is perhaps the best video about the AR platform o have ever watched. The AR has gotten multiple reputations and there are 2 extremely different sides. People hear vietnam stories and think the weapon is garbage. Even guys I served with. But then there's me, so much shooting and I watched these guns chew through round after round and always wondered why people think they're unreliable. Every issue I've ever had had.beem magazine related. This is such a great video explaining the actual issues it had and why. Thank you.
Vietnam. ..6/18/66 -6/18/67 1st Infantry Div. War Zone C, Blue Spaders The rifle I was issued, all plastic parts looked like it was dragged on a gravel road. Training for proper care was all on the job. No cleaning kits were ever issued. No oil, brushes, rods nothing. We had to improvise with toothbrushes, rags and any oil we cold fined. Rifle faild to eject the casing on two occasions . I always thought that dust from from the helicopters was the problem or any dust. Hated the rifle. I could Never trust it. Thanks for answering many questions.
My dad was in Vietnam in 1966 as a Army Ranger, he and his war buddy would talk about how he ditched his M16 and used a rusted AK he found in a bunker and it worked. He would have loved this video, he died in 2009 of agent orange related cancer.
My condolences regarding your father. The Vietnam veterans deserved better than they got from our nation. The late Colonel David L. Hackworth - one of the finest combat leaders our country has produced and an expert practitioner of counter-guerilla warfare - was fond of doing a demonstration with his men in which he would dig up an AK47 which had been buried, and without cleaning it in any way save to make sure the action and barrel did not have mud or dirt blocking them, and then load and fire the weapon. He'd finish by saying that - unlike the M-16 (which he apparently didn't care for) - this was a "real combat rifle." Though the M16/M4-family of weapons now in use by the Army and Marine Corps are, by many accounts (though not all) good, serviceable weapons - the instruction of the platform back in the 1960s was a real fiasco. One so bad that it triggered a Congressional investigation.
@@felixway_stunna7070 Ever hear of "Project Eldest Son"? Project "Italian Green"? "Project Pole bean"? No? I can tell. The CIA was salting the NVA supply lines with sabotaged ammo, the propellant was replaced with high explosives. On firing it would drive the bolt through the shooters head, and injure anyone around with fragments. No platoon sgt worth a thing would have ever let his troops fire any AK unless he could guarantee the ammo source. But go on believing some crap you saw in a movie, It is however, not true.
My favorite stories were the guys would tell me how they had matel toys stickers on them and the parts were plastic blah blah blah and I would have a semi-auto version dated in the 60s with me and would ask them to show me. lol, Some of those guys were motor pool and supply guys unfortunately, the other guys that loved them for the most part were combat veterans.
Jesus, I like to listen to this stuff when I’m doing paper work, but I have to stop and listen to this while I’m not distracted. Too much good info, thanks.
Your videos are absolutely fantastic my brother! I am so thankful that you are sharing your vast knowledge of history here on TH-cam for everyone to see. Thanks again for sharing!
Spring 1975, Ft. Bragg NC, 82nd Abn Div, I was qualifying on the range. Firing pin of my M-16 punched a hole through the cartridges primer cap and embedded, preventing removal and reloading. Platoon sergeant pokes a rod down the barrel but still had to disassemble it to remove the cartridge from the firing pin. Of course he told me it was because the weapon was dirty. I knew it wasn't but kept quiet. Next time on the range it was with an M-60. Platoon sergeant decided I would be best used as a machine gunner. I earned a rifle expert badge in basic. Go figure. I didn't want to carry that beast.
I had an M16A1 in Basic at Ft. Benning in 1986. My issued rifle had a GM Hydramatic Division lower rebuilt by Anniston Arsenal Depot in Alabama from 82 through 85 because they were stamped AND then the two digit year. The stock, barrel, handguards, were all new replacement parts. Infantry Basic trainees beat the shit out of these rifles every cycle. I never had a problem with it's reliability, function, and accuracy because my Drill Sergeants would always inspect our rifles after cleaning them after training before storage into the arms room. We were drilled to perfection to all malfunctions and immediate actions. There was no excuse for an infantryman to have a dirty and malfunctioning rifle. Ft. Benning Infantry Drill Sergeants were brutal when it came to weapons. I still love the M16/AR series that I own 5 of them. I have built 3 of them.
lilbeserk= Check out Forgotten Weapons or In Range TV about the M16 mud test. These guys slathered on mud on the M16A1 rifle and fired it. Never tried it during my time in service. I had my issued rifle in snow and the cold in Germany, and Ft. Carson. Hot summers in Carson again and a couple of NTC rotations. The jungles of Panama at JOTC and Hawaii's almost similarity in climate and terrain. Iraq 2006 through 2008 was more fucked up with sand storms during the hot summers. The M16A1,A2,A4, and M4s really worked well for me in training and combat. Even the AK had it's problems too. I have found AKs with frozen bolts because of dirt inside the bolt carrier and bolt with the locking lugs. Empty shell casings inside the dust cover blocking the hammer and bolt carrier. All of this was basic soldier operator error. The receivers on AKs majority of them are of course sheet metal. Never abuse them as using them as step ladders because they bend easy too. Even their best Russian, and Yugos had the same problem. Most of the stuff we found are mostly Chinese Norincos. Majority malfunction due to neglect and unfamiliarity. The Hadji insurgents especially the older ones really took good care of their weapons and were really good because they were veterans of Saddam's Army. The rest were young guys from 14 through their early 20s just fired them until it stopped. Either ran from us to fight another day, very few dumped them on the spot and ran. We had a lot more problems from the Taqfiris A.K.A. Iraqi Gang Bangers. They were the young guys who had no clue about taking care of any weapon in combat. They were trained by competent Arab Al Quaida guys from the Stan or real professionals from Chechnya. After training all that shit went out the window when it came to combat against American infantry in the open combat. An American infantry company can take down a city block quickly by blasting its way through buildings and houses if all the civilian inhabitants had left but that was not always the case. As far as both weapons they all need care even in combat or training.
@@reddevilparatrooper In 1983 at Ft Bliss the Army put an M16 in my hands that was a Colt that was stamped XM16E1 and had a 6 digit serial number, at the time I knew nothing about the variables of M16's but I knew mine had a different stamping then the others the guys around me had, the day of practice for qualification I shot a 40 out of 40, the next day I went on the firing line and inserted the mag, dropped the bolt, tapped the foreword assist 3 times and when I went to shoot it wouldn't come off of safe, so they pulled me off of the firing line, took me to a rear area at the range and a DI took the lower off of mine and installed my upper on a different lower, I went through on the next firing rotation and shot another 40 out of 40 for the actual record, I can't think of another rifle where you can take the two major parts of a rifle, mix them with another and it'll hold zero like that.
Lackland AFB 1976 and only went to shoot one day. Qualified as marksman as nobody was paying attention. Qualified as Expert years later as a DPS officer. Never did pay attention to who made the rifle or the markings then, but I do own a Sig M400 now.
Duke Craig= Once you zero the upper receiver you are golden. All M16 lowers makes no difference, the lower is just to make it go bang. What can throw your zero off is if your unit is shooting 2 or 3 different lot number ammunition. Using the same lot number ammunition during zero and qualification is success.
I trained at Fort Dix in Nov. '73; we had a mix of open and birdcage flash hiders, we all seemed to have the chromed bolts, bolt assist grooves and lighter firing pins. Not sure about chrome chambers and bores. Never saw a bolt with no chrome, all those parts were chrome by then. All our rifles came back from the war, and had worn out bores. We did not have trouble with corroded chambers or misfires. These beat-up worn rifles were accurate out to 1000 yards. We did keep them very clean, but it was used in a sandy environment including long-distance marching and low-crawling in sand. There were a few select newer condition rifles, only issued to expert marksmen for long range 1,600 yard qualification purposes. They did very well even at that range.
@@frankpienkosky5688 I knew a friend who was accidentally shot with a .22 long rifle round at about 800 yards; the solid nose lead bullet went from front to back, the doc cut it out from the back just under the skin. The bullet missed everything vital, but took a couple years to heal that wound.
I had no idea this channel was taken down by TH-cam. It just dawned on me I hadn't seen notifications from this channel in a long time and noticed I wasn't subscribed any longer
I, too, am a student of this subject and might be considered very well read on this rifles history. Thank you for a very thoughtful and detailed account of this history. Though some of my info suggests that Sec. McNamara himself was a large source of the budget cuts and resulting changes to the M-16 that resulted in it's shortcomings in Vietnam. That aside though, everything you stated about what changed and why I found to be completely consistent with my own research. As for my own experience, hands on, you touched on a big source of problems that can occur with any magazine fed, semi or full auto firearm, the magazine. When I was in US Army Basic Combat Training (Boot Camp in the Navy or Marines) back in 2001, we were issued M-16 A2's and while we did have a few stoppages we were assured that come final weapons qualification day we would have much newer magazines, and our rifles would be fine. Well our rifles were old and very USED, and those mags were likely just as used, maybe more so. I even experienced my one and only bolt over-ride's, which are rare and most soldiers are haven't even heard of such a thing. True to that Drill Sergeants word, come Qualification Day we got some much newer and nicer magazines and our old worn rifles performed flawlessly. Now I have many old surplus 20 and 30 round mags that perform just fine, but no matter how well a gun is designed or built all it takes is a crappy mag to ruin your day. I suspect many failures of the M-16 variants in Vietnam were the result of a magazine and not just the rifles. Later on I had a personally owned Ruger Mini 30 in 7.62x39 and all my after market mags were garbage. That rifle gave me a lot of failures to feed. My one factory Ruger mag however, flawless. I sold the gun anyway as I didn't want it anymore, but the gun store sales man, I consigned it through, told me he didn't even want any of those after market mags.
Very thorough and thoughtful. Thank you for filling in a lot of blanks regarding this venerable weapon. Your passion and care is very evident in this piece.
I was in the Air Force from 1961-1965 and had to carry the AR-15 and it was a pain in the butt. If we trained on a Army base we had to be personally responsible for the rifle because the base commanders wouldn’t let us put them in their armories. Also they were having problems with the charging handles that were hard to lock properly and you could lose your cheek bone. Glad to see they got it worked out.
Outstanding video! You sure did clear up a lot of why the M-16 got such a bad reputation during the early days of the war. During my time in the Army we were always told it was because of the cleaning kits weren’t sent over with the rifle is why there were so many malfunctions. Not the old WWII powder or not having the barrel and chamber chrome lined that caused the main malfunctions with that weapon. Very interesting and great job on this video! I served in the early and mid 1970s and the Vietnam vets that I was trained by and trained with never said anything about what you explained in this video as being the malfunctioning problems with the rifle. Some of the combat vets weren’t too fawned of the M-16 especially the old timers. I thought it was then and still is a great rifle! Cpl. Sev.
I kinda like the forward assist. Very handy when I need to quietly chamber a round. The normal way is as loud as slamming a screen door. Yo can slowly ease the round into the chamber then give the forward assist a little push. Works every time. Say if you're hunting and you would rather not scare everything away.
