M1 vs M16

[All American Kid]

And before you start pretending to be a tough guy complaining about "city boys who have never fired a real gun", Id like to see you controllably hit targets at 100 yards with a full auto .308
In my limited experience of beating the ground in the service I was never asked to hold my weapon on full auto unless it was the M-60. But I could be wrong it has been a many moons ago unless that the service wants you to fire fully auto on small arms what’s the point?

About me pretending to be a tough guy well never claimed so or view myself as such, just pointing out the fact that on average country folks have better experience than someone from the inner city, if you got issue to that well that's your problem.

but for the most part I didn't realize that improvements where made as thinking the (M-16's) barrel and adding a thirty-round clip and come to the conclusion that as the sheriff put it the M-16 is a "soldiers rifle" even though as I see farmers decapitate groundhogs at squint eye distances with the .308 I can see where the pound lighter and 30-rounds capacity has the greater significance.

[HillBilly]

Well, as a civilian, I prefer the Garand over the AR-15. (M-16 is the military code for it... it's actually just a select-fire AR-15).

The Garand is better built, more powerful, more reliable, more accurate, and uses a much more impressive round. But it's no longer practical in the military, I hate to say.

Now, the M-14 vs. the M-16, and I'd say they never should've switched.

[Dr. Madd]

M1 vs. M16- Arm 'em all with BARS and be done with it. *lol*. Between jobs not long ago, I ran into a fellow at our thirty mile yard sale (A once a year thing. Very cool.) Selling both an M1 Garand in beautiful condition, and a Japanese Arisaka rifle from WW2. I still lament being broke that morning.