20 vs 16

[Guest NotDylan]

Talk to me about the M16 style rifles (20" bbl, fixed A2 stock) vs the M4's. I know the M16's offer a longer sight radius for improved accuracy and more velocity at the expense of weight and maneuverability. How big of a difference is there really between the two? What are your experiences with the two rifles?

For some reason, I am drawn to the M16 over the M4 even though I am looking for a general purpose rifle, which I hear the M4 is better for.

[Guest Mugster]

Well, on weight, thats mostly a function of barrel thickness. The original M16A1 or ar15a1 or sp1 are lighter in weight than most current 16" rifles. Since they have a full length gas system, they are nicer to shoot. And they just have a good feel (to me). The 16" barrel makes about twice as much noise too. In terms of your ability with iron sights, I don't notice a whole lot of difference. I do like A1 style sights with the L aperture. The 0-2 sight on the A2/M4 is worthless, imo.

The A2 is a much heavier rifle in general. An A2 style 20" barrel works well with a scope. They are much more accurate than the older a1 style stuff.

The downside to the A1 20" is accuracy. You'd be disappointed scoping a skinny barreled carbine. About 3-4 mags of full automatic will leave the barrel glowing too, but i don't see that as an issue for a hobbiest.

The only place an M4 or even a longer 16" barrel works better, imo, is fighting out of a vehicle. In terms of house clearing 20", 16", or 14" is all about the same. The 14 might have a slight edge, but its not much. Its all about weight and the sighting system, to me anyway.