"M16A1 Rifle Comic - 1968" Topic

Here is a training comic from the late 60's.

link

"Tiger" looks like the kind of guy that would say the M16 was a piece of junk. Of course if it was an AK-47 in his hand it would still have worked…

I also always thought the M16 was a peice of junk. Should have stuck with the M-14.

We still got those every month until I got out. By the time I got in though connie had a new friend bonnie, so we where a little better ethnicaly balanced.

Shame that you ahve to make a trainig manuel a comic book, and include cartoon hot chicks to get rtroops to read them, but hey what ever works.

Owen

Speaking of M-16s and comics, I remember when this ad ran on the back of comics in the late '60s:

"Shame that you ahve to make a trainig manuel a comic book, and include cartoon hot chicks to get rtroops to read them, but hey what ever works."

Why is it a shame? I certainly don't consider comics to be an inferior or childish medium and the one pictured is drawn by Will Eisner (at least the cover is) and he has produced some of the finest literature I have ever read, all in comics form.

Like the WW2 training cartoons for why you use mosquito netting.

Murphy's 3rd law of combat: If it's stupid and it works, it's NOT stupid!

I recall seeing some pictures of a Tiger I maintenance manual that were done in a comic book style and of course if the Wehrmacht did it, it must be cool :)

I still have a copy of my brother's. It added to my mystique when I knew what I was doing in boot!

Back in the 70s my Father was a US Army maintenance advisor to the Arizona Army National Guard. I used to get the old P&M comic magazines all the time. I used to have a great collection . Robert

jpattern2, they were called "Mattel Supertoy", IIRC.

nazrat, because the info in there is often very important (and sometimes not) and can definately keep you from getting hurt or killed. That alone should be enough for a rational soldier to want to read it. But sadly most privates, and many NCOs would rather not be bother with such a hard task as reading. Much better to have the gear break, or somebody get hurt and then whine about well nobody told me.

I am not saying the comic formate is a bad idea. It is a good idea as itdoes work to some degree. Just that it bothers me that many American soldiers just dont care about parts of thier job.

This is not a new story from me. I have complained about this and knucklehead soldiers for most of my adult life. I bet grouch old Roman cenurians complained about thier idiot soldiers to.

Owen

Omemin my introduction to the M-16 was "its made by mattel, its swell" delivered in a tone dripping with sarcasm. I never saw anything about the M-16A1 to change that initial impression.

Owen

It's been discussed here before at length, but I'll still say it, because I feel so strongly about it: The M16 is/was a POS. M4 is a *lot* better.

I remember that Mattel product. A few of my school buds had that toy rifle.

This is not a new story from me. I have complained about this and knucklehead soldiers for most of my adult life. I bet grouch old Roman cenurians complained about thier idiot soldiers to.

No bet.

I had the M16A1 the whole of my time in the Army. It had the forward assist, but was still a piece of . You were lucky if it would fire in a total vacuum, let alone with the slightest speck of dust within 100 yards of it. The plastic stock of mine actually had "Made by Marx Toy Co" stamped into it. No joke!!

David, I think someone messed with your weapon to pull your leg: snopes.com/military/m16.asp

As far as I've been able to determine, no part of the M-16 was made by either Mattel or Marx, or any other toy maker.

Here are some pages from the Wehrmacht Tiger and Panther manuals. Robert

link