Colt's grip on military rifle market called bad deal

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Colt's grip on military rifle market called bad deal (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:23:01 AM EDT

I searched but didn't find a dupe...

Colt's grip on military rifle market called bad deal

Apr 20 12:29 PM US/Eastern
By RICHARD LARDNER
Associated Press Writer Write a Comment

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) - No weapon is more important to tens of thousands of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan than the carbine rifle. And for well over a decade, the military has relied on one company, Colt Defense of Hartford, Conn., to make the M4s they trust with their lives.
Now, as Congress considers spending millions more on the guns, this exclusive arrangement is being criticized as a bad deal for American forces as well as taxpayers, according to interviews and research conducted by The Associated Press.

"What we have is a fat contractor in Colt who's gotten very rich off our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan," says Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.

The M4, which can shoot hundreds of bullets a minute, is a shorter and lighter version of the company's M16 rifle first used 40 years ago during the Vietnam War. At about $1,500 apiece, the M4 is overpriced, according to Coburn. It jams too often in sandy environments like Iraq, he adds, and requires far more maintenance than more durable carbines.

"And if you tend to have the problem at the wrong time, you're putting your life on the line," says Coburn, who began examining the M4's performance last year after receiving complaints from soldiers. "The fact is, the American GI today doesn't have the best weapon. And they ought to."

U.S. military officials don't agree. They call the M4 an excellent carbine. When the time comes to replace the M4, they want a combat rifle that is leaps and bounds beyond what's currently available.

"There's not a weapon out there that's significantly better than the M4," says Col. Robert Radcliffe, director of combat developments at the Army Infantry Center in Fort Benning, Ga. "To replace it with something that has essentially the same capabilities as we have today doesn't make good sense."

Colt's exclusive production agreement ends in June 2009. At that point, the Army, in its role as the military's principal buyer of firearms, may have other gunmakers compete along with Colt for continued M4 production. Or, it might begin looking for a totally new weapon.

"We haven't made up our mind yet," Radcliffe says.

William Keys, Colt's chief executive officer, says the M4 gets impressive reviews from the battlefield. And he worries that bashing the carbine will undermine the confidence the troops have in it.

"The guy killing the enemy with this gun loves it," says Keys, a former Marine Corps general who was awarded the Navy Cross for battlefield valor in Vietnam. "I'm not going to stand here and disparage the senator, but I think he's wrong."

In 2006, a non-profit research group surveyed 2,600 soldiers who had served in Iraq and Afghanistan and found 89 percent were satisfied with the M4. While Colt and the Army have trumpeted that finding, detractors say the survey also revealed that 19 percent of these soldiers had their weapon jam during a firefight.

And the relationship between the Army and Colt has been frosty at times. Concerned over the steadily rising cost of the M4, the Army forced Colt to lower its prices two years ago by threatening to buy rifles from another supplier. Prior to the warning, Colt "had not demonstrated any incentive to consider a price reduction," then-Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Sorenson, an Army acquisition official, wrote in a November 2006 report.

Coburn is the M4's harshest and most vocal critic. But his concern is shared by others, who point to the "SCAR," made by Belgian armorer FN Herstal, and the HK416, produced by Germany's Heckler & Koch, as possible contenders. Both weapons cost about the same as the M4, their manufacturers say.

The SCAR is being purchased by U.S. special operations forces, who have their own acquisition budget and the latitude to buy gear the other military branches can't.

Or won't.

"All I know is, we're not having the competition, and the technology that is out there is not in the hands of our troops," says Jack Keane, a former Army general who pushed unsuccessfully for an M4 replacement before retiring four years ago.

The dispute over the M4 has been overshadowed by larger but not necessarily more important concerns. When the public's attention is focused on the annual defense budget, it tends to be captured by bigger-ticket items, like the Air Force's F-22 Raptors that cost $160 million each.

The Raptor, a radar-evading jet fighter, has never been used in Iraq and Afghanistan. For the troops who patrol Baghdad's still-dangerous neighborhoods or track insurgents along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, there's no piece of gear more critical than the rifles on their shoulders. They go everywhere with them, even to the bathroom and the chow hall.

Yet the military has a poor track record for getting high-quality firearms to warfighters. Since the Revolutionary War, mountains of red tape, oversize egos and never-ending arguments over bullet size and gunpowder have delayed or doomed promising efforts.

The M16, designed by the visionary gunsmith Eugene Stoner, had such a rough entry into military service in the mid-1960s that a congressional oversight committee assailed the Army for behavior that bordered on criminal negligence.

Stoner's lighter, more accurate rifle was competing against a heavier, more powerful gun the Army had heavily invested in. To accept the M16 would be to acknowledge a huge mistake, and ordnance officials did as much as they could to keep from buying the new automatic weapon. They continually fooled with Stoner's design.