Ones That Gave Us Most Problems Were Early Part of War,65-67,Had To Be Cleaned Too Much. Least Little Bit of Sand or Dirt That Got in Chamber Caused It To Be Jammed if Fired Too Much On Full Auto.Too Tight a Clearance Between Bolt & Chamber ,Didn'tt Help & W/ 2 Monsoon Seasons in Central Highlands,& If U Didn't Clean It EVERY NITE, It Would Give Us Problem.After My 2nd Problem,Caught An E6 Leaving to Go Back Home,That Had A Savage 12 Guage Pump.Talked Him Out of It & Traded Him Mine To Turn In .
This is the most comprehensive film or video regarding the M16 and it's malfunctions during the Vietnam War that I have ever seen. Thanks. That being said, the only problem I EVER had with my M16A1 rifle was caused by insufficient cleaning during a field exercise when we were firing a whole lot of blanks, and were given very little time for sleep, much less for cleaning our rifles. Blanks foul the shit out of these rifles.
Interesting video, thank you. I went through basic in 1986 with an M16A1. Mostly carried an A2 in batt, when I didn’t have certain jobs that carried a tube or a carbine. We used the forward assist as a procedure, if it failed to close or not. I can tell you that I’ve personally used it to close the bolt due to dirt or carbon buildup, and I haven’t seen any reason not to. I switched my cheap knockoff to a nickel plated bolt, and don’t think I’ve had that bolt fail to seat. Crappy ammo, reloads maybe, or just dust that sticks to everything but aholes and eyeballs, is easily defeated by the forward assist. My knockoff lives to be kicked around on the floorboards, but I expect it to operate dirty. I won’t claim any scientific proof, but I do have a lot more experience than the average soldier because we had an ammo budget that had to be shot, and it was more than we had time for in training missions. Before I got tabbed, I was routinely grabbed to fire off ammo until my fingers swelled up. Then keep firing. We got sick of it. Never regretted using the forward assist, and it saved me thousands of jam clearing operations. Nice ammo, and a clean weapon, maybe I’d never have needed it, but if you want to be an infantry weapon, you got to willing to play in the dirt. I have a knockoff of an AR that I shoot
Very informative. This information is fantastic for people making modern rifles too. It really gives someone a view/understanding of critical features and potential points of failure
Thanks for the video. I served in 1970 and 1971. I was in the second cycle of Basic Training to use the M16 at Ft Lewis. Basic was an M16E1, and A1 in Infantry school. A1 in Vietnam. I never had a malfunction with any of them except for a bad magazine in VN that caused a double feed. But I always ran it "wet". I believe the M16 was intentionally sabotaged by M14 advocates, it could not be accidental. Remember the torpedo problem in WW-II and the high ranking resistance to actually fixing the problem. The resistance to the Henry and Spencer in the Civil War. So its not the first time such things as the video states. I loaded mags with 18, it was "common knowledge". I don't recall a trapdoor stock in any of them and I was somewhat surprized year later when I bout an AR with one. We had cleaning kits by lat 1970. We used LSA in VN. I also used Dri-Slide on the bolt carrier and inside the upper where the bolt ran. I then filled the the bolt carrier at the bolt pin cut with LSA. First shot would then wet the inside of the upper with LSA. Mine would fire all the ammo I carried, 18-21 mags, without a hiccup. I had complete confidence in the M16 I carried.
First I want to thank you for the education you provided in this video secondly I want to thank you for standing up for this weapon, I am so sick of people bashing the many variants of Mr Stoners rifle. I have built many A-R platformed rifles in a large variety of calibers I think that is why I love this system so much but until today I didnt know of all its many growing pains thank you once again Sir this is the best video on the subject I have seen
Thank you, so much, for this video. I went through basic training in Jan, Feb of 1970. I vividly remember having to get the M16 A1 immaculate, before being let in to chow. So, the cleaning part stayed around a while. We were also trained to hit the forward assist after loading. I forgot about firearms, until recently. While I never experienced a failure, all these years later, I'm just finding out the true causes of the stories we were so scared of.
There's one angle I haven't seen pursued. This video examines only the US experience with the M16 in Vietnam. I had wondered about the Australian experience. Australia did not adopt the M16 as a standard rifle. The M16 replaced two weapons in the Australian infantry section, the Owen Machine Carbine (a 9mm SMG), and the M79. The Owen Machine Carbine was used by scouts, Section Leaders, Officers, and Sergeants (N.B. Sergeants don't lead Australian sections, corporals do that). Prior to the M16/M203 combination, the Section Grenadier used an M79, and an L1A1 SLR. Riflemen retained the 7.62mm L1A1 SLR. Australian SAS units also used the M16, in addition to the XM177, and both the XM148 and M203 grenade launchers. To round out the Australian history with the M16 (and platform), it continued in the Infantry section until the end of the 1980s, when it (and the L1A1) was replaced with the F88 Austeyr (Steyr AUG). The M16A2 lost out in competition with the Steyr AUG. I believe the tipping point was intellectual property, Steyr were more reasonable about licensing the AUG to Australia. Australian special operations units use the M4. I possess an Australian Army manual for the M16 and XM16E1 dated 1965. This manual prescribes a cleaning procedure, and lists a cleaning kit as part of the standard equipment for the M16. I have never seen any indications that the Australian Army had any problems with the M16 rifle. Does anyone know of any Australian issues with the M16?
I have done some checking online in the National Archives of Australia, and in Hansard. The National Archives contain some documentation on the initial purchase of AR-15s for trials (as a side note, the Australian Defence Attache in Washington who was on a lot of these documents went on to command 1 Australian Task Force in Vietnam, his tenure included the Battle of Long Tan). Hansard contains nothing about military use of M16s, and AR-15s (all the references to the AR-15 platform were in the context of gun fascism). My conclusion - the Australian Army experienced no problems with the M16 rifle, neither did the Clearance Diving Teams of the RAN, and the Airfield Defence Guards of the RAAF. I haven't checked any state sources to see of there's mention of police special operations units having troubles with M16 rifles, but I anticipate nothing would come from such a search.
I went into the country in 1970. I couldn't load more than 18 rounds in the magazine without it jamming. I had a real problem with carbon on the firing pin. Carbon was a real problem.
Thank God my father survived Vietnam. He tells me about how the AR 15 would always malfunction and how impressive the modern AR 15 is today. He still loves the M 14 though but admits it didn't work well in jungle warfare(CQB) compared to the AK. This video is outstanding Simper Fi (from my old man)
I trained on an M14 in basic at Ft. Bliss. You had to clean those rifles and keep them oiled or they would jam. They did not like the dusty and dry conditions that prevail at Ft. Bliss.
@@patscally5390 ...that's available...saw several in the warehouse.....but no one seems to mention the obvious...the weight factor...both the rifle and the ammo....which meant a lot to someone who had to hump it all day......
Interesting how the Ordinance Corps said the weapon didn’t need to be cleaned, but in congressional hearings they said its problems were caused by not cleaning it.
Cleaning was not the most serious problem. It was the failure to chrome plate the chamber and the ball propellant. Lack of cleaning added to the more serious issues.
Enlisted in Marines 1967, went to 9 Marines 1968. I was trained using M14, M1, didn’t meet M16 until I went to WestPac. I was told the stories, I also carried an M3 grease gun rescued from downed chopper. Cleaned it up an used it as backup weapon. I was not a ‘Grunt’ but used both weapons a couple of times, in Ashua Valley. M16 was always a good rifle, it also a great gun to open cases of C-Rats.
When I was sent/ordered to RVN for time frame 1966-1969 I was Issued a M-16, when I learned of the jam issues, I traded it for a M-14, then since the M-14 was so heavy I traded it for a M-2 carbine with 30 rd. magazines which I kept for the rest of my tour zero problems with the M-2. The M-14 was a fine rifle but it was heavy, just a few pounds lighter than a BAR and they both had a 20 round magazine of heavy ammo. The M-14 was select- able full auto or semi auto, the BAR was only full auto with a select-able slow or fast fire but still full automatic and it was a bit over 20 lbs.
I was in vietnam 19 months the m14s we had were made by Winchester H&R and TRW the one I had was made by TRW I never saw one made by the springfield armory
the army did everything they could to discredit the rifle, including ammo, construction and maintenance. All at risk to our men of service. Unforgivable.
@@wilsmith6551 the gun was designed, tested. then the army added their changes. the army did not like the new weapon. look at why we did not use the FAL, but instead used the M14. the head of the US Armory played favorites and did not base his decisions on the science of the testing. It was politics and personal power that chose the M14. If that decision to go with a NATO rifle, after the US pushed to standardize, the boys in Nam would have been hefting FALs.
@@bbhrdzaz Hey yes, I just saw the video explaining about that. One person's ego kills a great weapon that would have made a huge difference in the Viet War. That FAL is great gun especially with the sand cuts. I am still a big fan of the M14 and M1 design- the M1 performed flawlessly WWII all terrains. Just an FYI- 1.) The M14 was to be "redesigned" in Viet. but they chose the M16. 2) Proper muzzle breaks would have made weapon much more manageable. 3) It was too long and too heavy but alloys and changes would have helped. 4) There is an M1A1 Socom 16. It would be ideal for CQB....th-cam.com/video/YXvJLR5a7Bw/w-d-xo.html. But the FAL was a product of perfect testing and applying the changes it needed. Thanks
I don't remember cutting down to 28 rounds on the 30-round magazine because the spring was weak. I remember it caused misfeeds because there was too much pressure when 30 rounds were in the magazine.
I was recently commissioned to transfer a stack of tapes to digital audio of a point man Lance Corporal in Marine Reconnaissance for a woman who was only three months old when her father was killed in action in Vietnam. The recordings on the tapes are of her father to his friends and family. I was able to do that for her and she was able to hear her father's voice for the first time. In one of the tapes, he speaks about the M-16. August 6, 1967 he states, "...oh and uh.. on our last patrol we used (the) M-16. We had six M-16s, one M-79 and my M-14- I carry an M-14; its the only weapon I got faith in beside(s) the 79. Anyway all six M-16s misfired- they weren't firing- they fired about one magazine a piece and stopped firing, my M-14 never misfired and kept firing, the 79 got one round off and it was broken- all it could get off was one round so uh.. everybody is gonna start tryin to go out with M-14s and shotguns now. I'll tell you the M-16 is a TOY it belongs back home with the kids." The subject is changed but a few minutes later he makes another comment (speaking to his father, an Army WW2 veteran, "You said that when you came into the service you were just a boy at 19, Well as you know, the Marine Corps builds men. This is the Marine Corps, not the Army so you WOULD be a boy at 19. Boys play with toys! haha... Come to think of it that's probably what we playin with is them Mattel M-16s." -LCpl Gerald Paul “Peppy” Gauthier age 19. Killed in action January 2, 1968. I have edited a version of the tapes in a compilation without the personal "back home" type material in hopes that the lady will allow me to publish to the public. The war stories are amazing, just listening to Peppy and his platoon speak on the tapes about life in Vietnam is extraordinary. Some of the stories are being recorded on the same day of the patrols in which one or more men were injured or killed by enemy contact. A side note, this lady had given the tapes to me about 2 months ago and I didn't have a free weekend until last weekend. I baked the tapes for a day and began making the recordings on Sunday. My wife and I were listening to the recordings as they were being transferred into the next day. She commented to me, "This is amazing, what you're doing on Memorial day". It had not occurred to me. I have never had anything personal to remember or celebrate on Memorial day until I met Peppy and I'll never forget him. I couldn't accept a payment for the job after having heard the tapes. The lady came to pick up the thumb drive and tapes and gave me his purple heart and his service ribbons. I will make a shadow box. I hope to be able to share this story in more detail.
