Quote Originally Posted by Syme View Post
Regarding the M16A3, no branch of the US armed forces uses them. They never saw widespread use even when they were first introduced in the 1980s, since they were intended only for specialized use by certain units. Only a small number were ever made. Nowadays they aren't really used at all. The SEALs, etc., probably still have a few lying around, but that's about it.
I've yet to see one. My understanding is that SOCOM purchased a few of them just before the M4 was adopted. The M4A1 then negated the need for a full auto "musket".

As for the bullpup carbines, I have little interest in them. Sure, they look cool and are great in concept but the fact I am a left handed firer negates any perceived advantage some may have. Something about an ejection port in my cheek isn't too appealing.


One last thing, from a practical standpoint, the rifle in my hands is a "combat rifle." I guess in a way terms such as those used by Tactical Response is a reason I all but stopped buying some of my former favorite magazines such as Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement. Leave it up to the "experts" to come up with still more terms to confuse the layman about what he is buying. Honestly, I often use the term battle rifle to describe my old Mausers and so on. That said, they are still combat capable as I am sure some in Third World countries would still attest to. I can see Joe from the street going into Tactical Bob's Combat World right now:

Joe: "I'm looking for an assault weapon."
Bob: "There's no such thing, the Liberals came up with that term, I do have a wide selection of state-of-the-art combat rifles over here, though."
Joe: "But I don't need a combat rifle. I just want something fun to shoot, like an AR-15 assault rifle."
Bob: "Sorry, I don't have any selective fire ARs."
Joe: "I didn't say I want selective fire, just a semiautomatic assault rifle."
Bob: "No such thing, now if you mean combat rifle..."
Joe: "Okay, okay, what kind of 'combat rifles' do you have."
Bob: " Well, got this AR-15 over here with EOTech, RIS and supertactical peanut dispenser."
Joe: "$2503.22 is a little too expensive for my tastes; whoa, they make a .308 AR combat rifle?"
Bob: "No, the AR-10 is not a combat rifle. It's a battle rifle. But yeah, they make it, and I have one with your name all over it."
Joe: "So, which battle was it in, looks new."
Bob: It wasn't in a battle, it is chambered for an intermediate full power cartridge, making it a battle rifle like the M14 instead of a combat rifle like the AR-15."
Joe: So, if I get into a firefight, it is considered combat or a battle? I really need to know because I don't want to have the wrong equipment."


Oh, and before someone catches onto the "intermediate full power cartridge" I was talking about, bear in mind that 7.62x51 NATO was originally designed by the US as an intermediate cartridge to be adopted over the .280 British. The Pentagon did not want to give up a full-sized cartridge but needed something better suited for automatic fire than the .30-06. Hence, the 7.62 round; shorter but containing similar ballistics to the .30-06. Ten years later it was replaced as the standard service round by the 5.56, a truly intermediate (at best) cartridge.