The Differences Between the M16A1 and M16A2
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 лют 2025
- Video on Vietnam M16s: www.bitchute.c...
This channel depends on your support, here are several ways to do so:
Patreon: / mikeb128
Bitcoin: 173Yu7hxmPeCExhFdVhShXVt12SckfLebP
Bytecoin:229Km4RndogNwKFY3w72Hr4icEkS11afbaZcGoJ5gvDwGQPKAnX4NqeFr6MNqj3PGR4PGXzCGYQw7UemxRoRxCC97rhRBP
Monero:4BrL51JCc9NGQ71kWhnYoDRffsDZy7m1HUU7MRU4nUMXAHNFBEJhkTZV9HdaL4gfuNBxLPc3BeMkLGaPbF5vWtANQuQxHHHVJekU3rP6yM
Also, if you like Military Surplus gear and collectibles, visit my online store HERE: www.mikesmilitaria.com - Розваги
3 round burst was a way of giving you full auto without emptying the mag, overheating the barrel, and running out of ammo.
At least that is what they told me in basic. They said soldiers under fire will go full auto with little results and all the negatives above.
Do you have a preference for an current A4 version out now sale?
For an A4, you may as well just go with something like PSA. Just get their 20 inch "freedom rifle" kit and get some picatinny heat-shields and voila.
The AR in full auto is way too fast, it best to slow down and keep full auto instead of three round burst. IMHO.
Better hit probability for moving or hiding targets. 3 bullets instead of one. Better control than full auto
Burst is crap... always was.
And apparently made the semi-auto pull a lot worse, helping to ensure you wouldn't hit anything, either way?
Used the M16A1 in basic training and in Korea. Once I came back to the states, we transitioned to the M16A2. Same with the M1911A1 and the transition to the M9. I own the civilian versions of all 4 to this day! Great memories.
this is the most American comment i have ever seen
Dingo ye
Liar! The M16A1 was designed in 1959 and introduced in 1961! You couldn’t have used it in Korea if the Korean War ended in 1953. Stop faking stories for internet points
d u c k I was just about to say that
@@coffee4682 He didn't say he fought in the Korean war. He just said he served in Korea.
Thanks for the great video Mike. I built my first AR-15 almost 20 years ago using an Olympic Arms lower and a 20" HBAR barreled DPMS A-2 upper .
It was a great rifle and very accurate but it just did not have the same sweet balance and feel of the M-16A1 the US Army issued me in 1979.
That HBAR just made it feel nose heavy to me. It was heavy all the way through so not really an A-2 style barrel.
In 2012 after a few personal life challenges I needed ro sell all my guns to help finance a move from Texas to NC. In time I decided I would build another AR and this time
it was going to be an AR-15A. It took me two years as i live on a low SSI disability income now but she has the same weight and feel of my old Rack # 54 M-16A1 I carried in the 70's and 80's. Now here is the cool factor. When I was PCS'ing from West Germany I was turning my M-16 in to the armorer in our unit for the last time after I cleaned it. He took it from me then removed the hand guards , which were really worn down, and replaced them with new triangular handguards. I asked what he did with the old ones and he said they were expendable items so they threw them away. I asked if I could have them and he said OK. So I used my old M-16A1 hand guards on my repro AR-15A1. I had to use a piece of an old credit card and some JB weld to replace a missing finger on one and to reinforce 3 cracked fingers.
Thats so cool
That's awesome dude.
That is so cool. I had the same A1 for most of my 20 year hitch in the Army National Guard. The last 4 years was with the A2 which I never grew fond of.
The M-16A1 was a great rifle. For us lefties, you were issued a plastic brass deflector. It had a detent ball that snapped into the hole in the carry handle. Kept hot brass from going down your blouse and burning the shit out of you. The solid bottom flash suppressor was issued on some of the last production A1’s, I was the company armorer and got a few brand new A1’s though supply. It’s intent was to keep from dusting yourself while firing from the prone.
Very good informative video. Many non-military and even some non-combat viewers will learn much when they watch. Thank you much for doing this for everyone.
