The truth about the m4/16 type rifles

[usnmars 136]

As y'all know, I have absolutely no respect for the m16 type rifles. I have carried them in the armpit of the world and was let down by it on more than one occasion. Ask many vets returning from the sand box about it and many will agree. This is the reason there will never be one in my collection, I have no faith in it. Here is an interesting read about the problems with them, many sources are from the troops themselves. How long are we going to keep this thing in service just because it is "America's iconic weapon " How many troops are going to get maimed and injured because of it's inadequacies? I understand many people have them and have never had an issue with them. But how many are put to the extremes of an actual combat situation? Most just see the benches at Dix or CR and use the finest ammo available and cleaned with the best supplies on the market. The military "upgrading" them with better barrels and gas pistons is like putting a bandaid on a bullet hole. It is time for the US to move on and once again carry the best weapons in the field. Here is an interesting read about all of the above, although a bit long, it is goodMy link

[Babaganoosh 192]

As y'all know, I have absolutely no respect for the m16 type rifles. I have carried them in the armpit of the world and was let down by it on more than one occasion. Ask many vets returning from the sand box about it and many will agree. This is the reason there will never be one in my collection, I have no faith in it. Here is an interesting read about the problems with them, many sources are from the troops themselves. How long are we going to keep this thing in service just because it is "America's iconic weapon " How many troops are going to get maimed and injured because of it's inadequacies? I understand many people have them and have never had an issue with them. But how many are put to the extremes of an actual combat situation? Most just see the benches at Dix or CR and use the finest ammo available and cleaned with the best supplies on the market. The military "upgrading" them with better barrels and gas pistons is like putting a bandaid on a bullet hole. It is time for the US to move on and once again carry the best weapons in the field. Here is an interesting read about all of the above, although a bit long, it is goodMy link

 

Been thinking of putting together an AR. Now I know it will never see the abuse that it would get overseas it does make me think twice about it. It's prob going to cost me approx 1000 bucks to put together what I want. Might as well spend a little more and buy an ACR or a SCAR. Why spend at least a grand for an inferior product? I already plan on picking up an AK style rifle in April anyway.

[matty 810]

Been thinking of putting together an AR. Now I know it will never see the abuse that it would get overseas it does make me think twice about it. It's prob going to cost me approx 1000 bucks to put together what I want. Might as well spend a little more and buy an ACR or a SCAR. Why spend at least a grand for an inferior product? I already plan on picking up an AK style rifle in April anyway.

 

Get an SKS

[Krdshrk 3,878]

Adding a round counter to track the total number of bullets fired over the weapon’s lifetime.

 

What?!

[Shane45 807]

I respectfully disagree. I find that MUCH of the myth surrounding this weapon platform is born and raised right here on the internet. I have in fact interviewed many from and still operating in the sandbox and those performing the training in said sandbox. Simply put, overwelmingly they love their M4's. I have even had conversations with designated marksman that chose to take their M4's even over M14's! Its a mature platform at this point.

Not perfect, but I would argue it is very good.

 

Heres a good article from an individual I KNOW is squared away!

 

http://www.defensereview.com/the-big-m4-myth-fouling-caused-by-the-direct-impingement-gas-system-makes-the-m4-unreliable/

[EngineerJet 191]

Thank you sir for your service. I understand you have had more intimate experiences than most here, but I have to ask. What weapon would you lean towards?

 

I have seen AR's fire fine with little to no cleaning for thousands of rounds. In fact the BCM filthy 14 has gone through 30k+ rounds with basic lubing and wipe downs. There are also many who love the platform who have used it extensively in the field.

 

I am curious though, how many of our soldiers died due to direct weapon failure. If it is as catastrophic and often as you say then why aren't we losing conflicts more often. I am not being argumentative, I am genuinely asking questions.

 

Now I love my AR's but I do clean them every chance I get. Maybe I can designate one to remain uncleaned and see how many rounds it lasts.

