Western Rifle Shooters Association

Do not give in to Evil, but proceed ever more boldly against it

Friday, September 26, 2008

The USA’s M4 Carbine Controversy


From Defense Industry Daily, a good recap on the ongoing efforts to replace/repair/upgrade the M16/M4 family of rifles.

Regardless of what the .mil folks do, every reader of this blog needs to know how to run and keep running the M16/AR platform, the AK series, the FAL rifle, and the M14/Garand system, along with the 1911, Glock, and SIG pistol families.

More ambitious students can then start studying these tools, along with this useful device and this fine machine.

Take a look at this compilation as well.

Tempus fugit.

7 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think the best bang for the buck improvement for the current inventory is to retrofit some sort of Piston upper design to each weapon.

The benefits are obvious. As far as a replacement goes. Not sure. An upgrade to a Piston Driven 6.8SPC platform would be nice barring a new revolutionary design.

September 27, 2008 at 12:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i understand piston modifications are potentially beneficial except in the case of dealing with SBRs. this could probably be debated elsewhere.

September 27, 2008 at 4:12 AM  
Blogger tom said...

Direct gas has the advantage of less reciprocating mass and better controllability and target recovery. If you can't maintain a modern Stoner pattern rifle with good ammo. as is, you don't deserve a rifle at all. If you shoot dirty ammo in your rifle, you don't deserve a rifle at all.

It takes all of about 5 minutes to strip, clean, and re-assemble a Stoner pattern rifle and should be done so on a daily basis with any rifle, even an AK, if your life depends on it.

My two pence.

Other's such as this fellow and this fellow seem to agree with me, and they are both vets who've had to use them in the real world.

September 28, 2008 at 1:15 PM  
Anonymous Michael Gilson said...

The Stoner variation of direct gas action gives considerable weight advantage at 7.62, not so much at 5.56 and 5.56 also requires tighter tolerances. This would point toward a piston design.

For an oddball idea, how about an easily replaced ablative synthetic section in the gas tube where the vaporised polymer would serve as lubricant? The 30mm GAU 8 cannon used a synthetic like that on each round so that each round would relube the barrel for the next round.

September 28, 2008 at 7:19 PM  
Anonymous Spartacus said...

1. Ditch the M855 round for something bigger.
2. Move to a different rifle platform that does not have direct gas impingement and does not have a bolt or bolt carrier moving within tight tolerances in a closed receiver.

September 30, 2008 at 2:40 AM  
Blogger tom said...

I retrofitted most of mine to 6.5 Grendel, not gas-piston-operating rods. No malfunctions yet going on 2 years of ownership and a lot of rounds that will dot your eye out to a sizable range and perform better than the 6.8SPC.

October 1, 2008 at 4:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Direct gas has the advantage of less reciprocating mass and better controllability and target recovery. If you can't maintain a modern Stoner pattern rifle with good ammo. as is, you don't deserve a rifle at all. If you shoot dirty ammo in your rifle, you don't deserve a rifle at all.

It takes all of about 5 minutes to strip, clean, and re-assemble a Stoner pattern rifle and should be done so on a daily basis with any rifle, even an AK, if your life depends on it.

My two pence.

Other's such as this fellow and this fellow seem to agree with me, and they are both vets who've had to use them in the real world.

September 28, 2008 1:15 PM"

Been there and done that from the early 80's to the early 90's and carried the M16 series in all kinds of environments.

Try dragging one in harsh environment’s for months on end with a supply chain that breaks down leaving you to scrounge cleaning supplies and you’ll retract your statements on how god the weapon is.

When you've carried a M14 derivative and an M16 hands down the 16 loses in reliability, range, ability to defeat barriers to name a few.

And as far as the m14 being "I'll use an M14; it's accurate enough, but frankly, it's heavy, bulky, subject to warping and hideously overpriced for what it is--a 60 year old variant of a 70 year old glorified deer rifle. But it will kill."

Bull S*$# to his statements on this fine weapon!

And as for the m16 being more accurate at a 1000 meters. There’s a big difference to shooting holes in paper and shooting humans.

These 2 you quote know nothing.

For those in the know the AR-18 is what the M16 should have been.

February 21, 2009 at 5:33 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home