I put an A1 kit together, it was rough. I spent some cash buying a nice used hand guard, then brownells started making replica ones. An A2 build came after that. I’m glad the A1 and A2 are becoming popular again.
I finally got my hands on both. Damn near took a prayer to god to get one since they’re sold out basically everywhere now.
Filling in the bottom of the a2 bird cage also helps to mitigate debris getting kicked up when firing from prone, or so I've been told
That is the primary reason, secondary reason was to act as a pseudo-compensator
Not true. Better design for recoil control, because the gas leaves the bird cage and pushes down on the rifle instead of pushing up.
The birdcage is in fact, very useful for prone shooting on loose dirt. 👍
I've been told the same thing
This change may look small, but was a huge improvement to the rifle
I was in an Army National Guard Field Artillery Unit 82-89. I was issued the A-1 in basic and AIT. Once in my unit, we had the A-1 all during my enlistment. We also had 1911's. They were beat to death! Most A-1's I seen were GM. I did get the chance to handle a rare H-R manufactured A-1 during basic. And we did in fact use a nail to adjust our rear and front sights in basic and once in my unit. Every firing post had a nail there for us to use.
Badas s two really awesome builds been considering building me a retro m16 as part of my new years resolution
I just built an M16A2, and found some good A1 parts along the way. I will let that project take as long as it takes to find the correct parts. Nice informative video. Thanks.
I got one of the Capco A2 uppers off of Gunbroker and built it up like yours but used a PSA stealth lower. I was looking at the Colt A2 upper kits on GB, but just couldn't justify roughly $1000 for it. I am also working on a Colt A1 build (kit) from Atlantic Firearms. These are great collectors. Great video, looking forward to more on these, thanks.
I experience with both weapons. Summer of 1987, I attended basic at Ft. Leonardwood, MS. I qualified with the M16A1, once I was posted with my unit in W. Germany. My unit received the M16A2. For the rest of my time in the US Army until 1996, I used the M16A2.
Imagine not going tip to butt. smh
Ghost that trigger.
ddd ddd When papa doot doots his rifle, we say “doot doot”
This is the way.
Steven Bobby Bills “A bit of mush, little bit of mush, there’s the wall... and a clean break”
Nut to but
Flannel daddy would not be pleased.
Going from A1 to the A2 in 85' the round grip was real nice the sights were nice and being able to adjust the sights quickly was a plus. No one was a big fan of the 3 round burst instead of full auto but accepted it fairly quickly.
The muzzle flash change on the A2 reduced dust kick up if shooting from the prone. No dust kick up reduced the ability to see where you were shooting from and kept it the visibility
Great job Mike. I really love that you are doing these very informative videos. There's only a couple things I could add (Im sure you know these but some viewers who have not owned/handled the weapons may not). The A2 barrel is only stronger beyond the handguard, it is the same diameter as the A1 barrel inside the handguards. Also in regards to the handguards, the main improvement with the A2 is that you no longer need two different part numbers in order to replace the handguards (as in the A1 with a left and right side). On the A2 they are the same.
Indeed Bruce, I should have mentioned that fact about the barrel.
You mentioned the deflector on the C-7 being transitional. There were a few of these minor transition parts on my A1 while at MCRD in 1982, no deflector (Our lefties had a snap on plastic deflector) We had tapered slip rings, large aperture rear site and 9" twist barrels.
Good job and a very accurate video, keep up the good work.
It's pretty cool that you have those. I have a pre-AWB Colt AR-15 A2 which has some differences from the one you've shown. The bad ones are having the bayonet lug shaved off and a fat front pin to make changing out uppers difficult. The lower doesn't have all the gate stuff around the magazine release either. It's an HBAR version, but it has the cuts for the M203 grenade launcher. It's the first rifle I ever bought, so in spite of its shortcomings, it has a special place in my heart. The dust cover spring got broken at one point. I'm sure you'll understand why I haven't tried to replace it. Anyway, I enjoyed this video.
The dust cover is improved. A little bump keep it from catching in the lower receiver and bending it
Pro tip Mike, Fulton armory sells a tool to use for A1 front and rear sight adjustment. I read the browells one wasn’t very good. I got the Fulton one and have no complaints. Works like butter and doesn’t feel like anything on it will break. After getting mechanical zero using a punch I appreciate the tool a great deal.
