MovieChat Forums > Southern Comfort (1981) Discussion > M-16's

M-16's

posted 20 years ago by metallicant_1984
23 replies | jump to latest

This movie takes place in the year 1973, at that time, the army(national gaurd) would be using the M-16 A2 or A3. The guns they use in this are the M-16 A1, which was disbanded for jamming during Vietnam. The visible diffrence between the A1 and A2,A3 models is the forward assist on the right side of the gun, the guns in this movie did not have them. This gun would not have been issued to the National Gaurd in 1973. Also, in the movie the men switch between blanks and live ammo a lot. To use a blank round you have to attach and device to the barrel to create enough pressure to work the action, with this on you cannot fire a live round, yet they go back and forth without
changing anything on the gun. Good movie, but they needed a weapons advisor.

[–] ph34r_me 20 years ago

the thing about the blanks may have to with the fact that during filming they would really be using blanks even when they were using actual bullets as far as the movie is concerned so if they took the things off the barrel the guns wouldn't work

[–] Scarlet_Illuminati 20 years ago

First of all, it's not a gun; It's a weapon or rifle.

Second of all, if the regular army is using M16-A2's, the national guard would be using M16-A1's, because the army reserves and the national guard get the regular army's hand-me-downs.

Third of all, the device is called a blank adaptor.

And lastly, it's just a movie.

[–] whitten-1 19 years ago

If it's just a movie, then can't they talk about it by saying 'gun'?

'gun':

"Any portable fire-arm, except the pistol; a musket, fowling-piece, rifle, etc."

[Oxford English Dictionary]

Gun is fine.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Gibsualdo 19 years ago

The M-16-A2 entered service in 1985.

According to the novel 'We Were Soldiers (and Young)' by Lt. Gen. Harold G. Moore, it was the type of gunpowder used in the 5.56mm rounds, that was causing a lot of the jamming problems. The company that produced the rounds, changed the type of gunpowder used from the type which was used during the original field-trials. The company erronously neglected to inform the army of the change, and so many troops were left in *beep* because of this *beep* up. The problem was that after discharging a round, the powder would leave behind a sticky residue in the weapon's working parts, which would gradually build up with use. During rapid/heavy fire situations, the residue would often buld up in no time.

The AR-15/M-16-A1 was never a particularly great rifle, although as far as jamming goes this was deduced to be the main cause (other than general neglect by individual users). The re-worked M-16-A2 is quite a different, and vastly superior weapon. One of the best assault rifles in service today.

And finally, that part about the National Guard always using hand-me-downs, isn't necessarily always the case. Whilst it may happen some of the time, I've seen pictures of guardsmen fighting in Vietnam with M-16-A1s (albeit only 1 NG regiment was deployed iirc) and pics of guardsmen in Iraq with M-16-A2s. It could be though that when deployed in combat situations, guardsmen are given an upgrade as such. As for the movie (which I throughly enjoyed), maybe it's possible that being 15 or so years since the M-16-A1 was released, that by that time some earlier ones would've made it down the line by then. And about the blank-firing, yeah they *beep* up with that one. Fake M-16s made for movies (that can't fire real rounds) shoot fine without the blank-firing attachment, *real* M16s do not. You need to re-cock the weapon after discharging just 1 round.

Oh and for the nit-pickers, a rifle is a *type* (catagory) of gun.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mobocracy 19 years ago

It's been widely reported that while the powder change contributed to the jamming problem, a more compelling problem was that the guns were sold as "maintenance free" and issued with no cleaning kits or instructions.

Once the kits were issued along with instructions the jamming problem disappeared.

[–] Okie_Engineer 19 years ago

Yes, it's true that the M16 variants were originally issued as "self-cleaning," however, that wasn't the only problem. The original versions were issued without chrome lining in the bores and chambers of the barrels. Because of the absence of this, corrosion was a real problem in the tropics of Southeast Asia. There was also a real lack of good M16-specific weapons training for soldiers.

A recap of the solutions to the M16 problems:

Better ammo
Chrome lined barrels
Better training

Any questions?

[–] Okie_Engineer 19 years ago

From your post, I'm guessing you don't have any real experience with the AR15/M16 family of weapons.

Like your quote of:

"The AR-15/M-16-A1 was never a particularly great rifle, although as far as jamming goes this was deduced to be the main cause (other than general neglect by individual users). The re-worked M-16-A2 is quite a different, and vastly superior weapon. One of the best assault rifles in service today."

