"The Black Rifle" books

[Slater]

I'm looking at buying "The Black Rifle" and/or "Black Rifle II", as I'm somewhat of a history buff. For those that have read them, are they worth the cost? Most reviews have been generally positive.

[Circle_10]

I have them both but haven’t actually read them cover to cover. The first book is generally well thought of, although apparently contains some errors and some mislabeled photos. I don’t know what the errors are since I’m not enough of an expert on the early development of the M16 to call the book out on stuff.
The second book, by Chris Bartocci, I guess also has some errors in it and there was I think some dispute about his account of the development of the M16A2. I believe Bartocci’s rebuttal was essentially that he could only work off of sources who actually responded to his inquiries for info, and a lot of the people his detractors were saying he should have talked to never got back to him...and he had no option but to proceed without the input from those individuals....or something like that anyway.

For the most part they are pretty good books, or seem to be anyway, and I don’t regret buying them. I’d look for used copies though to see if you can score them a bit cheaper. I think I got BRII off of eBay

[Slater]

Thanks for the feedback. Regarding the development of the M16A2, there's a Youtube video in which Col. Dave Lutz gives a rundown on the hows and whys of the M16A2. Col. Lutz was the Project Manager for that program from 1980-1983 and it seems that he 's the one largely to blame for the whole "Burst" concept. Interestingly, he says that the idea for the A2 rear sight came from one of Colt's Light Machine Gun prototypes. I'm sure this only scratches the surface, but it's interesting coming from the original program manager:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fX5RoaYqQ04

[ABNAK]

IMHO the first book is better than the second. YMMV of course.

[cd228]

They are good books, that put a lot of info together in one spot. The first book seems like a composite of Misfire and The great rifle controversy (Both out of print). The second book was a good faith effort, but Bartocci went down a wrong path on the .50 cal upper and apparently couldn't get a response from Lutz for some of the M16A2 stuff. There is a thread here on M4 Carbine where bartocci, Lutz and the late Pat Rogers went back and forth about the book.

[The Dumb Gun Collector]

Amazing books. #1 is the Bible, #2 is the Talmud. Must have books.

[SteyrAUG]

Amazing books. #1 is the Bible, #2 is the Talmud. Must have books.

Yep and required reading for anyone even remotely interested in the subject. Wall to wall factual information and history, almost the antidote to the internet.

[Ed L.]

I have both books and like them. It seems that it was a vast subject to research, and perhaps the author was a bit off on a few small details. Still, I consider the book a must buy.

Here is an old thread discussing issues that some people had with the second book.

https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...k-Rifle-Book-2

[SteyrAUG]

[Slater]

I have both books and like them. It seems that it was a vast subject to research, and perhaps the author was a bit off on a few small details. Still, I consider the book a must buy.

Here is an old thread discussing issues that some people had with the second book.

https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...k-Rifle-Book-2

Wow. Didn't realize the book was that controversial.