Okay, but it's still not something you want to do during a firefight lol.
Agreed! Makes zeroing one at the range and trying different battle sight zeroes a breeze. Honestly I don’t think it was really intended to be changed in the field. Zero at your FOB or whatever and then hold off for everything else. I need to take my clone and run it out to 400-500 yards. I used a repro C7 upper like you mentioned as I’m left handed. It’s not a true clone but I didn’t want a safe queen I wanted a retro beater.
Anyone using the C7 uppers from brownells be careful. I put in a set of vintage colt rear sight parts, new in the plastic from 1974, and it was a bitch to get in the screw on top of the flat spring. I think it was out of spec tolerance in the sight channel on the upper but after flipping the sight 100+ times with some oil it’s started to loosen up.
They also built up the area around the front take down pin on the receiver in the A2.
I was told that the theory behind 3 round burst was because of studies on full auto fire. After 3 rounds the weapon had a lot of muzzle rise. With 3 round burst you pull the trigger once & could possibly get 3 hits on a target without wasting ammo with muzzle rise. That's what I was taught in boot camp back in 93. Good video...
Love your videos man! They really encouraged me to get my first firearm just this week.
What are you getting?
Two things need mention: first, and irrelevant since you can use either one, but it is evident in the video, is that the M16A1 was still issued with 20-round magazines and when the -A2 was introduced, so were 30-round magazines; second, the reason the handguards are round is because if you broke one you could replace it with any handguard since they're identical, whereas with the triangular handguards on the M16A2 you need to find a match for that particular side, left or right.
Untrue, they started issuing 30 round mags in the early 1970s. Many saw use in vietnam.
@@redtra236 yeah by 1972 30 rounders were pretty standard for anyone expected to be in contact with the enemy.
Thanks. I had an M-14 in boot camp and on my duty stations but I used an M-16A1 in ITR in 1970. One thing I remember about that M-16 though was that the magazines were not all the same size. You had fat ones and thin ones - and because of that - you could adjust the magazine catch for the size of the magazine you had. So - I get this fat magazine and I have to adjust the magazine catch to get it to go in the weapon. I shoot that off (blanks) and go to put the next magazine in. I let the bolt go home to chamber the first round - and it knocks the magazine right out of the weapon and down into the dirt at the bottom of my fox hole ... so I had to grope around for it in the dark, adjust the magazine catch - THEN - put the skinny magazine in and fire off my second 20 rounds ... At the time - I was just picturing that happening in combat - and was not happy ... But - all the things I've seen on various versions of M-16's ... no one talks about that adjustment for the magazine sizes ... I've not used one since 1970 so ... I don't really remember that much about them ... except for this story ...
.
Interesting. Thanks for the service,never forget.
Had the M-14 in basic 67. Later M-16a1. Not to be left out M-1911.
We had M4A1’s in the 75th ranger regiment. (Still the full auto option on the selector switch)
They were great
great overview, im looking for an A2 and you really clarified/educated me well, thanks for a thorough job my friend
The first unit I was in 819RHS my issued M16 had no forward assist and was full auto. It was fun going full auto during an FTX but would mag dump 30rds in less than 8 seconds on blanks and obviously a BFA
Didn't think I'd see another Air Force CE guy in these comments. I'm not Red Horse but it's always cool to run into other AF CE guys online.
You were using pre '65. I had a 66 model in early 70's. I've got the A1 now and is nice having a familiar buddy.
I had come to think just about all of the changes from the A1 to A2 were negatives (with exception of making the handguard round)
Now I see from your video that it's a far more mixed bag and some things certainly *did* need to change, including some things I had taken for granted
(no brass deflector on the A1? Oof...)
Thank you for taking the time with this presentation 👍
Our M16s in northern Germany (1983) had the open lugs on the end of the barrel and no forward assist.. a couple had 4 or 5 digit serial numbers... Vietnam vintage... those open lugs catch branches and krap when patrolling
Good video on difference between the two. I have two A2s. One heavy barrel built in 87 and one light barrel built in 86. They are both a lot of fun to shoot and keep them in impeccable condition. I shoot on both the lighter 55 grain but th 62 grain is their favorite. Groups with the 62 at 100 yards are much superior. Thanks for your illustration!