Where in the hell'd you get that? Once proper training was implemented and proper ammunition issued, the M16A1 was a GREAT military rifle. Hell's bells, it's still in service around the world (like with the Israelis, for instance). Light weight, accurate, easy to train new soldiers (much easier to train new soldiers to shoot expert than with the previous M14 and M1 rifles), and very reliable.

The M16A2 incorporated several improvements, but for the most part it's the same basic rifle as the M16A1.

For those interested, the M16A2 has these features over the M16A1:

Larger diameter/heavier barrel forward of the handguards/front sight base (the M16A1 barrel is the same diameter muzzle to breech).

Round, corrugated handguards with delta ring to allow one-person disassembly (M16A1 has triangular handguards and a funky delta ring -- item that secures handguards at their rear -- that requires a second person to disassemble).

A rear sight in its own housing (M16A1 rear sight is incorporated in the carry handle).

Integral shell deflector in the upper receiver for left-handed shooters (M16A1 used a detachable plastic shell deflector that wasn't worth a damn -- and good luck finding and keeping one once you're in the field).

Three-shot burst fire control (M16A1 had full auto capability).

Buttstock with longer length-of-pull/overall length than M16A1.

Pistol grip with finger groove as opposed to M16A1's smooth grip.

Reinforced lower receiver at front pivot and rear buffer tube (though Colt Firearms did ship a few M16A1 rifles with the reinforcements).

If you HONESTLY believe that the M16A1 wasn't a very good rifle, then you've never handled or used one. FYI, the Canadian Armed Forces' versions of the M16 are much closer to the M16A1 configuration than the M16A2.

I know for a fact that nasty guard units were still using the M16A1 as late as 1995. Active duty Seabees were using them during Desert Shield/Desert Storm.

[–] BlakeSlayton 16 years ago

"The M-16-A2 entered service in 1985."

True from my experience. I entered Marine Corps boot camp at MCRD San Diego on July 23, 1985. Our Series was the first to be issued the M-16A2 service rifle. Brand spanking new.

The Series that graduated the week before us did so with the M-16A1.

[–] Okie_Engineer 19 years ago

So much BAD info from a moron.

As pointed out previously, the M16A2 series wasn't adopted until 1984 (no, 1985 is not the correct date).

The military's problems with the M16 in Vietnam were attributed to calcium carbonate-based gun powder slowly lacquering over the gas tube, poor training (someone -- someone a LOT like you -- advised the Army that they didn't need to clean their new M16-type weapons), and a lack of chrome lining in the bores and chambers of the barrels.

These problems were all corrected by 1967 with the issuance of better ammunition, better training, and the adoption of the M16A1 version of the rifle (the original M16 and XM16E1 were used by a limited number of soldiers in the 1965-1966 timeframe and were the rifles that experienced the problems of serving in the tropics).

And if you'd paid a little closer attention to the movie, Jethro, you'd have noticed that the rifles used are actually SP1 versions of the civilian AR15; no forward assist, large front pivot, and no "raised fence" around the magazine release.

Please don't feel compelled to post any more bunk and I won't feel the same compulsion to eat your ass.

[–] Scarlet_Illuminati 19 years ago

"Please don't feel compelled to post any more bunk and I won't feel the same compulsion to eat your ass."

LMAO!!!

[–] TransAtlantyk 19 years ago

Goddam, you know your *beep* Armalite.

Fredo, you're nothing to me now. You're not a brother, you're not a friend.

[–] jeselmira 19 years ago

Armaliteshooter has spoken the truth. This image clearly shows the lack of any forward assist: http://www.moviegoods.com/Assets/product_images/1020/28219.1020.A.jpg
See some models depicted with a chronology here: http://world.guns.ru/assault/as18-e.htm

One point that no one seems to have considered is the possibility that the Louisiana National Guard had not transitioned out of 7.62 by 1973. My guess is they were still using M14’s or M1 Garands.

For example, consider this image:
http://speccoll.library.kent.edu/4may70/box189/ayers13.jpg
It was taken at Kent State University on 3 May 1970 shortly after the arson of the ROTC building there. It depicts an Ohio National Guardsman bearing what is plainly a 7.62x63 M1 Garand.

Now, by 1973 further production and the demobilization in SE Asia undoubtedly could have freed up more Armalites for use by guard units. However, there is a strong probability that the Louisiana National Guard had no M16/M16A1’s to issue in 1973.

[–] Fatwoul 18 years ago

Armalite wants to marry an M16. He wants to have its babies.

[–] Kev76 17 years ago

Rofl, fatwoul!!! Will the babies be 5.56 mm in diameter?

