Today's service rifle and sidearm.

[S.A. Boggs]

If YOU had to hump a weapon today, using CURRENT issued shoulder arms what would it be. Rifle must have been adopted after 1957 which deletes the M1. My vote goes to the current rifle issued by the State of Israel. The sidearm is the new M17, am saving my pennies to get one.
Sam

[lyman]

never served, so all the humping I did was back and forth to Gunshows and the firing line,

I see nothing wrong with a M16 (or M14)

pistol, I'm comfortable with a 1911

[blackhawknj]

The best firearms aren't that good without proper training. Probably more crack shots in the Army back when they used the 45-70 and Krag-Jorgensen.

[Merc]

I’d take the M14, the last battle rifle in our arsenal. Side arm - no preference. The 1911 had great stopping power. What’s similar today?

[Allen]

The 1911 had great stopping power. What’s similar today?

The 1911.

[bruce]

G-3 and a G-17. Figure that'd handle just about anything. Sincerely. bruce.

[Vern Humphrey]

I was issued an M2 Carbine on my first tour in Viet Nam, and it got wrapped around a tree and I bummed an M1 from the ARVN. My second tour I bullied my battalion commander into getting me two M14 sniper rifles (pre-m21). I had one man who had been through the 3rd Marine Division sniper school, and he got one of them, I got the other.

The M1 and M14 are superior rifles, in my opinion IF you know combat shooting.

And nowadays I can carry any handgun I want, and I carry an M1911.

[Art]

Since opinions are like noses...…here are my personal number one picks.

The rifle would probably be one of the more recent variants of the Galil (IWI Ace.) If I could be really picky, probably the current Vietnamese Army issue version in 7.62x39 which takes AK magazines.

I generally carry .357 Magnum revolvers for my everyday guns but they really aren't appropriate to the meaning of the OP. There are a lot of good auto pistols out there without much difference between them in quality or reliability. My personal favorite, out of the ones I've handled are the 4" barrel versions of the Springfield Armory XD. I own its predecessor, the HS 2000 I shoot it well and have thousands of rounds of a variety off ammo through it without a hiccup. I prefer it to the other striker fired types.

[Allen]

I was issued an M2 Carbine on my first tour in Viet Nam, and it got wrapped around a tree

But wasn't the M2 fun to shoot? It is one of the few full auto's that is controllable--I believe you could write your name with one.

Did the M2 get wrapped around the tree accidently or out of frustration?

[Allen]

Regardless of our preference I think most of us would rule this one out.

[Clark Howard]

I shudder to think of shouldering a ruck with a basic load and a pistol belt, with any pistol in the holster. The Model 60 in my back pocket does the job for me now. Regards, Clark

[Sunray]

"...had to hump a weapon..." How very uncivilized. One puts one's SMG in the turret and closes the hatch. One's pistol is on one's belt. snicker.
"...after 1957 which deletes the M1..." That leaves the M-14 and M-16, only. If the adopter is the U.S. of A. You can't have an FN C1 since it was adopted before 1957. SOB's are heavy anyway.
An M-14 with the fibreglass stock isn't ugly to lug around. Mostly depends on how you carry the ammo. A BAR mag belt works well if you're not going to be getting into too much shooting. Only holds 12 mags and it'd be heavy with that.
"...more crack shots in the Army back when..." Recruits then were no more experienced shooters than they are now. Most were looking for regular meals and a bed that was inside.
"...it got wrapped around a tree..." Vern, you really need to tell us that story.

[jon_norstog]

".. Recruits then were no more experienced shooters than they are now. Most were looking for regular meals and a bed that was inside.


That was me in 1966. We all shot the m1 and the 1911 in training. Most of the guys weren't shooters, I was. I could hit anything I could see. USCG, I never handled an issue weapon after boot camp. I was a snipe. I would have chosn the m-14 if I had to go into battle. As far as a sidearm goes .... the bigger bore the better

jn

[blackhawknj]

Somewhere the Army became very ungun. One long gone friend who enlisted in 1935 said if you qualified "Expert" you received an extra $5 a month-when a private's
pay was $21 a month. I'm pretty sure he said they qualified quarterly. I have seen several pictures of Officers and NCOs from that period with their chests covered with marksmanship medals. Conversely in my 4 years 1967-1971 I met only one NCO who was a gun guy , rifle and pistol teams had disappeared-one of the argument against them was it created bitterness among those who had to perform fatigue duties while others were having fun.

[Tuna]

Ah yes the new Sig side arm. Seems it has quite a few bugs to get rid of. But it seems that they go all the way back to the Sig 250 I was told. Feeding problems as many times if you fire a full magazine you look over and half of the rounds you fired are laying on the ground unfired. And the Army has sent it to the sandbox. New ball that does not work well with the new Sig but the new hollow point load works OK. Oh this is a great one for sure. I am not a fan of the Glock but it has to be better then this.

[p246]

The 75th is still holding onto it’s Glocks, but big Army will eventually prevail. The M4 in well trained hands have served us well. The FAL in 7.62 Kurtz or 280British would have been nice to see. Obviously it would still be old tech by now.

[Former Cav]

If I was young and healthy like I was when I was 18 to 21, and had my pick today, I'd take the SCAR 17 and the good old fashioned 1911 in a double stack version in 45 ACP of course. If I could not have the SCAR then I'd go with the good old M14.
I've shot it in matches. I got the "mouse gun" when I got into my Armored cav unit in late 1967. they took away all the M14's.