My first M16A1 in the Army was built by the TurboHydromatic division of General Motors. Never forget the reciever was a funny shade of dark green. Lots of great memories.
Well, yeah, I believe you, because there are actual photos and surviving examples and military stock records that prove that some for Basic Training were made by Hydromatic. Nobody has yet actually been able to produce actual evidence of Mattel made receivers. Just goes to show how susceptible the general population is to accepting myths.
Thanks for posting. I only shot the M16A1 myself. I served 1980 to 1983, US Army. This we'll defend!
We’re you part of the Invasion of Grenada?
Difference: A1 has a better Length of pull.
As a young L/CPL in 1986 they took my A1 and issued me a brand new A2. All us troops noticed right off the bat the A2 stock was the only bad change. The flack jacket pushed the rifle out even further with A2.
@@PLT-dq3dd that must've been enjoyable. What'd you think of the weight compared to the A1. Like or dislike?
@@ironstarofmordian7098 that depends on whether you like to carry around more unnecessary weight or not
@@ironstarofmordian7098, before I joined the army in 85, I bought an AR15. It was an A2 6500 Sporter II transitional model. It was the first model with the forward assist, as the first A2 variant had A2 parts minus the FA.
I didn't initially think anything about the weight or balance till after I left the service in 89. I LOVED my M16A1. It was extremely lite, and almost felt like a long barrel pistol.
When I got back to the civilian world and my Sporter 2, I didn't like the additional weight on the front end due to the barrel being larger in diameter for the last 7".
I replaced the A2 handguards and pistol grip with A1 parts. I don't have body armor, so the stock length doesn't bother me.
The only change I'd make at this point is getting a pencil barrel, as I have only changed the charging handle with one I won from the NRA, and recently dropped in a Geissele trigger.
The additional barrel weight is a waste, along with the forward assist.
The one actual improvement is the closed off flash suppressor.
A2 was my service rifle. I miss it. Thanks for posting this.
We in Canada were always told the C 7 grew out of the A2 and not the A1 as you state. C7 had: A2 sights, brass deflector, A2 hand guard, A2 barrel....
It was a receiver style that was literally an a1 receiver with the brass deflector.
@Ben Finny The adults are trying to have a discussion about small arms development. Back to your video games now.
@@MikeB128correct
I like the video idea. I don't serve in the Army... but knowing people who have, I don't think any of them would consider any of the 'A2 updates an upgrade over the earlier 'A1.
Barring the brass deflector. That was good and justifies it all, dunn'it?
Good job Army/Marines who totally aren't out of touch! 😊
Enjoyed my time with the /A1..Full FUN switch
Great video man, thanks a lot for doing this. I look forward to seeing more of your stuff.
Excellent comparison! Good job
The differences are that the M16A1 was designed to be a combat rifle. The M16A2 was designed to be a camp Perry national match rifle.
Correct! The M16A1 was a simple ‘aim & fire’ rifle, not a target ‘gotta adjust my sights’ rifle!
I've grown up shooting the a1 and with a marine familie they all love the a2 and I thot the a1 was perfect
Thank you for the clarification
. I have an A2 that I absolutely love.
I
Glad to say I still have my fathers M16A1 he used when he was still in the service. He handed it to me when I was still 12-13 yrs old but ofcourse mags and ammo not included for safety purposes. 😁 it's made by elisco though here in the PH.
I was about to call bullshit, but then you said you're in the Phillipines where I thought firearms ownership was restricted?
Yes it is. If you want to own a gun here legally you have to undergo a very long process like securing certificates from various government agencies and ofcourse it includes a neuro exam 😑
Great explanation on differences.
Recently put a A2 stock on my DPMS AR-15, and made it into a M-16A2 clone. Because for some reason somebody though it was a good idea to put a 5 position stock on a 20 inch heavy barrel with a solid carry handle but now it’s in full A2 glory like God intended
Gotta be an operator you know.. Glad you have an A2 clone now, they're definitely neat.