Great info, guys.

[–] GraeShadowe 17 years ago

Actually the M16A2 didn't come out until the mid-80's, and the absence of a forward assist is one mark of an M16 (pre A1), so the models used would be about right for the time period; maybe even M14, lol.
You're dead on about the blank adapters, tho. The funniest part was at the beginning when they were firing in a line, and the folks walked infront of them, lol!

Refusal to believe does not negate the truth.

[–] txsoldier41 16 years ago

I was truly amazed at the amount of mistakes in these threads. There were a couple of people who actually did some research on this so I have to give them some credit.

I am a retired soldier. I served in the Regular Army from 1983 to 1992, then in the Army National Guard (New York) in a Active Guard Reserve position (meaning I worked full time for them) from 1994 to 2007.

As the film takes place in 1973 it is not an accurate accounting for the soldiers to have M16's (either the original, the A1 or the A2.) The National Guard at the time and up until the early 2000's, received "Legacy Equipment" from the Active Component of the Army. Yes, it is the equivalence of hand me downs, from vehicles to weapons to radios that is what the National Guard had to use.

As for the need for a blank adapter. You can (and I have) fired the M16A2 without the blank adapter. The need for the blank adapter is so that you have enough backpressure to slide the bolt back and chamber another round. For safety reasons you should never walk in front of anyone firing (blanks or live rounds) the pressure from a blank firing close up can and will injury you.

That being said. Yes it is just a movie. And we have to take it with a grain of truth only.

[–] veggieboy18 16 years ago

I was a reservist in an engineering battalion beginning in 2003. When our unit, the 854th HSC out of Kingston, NY was activated, we were forced to exchange our armory full of M16A1s for M16A2s from another unit that had yet to be deployed.

I was a clerk, 71L back then, and was floored to find out we still had M16A1s. I thought for sure that they would have gone to some federal supply house or been melted down for steel back in like 86. Hell, the M16A2s we used in basic and to qualify at ranges where old enough.

So, it doesn't surprise me at all to see them still using M16A1s. A guard unit at that time would probably have been excited to get such new weaponry.

[–] phantomsever 16 years ago

Just to clear the air (or conversely, roll a can of CS under the tent flap), the rifles used by the ersatz guardsmen in "Southern Comfort" were not (repeat, NOT) M-16s. While a case could be made that they were straight M-16s (no suffix), that doesn't hold water since all government-contract M-16s (the early non-suffix models, the -A1s, and the -A2s) had the reinforcing webbing around the magazine release button.

The first production M-16s procured in large numbers were straight -16s (no suffix) bought in 1964 for the USAF's air police and security forces in Vietnam. These weapons had Armalite's original 1:14 rate-of-twist barrels, no foward bolt assist, and no buttstock trapdoor.

The Army's version was adopted as the M-16A1 in 1965 and differed by having a 1:12 rate-of-twist, the forward bolt assist, and the buttstock trapdoor (usually used to hold a cleaning kit, several 100-piaster notes, and/or a few doobies in a ziploc). This weapon would remain the US's main battle rifle until the mid-80s when it was supplanted by the -A2 variant.

The M-16A2 rifle featured several changes, the most significant of which was the improved ammunition (63-gr M-855 ball and M-856 tracer), requiring a 1:7 barrel twist to improve the heavier round's ballistic coefficient at extreme ranges. The other major alteration to the weapon was deletion of the "full auto" function in favor of a 3-round burst option on the selector switch.

As for the comments by the resident "gunstore commandos" that the M-16 was prone to jamming, they are correct -- but only if the soldier carrying said weapon bought into the "self-cleaning" hype. Likewise there were some problems -- initially -- when munitions contractors switched from "stick" to "ball" powders. However, reports of these difficulty were vastly over-exaggerated.

Interesting to note is the older M-16/M-16A1 rifles cannot use the newer 63-gr ammo but the newer -A2's do quite well with the lighter (earlier) 55-gr M-193 round. The earlier 1:12 rate-of-twist provides insufficient spin for the M-855/856 projectile, resulting in lackluster accuracy at any range beyond point-blank.

The weapons carried by the actors in "Southern Comfort" were likely carrying commercial versions of the Colt AR-15, built as (or modified into) selective-fire rifles and configured for blank ammunition by fitting a concealed adapter between the weapon's screw-on flash suppressor and the peel washer.

Six Actual......OUT!

[–] houndawg3 16 years ago

M855 is 62 grain, not 63.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]