I’m sure everyone has seen it but “Modern Marvels: The M16 Assault Rifle” is currently on Youtube for your viewing pleasure. It is worth a watch if you haven’t seen it. Other shows such as the AK47 are also viewable.
It this just rehashed “Tales of the Gun” footage?
I searched “Modern Marvels: The M16 Assault Rifle” and the first video that came up called it “The most powerful assault rifle ever used in combat.” and showed a few pictures show an M14 and what looks to be a soldier running up a hill with an M1 rifle.
These stupid shows never get it right. I recently watched part of a Warriors segment entitled Mafia vs. Yakuza. One of the weapons used by the Mafia guy was a 1928 Thompson with a “50-bullet drum clip.” Um, OK. Then they demonstrated one of the weapons used by the Yakuza, a P38. But then they showed a picture of all of the Yakuza’s weapons, including a Sten, a P38, and some nunchucks … but the “P38” they showed a picture of was a Luger. Then they did it again, so I switched channels.
Why can’t these shows ever get this stuff right? It’s not rocket science …
I believe you might be right, though there might be additional material. I didn’t remember all of the interviews with Stoner on the TOTG one.
What all did this show get wrong?
I enjoy the History channel for just that, HISTORY. It does get anoying to see the mistakes they make on things such as mislableing guns though. But they do offer alot of info that i enjoy watching. One of the other things i dont like about em is somtimes they put an atheistic spin on some of theyre religious programs. But as far as old military battles and such it aint tooooo bad:p BTW, my TV is set on Discovery and History occasionally Comedy, other than that i dont get into alot more than that. I wish i Had the military channel though:p
I’ve already discussed what I noticed that the show got wrong. Evidently you want more information. OK, here goes:
There is a Chinese saying to the effect that it is the beginning of wisdom to call things by their right names. Personally, I expect those who practice a trade or profession to correctly use the terms of art that apply to that trade or profession. Would you hire a carpenter who referred to that tool you use to drive nails as a “screwdriver”? Would you retain an attorney who confused the terms “lean” and “lien”? I wouldn’t.
The round thing that feeds ammunition into M1921 and M1928 Thompson SMGs is not a “50-bullet drum clip.” “Bullets” are the metal things that come out of the barrel when you pull the trigger. What you put into the weapon are “rounds” or “cartridges.” The only time you load a weapon with a “bullet” is when you load a muzzleloader.
A “clip” is something, almost always made of metal, which holds rounds in place while they are outside the magazine, such as an 8-round Garand clip. A “magazine” is a container in which ammunition is stored, such a 20-round M14 magazine or a 30-round M16 magazine. The most common types are box magazines, such as the M14 and M16 magazines just referred to, and drum magazines, such as those used in 1921 and 1928 Thompson SMGs.
So when the so-called “mafia weapons expert” referred to the 50-round drum magazine which was inserted into the Thompson as a “50-round drum clip,” he got it wrong. At that point he convinced me that he didn’t know WTF he was talking about.
For more information regarding the difference between clips and magazines, check out the article at http://everything2.com/title/Clip%2520vs.%2520magazine.
The show also demonstrated the use of a WWII-era Walther (could have actually been made by a variety of manufacturers) P38 but on at least 2 occasions showed a picture of a Luger and identified it as a P38. They are very different pistols. If a car salesman showed you a Ford Expedition but called it a Chevrolet Suburban, would you think he knew what he was talking about? Would you buy a car from him? Or would you immediately leave and shop somewhere else?
Like I said … it isn’t rocket science.
I didn’t stick around to see everything that the show got wrong. After the second misidentification of the Luger, I switched channels.
Actually I don’t, so I hope you didn’t waste too much of your time typing up that sarcastic little essay.
“This show”, was referring to “Modern Marvels: The M-16 Assault Rifle”. Since that was the topic of this thread I thought I would ask you what inaccuracies were in the show. I really don’t care about your Japanese gangster show or how bad it was.
Too late!
Actually, I liked the M-16 Assault Rifle episode. Although I am no expert I did not catch any inaccuracies.
Then why did you ask the question?
If you had bothered to actually read my post you would have noticed that I said “I recently watched part of a Warriors segment entitled Mafia vs. Yakuza.” I think most people realized that my post was referring to a different show. You, on the other hand, evidently did not bother to actually read what you were responding to.
I enjoyed it as well, and certainly do not consider myself an expert … but, as was noted in another thread a week or so ago, there were some inaccuracies.
I was asking about the show which is the topic of this thread. Once again, by saying “this show” I was referring to the Modern Marvels M-16 topic. Maybe I should have been more clear about that.
I did read you post which is how I knew it was about Japanese gangsters, as I already stated. I simply wanted to know if you had also seen the M-16 show, and if you had spotted any inaccuracies in the program.
It was a simple misunderstanding. However, you took what you believed was an opportunity to make me feel foolish, and decided to write 1/2 page of childish rambling.
Sorry, I’m done.
OK, I can understand that.
Maybe you think it was childish rambling. You asked a question. I assumed that the reason you asked was because you did not know the answer. I answered the question, explaining why the show got its terms wrong. I regret that you found my answer to be inappropriate.
Any sarcasm wasn’t directed at you, and I should have made that clear. My bad, and I apologize. It was directed at the people who produce inaccurate documentaries about firearms.
I do not understand why producers spend thousands of dollars to make one of these shows and then don’t get their facts straight. If you were going to produce a documentary about America’s Cup racing, or bear hunting, or kite flying, and you didn’t know anything about the subject, wouldn’t you hire some people who were experts on the subject to guide you while you were making the film? And when the film was finished, wouldn’t you have them view the finished product to make sure that it was technically accurate? I would. You would.
Maybe they just don’t care.
Me too.
I am an expert on the M-16, having fired one or two in anger, as a General who led troops in combat once, is to one who led for months in the fields of destruction and hate.
My level of expeience is fleeting…
I can tear apart, reassemble etc. the rifle. The ones who were facing me? They can’t answer. I sighted in. I aimed true. I hit my targets.
Can I quote the chamber deminsions? The exact barrel lengths? No. Ballistics? I can come close. Terminal ballistics for every kill by 5.56? Hell no.
I can tell you what I DID and saw. I am no expert. I am simply a man. I have shot this weapon, far more than most. No expert here. But I have been there. Seen the big old fat elephant.
I do not wish those days on anyone, but I treasure them, still…
I don't know why.......
dog