"The Army, if anything, was trying to sideline and sabotage it," said Richard Colton, a historian with the Springfield Armory Museum in Massachusetts.

Despite the hurdles, the M16 would become the military's main battlefield rifle. And Colt, a company founded nearly 170 years ago by Hartford native Samuel Colt, was the primary manufacturer. Hundreds of thousands of M16s have been produced over the years for the U.S. military and foreign customers. Along with Colt, FNMI, an FN Herstal subsidiary in South Carolina, has also produced M16s.

Development of the carbine was driven by a need for a condensed weapon that could be used in tight spaces but still had plenty of punch. Colt's answer was the 7 1/2-pound M4. The design allowed the company to leverage the tooling used for the M16.

In 1994, Colt was awarded a no-bid contract to make the weapons. Since then, it has sold more than 400,000 to the U.S. military.

Along the way, Colt's hold has been threatened but not broken.

In 1996, a Navy office improperly released Colt's M4 blueprints, giving nearly two dozen contractors a look at the carbine's inner workings. Colt was ready to sue the U.S. government for the breach. The company wanted between $50 million and $70 million in damages.

Cooler heads prevailed. The Defense Department didn't want to lose its only source for the M4, and Colt didn't want to stop selling to its best customer.

The result was an agreement that made Colt the sole player in the U.S. military carbine market. FNMI challenged the deal in federal court but lost.

And since the Sept. 11 attacks, sales have skyrocketed.

The Army, the carbine's heaviest user, is outfitting all its front- line combat units with M4s. The Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and special operations forces also carry M4s. So do U.S. law enforcement agencies and militaries in many NATO countries.

More than $300 million has been spent on 221,000 of the carbines over the past two years alone. And the Defense Department is asking Congress to provide another $230 million for 136,000 more.

Keane, the retired Army general, knows how difficult it is to develop and deliver a brand-new rifle to the troops. As vice chief of staff, the Army's second highest-ranking officer, Keane pushed for the acquisition of a carbine called the XM8.

The futuristic-looking rifle was designed by Heckler & Koch. According to Keane, the XM8 represented the gains made in firearms technology over the past 40 years.

The XM8 would cost less and operate far longer without being lubricated or cleaned than the M4 could, Heckler & Koch promised. The project became bogged down by bureaucracy, however. In 2005, after $33 million had been invested, the XM8 was shelved. A subsequent audit by the Pentagon inspector general concluded the program didn't follow the military's strict acquisition rules.

Keane blames a bloated and risk-averse bureaucracy for the XM8's demise.

"This is all about people not wanting to move out and do something different," Keane says. "Why are they afraid of the competition?"

As Colt pumps out 800 new M4s every day to meet U.S. and overseas demand, the company is remodeling its aging 270,000-square-foot facility in a hardscrabble section of Connecticut's capital city. New tooling and metal cutting machines have been installed as part of a $10 million plant improvement.

Many of the old ways remain, however. Brick-lined pit furnaces dating back to the 1960s are still used to temper steel rifle barrels.

"Modernizing the plant while trying to maintain quality and meet deliveries has been a challenge," says James Battaglini, Colt's chief operating officer.

Within military circles there are M4 defectors. U.S. Special Operations Command in Tampa, Fla., was one of the carbine's first customers. But the elite commando units using the M4 soured on it; the rifle had to be cleaned too often and couldn't hold up under the heavy use by Army Green Berets and Navy SEALs.

When the M16 was condensed into an M4, the barrel and other key parts had to be shortened. That changed the way the gun operated and not for the better, concluded an internal report written seven years ago by special operations officials but never published. Dangerous problems ranged from broken bolt assemblies, loose and ruptured barrels, and cartridges stuck in the firing chamber.

"Jamming can and will occur for a variety of reasons," the report said. "Several types of jams, however, are 'catastrophic' jams; because one of our operators could die in a firefight while trying to clear them."

Pointing to the report's unpublished status, Colt has disputed its findings. The M4 has been continually improved over the years, says Keys, the company's chief executive. The M4 may not meet the exacting standards of U.S. commando forces, he adds, but it fills the requirements spelled out by the regular Army.

Special Operations Command is replacing the M4s and several other rifles in its arsenal with FN Herstal's SCAR, which comes in two models: one shoots the same 5.56 mm round as the M4; the other a larger 7.62 mm bullet and costs several hundred dollars more. Both SCARs can accommodate different-size barrels allowing the weapons to be fired at multiple ranges.

The SCARs are more accurate, more reliable and expected to last far longer than their predecessors, said Navy Lt. Cmdr. Marc Boyd, a command spokesman.