@ Dandy: I hope you'll do your best to find a home for those transcripts and tapes. Perhaps there is a Vietnam Museum somewhere that would welcome them into their collection. They ought to be preserved for posterity, don't you agree?
There is an M16 story I remembered about Vietnam, in which a Marine squad was badly ambushed by an NVA regiment while out in the open. The Staff Sgt. who was leading the squad rifle started to jam up badly because he was in muddy terrain (he was already shot in the heal and was returning fire prone). But because of the jamming he had to recycle his Bolt Carrier Group via charging handle. It got more and more difficult to recycle the BCG that he decided to get up and pry it open. Only to be shot in the chest paralyzing him for life.....Tom Cruise would later portray him in the film "Born on the Fourth of July" (Although that film inaccurately showed them with M14s) .
1965: Marines landed with M-14, two or three months later the US Army's 173rd Airborne Infantry landed with their M=Armalite' in hand, which they were issue long before on Okinawa. Ed Evans, PFC Evans, Alpha Company, 1st Battalion, 173rd Airborne Infantry, 65-66
I arrived in-Country as a 1st Cav artilleryman with the Division of September 5 1965. We carried M14s as our personal weapons (our real weapons fired 33 lb bullets).In December of 1965, right after the Ia Drang fight, I along with the rest of my Battalion were issued new in-box, XM15A1s. As I recall, the rifle came with 7 magazines, bayonet w/sheath, a stupid clip-on bipod, and a CLEANING KIT.
A man I greatly respected and admired told me the M16 was a good weapon, but he preferred the M60 for its life-saving capabilities while serving in Vietnam
What I find most amazing about the Colt AR-15, is how deep they could dig in the junk bins to assemble commercial market guns! Having owned several commercial new from Colt rifles from the late80's and 90's, I had all combinations...Slab side receivers, no brass deflectors, A1 uppers (ON A2 MARKED Lowers) all built and sold as AR15-A2 rifles, with A2 furniture and 1/7 barrels. I loved every one and found them all "special" in a way or another.
Thank you for explaining the reasons for the early M16's failures. I'm sure the people in the military at the time were in favor of delaying and refining any new weapon change. My experience is that the military leaders of the time had the highest regard for the equipment of their fighting men. My conclusion is that political interests and lobbying from the military industrial complex caused many of our soldiers to die unnecessarily on the battlefield.
I’m a Vietnam Vet. I served in the Marines in I CORPS. I did three tours over there. Finally, finally I have a sensible explanation of why the M16 had issues. I came close many times of being killed because the rifle jammed. Now I know why. Thank you for this video.
Henry Wilson this was the whole and entire reason I made this video. Thank you and thank you for your service!
Indeed..Thank You Henry for your service!! Thank You Sir.
I 3/1 here Henry..69/70. 16 was junk. They made us transition from the 14 in I think it was March of 69...they pieced it till everyone was required. They actually were used from the army. Nothing but problems..ammo gave us fits.
yeah, I've had them jam a lot in training
What types of malfunctions did you guys see most back then? When I served, we mostly had issues with extraction rather than failures to feed even though we would, every now and then, get a double-feed problem - that was usually because of lack of maintenance though.
The main issue I had with the weapon was the flexing of the receiver and thus the need of the bolt carrier to not only slide up that "ramp" inside but also to lock in with the eight lugs but to do that while the entire receiver is flexing and therefore it looks like a roller coaster especially when you fire on anything other than semi-automatic. Not to mention the direct impingement fouling the upper receiver after about three or four magazines fired.
Don't get me wrong, I love the rifle even though on my deployments I was not armed with the M16A2 but with the M249 and then I was eventually issued an M4 while I was still an AB on the M240 before I was moved to the main gunner role.
I was with First Recon, A-3, at Chu Lai. We were issued the M16 sometime in early 1967, if memory serves. During my first patrol carrying the M16 we stopped on a hillside. We were being followed. I was the last man in the group, when I opened up the M 16 jammed almost immediately and I couldn't extract the shell casing. Two Marines flanked me and took on the fight. After extraction I got my old M 14 back. The M14 never failed. Thanks for explaining the problems with the M 16.
Emmet Band were you carrying the M16E1 rifle non Chrome line Chamber and Barrel, you have to clean that type of rifle after couple hours of use the carbon will build up on the Chamber bore, there was deliberate shortage of 223 cleaning kits in the Vietnam war many Soldiers, Marines, Air Force and Navy purchase there owned kits from private dealers ( a similar situation was notice happen in Afghanistan and Iraqi theatre operation early 2001 -2004 Miltary personal buying Kevlar vest from private dealers) the Marine start issue order in June 1967s to maintain there rifles, sad thing to see Government and Miltary officials not care about the well being of the men they command thanks for your services.
I didn't keep a journal but I think we were issued the M16 in early 1967. That would be prior to the resolution of the corrosion issue. I believe that the problem was the ball powder.
@@emmetband4931 thank you welcome home.
@@bjornsmith9431 A friend of mine had to get cleaning supplies from his dad who owned a gun store. That was for his M14 which only got used once for real. He was in Signal Corp on a hilltop in central VN and manning an important radio relay complex. He had to brush down his M14 every day with some forgotten powder/lube his dad would send. Changed the color of his M14 to silver.
This dovetails the experience of another bud who was in the delta area. He had to clean his M14 twice a day to keep the rust down. He swore that gun would rust if you looked at it. FWIW he bluntly will tell you the M16 was a better rifle than the 14. He did 2 tours late 67 to enjoy Tet in Saigon/Delta, and 2nd one he transferred up to DaNang. He didn't see any legendary "rock apes" although there was plenty of scuttlebutt about encountering them in the jungle.
@@LuvBorderCollies yes, the M14 rifle wood would enlarge making it heavy for there users and mistline the Gun sight, the M14 was battle rifle, not Assault Rifle like A.K 47 in test with the M14 rifle the A.K 47 beat the battle rifle in time on target and slight control of the A.K 47.
As a Marine I had qualified with the M~14 and had never even heard of the M~16 let alone seen one until I arrived in Vietnam in October, 1967.
I loved the fact that it was fully automatic, light weight and had a simple manual of arms. I immediately heard of the problems and how much the weapon was hated by the grunts.
I witnessed failure to extract but only occasionally. The problem was apparently corrected in late ‘67 and by ‘68 we saw no further problems.
My uncle was E 2/3, 1967 Operation Buffalo and the Hill battles to name a few. Both he and his CO in his book details marines killed due to the M16 problems.
ThankYou for your Service and GodBlessYou
I got to Vietnam Aug 1970. By then, the bugs had been worked out. I found the rifle to be superb in every way. The one area that it seemed the AK-47 had an edge was the size of the cartridge. The bullet would go trhough telephone pole! .... It (AK-47) was reliable as hell from jump. But, I fell in love with the M-16. Now my nephew 50 years later, has an AR-15. The M-16 ws light , easy to carry, had the kit in the stock, and , in a pinch, you could fire it non-stop for hours and hours. I never had one single problem with it. To this day, tho, I crack up thinking how one cartridge is the tool to completely disassemble the rifle. Plus, since the ammo was a tad smaller, you could actually carry more rounds. I always found ways to carry 2 or 3 more magazines than the others. But, there was a special sound theAK made, and when you heard it, you knew shit was gonna get real ... cuz it seemed they NEVER go into a fight unless they had the advantage. And by 1970, we all knew it was corrosion and a lack of chroming. None of us had any illusions. But I came home and had to listen to the bulshit the civilians had been fed. I loved that rifle then and love it now. It got wet, muddy, hundreds of rounds sometimes between cleanings... never a single problem. I always felt sorry for the poor saps the army sent into combat with a POS that rifle was at first.....through NO fault of the rifle itself. The freakin army .... sigh...
thank you for writing your comment.
I agree the M16 is a great rifle...Sound like the Army did wt they could do to make the rifle fail...Look at them now with the M4 doing nothing to up grade it when the whole can see the civilian AR 15 M4 is way better they rather save money then save lives....Thanks for letting the people know
Yo that was a great lesson in the M16 rifle that a lot of still today don't know....l always love the M16 l got the AR 15 tho the M16 they sell for alot money now....Thank you for Service
I don't know what kind of telephone poles you were shooting or what they were made of but an AK round won't "Go through one", not anyone I've ever shot before, maybe if it was an old discarded phone pole that the power company threw away and has been sitting on the ground rotting for 50 years.
I've never had a US .30, 7.62MM, 7.62×39, or a 5.56 go through a phone pole.
Just because an AK round is .30 cal in diameter doesn't mean anything, it's a medium capacity case that lacks the power of either a US .30 or a 7.62mm and under penetrates compared to either one of those, it's anemic compared to them.
@@CCs.p.i
He was there when they first got them, they were underdeveloped at that point and William Macnamara was responsible for pushing them on the troops in that state, he wanted the M14 replaced with the M16 because M16's were so much cheaper to produce and as Secretary of Defense he was trying to cut costs in the military.
But the original poster is correct, by the time he got there in 70 all the bugs had been worked out, the one's issued in 70 were the same one's issued when I was in the Army in the early/mid 80's, they were accurate and performed flawlessly.
My M16 in basic training in the early 80's had a six digit serial number and was marked XM16E1, making it a Vietnam era manufactured weapon but one that was made late enough that the bugs had been worked out, it fired perfect 40 out of 40 scores on the qualification range and earned me a trophy for highest scoring shooter in my basic training class.
The problem with the earliest one's were that they didn't have chrome lined chambers and bores and the early ammo issued with them burned very dirty causing the cases to be stuck in the chambers and were difficult to clear in the heat of the moment, once they chrome lined the chambers and bores and issued proper ammo the problems with them dried up and they turned into the first class weapons that they are today.
I have watched a lot of documentaries about the Vietnam war. A lot of them stated the problems with the rifle
but never really truly stated what was wrong with the rifle so I thank you for your detailed description of the failures
My father was at the Chosin reservoir in Korea he prepared me well for infantry school when I enlisted in the US Army in 1980 I learned a lot from men like you and my father Semper Fidelis there sir You are still doing well alive and kicking Experienced combat veterans taught me how to be a better soldier Peace out from the left coast 2022
@garrettdalton3543 How do you feel about the Army today? I have family who served going back to Revolution-era militias, but I have severe doubts as to exactly what ends my efforts would go toward if I were to join in current times.