 

What issues specifically did you have with them?

[Shane45 807]

I would in fact choose my Colt over an ACR!

[Babaganoosh 192]

Get an SKS

 

Thats a possibility as well. The only thing I don't like is the fixed 10 round magazine.

[Krdshrk 3,878]

Been thinking of putting together an AR. Now I know it will never see the abuse that it would get overseas it does make me think twice about it. It's prob going to cost me approx 1000 bucks to put together what I want. Might as well spend a little more and buy an ACR or a SCAR. Why spend at least a grand for an inferior product? I already plan on picking up an AK style rifle in April anyway.

 

For what I'm putting together it's under $700 so far I have confidence it'll work for what I need it to do.. and if it doesn't, I can drop it and grab my PSL

[matty 810]

Eh, you could always have a protest outside the gate of Picatinny Arsenal, since that's the small arms R&D operation

Unfortunately, based on what I see from inside the military acquisition bureauocracy, there will be no big new programs anytime soon that are

big changes like adoption of a new rifle, or pistol, or especially a new cartridge. Or a new armored vehicle, helicopter. There will continue to be R&D

and deployment of programs that are really needed (USAF tanker) or are finally reaching the fielding phase (magnetic catapult from Lakehurst).

But things are slowinng wayy down. There was a window the last few years where stuff could and did get rapidly fielded (a gazillion UAVs)

but that is closing or has closed, as the bureaucrats reasserted their control. Some has to do with slimming budgets, however,and the mindset that its easier to

do nothing or make some safe minor "improvement' and keep everyone that counts happy. By that I mean the industry contractors, congress critters and Pentagon

Princes& esses, military & civilian.

 

I have always wondered why the US military did not further develop the M1A carbine. Yeah, M2 and the abortion M3, but what I am thinking of would be to re-cartridge that thing,

and stretch the barrel, put a PG on it, say in the 50's. Ah well, its nice to what if

[matty 810]

Thats a possibility as well. The only thing I don't like is the fixed 10 round magazine.

 

Wha wha WHAAATTTTTTT????WHY YOU NEED MORE THAN 10 ROUNDS???? OMG!!

[Babaganoosh 192]

Wha wha WHAAATTTTTTT????WHY YOU NEED MORE THAN 10 ROUNDS???? OMG!!

 

haha, well it does make it quite convienent for us NJ peeps huh

[Joelk 61]

As y'all know, I have absolutely no respect for the m16 type rifles. I have carried them in the armpit of the world and was let down by it on more than one occasion.

 

Would you be willing to share how the m16 platform let you down? I always like to hear first hand accounts, and find them much more valuable than the "I heard from a friend who has a buddy in the army" kind of stories.

[matty 810]

Would you be willing to share how the m16 platform let you down? I always like to hear first hand accounts, and find them much more valuable than the "I heard from a friend who has a buddy in the army" kind of stories.

 

Not once in all those times my coworkers dry fired their empty M16s into the clearing barrel outside the chow hall on the FOB did it jam.

[SSlav 14]

:thsmiley_deadhorse:

[Maksim 1,504]

shane, fantastic article that sheds the light on the issue.

 

I must say, the AR platform is hard to beat, especially with all the R&D that went into making the platform work.

[GRIZ 3,369]

I understand many people have them and have never had an issue with them. But how many are put to the extremes of an actual combat situation?

 

I have used M16s, ARs, and M4s since 1968 and it would still be my battle rifle of choice. I have used them in more than one "actual combat situation" and it would still be my first pick of what's available. I have used them in just about every type of environment there is. Yes it does need more attention than a M1 or M14 (another battle rifle I've used for that purpose) but in return I get lighter weight and can carry more ammo. There are other rifles that meet this criteria but most of those I've used extensively (like the AUG) I don't have to test in combat because they failed my test without going to war. As far as AKs go I feel its a good rifle for the other side to use.

