M16A1 Magazine Capacity

[The Notorious FNG]

First off, I'd like to state that I don't expect this to change and I am not demanding a change. That said, it just doesn't sit well with me that the M16A1's magazine capacity is 18 out of 20. I get the rationale for it helping with [arguable] elements of realism, but it just sticks out as an odd choice to me.

The M16 saw quite a large series of alterations as it was introduced and throughout its service life, but the "load 18 cartrdiges in a 20 round magazine to stop feed problems" mantra was built upon the combination of the perpetuated "self-cleaning rifle" advertising and the initial troubles thanks to a switching of the powder type used in the ammunition. Investigations into the troubles discovered that the usage of the faster burning ball powder (propellent) in the cartridges caused a cyclic rate increase of the rifle and, at times, the bolt to open prematurely, resulting in the extractor shearing off the rim of the case leaving a partial case in the chamber and a catastrophic failure of the rifle. Increasing the cyclic rate of a rifle past its intended design limits will result in increased wear and tear on the internal components and a faster rate of failure, hence the poor reputation that the M16 received early on. Mixing this with the dirtier burning powder caused fouling rates to increase leading to more failures. However, by 1968, the rifles on the frontlines benefited from the revisions to the design of the M16 (read: M16A1) resulting in most mechanical reliability problems being solved (it came more down to the individual soldier’s care of the rifle rather than the quality of the rifle).

The practice of not loading the maximum number of cartridges into a magazine to preserve spring life is a debate that I see no end to. Some will say that not compressing the spring for a maximum load will increase its life while others will argue it will wear out faster. Initial DoD thinking was that M16 magazines were intended to be of limited use, similar to the M1 Garand's en bloc clips (essentially use once to a few times and then discard), hence their lacking build quality early on. How widespread was the practice of loading 18 instead of the full 20 is something I cannot find reliable sources on, as I find some veterans saying "I carried a full 20; 18 would be stupid" to the "I ain't risking a jam in a firefight, I stuck with 18" to modern tests and examples showing that even heavily worn magazines and heavily worn M16A1s continued to function as intended even when subjected to brutal conditions.

Since reliability and quality of the weapons are not modeled and state of the weapons in game are, for a lack of better words, "factory fresh", why is it the M16A1 seemingly treated as if it’s an original, non-revised M16? Why are the magazines for it treated as so worn and degraded that they should only be loaded with 18 to avoid failures not even modeled in the game? If this is the case, shouldn't other weapons in-game be subject to this kind of scrutiny?


TL;DR version: M16A1's feed problems were a result of ammunition powder choice and poor quality magazines. Refinements to the design resulted in a quality firearm by 1968 so why is the M16A1 gimped to perform as purely a pre-‘68 firearm?

[Desert Kitsune MarlFox]

the two rounds don't matter in game

however to explain the different responces from veterans and this is with no research so take it with a grain of salt
but the guys in theater longer when they swapped from M16s to A1s with better mags more than likely kept the same idea of 18 loaded because they still didnt trust it while the later guys who didnt even know of the 18 loaded thing obviously didnt even bother with it
a key point with asking veterans about this issue is were they early or late war? did they see the change in rifles from M16 to M16A1

and to add to the idea of loading mags under capacity that was common practice with several firearms notibly the WWII Bren Gun. and while i don't know the doctrin around with with the Spanish but a Star Model B i have shot wouldn't even chamber rounds if the mag is fully loaded

now to explain why in game? to nerf the M16 in a slight way as it is better than almost any other rifle in game

[Bad Hombre DC]

In a game where one bullet is all it takes to kill, 2 rounds absolutely do matter.

[Bob Hope]

I'm a radical centrist, so let's make it 19 rounds.

[The Notorious FNG]

Originally posted by Desert Kitsune MarlFox:

the two rounds don't matter in game

however to explain the different responces from veterans and this is with no research so take it with a grain of salt
but the guys in theater longer when they swapped from M16s to A1s with better mags more than likely kept the same idea of 18 loaded because they still didnt trust it while the later guys who didnt even know of the 18 loaded thing obviously didnt even bother with it
a key point with asking veterans about this issue is were they early or late war? did they see the change in rifles from M16 to M16A1

and to add to the idea of loading mags under capacity that was common practice with several firearms notibly the WWII Bren Gun. and while i don't know the doctrin around with with the Spanish but a Star Model B i have shot wouldn't even chamber rounds if the mag is fully loaded

now to explain why in game? to nerf the M16 in a slight way as it is better than almost any other rifle in game

The original M16 was a fairly limited run. More or less it was field trials where numerous issues were discovered and rectified in the M16A1. It took a long time for the bad reputation of these early M16s to be shaken, hence why even today people still talk about how supposedly "awful" a rifle it is. The M16A1 is most easily identified from the original M16 by the addition of a tear drop shaped forward assist and the bird cage flash suppressor.

Yeah, I don't know if you ever played the old game Vietcong, but almost every gun in that game had a reduced number of rounds in the magazine to simulate exactly that. It puzzles me why the choice was only applied to the M16 in this game, since they could just as easily found a different way to "balance" the rifle against the other firearms on offer.



My two cents would be giving the M16A1 20 rounds in the magazine and offering an original M16 variant with some differences between the two or to apply the reduced number of rounds in the magazine to preserve magazine life across the board to other firearms in game where it was practiced. Like I said in my original post, I don't think this will change and I assume it would be a lot of work for the developers that could be spent on more pressing issues/feature requests.

[=(e)= Lemonater47]

It was a soldiers myth that they all believed until the end of the war.