I was a sophomore in high school in 1965 when I started hearing problems about the m16. I read and saved as many newspaper and magazine articles as I could find, and did my jr & senior theme papers on this very subject. At that time I did not know about the change in the powder nor did I know of the lack of chrome plating. I did know the cyclic rates were too high causing cook off's which would render the gun out of service. The lack of cleaning kits and lube was also made known. Fifty some years later I learn of the powder being switched causing the high cyclic rates (no mention of cook off's though which I thought strange), the lack of chrome plating and a cleaning kit and some parts changes/upgrades. This was criminal. To this day we still have the forward assist which I have used on several occasions and it will only get you deeper into trouble. If you bolt does not go fully into battery forget the forward assist and extract the round. We should always give our men and women the best.
Have you seen the Forgotten Weapons video on the forward assist?
@@stephenzavatski8016 No, I have not, but if you have to use it it's best to extract the offending round and hopefully get a better one in.
@@buckshot4428 true, the video is about how the tests that were done found literally 0 use for it, but they left it on anyway.
@@buckshot4428 by using the forward assist you can jam the stuck round even further causing mayhem
@@MultiJennifer54 That was one of my points.
Thank you so much for all your channel's content. In Vietnam I was issued an XM16E1. I was very pleased to shed the M14 for something more realistic in Vietnam's environment. But, I was also made aware of some of the problems of the "16", which no one really understood at that time. Fortunately, being raised with some kind of firearm in my hands almost daily, I knew about cleanliness and reliability. So, fortunately, I was pretty well served by my rifle. My first cleaning kit was homemade from a 3-foot length of brass brazing rod, a toothbrush and a shaving brush. Later we got proper kits. Sometime after the Tet Offensive I was handed an XM177E2 (629) for a short time. I cannot put into words how much confidence (real or imagined) that carbine gave me. In the 1980s, after the service I opened a small gunsmith shop and in short time was building AR-15 rifles with mil surplus parts from the various distributors - all pre-ban. Needless to say, over the past 35-years or so, I have become intimately familiar with the fit and function details if that superb platform. Despite how much I've learned about the AR-15 family, I have had only a passing knowledge of the history of the rifle, Mr. Stoner's team and particularly all the stuff that happened at Colt. I have been binge-watching your channel and currently very interested in the JFK series. I have your Armorer's book which sits by the workbench which I use to explain things to customers. I want to thank you for all you do for the serious fans of the AR-15 platform.
Have a great 2022 and glad to see that you're healthy again and shed the tree-cutting body armor.
Some comments: I was issued my first AR-15 (we did NOT call them M-16's at the time) in either December 1963 or early 1964. They replaced our M-2 Carbines. I was on a 5th Special Forces Group A-Detachment in III Corp at a place called BuDop. The rifles were delivered by a full bird Colonel flying around in a fancy Caribou aircraft. Only Caribou I ever saw with a couple of rows of passenger seats forward in cargo bay. Wish I could remember his name. As I remember he was from R&D at Ft. Belvoir and split his time between Belvoir and Vietnam. The original rifles were Colt Armalite rifles, steel mags, NO forward assist and I don't REMEMBER a dust cover. Ammo was specific with a specific propellant specified by Colt. We DID clean our rifles, unlike a lot of the draftee types that came later. I am told that most of the problems came when Congress decided to buy a different propellant from Dupont in Delaware. There are those who suggest that this was a political decision. Using the prescribed ammo and keeping them clean, they performed well for us. And yes, we got shot at and we shot back! We did not fully load mags, probably because most of our 700 strong Steing Montagnards were armed with M-3's and Thompson's and it was believed that problems occurred due to fully loaded mags in those weapons and we wanted to play it safe.
Ever heard of an officer named Phil Byarley? I heard he was in 5th Group.
I read your post you left a year ago. You said "the draftee types" referring to soldiers other than yourself. Better than two thirds of all those that served in Southeast Asia were not drafted but enlisted of their own free will. Most of all the marines sent in 65 were volunteers as were most of the regular army sent before the Tet offensive in 68, also volunteers.
@@thomaspeters5889 Yes, yes. Semantics. The cleaning was still an issue regardless at first.
I'd bet if you reached out many guntubers would love to interview you, mightve literally been the first battle batch!
One of my uncles went to VN to help test the first batch of Hueys along with the SF. That was in 1962. I just recently found out about the 1962 deployment and not from him. He was super tight lipped about his work in '62. I found a stack of 8mm films of "sightseeing" and flying Hueys. They were still in their mailing boxes "APO San Francisco" 229th Av Btl, 1962. If it weren't for that discovery I'd never known about it. He took his work very seriously.
I received my M-16 in April 1967. I never had a problem with it. I kept it as clean a possible. Thanks for a informative program.
ThankYou for your Service and GodBlessYou
I arrived in Vietnam in April, '69. I was a scout/sniper with the 3rd Marines sniper platoon.On my first op I carried the Remington 700 sniper rifle. I learned from that that I wanted nothing to do with a bolt action rifle that held 5 rounds loaded one round at a time because most of the fights were at night. After that I carried an M-14 until the 3rd Marines were pulled out in September. I loved my M-14 because I trusted it. I was transferred to the 5th Marine sniper platoon. I wanted another M-14 but they said they didn't have any magazines so I was issued an M-16. It would not fire two times in a row without hitting the forward assist. And I cleaned it within an inch of it's life. I used a toothbrush on the locking lugs, a chamber brush and a bore brush, lots of patches in the bore and chamber. I disassembled the mags and cleaned them. No luck. Finally I got an M-14 to finish my tour. I've never figured out why my M-16 wouldn't work. (It was the original M-16 with the three pronged flash suppressor.) Maybe you have some idea what the problem was with my M-16. PS. My opinion of the AR has gone way up after watching a number of your videos.
Thank you for your service! This video will explain exactly what happened to your rifle.
From what I can see all the problems with the M16 revolve entirely around massive corruption and what can only be called psychopathic greed within Ordnance Corps. Reminds me of the Mk 14 torpedo.
You stole my thunder. Mark 14 was a wake-up call for the US Navy. There is a long dark history of US ordnance bureau corruption and incompetence that goes back to even before the Civil War. BTW: It may interest you to know the Chief of the US Naval Bureau of Ordnance, who initially blame the Mk14 torpedo malfunctions on incompetence of the submariners and caused some of them to be cashiered, was promoted and later placed in charge of the US atomic bomb test at the Bikini Atoll.
May they ROAST IN HELL ETERNALLY!!!
@@badweetabix I think Admiral King was the wake up call for that crew of fuck ups
When sophisticated ordinance is too expensive to train with I think you are asking for trouble . I am thinking of the Javelin ATM which costs more than the Tank it is designed to kill I also think the Stinger is in the same situation too expensive to actually fire !
@@badweetabix Funny. Soviets/Russia suffers from the exact same issue with torpedo's.
Sir, I don,t know your name but I can tell you I was a Vietnam veteran and I was raised on a farm in Louisiana and if we didn't,t hunt at times we didn't, eat. I used an early m16 & had some problems, but I was issued a second one from the armored in 1968 ,and believe it or not with the cleaning kilt never , l repeat never had a problem with it, but I cleaned it religiously. Thank you for your program. Kudos!!!
BJ Tourere thankyou for telling us the truth. My dad was retired Army and did 2 tours and said the same thing.
Thank you for your service in our great country !!!
I know what you mean because I did 16WEEKS in Tiger Land and we had to clean are weapon all the time. They should have known when they first tried the M-16 at Fort Polk.
If you did 16 wks you must of been a repeat cause Tiger Land was only 8 wks of AIT training for 11B or 11C then Vietnam after a 30 day leave. I was a instructor on the demolition range from late 67 through 68. Co.B 1/2 1ST Inf Div. 66/67.
@@ozadarter I forgot to tell you that this was 1973 as part of the mercenary volunteer men the lives called us. You Nam guys called us stupid. By the way I was 11B. From there went to Cazy-Ass West Germany but that is another story.
"BJ Tourere" First thank you for your service ! May i ask years you served using the M16 both when it was not correct and when you had no troubles with it. I know some of the "Stick" IMR powder was used in a lot of rounds that i am pretty sure WITH CLEANING STOPPED THE ISSUES
I was a combat cameraman in Vietnam filming Med Evacs from the I-Corps area out to USS Tripoli. A Med Evac helicopter landed on the ship's flight deck and as the wounded were being lowered on the elevator to the triage area, a Gunny Sargent began slamming his M-16 on the deck destroying it and cursing it. Every M-16 in his unit had jammed leaving the sniper with an M-14 as the only marine with a functioning weapon...
Obviously, my motion picture footage of that event was conveniently lost...
@HH I am thinking that it was some time in 1967. I spent 26 months total in-country in 3-month periods from 1966-1972... I often don't remember the exact year that I was on any specific assignment.
@ Richard Crowe: Every Marine combat veteran of Vietnam that I have ever met - and I have known perhaps half-a-dozen or so over the years - hated the M-16 and loved his M-14. Stories like that one, the one you described, give me greater understanding why that was/is the case.
ThankYou for your Service and GodBlessYou
Viet Nam 1969 173rd. Airborne. Issued M16A1 with tear drop forward assist, chrome chamber but not bore, black carrier and bolt, trapdoor butt plate and no cleaning kit. Several of us shared a kit and used copious amounts of LSA. Rifle never failed me... ever. Smoked a lot from excess oil. It saved my life.
Thank you for your service Sky Soldier. Welcome home!
the Nam '68 & '69 .. Central Highlands .. same here brother .. never failed me .. I would trust my life with it anyday ... wish I had my baby now ..
LsA... the very name brings back memories of that smell. And shaking up bottles of separated oil.
Not to mention that nice pearly colour and consistancy.
Viet Nam '69 & '70 25th Inf Div Air Mobile M16A1-Same same as you Chuck - except I got a cleaning kit - and I used it meticulous and regularly. Never failed me once. My company was called 'contact charlie' and my platoon was selected as the point element for the Cambodian invasion for the Div. It got a lot of use. I was asked to carry the '79', and I did for awhile, but couldn't wait to get my '16' back.
God bless you sir, and all the brave service men and women from present and past conflicts. My dad, Jim Whetzel was also 173rd Airborne over there chewing on the same dirt as you at roughly the same time. He was a RTO on many of the patrols that he participated in. Sadly, he passed away over 5 years ago from prostate cancer, no doubt contributed heavily to by Agent Orange exposure. I miss him very much.