Mike B haha thanks, now I’m on the hunt for a G3/CETME, need to take a break from the AR platform
Also, drop a binary trigger in the A2 to simulate burst fire. Need to buy a couple before they get outlawed
IMO the A2 is a target rifle. The A1 is the better general issue fighting rifle. The Marine Corps specs were basically custom made for our KD course of fire.
Great video. You are a fine speaker, too.
Only advantages I found carrying the A1 was it was lighter when you had to carry your weapon for a long time and it was full auto, but unless you were in combat full auto really didnt make a difference. The A2 sight system was much better and provided a quick on the fly elevation change with the rear sight without having to have a tool to adjust the front sight. And the A2 was a more accurate weapon to fire in my opinion. I always qualified expert with the A2.
wierd - when I was in Basic we had M16A1 sights with the 3 round burst action. (1992 Fort Jackson)
Simply A1 upper and A2 lower.
@@scythelord - Yep - that's how I viewed it. I just didn't think the drills called it anything but an "A1" but was naive at the timeon the A1 A2 difference.
Colt also supplied c7’s (a1’s with brass deflector and a2 barrels)
Interestingly enough I served 24 years USAF, retired in 98, and until I bought my own AR I had never fired an M16 with a forward assist. And I was always rifle and pistol qualified, so at least once or twice a year at the range, and many many days lugging one around.
Ok
You go with what you know and good and comfortable and confident with.
One is clearly a masterpiece, and the other is clearly the master's piece.
Great video Brother. Thank you for the info and the entertainment. I'm a late 80's/early 90's Marine. Love the A2. I've built several. Keep up the good work my friend.
Hey for your a2 pulmetto makes a lower that is marked US Property M16a2 and it's only 50 bucks. Not a big deal but might tickle your fancy for that price. Great vid thanks.
stupid question, does an A2 upper fit on an A1 lower?
Yes
Valid, not stupid
Yes.
The windage adjustment on the A2 seems like it could get accidentally moved pretty easily
Longer length of pull is great when you're shooting on a rifle range in nothing but your shirt, but it sucks when you're wearing LBV and body armor. For solid buttstocks, I much prefer the A1 vs the A2 as it fits me better both with and without gear on. And I MUCH rather have a collapsible stock as then I can customize the length of pull.
I used the M16A1 in Vietnam in 1968 and it saved my life on both semi-auto and on full auto, it is better than the m16-a2, by a long shot.! The push button on the M16A1 is better, bigger and
easier to hit with your thumb, thus better.
I own an a2 I built with a Doublestar receiver lower and Colt a2 everything else. I did put an a1 pistol grip on it though. Both beautiful rifles.
When i qualified in boot in 1980 the coast guard had m16A1 10 round mags not much fun in full auto i scored 198 on a range gun of a possible 200 first time fired m16a1;)
What always amused me is they put a heavier barrel on the A2 to compensate for sustained fire, while also stripping out the ability to engage in sustained fire.
Awesome. Thanks for this
Glad you liked it!
I tested the M16a2 in the army. This and the Ak47 was very light compared to our Ak5.
While aiming with my earprotection on, shooting sounded like a funny airgun spring "flooiiing" sound.
My dad was issued m14 then m16a1 and i remember whan he was issued the brand new m16a2. Military Brat for life...
I like the battle worn look on the A1, Ya need to beat the hell out of the lower on that one though. I'd like to get a Old SteamPunk A1 to play with. This vid makes me want to go hug my AR15....Thanks Stoner!
the handguard is what makes it very easy to tell the difference
My A1 in RVN in 1969 didn't have storage in the buttstock. I have a replica, built with part obtained when the National Guard units were upgrading to the M4, and this buttstock has no storage either.
Maybe you had the XM16E1?
Good one Mr Mike keep it up
Thanks Mike, wondering if you could explain how did it detect the 3 round burst?
It's mechanical. Just search for it on Google or YT.
Rotational clockwork type mechanism....
A secondary disconnector with a ratchet gear on the hammer.