"SOCOM likes to be different," says Keys of Colt, using the acronym for the command. "They wanted something unique."

With the SCAR not yet in full-scale production, Heckler & Koch's HK416 is being used by elite units like Delta Force, the secretive anti- terrorism unit. The command would not comment on the HK416 other than to say there are "a small number" of the carbines in its inventory.

A key difference between the Colt carbine and the competitors is the way the rounds are fed through the rifle at lightning speed.

The SCAR and HK416 use a gas piston system to cycle the bullets automatically. The M4 uses "gas impingement," a method that pushes hot carbon-fouled gas through critical parts of the gun, according to detractors. Without frequent and careful maintenance, they say, the M4 is prone to jamming and will wear out more quickly than its gas-piston competitors.

"A gas piston system runs a little bit smoother and a lot cleaner," says Dale Bohner, a retired Air Force commando who now works for Heckler & Koch. "If the U.S. military opened up a competition for all manufacturers, I see the 416 being a major player in that."

The top half of the Heckler & Koch gun—a section known as the upper receiver that includes the barrel and the gas piston—fits on the lower half of the M4. So if the military wanted a low-cost replacement option, it could buy HK416 upper receivers and mate them with the lower part of the M4 for about $900 a conversion, according to Bohner.

Yet outside of Special Operations Command, there seems to be no rush to replace the M4.

Brig. Gen. Mark Brown, head of the Army office that buys M4s and other combat gear, traveled to Iraq and Afghanistan last summer to get feedback from soldiers on Colt's carbine.

"I didn't hear one single negative comment," Brown says. "Now, I know I'm a general, and when I go up and talk to a private, they're going to say everything's OK, everything's fine. I said, 'No, no, son. I flew 14,000 miles out here to see you on the border of Afghanistan. The reason I did that was to find out what's happening.'"

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., says the troops may not be aware of the alternatives. He wants the Pentagon to study the options and make a decision before Congress does.

"Sen. Coburn has raised a good question: 'Do we have the best personal weapon?' And I don't know that we do," Sessions said. "We're not comfortable now. Let's give this a rigorous examination."

__

On the Net:

Colt Defense: http://www.colt.com/

U.S. Army: http://peosoldier.army.mil/

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:25:49 AM EDT

[#1]

A REAL fucking hatchet job !!

Coburn is the M4's harshest and most vocal critic. But his concern is shared by others, who point to the "SCAR," made by Belgian armorer FN Herstal, and the HK416, produced by Germany's Heckler & Koch, as possible contenders. Both weapons cost about the same as the M4, their manufacturers say

Senator Coburn is a first term Senator from Oklahoma who sold out early to H&K.

5sub

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:28:35 AM EDT

[#2]

"A gas piston system runs a little bit smoother and a lot cleaner," says Dale Bohner, a retired Air Force commando who now works for Heckler & Koch.

.......who now works for Heckler & Koch.

Gimme a break !!

5sub

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:35:52 AM EDT

[#3]

That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:36:15 AM EDT

[#4]

xm8 melted, wtf....

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:36:20 AM EDT

[#5]

Wonder how fat the plain brown envelope he gets monthly from Germany is.

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:36:37 AM EDT

[#6]

AGNTSA!!!

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:37:35 AM EDT

[#7]

I would pay $1500 for an FN or HK instead of a Colt

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:40:36 AM EDT

[#8]

Fucking HK lobby idiots... Someone wants a factory built in his district...

Seriously, Colt shouldn't have a sole-source monopoly on the M4...

FN, Bushmaster, et al should be allowed to compete for the contract...

A new rifle, however... That is, at the present, unwarranted...

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:40:55 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

That I do not know.

This Coburn ass-hole held up the appointment of the new Secretary of the Army to force some sort of H&K test.

Yes, Coburn is a reliable 2nd Amendment defender. Yes, it would be nice for Oklahoma to have an H&K plant here.

HOWEVER, tens of thousand of American service men have bet their lives on Colt and won.

5sub

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:41:24 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

Possibly for the full SOPMOD package...

Plain-jane rifles, they pay under $600/ea for...

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:42:38 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:

Wonder how fat the plain brown envelope he gets monthly from Germany is.

I doubt he's getting paid...

The arrangement is more like 'Get this done for us and we will build them in your state'....

OINK OINK OINK SQUEEEELLL OINK OINK

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:47:45 AM EDT

[#12]

I guess congressman what's-his-name is not acquainted with the exhaustive tests done by the Army quite recently which show that the M-4 does NOT "jam excessively" in a desert sand environment.

Statistical analysis showed that it jams no more frequently than three different 21st century designs which have been proposed to replace it, all of which were much more expensive per copy.