As a US Army veteran 1969-1972 I DI appreciate this. February 1969 we were the first cycle through Fort Gordon to get the M16’s. No bolt assist. I only had 2 times where I had to eject a round that undoubtably did not seat all the way. It was raining, just below freezing and red clay and sand everywhere. I loved the way it shot. Country boy from Mississippi that had been hunting since he was 6 years old with a weapon like that and how could I not fire expert? Joined the NG 1974-1983 and fired the A1 with not a whisper of a problem. I spent 3 years in tanks where I fired the 45, M-60 and 50 cal. I had heard of problems in Nam and was told LBJ wanted them real bed because Lady Bird had a good size interest in Colt. Still don’t know that for sure. I am going the get a few of these books and make sure my friends that went to Nam see this.👍🇺🇸🤙😃
I shot a perfect score during rifle qualification Ft Gordon August 1969. My DI just scratched his head and asked me how did I do that. I told him the targets were big - hard to miss. I too was a country boy from Mississippi. Grandfather gave me his Remington Speedmaster 241 .22 when I was 6 years old. Still have it. I was captain of the rifle team at Columbia Military Academy in the 8th grade. I carried a M16A1 in Nam. No problems with it.
I was in the Marine Corps from April 74 to April 78 and of course issued the M16 from duty station to duty station . I was stationed at Camp Pendleton , Okinawa and 29 Stumps , therefore 3 different M16's . I had no issues with the 16 , you just had to keep it clean as with all weapons . It was a very accurate rifle especially at 500 meters during qualification . The 5.56 was a pretty mean round with nasty characteristics . To make a long story short the M16A1 was a hell of good rifle in my opinon .
My rifle in Desert Storm was a M16-A1. I remember thinking I'm glad I had full auto and not the 3 round burst. That might be the last war the M16-A1 saw not that I was the only one with it.
Still plenty of M16A1’s bouncing around in 3rd world conflicts, especially in south east Asia.
I fell in love with this gun as a kid. I had a fit to get a Mattel toy M16 around 1968 or 1969. When we played army the kids with the M16 were superior. As soon as I was old enough I bought a real AR 15, I own 3 today. Great video!
It's a shame that youtube would remove a video with serious historical context for their own political agenda.
The do it all the time sadly. If it's not the history they want you to hear the edited it right away.
@@Lawiah0 do you have hard factual proof of that or is that your opinion?
oi vey
I'm a Jew and I love Chris....he is a national treasure!!! :-)
Jeff Walker
The CEO of TH-cam is Susan Wojcicki (a Jew). TH-cam is a subsidiary of Google. Google LLC and its parent company, Alphabet Inc. are owned by cofounders Larry Page and Sergey Brin. Larry Page is the current CEO of Alphabet and Sergey Brin is the President. They are both Jews.
Great video! I just had a different experience I guess, my M-16 was not a good piece of gear. I was a 13A from 1990 - 1996, carried the same rack # M-16A2 for a year at a time. I was an Artillery FSO, carried an A2 and a 9mm Beretta. We had to qualify with both every year, but made trips to the range quarterly at least. Maybe mine was just worn, or maybe we were shooting ball ammo, but malfunctions were an everyday occurrence. The range NCOs walked up and down all afternoon with cleaning rods clearing misfeeds and failures to extract. I couldn't get through 2 magazines on 3 round burst without a malfunction, or a double feed which would shut down the range for a few minutes. We were trained to use the forward assist, and this rifle needed it! My rifle was kept remorselessly clean. I just didn't like to shoot the A2 because it just never worked very well. I was never so glad to get back to my howitzers.
My brother had issues with the badly worn M16A1 at McClellan. The rifles were bad but the magazines were in worst condition. So problems galore. That is not how instill confidence in recruits. Falls under spending a dollar to save a nickel. However when he deployed overseas he was issued a brand new M16A2 AND brand new mags....sweet dreams had arrived.
A couple years my son-in-law had trouble with magazine bottoms falling off while shooting the M9. My brother mentioned that in Somalia about the awful contract of M9 mags. I guess the DoD boys were getting them replaced but they are still in the system.
I'm not used to seeing ads on gun channels.... You're doing something right. Keep it up, I enjoy the education
ED SMITH luck of the draw if we get adds
Thanks for showing the details of the operation of the M-16 and the historical background. I was in the Army in 1969/70 and used the M-16, both the XM-16E1 and the M-16A1. In my experience the rifles were not sufficiently reliable, especially mine as it would jam unpredictably. This was in spite of my best efforts to keep it clean and in giving it good care. The forward bolt assist never once helped to unjam a rifle for me, as I always had to breakdown the rifle and clean it. When we complained to our officers about the problem they just read back the line they had been given from the brass above, that we were not maintaining the rifles properly.
Jim Nesta you had a corroded pitted chamber sir. No amount of cleaning would have stopped the malfunctions.
I was in Vietnam in 66. USAF 22nd TASS at Binh Thuy near Can Tho. I suspect that the army or the ARVN were running low on M-16’s so 6 months into my tour I was required to turn in my weapon. So for 6 months I was on base and mingled with locals with no weapon of any kind. I guess it is amazing that now 55 years later that I am here.
I'm not a weapons aficionado but was interested in the topic, you present in such a great manner, even me as a non english speaking listener was able to fully understand the issue. Great stuff!
I served two tours in Vietnam. 2nd tour 69-70 I initially carried an AK-47. Later in 1970 USARV and MACV prohibited American and allied forces from using the AK because is had a very sharp report ( sound of fire). Because it had a individual report as that of our enemy it was forbidden because the report drew fire from friendly forces. So my last few months as the company commander Bravo 125th Signal Battalion, I carried the M-16 and the M1911A1. My driver carried theThumper M-79 grenade rifle and the M-1911A1.
excellent video!!! my late uncle was in nam he told me that when he was over there during his tour, his m16 jammed on several occasions, he thought it was due to the heat and severe humidity and the fact that he was not issued a cleaning kit for his m16, he was also told that the m16 was self-cleaning.
I’m learning a lot of things I didn’t know Ty, I got my colt sporter 37 year ago. My dad was a Korean War veteran, I want to thank all the veterans for there service.
In the military 1967-1973. You're right about the major effect being the morale. We heard about the jamming long before seeing the rifle. The Marines seemed to have less trouble with eject failures. I think more focused rifle training and fewer draftees. The only eject failure I had was the M2 using 1944 ammo.
You must be a teacher. I served from '66 to '67 with the M14. This video is the greatest tutorial on the AR 15 I have ever watched in my 73 years on this Earth!
Ditto.
@@6NBERLS ...certainly very comprehensive...don't think cleaning out the gas tube with a pipe cleaner was mentioned, though...i've usually found that to be helpful...
This is Hands Down the most Factually Sound Researched Material with Accurate Documentation as to why the M-16 had problems in Vietnam. Please Like This Video. Cheers!
You and Ian from forgotten weapons need to do a collab.
Imagine how many names are on the war memorial in DC. Because the ARMY WAS A JACKWAGON.
VERY VERY SAD THAT WAS ALLOWED TO HAPPEN!
Yeah, but - but.......muh Springfield Armory!!
you dont look like you served a day in your life -- you wear camo to look like a hardass- but you go on recon with me and ill betcha id find you before you know i was there?? then what ,,, it would be all over with . there would be just me left
@Terry Bruce I was there, Tonkin Gulf. Never knew so large a number of our KIA were so young. Such a long long time ago, far far away. 50 years last month we pulled acknowledge into Long Beach Naval Station.
I certainly don't know what it was like nor understand about being out in the bush and these wanna be's running around with their camouflage & ARs don't either.
Welcome home Mr. Bruce.
@Terry Bruce >>> People saying _"Baby Killer"_ should be SMACKED IN THE HEAD with an M16 rifle butt....
"As test after test showed that ball powder made the rifle fire too fast and then jam, the manufacturing company finally threw up its hands. Colt said that it could no longer be responsible for the M-16’s passing the Army’s acceptance test. It could not guarantee performance with the ball powder. One of the test requirements was that the rifle’s cyclic rate not exceed 850 rounds per minute, and six out of ten rifles were far above that when using ball powder. Don’t worry, the Army said, you can use whatever ammunition you want for the tests. But we’ll keep sending our ball powder to Vietnam.
"
My father was a Vietnam vet and hated the M16 and all AR15s for a long time. It wasn't until I got my own and showed him how reliable it was that he started becoming a fan. Unfortunately, due to the injuries he sustained he couldn't share the joy of shooting a (reliable) AR15 with me, but at least now we know why he and so many other veterans of the era had so many issues with the rifle.
I wasn't in combat, being a UH-1 repairman in Germany, but by 71 the M-16's worked pretty damn well. I fired hundreds of rounds on the range and never had a single failure. I know that's not the same as combat.
Can't believe I'm just finding this channel. Not a video I haven't learned somthing in.
I thoroughly enjoyed this documentary, one of the best I've ever seen. Thanks for posting it. I love getting into the technical specification and mechanics of anything, and I really appreciate your detailed, yet concise explanation and review of why specifically the M16 had issues. Thanks for the history too. Amazing video, it gave me something fun and informative to kill time. It never felt as long as it was. Why did youtube take it down? but I'm glad you put it back up.
Miss the M16A1. Class of 1972. Didn't have any issues with mine. In basic, i had one issue with the blank fire adapter. I left the port cover open low crawling. Got some sand in the bolt locking lugs. Lesson learned. Close bolt cover to avoid jams.
Now I build them from scratch. Been looking at the A1, lately, remembering the days when I was 18-21. I think I need to build one, soon.
I learned a few things I didn't know. Especially the firing pin.
I carried the original m-16 while in the USAF '74-'78 and no forward assist. It never failed to fire and was very accurate.
I carried the same version from '75-'86 and my experience was the same. I used it in woodlands, deserts, and jungles with never a problem. In my opinion, the forward assist is a useless solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
@@unnamed_boi It's been a long time and it wasn't something important so my memory could be wrong, but my recollection is that they were marked Colt M-16.
@@unnamed_boi That is definitely true, and I'm 99% certain that all the ones I saw were marked Colt but I'm less sure about the M-16 vs AR-15 marking.
this gun does not lend itself to tinkering...and I have a lot of the earlier versions...mixing and matching parts is not advised....
Nice to have a bolt retractor. Like a tourniquet you don’t need one very often but when you do it will save your ass. Notice they put one on the m16.
Thank you for the excellent lecture on the evolution of the modern M-16/AR-15 rifle. My only comment is that it was unfortunate that the design changes had to occur based on battlefield problems where actual soldiers suffered from design flaws. Upside is what we have now is one damn fine rifle.
This video needs to have 250,000 views and 10,000 likes. it should be mandatory reading it you own any AR 15.
Unfortunately it did have those views at one time. But I’m sure it will again.
414k views and 10k likes April 23, 2021 :)
My grandfather is a Vietnam vet, and maybe he's an oddity, but he loved the m-16. He served on a river patrol boat and saw a lot of action and obviously a lot of water, yet with proper maintenance he never had an issue. After 5 years and 2 deployments with the 101st in Iraq, I can say, the only jams I ever saw were caused by gross negligence. It looked like this guy threw sand in the open receiver. The ar15 is plagued with myth and misinformation. Now the cool thing to do is not lube your rifle, or to just waste lube where you don't need it. I've seen a guy on youtube lube his trigger pins...on the outside...and he has almost a million subs. It's insane how difficult it is to get people to use common sense. The history of the m16 is tragic, but I'm glad it is redeemed, and its platform has gone on to become the pinnacle of modern firearms.
