>>64094661
Completely different, the M16 was an actual doctrinal step forward, and the field testing which had been done with it under Project AGILE had it come away with virtually only glowing reviews, soldiers loved the fuck out of the AR15 after getting to use it in real combat.
The problems come with starting up production of this new cartridge, the 5.56x45mm. At the time, this cartridge was only specced for a high grade sporting powder which just was not being manufactured in the quantities that a military was looking to use, thus why the powder was substituted.
Not doing enough testing in turn, this turned out to cause timing problems and wear problems, which are exacerbated by the thought that it would not be necessary to chrome line the barrel. There's two particularly important changes the M16A1 does among many, which fixes this, and that's making the recoil buffer heavier so that dwell time and cyclic rate is normalized, and the other is to chrome the barrel, which primarily makes it so casings can virtually not stick in the chamber anymore. Existing M16s have their buffers and barrels replaced whenever thy come back to the armory to be made as reliable.
Presto, the M16A1 isn't just as good and beloved as the AR15 was in Project AGILE's testing, it's even better.
Meanwhile, the XM7 is NOT liked by soldiers testing it in the field, they fucking HATE it and think it's pointless, calling it out as "doctrinally outdated." The rifle is bigger and heavier, you can't carry as much ammo so they keep running out in field exercises, they never find themselves making use out of its extended range, and there's problems with accuracy and wear.
The XM250 isn't faring better, being worse than both the M240B and the M249.
