I have a m16 rifle manufactured in canada, brand new. Is it possible to soften the triggger, because it's a military rifle, the trigger is very hard.

Morky;You have E-mail w/info I would have posted here but couldnt figure out how it came from the AR15.com site w/regards

gophershooter, I had the same thing happen a week ago. Someone emailed me saying he'd seen my post on AR15.com but I don't post there!

Redial

Perhaps someone is copying and pasting. I'd like to see the details of the trigger mods, though, if that's possible. Thanks. - Dan

M 16 triggers can be improved, but, being reactionary, I prefer to put my efforts into a good old M1 or M1A/M14!!

Thanks for the copy of the trigger mods. - Dan

Eldeguello;I used to feel exactly like you.I was a early Vietnam era Marine trained w/M1,BAR and 30 cal air cooled MG and loved the m-14 when they took our M-14,s and issued M15,s I couldnt believe it or accept it and actually it was premature as all the faults of the early AR were not adressed luckily for me my enlistment was soon up.
So I sneered at the AR and 223 for the next 30 some years until about 4 years ago and finally saw the light with the right wt bullet and configured AR this an awesome weapon in a small package.So I have now made peace with the AR and have a AR15 and an AR10 in 243 if I need a little more muscle.W/regards

gophershooter, I never got to try the "new" M16's after they put the fast-twist barrels on them and came out with a bullet that would actually penetrate something! When first introduced, the M16 caused some horrific wounds because the bullets were unstable and tumbled after hitting. Then they tightened up the twist a little, so you could hit something at longer ranges, and their wounding ability decreased. When we were first testing the M16's in Alaska at very low temperatures, (-40 or so), the bullets actually began tumbling in the air at around 600 meters, so a faster twist was introduced. I believe at that time we changed from a 1/14" to a 1/12" twist. Now, the twist is so fast, the bullets only make a .22 cal. hole in whatever they hit! I notice the troops in Afghanistan have complained of the lack of stopping power of the present-day 5.56mm NATO round. The Army is beginning to think about increasing the caliber. What they seem to be talking about is some kind of a short-cased .270 or 7mm. (Made from a necked up 5.56mm???) It sounds to me a lot like the .280 assault rifle round the Brits were pushing when we made everyone in NATO adopt the 7.62X51, (shortly before WE switched to the 5.56mm)!!!

[ 02-18-2003, 20:24: Message edited by: eldeguello ]

Yeah let's all just adopt the 280 Brit. I like that idea. I think it was a cartridge way ahead of it's time. - Dan

There have been several discussions on the AR15.com forum concerning the bullet failures in Afghanistan some of the contributors claim to be military and have access to first hand knowledge I dont know if its true or not but some interesting reading.There is supposedly a problem with a particular lot of green tipped ammo and or the use of 14.5 inch barrels.
There was also a thread concerning the military and the win. and rem, 7mm SM being built on AR 10,s.The Armalite moderator weighed in on that subject and if my memory is correct said the win. had been chosen because the brass worked better through the AR10.Some special opps groups are apparently already using AR 10,s in 7.62 nato.W/regards

You give up alot of evnegy with the .223 when droping for the M16's 20 inch barrel to the M4's 14.5 inch barrel. With a M4 your target is effectively 100 meters(energy wise) father away then with a M16.

Tho the real answer comes in the forum of artillery and actual close air suport. Not the wiz-bang semi-smart munition garbage the Air Force is trying to sell the Army(and tax payers) on. If the USAF is too timid to get into the dirt, let the Army have A10s so they may take care of them selves.

Kristofer

[ 02-24-2003, 01:32: Message edited by: KBGuns ]