Brings back lots of memories with the A1, lots of classroom time concerning all of these topics, and lots of rounds down range.
1974,Ft.Jackson,SC.....Issued M-16a1s....They worked fine,we were drilled to clean every part regularly,before they went back to arms room, inspected for proper cleaning and lube. CONFIDENCE high during service with the rifle. Renovations certainly improved it.
I have watched this at least three times over the last three years.
Thanks for the video. I have linked it to the Texas Gun Talk forum for a discussion on the rifle along with with your next video discussing the M-16A1 and A2 models. My experience in 1967-68 in Vietnam was the cleaning supplies were getting to the field and the Marines were learning more how to clean/lube it better. In my 13 months in-county I was issued two different types; 3-prong flash suppressor style and then the bird cage flash suppressor with chromed internals.
Thank you, great video. I've learned more about the M-16 in less than a hour then in my entire 56 years. I carried and used this rifle for nearly 14 years as a Infantryman is the US Army with out any problems that I can remember. That is why I own a civilian version of it.
joseph gonzales You never heard anything of this background from the gov now did ya? Me either.........😖
Thank you so much for reposting, this video is something I want to last forever to do this rifle justice. Awesome video still, just as good as watching it the first time. Hope you’re doing well and I’m very glad to see your channel is still around, you’re a valuable guy
My grandfather, in Vietnam in 69, said they told them to load the magazine with 1 round less to prevent jamming
When a bunch of academics, bureaucrats, and desk jockeys think they know better than Mr. Stoner you end up with an inferior rifle and people die. Whoulda thunk?
The rifle wasn't inferior the U.S. Ordinance Corps deliberately sabotaged the development of the rifle so it would fail, and be deemed "inferior". Then they deliberately sent these rifles which had not been properly tested in safe conditions to combat hoping that the people in charge would see the "error of their ways" and let the Army switch back to the M-14 rifle. We had to learn the bloody way what the rifle needed to be the effective weapon it was intended to be for the Army which would not have happened if the Military had properly tested the shit out of it like they do today for ANY potential weapon systems in their arsenals.
Eugene Stoner was a firearms design genius, without question, but that doesn't mean he did not make mistakes. He didn't design enough flexibility into his light rifle - the M16 - to handle the inevitable changes to the ammunition - nor did he chrome-line the chamber or barrel. He and Kalishnikov met, shortly before Stoner's death. It would be interesting to know what they talked about...
@@GeorgiaBoy1961 I do believe that Stoner's specifications always included the correct powder and chrome lining. It was the Army Ordinance Corpse that screwed up.
Ordnance has much to answer for, but the real villains in this drama, IMHO, are Defense Secretary MacNamara - an executive from Ford Motor Company who somehow got the idea that he understood war better than professional military men - and his whiz-kids, the guys with their slide-rules and main-frames who thought they could chart out a war by the numbers. Ludicrous. MacNamara pushed the M16 into the field too soon, before its bugs, problems and the inevitable teething problems could be worked out and solved. He also abruptly cancelled the M14 program, which was already up and running and would have been able to supply our forces with a service rifle until the newer design was sorted out. This episode was neither the first -nor was it the last - time our higher-ups have pushed a new and untried design into combat too quickly, but in this case, good men died because of the gross negligence involved. Stoner was a genius as a designer, but that is not the same thing as saying he was perfect. He should have included an adjustable gas block on the AR15 to allow the user to dial in additional gas flow to continue to operate the rifle when it was dirty, fouled or cold. Ideally, too, the rifle would have been robust enough to withstand changes in its ammunition without all of the malfunctions which occurred. It is probably not a realistic expectation that ammunition manufacturers and/or the military aren't going to change those at some point. The M-1 Garand, for example, withstood a change from M1 Ball to M2 Ball - the M-1 had been designed around M1 Ball 174-grain FMJ, during the 1920s and early 1930s, but when the armed forces switched to M2 Ball 150-grain in the late 1930s, the M-1 continued to perform well. Why? Because Garand's design was robust-enough and had enough flexibility and adaptability built into it to withstand changes in its ammunition.
@Terry Bruce - McNamara was a real piece of work, wasn't he? Johnson, too. The guy swore he wouldn't ask American boys to get in a fight halfway around the world in someone else's backyard - but then he went and did exactly that. I've been alive a long time and am still waiting for an honest politician to come along....
Thank you for this excellent video, Chris! Somehow I missed it until now even though I follow your videos and have your book Black Rifle II. I was in Vietnam 1968 and first had the M14 then the new M16A1 which sure was easier to lug around. It was great seeing your retro builds on the table and comparisons. I've watched your videos about them also. Funny thing, even though I was US Army and my M16A1 always was reliable I bought the Brownells BRN-601 retro version of the early US Air Force pre-M16. It's just so simple and different plus I have to tip my hat to the USAF and General LeMay for fighting hard to buy this fine rifle. I don't remember seeing a mean green jungle machine (gun) in 1968 but I have one now! Well semiauto...
QuentinQuatermass thank you for your service
This is perhaps the best video about the AR platform o have ever watched. The AR has gotten multiple reputations and there are 2 extremely different sides. People hear vietnam stories and think the weapon is garbage. Even guys I served with. But then there's me, so much shooting and I watched these guns chew through round after round and always wondered why people think they're unreliable. Every issue I've ever had had.beem magazine related. This is such a great video explaining the actual issues it had and why. Thank you.
Vietnam. ..6/18/66 -6/18/67
1st Infantry Div. War Zone C, Blue Spaders
The rifle I was issued, all plastic parts looked like it was dragged on a gravel road. Training for proper care was all on the job.
No cleaning kits were ever issued. No oil, brushes, rods nothing. We had to improvise with toothbrushes, rags and any oil we cold fined.
Rifle faild to eject the casing on two occasions . I always thought that dust from from the helicopters was the problem or any dust.
Hated the rifle. I could Never trust it. Thanks for answering many questions.
Wow. This wasn’t a quick history, it was an entire 3 credit hour class on the subject. Impressive !!
My dad was in Vietnam in 1966 as a Army Ranger, he and his war buddy would talk about how he ditched his M16 and used a rusted AK he found in a bunker and it worked. He would have loved this video, he died in 2009 of agent orange related cancer.
Joseph Anthony my uncle was a U.S army sniper and he also died due to agent orange . I think he was in his early forties
My condolences regarding your father. The Vietnam veterans deserved better than they got from our nation. The late Colonel David L. Hackworth - one of the finest combat leaders our country has produced and an expert practitioner of counter-guerilla warfare - was fond of doing a demonstration with his men in which he would dig up an AK47 which had been buried, and without cleaning it in any way save to make sure the action and barrel did not have mud or dirt blocking them, and then load and fire the weapon. He'd finish by saying that - unlike the M-16 (which he apparently didn't care for) - this was a "real combat rifle." Though the M16/M4-family of weapons now in use by the Army and Marine Corps are, by many accounts (though not all) good, serviceable weapons - the instruction of the platform back in the 1960s was a real fiasco. One so bad that it triggered a Congressional investigation.
@@felixway_stunna7070 Ever hear of "Project Eldest Son"? Project "Italian Green"? "Project Pole bean"? No? I can tell. The CIA was salting the NVA supply lines with sabotaged ammo, the propellant was replaced with high explosives. On firing it would drive the bolt through the shooters head, and injure anyone around with fragments. No platoon sgt worth a thing would have ever let his troops fire any AK unless he could guarantee the ammo source. But go on believing some crap you saw in a movie, It is however, not true.
Tartan Woods Chr I may of heard about reading the many books I have on Vietnam
Meus pêsames. ..fabrino fron Brazil
My favorite stories were the guys would tell me how they had matel toys stickers on them and the parts were plastic blah blah blah and I would have a semi-auto version dated in the 60s with me and would ask them to show me. lol, Some of those guys were motor pool and supply guys unfortunately, the other guys that loved them for the most part were combat veterans.
Fascinating information which answers the issues surrounding this rifle. Your AR breath of knowledge is so extensive!
Jesus, I like to listen to this stuff when I’m doing paper work, but I have to stop and listen to this while I’m not distracted. Too much good info, thanks.
Your videos are absolutely fantastic my brother! I am so thankful that you are sharing your vast knowledge of history here on TH-cam for everyone to see. Thanks again for sharing!
Spring 1975, Ft. Bragg NC, 82nd Abn Div, I was qualifying on the range. Firing pin of my M-16 punched a hole through the cartridges primer cap and embedded, preventing removal and reloading. Platoon sergeant pokes a rod down the barrel but still had to disassemble it to remove the cartridge from the firing pin. Of course he told me it was because the weapon was dirty. I knew it wasn't but kept quiet. Next time on the range it was with an M-60. Platoon sergeant decided I would be best used as a machine gunner. I earned a rifle expert badge in basic. Go figure. I didn't want to carry that beast.
I had an M16A1 in Basic at Ft. Benning in 1986. My issued rifle had a GM Hydramatic Division lower rebuilt by Anniston Arsenal Depot in Alabama from 82 through 85 because they were stamped AND then the two digit year. The stock, barrel, handguards, were all new replacement parts. Infantry Basic trainees beat the shit out of these rifles every cycle. I never had a problem with it's reliability, function, and accuracy because my Drill Sergeants would always inspect our rifles after cleaning them after training before storage into the arms room. We were drilled to perfection to all malfunctions and immediate actions. There was no excuse for an infantryman to have a dirty and malfunctioning rifle. Ft. Benning Infantry Drill Sergeants were brutal when it came to weapons. I still love the M16/AR series that I own 5 of them. I have built 3 of them.
My issue weapon in basic training was also a GM Hydramatic M16A1- in 1972.
lilbeserk= Check out Forgotten Weapons or In Range TV about the M16 mud test. These guys slathered on mud on the M16A1 rifle and fired it. Never tried it during my time in service. I had my issued rifle in snow and the cold in Germany, and Ft. Carson. Hot summers in Carson again and a couple of NTC rotations. The jungles of Panama at JOTC and Hawaii's almost similarity in climate and terrain. Iraq 2006 through 2008 was more fucked up with sand storms during the hot summers. The M16A1,A2,A4, and M4s really worked well for me in training and combat. Even the AK had it's problems too. I have found AKs with frozen bolts because of dirt inside the bolt carrier and bolt with the locking lugs. Empty shell casings inside the dust cover blocking the hammer and bolt carrier. All of this was basic soldier operator error. The receivers on AKs majority of them are of course sheet metal. Never abuse them as using them as step ladders because they bend easy too. Even their best Russian, and Yugos had the same problem. Most of the stuff we found are mostly Chinese Norincos. Majority malfunction due to neglect and unfamiliarity. The Hadji insurgents especially the older ones really took good care of their weapons and were really good because they were veterans of Saddam's Army. The rest were young guys from 14 through their early 20s just fired them until it stopped. Either ran from us to fight another day, very few dumped them on the spot and ran. We had a lot more problems from the Taqfiris A.K.A. Iraqi Gang Bangers. They were the young guys who had no clue about taking care of any weapon in combat. They were trained by competent Arab Al Quaida guys from the Stan or real professionals from Chechnya. After training all that shit went out the window when it came to combat against American infantry in the open combat. An American infantry company can take down a city block quickly by blasting its way through buildings and houses if all the civilian inhabitants had left but that was not always the case. As far as both weapons they all need care even in combat or training.
