July 2007
In truth, I came late to the black-rifle party, but it wasn't as if I didn't get a heads-up. In the late 1970s, like so many other shooters, I'd fallen under the sway of Colonel Jeff Cooper, the cult of the 1911 and the idea—or perhaps the ideal—of practical shooting. But the sport had just been born, matches were few and far between, and the only "custom" 1911s I'd ever seen were in the pages of Guns & Ammo.
That's when I met Jimmy Q, an explosive ordnance-disposal expert back from Vietnam. Jimmy was typically seen in a cut-off gray sweatshirt and mirrored aviator shades and lived in a one-room apartment over his gun store. He was also the first for-real "combat shooter" (that's what we called it back then, combat shooting) I'd actually met. He had one of those 1911s just like in G&A, and he was amazing with it. I knew a lot about hunting guns and not much else. Growing up in Tennessee, I'd had a lever-action .30-30 put in my hands about the time I said my first word, which I believe was "deer." I'd done a lot of shooting with Ruger Blackhawks, owned a 1930s vintage S&W double-action .38 for"self-defense" and purchased, for a deal that was definitely too good to be true, a first-generation S&W M59 9mm that worked only occasionally.
So I hocked the 9mm and a hunting rifle and put the money into a Colt Combat Commander 1911 .45 and a custom set of S&W revolver sights that cost me more than the gun, and off I went. Jimmy Q towed me along like the ice trail on the butt end of a comet, through competition, into police training, military special-forces training, simulations and role-playing—the whole world of what we now call tactical shooting.
At lunch one day in his apartment—he and his girlfriend had been teaching a bunch of us to rappel Australian-style off the top of his building—I opined with great conviction that the 1911 was by far the single greatest fighting machine created by man since the Scottish claymore, bar none, period, exclamation point, so there! Jimmy Q listened for a while, then cut me off.
"Hell, Michael," he said. "You're wrong."
He pointed at his beat-up AR-15 leaning against the wall, complete with two 30-round magazines duct-taped together for a quick reload. "That is the best gun in the world," he said with finality. "A gun just like it got me out of the jungle and back to the world, and I'll never be without one." I started the usual litany against the M-16/AR-15—unreliable, inaccurate, plastic, under-powered "poodle shooter," butt-ugly—until Jimmy Q stopped me again.
"Wrong on all counts," he said. "That is the Swiss Army knife of firearms. It'll do just about anything, and do it well." Then, pointing to the beautiful 1911 by his bed, he added, "The only reason I need that is to get me to my rifle."

http://www.outdoorlife.com/outdoor/shooting/article/0,19912,1639507,00.html

So is it fair to say that no one has any problem with the AR-15/M-16 being the Swiss Army Knife of Guns and the most versatile?

[Deleted by Admins]

That was a good article for Outdoor Life to try and get some of thier fans back after the Zumbo thing.

I like the fact that you can buy kits for it and switch calibers so easily using the same platform. You can shoot .22, .223, 9mm, and .50 beowulf off of the same frame if you wanted to spend the money. If I didn't like the AK platform so much, I would get one myself.

Man, I gotta get me one.

They ought to bring back an updated version of the M-14, IMO, that was a great rifle, and when they made the switch from M-14 to M-16, all the generals opposed it, it was McNamara's fault we switched, but not his fault we're still stuck with it.

I agree theAR is one of the most easily accessorized rifles made but as a combat rifle it's one of the biggest p.o.s. ever issued.
Cooper's name has been mention, well the Col. also stated the M-16 /AR is a fine weapon as long as you 're not asking combat vets who arse 's were on the line that used the weapon. The only reason it hasen't been replaced as primary battle rifle is costs plain an simple.
New issue M-16 's need only to shoot 4" group at 100 yard to be acceptable for issue.

[Deleted by Admins]

I like the AR platform granted it's not a combat rifle and my life depending on it situation but there's alot of work been done on the reliabilty issues from way back.Alot of new companies build parts and customize them...better than Govt issue equipment but still the troops do modify them with aftermarket stuff to make better service weapons.Look at some of the rails,optics,stocks,and the quality control off the line has come along way.The M-1's and M-14's were great and still are,destorying them if stupid,but cost and ease of maint. on the M-4's have to play a part in some of this.I have a friend that said in Veitnam he woulda traded his M-16 for a AK in a heart beat due to gas tube and b/c being a problem! He said something about field stripping it to clean while being shot at was a PIA.The troops doing service should have some say so on what they carry and we should be able to buy the Garands and M-14's rather than wasteing them!