[ktm525xcatv 5]

Anything mechanical can fail!

SCARS have a few issues i've heard.

Ak's can fail also.

the right bullet in 5.56 will do the job...hornaday TAP 5.55 bthp.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Man Eric, your hatred is in the heart!

 

I can't disagree with you more sir.

[bbk 188]

The failures I've personally dealt with regarding the M4 and M16 platforms were due to the fact that the parts in question were probably older then me (or sure seemed like it). For me personally it was a charging handle once, and an extractor on another occasion. Otherwise, I had no other problems that couldn't be traced to bad ammunition and/or magazines (often the latter),

I'll agree though that the military, at least at the micro level, do not get the proper equipment all the time. Such as the case with my first rifle which was an M16 (original M16 w/ no forward assit, etc) that was definitely older than me (though it was quickly replaced with an A2). The same could be said about the magazines (which I never saw a fresh magazine in my years when I was in) and CLP (which wasn't bad, but there is obviously better on the public market).

 

Still, I'll stand by the system as its proven itself to me personally. With the proper care and knowledge, its a system that can do most jobs asked of it.

[ktm525xcatv 5]

Pmags are better then the GI issue crap.

I think some soldiers bring their own and optics also.

My S&W M&P15 has has 3000plus rounds not one jam until i tried a 20 round aluminum cheapo mag.

[Old School 611]

The failures I've personally dealt with regarding the M4 and M16 platforms were due to the fact that the parts in question were probably older then me (or sure seemed like it). For me personally it was a charging handle once, and an extractor on another occasion. Otherwise, I had no other problems that couldn't be traced to bad ammunition and/or magazines (often the latter),

I'll agree though that the military, at least at the micro level, do not get the proper equipment all the time. Such as the case with my first rifle which was an M16 (original M16 w/ no forward assit, etc) that was definitely older than me (though it was quickly replaced with an A2). The same could be said about the magazines (which I never saw a fresh magazine in my years when I was in) and CLP (which wasn't bad, but there is obviously better on the public market).

 

Still, I'll stand by the system as its proven itself to me personally. With the proper care and knowledge, its a system that can do most jobs asked of it.

 

WOW Ben you're old if you were issued an A1...

 

Though I believe the Guard had some into the late 70's early 80's. About what year did you have an A1?

 

I only know of one combat jam that resulted in a casulty personally. No it wasn't me.

 

Old Old Old School...LOL

[axeman_g 128]

The m4 seems to have some flaws but I think the main issue with the system is the round it uses. Why was there no more efforts put into the 6.8 serjes cartridges? I am an old fashioned guy that appreciates power so I am biased. I also have many btdt friends that swear by the system or at it, about 60/40. To me it seems like the m4 has morphed into a submachine gun role, not a battle rifle. I am convinced the system does not suck totally, but there are too many detractors and maybe it is time todevelop.

[usnmars 136]

The main problem is the sand. The sand over there is nothing like I have ever seen anywhere else. We called it moon dust and it looks like talcum powder. It gets everywhere, and causes nothing but issues. Clean all you want and it is still there. We could tell the new guys because their rifles were still black. The longer you have been there, the browner they get. You can scrub all you want and it will never come off. Rounds getting stuck in the chamber was the most common failure, but I have seen more than my share of FTF's and FTE's. It seems like most of our wars and civilian saving actions are in the middle east. We need to adapt and adopt a weapon that isn't so susceptible to sand. I am not a fan of the 5.56 cartridge either. If you ask me it is grossly under powered. It was designed for a European adversary, under European compassions in combat. The round is designed not to kill, only injure. European armies will evacuate their wounded from the battle field. So you hit one guy and you effectively take 3 out of combat for stretcher bearers. Haji doesn't care about that. He just steps over his wounded and keeps coming. I have seen first hand someone need several shots to go down. I am a fan of the M14- Reliable, hard hitting, and battle proven. I carried one and it always performed flawlessly. There is a reason they are pulling them out of armories and re-issuing them in Afghan now. One of my good friends is a "private contractor" over in Iraq right now. He said they mostly carry SCAR's or M14's, almost nobody carries a 16 based platform. If you are allowed to carry what ever you want and that is what they are carrying, it says something.