@@reddevilparatrooper
In 1983 at Ft Bliss the Army put an M16 in my hands that was a Colt that was stamped XM16E1 and had a 6 digit serial number, at the time I knew nothing about the variables of M16's but I knew mine had a different stamping then the others the guys around me had, the day of practice for qualification I shot a 40 out of 40, the next day I went on the firing line and inserted the mag, dropped the bolt, tapped the foreword assist 3 times and when I went to shoot it wouldn't come off of safe, so they pulled me off of the firing line, took me to a rear area at the range and a DI took the lower off of mine and installed my upper on a different lower, I went through on the next firing rotation and shot another 40 out of 40 for the actual record, I can't think of another rifle where you can take the two major parts of a rifle, mix them with another and it'll hold zero like that.
Lackland AFB 1976 and only went to shoot one day. Qualified as marksman as nobody was paying attention. Qualified as Expert years later as a DPS officer. Never did pay attention to who made the rifle or the markings then, but I do own a Sig M400 now.
Duke Craig= Once you zero the upper receiver you are golden. All M16 lowers makes no difference, the lower is just to make it go bang. What can throw your zero off is if your unit is shooting 2 or 3 different lot number ammunition. Using the same lot number ammunition during zero and qualification is success.
I trained at Fort Dix in Nov. '73; we had a mix of open and birdcage flash hiders, we all seemed to have the chromed bolts, bolt assist grooves and lighter firing pins. Not sure about chrome chambers and bores. Never saw a bolt with no chrome, all those parts were chrome by then. All our rifles came back from the war, and had worn out bores. We did not have trouble with corroded chambers or misfires. These beat-up worn rifles were accurate out to 1000 yards. We did keep them very clean, but it was used in a sandy environment including long-distance marching and low-crawling in sand.
There were a few select newer condition rifles, only issued to expert marksmen for long range 1,600 yard qualification purposes. They did very well even at that range.
shooting this cartridge at that range is just silly...it won't even knock down a steel silhouette beyond 200 meters....
@@frankpienkosky5688 I knew a friend who was accidentally shot with a .22 long rifle round at about 800 yards; the solid nose lead bullet went from front to back, the doc cut it out from the back just under the skin. The bullet missed everything vital, but took a couple years to heal that wound.
I had no idea this channel was taken down by TH-cam. It just dawned on me I hadn't seen notifications from this channel in a long time and noticed I wasn't subscribed any longer
they tend to panic at the sight of a "black rifle".....even when the facts need to be known.......
I, too, am a student of this subject and might be considered very well read on this rifles history. Thank you for a very thoughtful and detailed account of this history. Though some of my info suggests that Sec. McNamara himself was a large source of the budget cuts and resulting changes to the M-16 that resulted in it's shortcomings in Vietnam. That aside though, everything you stated about what changed and why I found to be completely consistent with my own research.
As for my own experience, hands on, you touched on a big source of problems that can occur with any magazine fed, semi or full auto firearm, the magazine. When I was in US Army Basic Combat Training (Boot Camp in the Navy or Marines) back in 2001, we were issued M-16 A2's and while we did have a few stoppages we were assured that come final weapons qualification day we would have much newer magazines, and our rifles would be fine. Well our rifles were old and very USED, and those mags were likely just as used, maybe more so. I even experienced my one and only bolt over-ride's, which are rare and most soldiers are haven't even heard of such a thing. True to that Drill Sergeants word, come Qualification Day we got some much newer and nicer magazines and our old worn rifles performed flawlessly. Now I have many old surplus 20 and 30 round mags that perform just fine, but no matter how well a gun is designed or built all it takes is a crappy mag to ruin your day. I suspect many failures of the M-16 variants in Vietnam were the result of a magazine and not just the rifles. Later on I had a personally owned Ruger Mini 30 in 7.62x39 and all my after market mags were garbage. That rifle gave me a lot of failures to feed. My one factory Ruger mag however, flawless. I sold the gun anyway as I didn't want it anymore, but the gun store sales man, I consigned it through, told me he didn't even want any of those after market mags.
As always, great information!!!!! The history is fascinating to me.
Very thorough and thoughtful. Thank you for filling in a lot of blanks regarding this venerable weapon. Your passion and care is very evident in this piece.
I was in the Air Force from 1961-1965 and had to carry the AR-15 and it was a pain in the butt. If we trained on a Army base we had to be personally responsible for the rifle because the base commanders wouldn’t let us put them in their armories. Also they were having problems with the charging handles that were hard to lock properly and you could lose your cheek bone. Glad to see they got it worked out.
@William Cuthbertson
81105 67-71 I didn't really like it either. It was Light that's about all I could say about it.
Outstanding video! You sure did clear up a lot of why the M-16 got such a bad reputation during the early days of the war. During my time in the Army we were always told it was because of the cleaning kits weren’t sent over with the rifle is why there were so many malfunctions. Not the old WWII powder or not having the barrel and chamber chrome lined that caused the main malfunctions with that weapon. Very interesting and great job on this video! I served in the early and mid 1970s and the Vietnam vets that I was trained by and trained with never said anything about what you explained in this video as being the malfunctioning problems with the rifle. Some of the combat vets weren’t too fawned of the M-16 especially the old timers. I thought it was then and still is a great rifle!
Cpl. Sev.
This video was meant for those vets to clear up what really happened to the rifle during the war. The truth, not the myths of bs misinformation.
Correction. Some of the combat vets weren’t too “fond “ of the M-16, especially the old timers.
I kinda like the forward assist. Very handy when I need to quietly chamber a round. The normal way is as loud as slamming a screen door. Yo can slowly ease the round into the chamber then give the forward assist a little push. Works every time. Say if you're hunting and you would rather not scare everything away.
Should have already been locked and loaded
It actually works very well for that
Ones That Gave Us Most Problems Were Early Part of War,65-67,Had To Be Cleaned Too Much. Least Little Bit of Sand or Dirt That Got in Chamber Caused It To Be Jammed if Fired Too Much On Full Auto.Too Tight a Clearance Between Bolt & Chamber ,Didn'tt Help & W/ 2 Monsoon Seasons in Central Highlands,& If U Didn't Clean It EVERY NITE, It Would Give Us Problem.After My 2nd Problem,Caught An E6 Leaving to Go Back Home,That Had A Savage 12 Guage Pump.Talked Him Out of It & Traded Him Mine To Turn In .
This is the most comprehensive film or video regarding the M16 and it's malfunctions during the Vietnam War that I have ever seen. Thanks. That being said, the only problem I EVER had with my M16A1 rifle was caused by insufficient cleaning during a field exercise when we were firing a whole lot of blanks, and were given very little time for sleep, much less for cleaning our rifles. Blanks foul the shit out of these rifles.
they do that in all firearms...but in this weapon with its close tolerances the effect is particularly acute.....
We tried to avoid firing blanks so as not to foul our rifles when I was in the Marine Reserves.
Interesting video, thank you. I went through basic in 1986 with an M16A1. Mostly carried an A2 in batt, when I didn’t have certain jobs that carried a tube or a carbine. We used the forward assist as a procedure, if it failed to close or not. I can tell you that I’ve personally used it to close the bolt due to dirt or carbon buildup, and I haven’t seen any reason not to.
I switched my cheap knockoff to a nickel plated bolt, and don’t think I’ve had that bolt fail to seat.
Crappy ammo, reloads maybe, or just dust that sticks to everything but aholes and eyeballs, is easily defeated by the forward assist. My knockoff lives to be kicked around on the floorboards, but I expect it to operate dirty. I won’t claim any scientific proof, but I do have a lot more experience than the average soldier because we had an ammo budget that had to be shot, and it was more than we had time for in training missions. Before I got tabbed, I was routinely grabbed to fire off ammo until my fingers swelled up. Then keep firing. We got sick of it. Never regretted using the forward assist, and it saved me thousands of jam clearing operations. Nice ammo, and a clean weapon, maybe I’d never have needed it, but if you want to be an infantry weapon, you got to willing to play in the dirt.
I have a knockoff of an AR that I shoot
Very informative. This information is fantastic for people making modern rifles too. It really gives someone a view/understanding of critical features and potential points of failure
Thanks for the video. I served in 1970 and 1971. I was in the second cycle of Basic Training to use the M16 at Ft Lewis. Basic was an M16E1, and A1 in Infantry school. A1 in Vietnam. I never had a malfunction with any of them except for a bad magazine in VN that caused a double feed. But I always ran it "wet". I believe the M16 was intentionally sabotaged by M14 advocates, it could not be accidental. Remember the torpedo problem in WW-II and the high ranking resistance to actually fixing the problem. The resistance to the Henry and Spencer in the Civil War. So its not the first time such things as the video states. I loaded mags with 18, it was "common knowledge". I don't recall a trapdoor stock in any of them and I was somewhat surprized year later when I bout an AR with one. We had cleaning kits by lat 1970. We used LSA in VN. I also used Dri-Slide on the bolt carrier and inside the upper where the bolt ran. I then filled the the bolt carrier at the bolt pin cut with LSA. First shot would then wet the inside of the upper with LSA. Mine would fire all the ammo I carried, 18-21 mags, without a hiccup. I had complete confidence in the M16 I carried.
graphite can be useful...have to laugh when I see all those WW II movies where the torpedoes always seemed to work...which was far from the truth.....
never had to use, glad to have it, thank you, learned a lot, at 70yrs still moving forward god bless usa rgw
First I want to thank you for the education you provided in this video secondly I want to thank you for standing up for this weapon, I am so sick of people bashing the many variants of Mr Stoners rifle. I have built many A-R platformed rifles in a large variety of calibers I think that is why I love this system so much but until today I didnt know of all its many growing pains thank you once again Sir this is the best video on the subject I have seen
So glad you’re back. This and the M4 development videos were truely excellent. .
Thank you, so much, for this video. I went through basic training in Jan, Feb of 1970. I vividly remember having to get the M16 A1 immaculate, before being let in to chow. So, the cleaning part stayed around a while. We were also trained to hit the forward assist after loading. I forgot about firearms, until recently. While I never experienced a failure, all these years later, I'm just finding out the true causes of the stories we were so scared of.
Very informative, no nonsense, straight to the point.
There's one angle I haven't seen pursued.
This video examines only the US experience with the M16 in Vietnam. I had wondered about the Australian experience.