The A2 stock is 5/8 " longer.
Great video,thanks for the lesson.🙏
I competed with the A1 when I was in Germany from 81 to 84. We never got the A2's but I can tell you that I could easily hit 400 meter targets without any problems. Generally I was a single shot guy, but if I actually had needed to go to full auto, I was also competent enough to control my fire to 3 or 4 round burst. At 100 yards and open sites, I was accurate down to a 2 inch shot group. My biggest complaint was that I didn't have a scope option, so when the rails came out, I was all fan boy wishing... I also wish I could have tried the M-10 daddy to the M-16... 7.62/.308 semiauto love machine with scope.
Nice. There were actually scopes and mounts designed for them, but the military didn't want to spend the money. Look up the Colt 601 scopes.
@@MikeB128 Nice! I sure wish we had them in my unit. I would have known as I ended up taking over the Arms Room my last year there. ua-cam.com/video/17iX_LxZIbo/v-deo.html
Most ACOGs have a removable base and when it's removed they can attach to any M16 carry handle(fixed or removeable) with a thumbscrew. And Colt also sold a special scope that mounted the same way.
Give me the A1's stock, fire control group and barrel profile and the A2's 1:7 twist rate and sights in the same rifle.
If someone asked me which of these rifles I would choose in this video I would choose the A1, I have short arms and I would rather have a full stock because they don’t break easy. It is a cult classic firearm and is sought after by Vietnam veterans.
I love reading all about history including military and there's a trend throughout much of mankind's past: Something big changes the way war is fought, everyone adapts to it, time goes by, and suddenly people start forgetting the lesson and start tweaking those adaptations based on opinion, internal politics, misguidance, and other reasons. Three round burst is one of these innovations. See, full auto was created because the American civil war and world war 1 demonstrated that in trenches, bunkers, buildings, and generally any super tight environment the most important factor is reflex and ammo expenditure. See, bayonets may be the first thing people thing of when storming a trench, but most soldiers prefered to shoot their gun when possible once they were actually in a trench or bunker because running 10 feet at the enemy took time and he could just shoot you. It's hard to explain in text, but the chaotic fist fights of trench assaults along with the invention of bolt, pump, and lever actions meant that it was typically easier to just cycle another bullet whenever convenient until empty than it was to run back and forth from one guy to another, probably just getting stabbed or beaten to death yourself in short order anyway. On top of that, people don't just die instantly when shot; you need to shoot multiple times sometimes. The logical development was to take a regular machine gun and make it smaller. It took years for this technological advancement to spread across the world but by world war 2 it was considered a basic fact of warfare.
By the time Vietnam and the M16A2 rolled around, many people began to forget about this in many countries. This is why the FAMAS has such an impractically high rate of fire. This is why the MP5 has 3 different firing modes. Now that the USSR has collapsed, Russia has been making many similar blunders such as that weird double semi auto feature on the AN94. These ideas serve well enough in theory, but they openly defy the brutal pragmatism and desperate efficiency that inspired the original invention of full auto. Part of the problem is that people assume that you were totally meant to go automatic at long distances. Unless you have a machine gun heavy enough to handle that kind of perpetual vibration, you are only supposed to use it at most 20 meters. Typically it's a matter of "oh no, bad guys are literally right in front of me. I better kill one or two of them really quickly before they kill me and my friends".
So what you said about 3 round burst being silly over complicated is 100% true. Nothing is actually stopping you from basically going full auto anyway; it's just a more inconvenient way of doing it.
Truth. Especially about the lessons forgot as time goes on thing. Those who don't learn from history are foomed to repeat it.
The M16A1 my grandpa had in the army(1974) had no forward assist and some parts of it said AR15
601
@-YA- 006 No many M16A1s have AR-15 engraved on them but further down on the magwell also say M16A1 Same with the M16 and XM16E1 too though.
I actually just built an A1 replica that has a brass deflector. From what I was told, the upper receiver was refurbished surplus from an early Canadian C7. It looks pretty new, to be honest, although I did have to do a bit of filing on the pin hole to get it to fit into the lower. I don't really care if it's actually surplus or not because it was cheaper than a Nodak Spud upper, and I like having a brass deflector.