[Pew Pew Plates 358]

The round itself is also a contributor to its lack of reliability. While it is tecnically a tapered case, for all intents and purposes it is straight walled. So if there is added junk resisting extraction, the rifle has to fight the case the WHOLE way out. 7.62x39 and 5.45x39 both have significant tapers that act like wedges. Once the bolt cams the case out a tiny bit, it is broken free from the chamber walls and will extract easily under all conditions.

[GRIZ 3,369]

It seems like most of our wars and civilian saving actions are in the middle east. We need to adapt and adopt a weapon that isn't so susceptible to sand.

 

Does this mean we need to adopt a weapon system for each environment we may encounter (jungle, arctic,etc). The M14 rusts easily and wood stocks swell in humidity. These are things the M16 doesn't do.

 

I am not a fan of the 5.56 cartridge either.

 

The 5.56 is no where near a long range round as the 7.62 NATO. It is adequate at ranges most engagements take place at. It is also more accurate than the 7.62x39. Yes, I know some out that that have AKs that will shoot right along with a M16 but these are not the same AKs the enemy is using which are good if they shoot 6" at 100 meters.

 

Haji doesn't care about that. He just steps over his wounded and keeps coming.

 

Enemies like this are not new. We have been fighting them since at least the Moros in the Phillipines, Japanese in WWII, Chinese in Korea, and NVA in Vietnam.

 

If you ask me it is grossly under powered. It was designed for a European adversary, under European compassions in combat. The round is designed not to kill, only injure.

 

There are thousands of dead enemy soldiers that will argue this point. "The round is designed to wound" is a myth that has been perpetuated for nearly 50 years. The 5.56 gets a lot of its stopping power from the fragmentation in the target. The threshold is about 2600-2800 fps for this to happen. When you go to the handier, shorter barrel M4 a 55 gr bullet is only doing about 2800 fps from the muzzle. Heavier bullets are slower.

 

I've seen enemy who failed to go down after multiple hits of 7.62 NATO. Maybe we all should all carry .50 cals?

 

There are shortcomings in any weapon system.

[11b1p 14]

 

I've seen enemy who failed to go down after multiple hits of 7.62 NATO. Maybe we all should all carry .50 cals?

 

There are shortcomings in any weapon system.

 

It seems like some guys can just get hit with anything and stumble away.

[Cylinder Head 22]

There have been many improvements to the M4/M16 system that are apparent today in rifles being fielded by SOCOM. The Knights SR-16 is a perfect example of these improvements. The bolt redesign and use of PMAGS takes care of extraction and feeding issues, and with proper lubrication it is reportedly running very well in the sandbox.

 

As for the 5.56mm, as reference by Doc Roberts or DocGKR as he's known on the forums; he's come out and said that both the Mk262 and Mk318 rounds offer excellent performance out of the 5.56. Ideally you'd use a 6.8mm or 6.5mm round, but it's not exactly a revolution in terms of man-stopping power.

[EngineerJet 191]

From my own personal experience here are the only issues I have ever had

 

Noveske 16" midlength recce: zero issues, probably about 1000 rounds (still a baby)

LWRC: one jam, I cannot explain what happened. It went click and didnt fire, had to pry the charging handle back with a vengeance to extract the round and the primer was not even dented. less than 1000 rounds.

BCM 14.5 midlength: less than 100 rounds, still a baby, but no issues thus far. (I am not cleaning this one to see how long I can go)

[DevsAdvocate 112]

I'd love a FAL, SCAR, or ACR... too bad they're expensive to own here in NJ...