We've had 2 Vietnam vets on this forums that used to post often. Both of them said they underloaded. Both of them also served after 1970. One of them was also pretty adamant that if he fully loaded the rifle it would jam. Even though in reality it probably wouldn't.

But if it were you would you test that theory out in Vietnam? When it could risk your life.

So yeah. A lot of them took a round or two out. Even though the issues had basically been fixed before the M16A1 had even come out.

Though it would technically wear down the springs. But so would having 18 rounds in there lol. Just slightly slower with less. Then again the main way a spring wears out is constant "movement". So constantly depressing the spring and such.


Also its Not just for the M16. The PPSH is also underloaded. 65 rounds in a 71 round drum.

[The Notorious FNG]

Originally posted by =(e)= Lemonater47:

It was a soldiers myth that they all believed until the end of the war.

We've had 2 Vietnam vets on this forums that used to post often. Both of them said they underloaded. Both of them also served after 1970. One of them was also pretty adamant that if he fully loaded the rifle it would jam. Even though in reality it probably wouldn't.

But if it were you would you test that theory out in Vietnam? When it could risk your life.

So yeah. A lot of them took a round or two out. Even though the issues had basically been fixed before the M16A1 had even come out.

Though it would technically wear down the springs. But so would having 18 rounds in there lol. Just slightly slower with less. Then again the main way a spring wears out is constant "movement". So constantly depressing the spring and such.


Also its Not just for the M16. The PPSH is also underloaded. 65 rounds in a 71 round drum.

And a myth that the DoD spent quite a long time trying to curtail (introducing a new magazine in the form of the 30 round STANAG magazine certainly helped), haha

Ahh, I'll have to sift through and find some of their posts.

Vietnam was a brutal area to conduct a war. The weapons and soldiers were subjected to some of the most extreme elements and I'd say a testament to the weapons were the fact that they functioned quite well, all things considered.

I never fiddled with the PPSh with the drum mags; I did not know that.

[[PsI] Operative13]

Apparently we're now arbitrarily taking bullets out of expendable mags because of "spring issues."

Every mag spring wears down eventually. In my honest opinion, this is taking realism in a video game a bit too far. Heck, people have been complaining about the inaccuracies with the M16 gun modeling for ages, yet those still haven't been addressed. The majority of players didn't ask for the M16 to be nerfed, yet here it is. Even in beta we were all complaining about the AK removal issue and now another issue seemingly appeared out of nowhere.

Priorities are not straight.

[=(e)= Lemonater47]

Originally posted by PsI Operative13:

Apparently we're now arbitrarily taking bullets out of expendable mags because of "spring issues."

Every mag spring wears down eventually. In my honest opinion, this is taking realism in a video game a bit too far. Heck, people have been complaining about the inaccuracies with the M16 gun modeling for ages, yet those still haven't been addressed. The majority of players didn't ask for the M16 to be nerfed, yet here it is. Even in beta we were all complaining about the AK removal issue and now another issue seemingly appeared out of nowhere.

Priorities are not straight.

Only they did complain about the ammo.

Plus changing a 20 to an 18 seems like something they can do in about 2 seconds. As opposed to modelling inaccuracies. Which I might add they have fixed in the past when they are given proper references.

[MaDeuce]

The infantry still to this day underload standard issue magazines with 28 rounds because of failure to feed issues.

[DevilDaRebel]

Originally posted by MaDeuce:

The infantry still to this day underload standard issue magazines with 28 rounds because of failure to feed issues.

I highly doubt this is true.

[etomto]

My grandfather and his men in 1969 would put 18 rounds in their M16 magazines. He said it was a very common practice even that late into the war.

[AccelExhilar]

Just give the M16, 20 round capacity already... This is a game, no other technical fault of the weapons is represented void perhaps machine gun over-heating but I'm not sure that could be considered a "fault".

[ultrazero]

did they ever widely issue 30 round mags during the war tho?

[The Notorious FNG]

Not to necro my own thread, but I've been busy and I'm finally getting a chance to reply here.

Originally posted by ultrazero:

did they ever widely issue 30 round mags during the war tho?

Extremely late in the war. Standard issue for them was 1971, but they began cropping up before then in limited roles. The XM177E1 and XM177E2 were said to have seen issue with the 30 round capacity magazines but they were very unreliable and quite different than what most think of when they think of the ole "bent banana". A few vets' posts I've read on gun forums say they promptly traded their 30s in for the 20s, hence why the XM177 in game has the 20 18 round magazine.

Originally posted by BeyerDynamic:

Just give the M16, 20 round capacity already... This is a game, no other technical fault of the weapons is represented void perhaps machine gun over-heating but I'm not sure that could be considered a "fault".

I like the quirks of weapons being included. My whole point of this thread was feeling like the M16A1 was the only gun that had this kind of quirk, but I was informed that the PPSh's drum features that. I'd say bring more of them on!

Originally posted by etomto:

My grandfather and his men in 1969 would put 18 rounds in their M16 magazines. He said it was a very common practice even that late into the war.

It wouldn't surprise me and it's a precautionary move to take that makes perfect sense, all things considered. Most vets I've spoken to tell me that the M16A1 was a good rifle - the people who had problems were the ones who didn't take care of it. Magazines were the issue it seems and any step to reduce problems with them would be taken. Especially if your life was hanging in the balance!

Originally posted by DevilDaRebel:

Originally posted by MaDeuce:

The infantry still to this day underload standard issue magazines with 28 rounds because of failure to feed issues.

I highly doubt this is true.

It's not. Full 30+1 lest you run the risk of needing those extra rounds in combat.