There was the M16A1E1 that has the brass deflector too.
Hi Mike B, great video ! Could you tell me exactly what brand A2 hand guards you have on your M16A2 clone here? Any details would be great, I’d like to use exactly those for my build. Thanks !
They're the USGI ones made by CAPCO, who made the entire upper.
@@MikeB128 thanks! i appreciate that.
@@MikeB128 Thanks, they look a little on the thinner side, the A2 handguards, that's what I was looking for. I appreciate your help. :)
The compartment in the pistol grip is where I keep my beef jerky.
The A2 was adopted so the Marines could lay on the lawn and shoot bullseyes at 600 yards. You can't see an enemy at 600 yards. If your wearing load bearing gear, the a1 stock is not too short. The rear sight of a2 is adjustable, not soldier proof (where is my zero?). 3 round burst is ok idea. The ratchet mechanism is a crappy system. The military has been trying to save on ammunition since the trapdoor Springfield. Volume of fire can win fights. A2 is not a bad AR, but some of it's design does not help soldiers win fights.
Your voice is so NICE
I like the A2 flash suppressor on the A1. All the A1s I used had prong suppressors
There is a detail difference between the two Port doors. The A1 normally features a port door with a small rectangular pad, while the A2 features a larger squared pad that is actually tapered from front to bottom. This is because some people would not close the ejection port door when closing the rifle after cleaning and would bend or damage the port door. Angling the pad stopped This from happening.
Personally i prefer the m16a1 since its a bit smaller ish
I believe the a1 stock and hand grip were made from bakelite.
Partially. The Original Model 601s were bakelite then they went to a hyrbrid which was mostly fiberglass.
Is it possible to put a A2 handguard on the A1?
Yes. Original A2 guards were designed to be able to retrofit onto the triangular handguard cap that sits behind the front sight base.
These weapons are amazing. It took me awhile to really appreciate the design behind the AR-15 platform. I think the only weapon that can compete with it is a Russian made Kalashnikov design or eastern bloc made AK of some kind.
Love me some black muskets
10:31 💅accessories😜🤪 got me laughing
In regard to the lower “external” differences- is the rear casting the only difference? I had heard there was a mag well difference and maybe something around the mag release button? I’d love to know for sure! I’m starting an A1 clone build and have a raw 80 lower, that I can modify before coating, with the hopes of making it as correct as I can….
Great video!!!
THANK YOU!!
Subscribed!!
I have a 1976 sp1 done up like the airforce 601. It has no compartment but looks like the a1
My favorite myth I heard from my grandfather is the m16 projectile would cut people in half because it "tumbled" when fired. lol
It didn't tumble when fired, but did have tendency to tumble on impact inside a body.
I got to fire an M-16A1 at BMT as the weapon I qualified with (but it had an A2 stock).
Because you said "BMT", I know you're Air Force and whatever you say about firearms means jack shit. :)
Mike B seems kinda ignorant as a response, but alright...
Not like I couldn’t be a gun guy who thought the Air Force was gonna be better than what I got...
@@jroynonfisher It was a joke, not a dick, don't take it so hard.....................
Mike B dude, I can’t hear the tone and inflection you’re using, give better hints.
@@jroynonfisher The smiley face didn't do anything?
Didn't the airforce use the M16(no forward assist or fencing, some had partial fence I think) and not the M16A1?
A1 sight is god. Set and forget, A2 is great at USMC ranges which is why it was designed. If you aren't great at range estimation the A2 is not that great. Battle sight vs. Target sight.
The case deflector does make a big difference.
I always wondered about the forward assist, why would you want to jam something into rhe chamber that doesnt want to go?
Sounds more like a jam enhancer lol
Inhuman Filth because of the way the m16 cycles it can cause the action to get gummed up and that can cause the bolt to not go forward, the forward assist is kind of a fail safe so if your bolt isn’t going forward you can use that forward assist so you can keep shooting the bad guys
That's the intent, but doesn't address the question; if the round is reluctant to go in, does it make any sense to use a mechanical device to force it in? I think a "rearward assist", making it easier to get the reluctant round out of the gun, since there's no obvious op-rod handle to kick, as there is on the M1 Rifle, M1 Carbine, and M14, would be more useful.