Australia did not adopt the M16 as a standard rifle. The M16 replaced two weapons in the Australian infantry section, the Owen Machine Carbine (a 9mm SMG), and the M79. The Owen Machine Carbine was used by scouts, Section Leaders, Officers, and Sergeants (N.B. Sergeants don't lead Australian sections, corporals do that). Prior to the M16/M203 combination, the Section Grenadier used an M79, and an L1A1 SLR. Riflemen retained the 7.62mm L1A1 SLR.
Australian SAS units also used the M16, in addition to the XM177, and both the XM148 and M203 grenade launchers.
To round out the Australian history with the M16 (and platform), it continued in the Infantry section until the end of the 1980s, when it (and the L1A1) was replaced with the F88 Austeyr (Steyr AUG). The M16A2 lost out in competition with the Steyr AUG. I believe the tipping point was intellectual property, Steyr were more reasonable about licensing the AUG to Australia. Australian special operations units use the M4.
I possess an Australian Army manual for the M16 and XM16E1 dated 1965. This manual prescribes a cleaning procedure, and lists a cleaning kit as part of the standard equipment for the M16. I have never seen any indications that the Australian Army had any problems with the M16 rifle.
Does anyone know of any Australian issues with the M16?
I have done some checking online in the National Archives of Australia, and in Hansard. The National Archives contain some documentation on the initial purchase of AR-15s for trials (as a side note, the Australian Defence Attache in Washington who was on a lot of these documents went on to command 1 Australian Task Force in Vietnam, his tenure included the Battle of Long Tan). Hansard contains nothing about military use of M16s, and AR-15s (all the references to the AR-15 platform were in the context of gun fascism).
My conclusion - the Australian Army experienced no problems with the M16 rifle, neither did the Clearance Diving Teams of the RAN, and the Airfield Defence Guards of the RAAF. I haven't checked any state sources to see of there's mention of police special operations units having troubles with M16 rifles, but I anticipate nothing would come from such a search.
I went into the country in 1970. I couldn't load more than 18 rounds in the magazine without it jamming. I had a real problem with carbon on the firing pin. Carbon was a real problem.
Thank God my father survived Vietnam. He tells me about how the AR 15 would always malfunction and how impressive the modern AR 15 is today. He still loves the M 14 though but admits it didn't work well in jungle warfare(CQB) compared to the AK. This video is outstanding Simper Fi (from my old man)
I trained on an M14 in basic at Ft. Bliss. You had to clean those rifles and keep them oiled or they would jam. They did not like the dusty and dry conditions that prevail at Ft. Bliss.
The M-14 needed a synthetic stock.
@@patscally5390 ...that's available...saw several in the warehouse.....but no one seems to mention the obvious...the weight factor...both the rifle and the ammo....which meant a lot to someone who had to hump it all day......
M14 rear sight would move off zero when rapid fired.
Did your father ever mention anything about the L1A1 SLR gun used by the Australians in Vietnam.
Interesting how the Ordinance Corps said the weapon didn’t need to be cleaned, but in congressional hearings they said its problems were caused by not cleaning it.
Cleaning was not the most serious problem. It was the failure to chrome plate the chamber and the ball propellant. Lack of cleaning added to the more serious issues.
I had a converted A2 in basic training in 2005. Old. Scuffed up. Loved it.
Enlisted in Marines 1967, went to 9 Marines 1968. I was trained using M14, M1, didn’t meet M16 until I went to WestPac. I was told the stories, I also carried an M3 grease gun rescued from downed chopper. Cleaned it up an used it as backup weapon. I was not a ‘Grunt’ but used both weapons a couple of times, in Ashua Valley. M16 was always a good rifle, it also a great gun to open cases of C-Rats.
You weren’t a grunt but fought in a shau valley? Plausible deniability lol
So informative on the M16. Thank you.
We had 18 rounds in the magazine because the aluminum feed lips would spread and it would double feed. A death sentence in a fire fight!
When I was sent/ordered to RVN for time frame 1966-1969 I was Issued a M-16, when I learned of the jam issues, I traded it for a M-14, then since the M-14 was so heavy I traded it for a M-2 carbine with 30 rd. magazines which I kept for the rest of my tour zero problems with the M-2. The M-14 was a fine rifle but it was heavy, just a few pounds lighter than a BAR and they both had a 20 round magazine of heavy ammo. The M-14 was select- able full auto or semi auto, the BAR was only full auto with a select-able slow or fast fire but still full automatic and it was a bit over 20 lbs.
I was in vietnam 19 months the m14s we had were made by Winchester H&R and TRW the one I had was made by TRW I never saw one made by the springfield armory
the army did everything they could to discredit the rifle, including ammo, construction and maintenance. All at risk to our men of service. Unforgivable.
YES THEY DID COSTING AMERICAN TROOPS LIFE'S NOT M16 FAULT!
While I was in Vietnam, I discovered that the M16 would jam if it was not oiled. Even if the M16 was clean it would jam if not oiled.
@@sgoell75 M16 still had tons of problems
@@wilsmith6551 the gun was designed, tested. then the army added their changes. the army did not like the new weapon. look at why we did not use the FAL, but instead used the M14. the head of the US Armory played favorites and did not base his decisions on the science of the testing. It was politics and personal power that chose the M14. If that decision to go with a NATO rifle, after the US pushed to standardize, the boys in Nam would have been hefting FALs.
@@bbhrdzaz Hey yes, I just saw the video explaining about that. One person's ego kills a great weapon that would have made a huge difference in the Viet War. That FAL is great gun especially with the sand cuts. I am still a big fan of the M14 and M1 design- the M1 performed flawlessly WWII all terrains.
Just an FYI- 1.) The M14 was to be "redesigned" in Viet. but they chose the M16. 2) Proper muzzle breaks would have made weapon much more manageable. 3) It was too long and too heavy but alloys and changes would have helped. 4) There is an M1A1 Socom 16. It would be ideal for CQB....th-cam.com/video/YXvJLR5a7Bw/w-d-xo.html.
But the FAL was a product of perfect testing and applying the changes it needed. Thanks
I don't remember cutting down to 28 rounds on the 30-round magazine because the spring was weak. I remember it caused misfeeds because there was too much pressure when 30 rounds were in the magazine.
I was recently commissioned to transfer a stack of tapes to digital audio of a point man Lance Corporal in Marine Reconnaissance for a woman who was only three months old when her father was killed in action in Vietnam. The recordings on the tapes are of her father to his friends and family. I was able to do that for her and she was able to hear her father's voice for the first time. In one of the tapes, he speaks about the M-16.
August 6, 1967 he states, "...oh and uh.. on our last patrol we used (the) M-16. We had six M-16s, one M-79 and my M-14- I carry an M-14; its the only weapon I got faith in beside(s) the 79. Anyway all six M-16s misfired- they weren't firing- they fired about one magazine a piece and stopped firing, my M-14 never misfired and kept firing, the 79 got one round off and it was broken- all it could get off was one round so uh.. everybody is gonna start tryin to go out with M-14s and shotguns now. I'll tell you the M-16 is a TOY it belongs back home with the kids."
The subject is changed but a few minutes later he makes another comment (speaking to his father, an Army WW2 veteran, "You said that when you came into the service you were just a boy at 19, Well as you know, the Marine Corps builds men. This is the Marine Corps, not the Army so you WOULD be a boy at 19. Boys play with toys! haha... Come to think of it that's probably what we playin with is them Mattel M-16s." -LCpl Gerald Paul “Peppy” Gauthier age 19. Killed in action January 2, 1968.
I have edited a version of the tapes in a compilation without the personal "back home" type material in hopes that the lady will allow me to publish to the public. The war stories are amazing, just listening to Peppy and his platoon speak on the tapes about life in Vietnam is extraordinary. Some of the stories are being recorded on the same day of the patrols in which one or more men were injured or killed by enemy contact.
A side note, this lady had given the tapes to me about 2 months ago and I didn't have a free weekend until last weekend. I baked the tapes for a day and began making the recordings on Sunday. My wife and I were listening to the recordings as they were being transferred into the next day. She commented to me, "This is amazing, what you're doing on Memorial day". It had not occurred to me. I have never had anything personal to remember or celebrate on Memorial day until I met Peppy and I'll never forget him. I couldn't accept a payment for the job after having heard the tapes. The lady came to pick up the thumb drive and tapes and gave me his purple heart and his service ribbons. I will make a shadow box. I hope to be able to share this story in more detail.
Dandypanty Did she allow you to share some of the tapes? I’d love to hear them
@ Dandy: I hope you'll do your best to find a home for those transcripts and tapes. Perhaps there is a Vietnam Museum somewhere that would welcome them into their collection. They ought to be preserved for posterity, don't you agree?
My issued M16 during basic training in 1983 had GM Hydromatic stamped on the lower receiver. Never had any issues with it. I called it my "Turbo 400"
There is an M16 story I remembered about Vietnam, in which a Marine squad was badly ambushed by an NVA regiment while out in the open.
The Staff Sgt. who was leading the squad rifle started to jam up badly because he was in muddy terrain (he was already shot in the heal and was returning fire prone).
But because of the jamming he had to recycle his Bolt Carrier Group via charging handle. It got more and more difficult to recycle the BCG that he decided to get up and pry it open.
Only to be shot in the chest paralyzing him for life.....Tom Cruise would later portray him in the film "Born on the Fourth of July" (Although that film inaccurately showed them with M14s) .
1965: Marines landed with M-14, two or three months later the US Army's 173rd Airborne Infantry landed with their M=Armalite' in hand, which they were issue long before on Okinawa. Ed Evans, PFC Evans, Alpha Company, 1st Battalion, 173rd Airborne Infantry, 65-66
I arrived in-Country as a 1st Cav artilleryman with the Division of September 5 1965. We carried M14s as our personal weapons (our real weapons fired 33 lb bullets).In December of 1965, right after the Ia Drang fight, I along with the rest of my Battalion were issued new in-box, XM15A1s. As I recall, the rifle came with 7 magazines, bayonet w/sheath, a stupid clip-on bipod, and a CLEANING KIT.
This is hands down the best video I have ever seen with respect to the mechanical aspects of this firearm. Thank you!
A man I greatly respected and admired told me the M16 was a good weapon, but he preferred the M60 for its life-saving capabilities while serving in Vietnam
What I find most amazing about the Colt AR-15, is how deep they could dig in the junk bins to assemble commercial market guns! Having owned several commercial new from Colt rifles from the late80's and 90's, I had all combinations...Slab side receivers, no brass deflectors, A1 uppers (ON A2 MARKED Lowers) all built and sold as AR15-A2 rifles, with A2 furniture and 1/7 barrels. I loved every one and found them all "special" in a way or another.
Thank you for explaining the reasons for the early M16's failures. I'm sure the people in the military at the time were in favor of delaying and refining any new weapon change. My experience is that the military leaders of the time had the highest regard for the equipment of their fighting men. My conclusion is that political interests and lobbying from the military industrial complex caused many of our soldiers to die unnecessarily on the battlefield.