I do have combat time a long time ago, and the M 16 would be my choice. After humping an M 14 for two years in training, I don't think I'd enjoy humping it any more in combat.
You can't carry enough ammo in 7.62 NATO to satisfy me.
I've owned a M 1A supermatch, and the accuracy was good for the time, but not good by today's standards. You pay a lot to get a little, accuracy wise, and a AR 15 with a minimum of work on it will outshoot a Supermatch. They no longer use them much in matches, except the M 14 matches.
I also trained with the M 21 before it was the M 21...it was XMsomething. This was in Counter Sniper School at Ft. Benning. I liked the rifle and it was accurate aplenty...I think the standard was 1.5 MOA for the rifles. It's still about that now, ifyou ever watch those sniper shows. I don't mean 100 yards, I mean at three hundred. Snipers don't shoot much at 100 yards if they want to live long.
The G 3 is a good rifle, but again, really heavy. The FAL is great looking, but it was not considered accurate enough to build a sniper version. I have one of those civilian versions, as well as a CETME, and the CETME outshoots it consistently, although the trigger is awful. That's the best buy, IMO, in a battle rifle for the individual.
As someone else mentioned it depends where you are. If your enemy is shooting a 7.62 x 39, he's limiting himself to about 150 yards, for all practical purposes. Less if he's shooting it out of an AK...the accuracy isn't there. If you get hit beyond that range, it's either bad luck or a sniper shooting at you.
As far as not being enough firepower, I have to disagree. I've seen bad guys shot with M 60s and M 16s, and if the bullet hit the right place, it didn't matter. If it didn't it was roughly the same result. Shot placement rules. The Marines did a study after things calmed down in Iraq, and the report said essentially the same thing. It's shot placement. The report also criticized the SAWs and the 9mm pistols. Age on the SAWs, and failures on the pistols.
GIs, like everyone else, watch movies and in the heat of combat you want someone to drop like a stone. Especially close up, you want a magic wand that stops them in their tracks or blows the back ten feet because you're scared. (I was scared, anyway.) That don't happen more times that it does.
One reason is with an M 16 and a 3 round burst, you're putting three rounds into a guy's chest in about 1/3 of a second. The human body just can't react fast enough to drop like a stone in a lot of instances....if he's running toward you, it takes more than 1/3 of a second for his critical bodily functions to shut down. So, rather than a lack of firepower, it's unrealistic expectations. He's as dead as he'll ever be, he just hasn't had time to realize it yet.
You don't want to know my opinions of the rack-grade M 14. :>)