@@kimisdaman You don't always have time. You didn't force the round in, you just barely needed to assist. It was a very delicate gun, ie why a lot of us thought it looked like a matel toy plastic gun.
Another reason is we Marines were slobs sometimes. We assisted in that problem because we didn't clean them sometimes like we should . Think rain, mud nasty. LOL
Yes it IMHO all was corrected thank goodness.
Those M-14 could be drug through mud holes and still clean a 20 round magazine no issue.
M-16 not, we had to learn to do better in maintenance and through several upgrades of the M-16 it became outstanding. 1967/1968
3 round burst is a fancy term for a DOD budget cut on ammo
Nice bf109 with a Swedish soldier
In my opinion the M16A2 is the definition of hypocrisy against the saying "If it ain't broken, don't fix it". Well, they fixed it until it was eventually broken compared to the M16A1. Let's start with the stock. On everyday AR15s modern day, most people with a good stock are A1 length. RARELY is anyone gonna collapse their stock all the way in or all the way out. The materials used in the stock improved with the A2 however, but DEFINITELY not the length of pull. The A2 length of pull is way too long for me to care about. Now for the grips. Compared to the newer grips, both suck ass. But compared to only each other, the A1 grip is better than the A2 grip. That nub on the A2 grip is really annoying, but both grip angles are too steep. But the A1 grip is better regardless. For carry handles: I don't care for this one really that much, but I prefer the A1 carry handle over the A2's. I prefer the aperture of the A1's over the A2's for some odd reason. The A2's sight adjustment is definitely far more sophisticated, but too complicated for field use in my opinion. Now for forward assists. Here is where the A2 DOES get an edge. The A1 forward assist looks look, but isn't as convenient for not getting caught on things as the A2. For the hand guards, the A1 is clearly better, that's not even a question. To me the A2 hand guard looks ugly and feels kinda iffy. For front sight posts, I seriously don't care a single bit. Now for the barrels. The pencil profile barrel as for modern manufacturing makes the government profile barrels obsolete. The reason they switched from the pencil barrels wasn't because they just wanted something "better" or more accurate, but because they didn't have the technology to make a super lightweight barrel work for the time. Pencil barrels back then shifted roughly 2-5MOA or larger after a mag-dump due to the immense stresses barrels as a whole were forced under already. The government profile barrels really aren't any more accurate than a cold ambient temperature pencil barrel, and they're not any better in general other than a firefight where it won't shift under hot temperatures. Not to mention are FAR heavier! So that's that. Now for the last part, the muzzle devices, The A2 flash hider IS better, I'll say that. It's cheap as hell, but it seriously does it's job beautifully. The extension from 20 round magazines to 30 round magazines was an improvement, and sights at least for most people were an improvement, just not for me.
This is all my opinion as I've said multiple times so please don't kill me.
Is the m16a2 retro now ???
I’ve spent some time with both models but currently using m4commando but before this i used m4carbine. I’ve always been AK fan but the armed forces of my country are using ARs as primary firearm(but some branches might use a different one such as AKs and HKs) but if i can chose i’ll chose a1😊
I only prefer the A2's length of pull and sights because I'm an ogre and that extra inch and a half helps me out. If it had the "rock n' roll" switch instead of shitty burst, it would have been a LOT better IMO.
@@MikeB128 yes, i also prefer that full-auto. My issued Colt m4commando also has burst instead of full-auto which i don’t really like but most of the time we shoot only semi-auto so it’s alright i think. Another reason that i like about a1 is the lighter barrel but i’ve also seen a1 with heavier barrel and a2 hand guard in the force (can’t remember about the twist though), the hand guard could be after market but i think it is factory made. We got issued both m193 and m855 but mostly 855 cause m4 is the one that we use the most. Only thing that i don’t like about a1 is the furnitures are kinda flimsy but it gets the job done so far, so it wouldn’t be much problem i think.
Carried one in the war. Bullet tip on the rear sight.