I can think of two weapons which have given the American taxpayer a better value for their dollar than nearly any other in history. One of them is the B-52 bomber, and the other is the AR-15 family of rifles, to include the M-4.

If it ain't broke, don't "fix" it.

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:55:05 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

That I do not know.

This Coburn ass-hole held up the appointment of the new Secretary of the Army to force some sort of H&K test.

Yes, Coburn is a reliable 2nd Amendment defender. Yes, it would be nice for Oklahoma to have an H&K plant here.

HOWEVER, tens of thousand of American service men have bet their lives on Colt and won.

5sub

How many have bet their lives and lost?

The other question that needs to be asked is why are the Specwar guys using other weapons if the M4 is adequate? I think they would know the best, wouldn't you? They didn't get to where they are by dicking around and not knowing their weapons inside and out. That's a huge selling point to the idea that maybe, just maybe, your sacred AR platform rifle can be outdone.

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:56:16 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

Not even fucking close.

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:58:24 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

That I do not know.

This Coburn ass-hole held up the appointment of the new Secretary of the Army to force some sort of H&K test.

Yes, Coburn is a reliable 2nd Amendment defender. Yes, it would be nice for Oklahoma to have an H&K plant here.

HOWEVER, tens of thousand of American service men have bet their lives on Colt and won.

5sub

How many have bet their lives and lost?

The other question that needs to be asked is why are the Specwar guys using other weapons if the M4 is adequate? I think they would know the best, wouldn't you? They didn't get to where they are by dicking around and not knowing their weapons inside and out. That's a huge selling point to the idea that maybe, just maybe, your sacred AR platform rifle can be outdone.

How many have bet their lives and lost?

I do not know.................... do you ??

The only thing in this arena that I hold sacred is the lives of our military personnel.

5sub

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:59:26 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Fucking HK lobby idiots... Someone wants a factory built in his district...

Seriously, Colt shouldn't have a sole-source monopoly on the M4...

FN, Bushmaster, et al should be allowed to compete for the contract...

A new rifle, however... That is, at the present, unwarranted...

Really? So how about the SCAR? Shouldn't the plans be released and it go out to bid then? HK416?

Posted: 4/20/2008 9:59:26 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
A REAL fucking hatchet job !!

Coburn is the M4's harshest and most vocal critic. But his concern is shared by others, who point to the "SCAR," made by Belgian armorer FN Herstal, and the HK416, produced by Germany's Heckler & Koch, as possible contenders. Both weapons cost about the same as the M4, their manufacturers say

Senator Coburn is a first term Senator from Oklahoma who sold out early to H&K.

5sub

I'm thinking Sen Coburn got a nice re-eletion contribution, via Germany

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:01:21 AM EDT

[#18]

WEll if an air force "commando" working for HK can't be believed, who can?

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:03:02 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

Thats about right when you figure in a certain ammount of repair parts, training ect.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:03:41 AM EDT

[#20]

Sounds like a lot of people who are getting paid and campaign donations from gun manufacturers are throwing mud at each other and trying to take the little integrity left out of the weapons selection process.

IMO: the best way to select a weapons system:

1. Give each mfg an emergency PO for 30 weapons delivered in 10 days.

2. Each weapon fires 100 rounds from a bench unit.

Weapons system with least failures and best accuracy gets the contract. Price is fixed by .gov.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:06:32 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

Not even fucking close.

Possibly, with mags, spare parts, maintainence.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:09:04 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

That I do not know.

This Coburn ass-hole held up the appointment of the new Secretary of the Army to force some sort of H&K test.

Yes, Coburn is a reliable 2nd Amendment defender. Yes, it would be nice for Oklahoma to have an H&K plant here.

HOWEVER, tens of thousand of American service men have bet their lives on Colt and won.

5sub

How many have bet their lives and lost?

The other question that needs to be asked is why are the Specwar guys using other weapons if the M4 is adequate? I think they would know the best, wouldn't you? They didn't get to where they are by dicking around and not knowing their weapons inside and out. That's a huge selling point to the idea that maybe, just maybe, your sacred AR platform rifle can be outdone.

How many have bet their lives and lost?

I do not know.................... do you ??

The only thing in this arena that I hold sacred is the lives of our military personnel.

5sub

I do not, but I seem to remember reading a book about the Vietnam era (granted, this is the older M16A1s with the wrong powder, no cleaning, etc) that gave a number. How that's proven, I don't know. I'll try to find the number later when I get home from work.

I did not mean to say you as in you yourself, but more as a generality. Sorry for the confusion.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:12:30 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

Not even fucking close.

Possibly, with mags, spare parts, maintainence.

Maintenance?

What do you think Colt does, sells them an extended warranty like Circuit City?

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:13:30 AM EDT

[#24]

More HK propaganda.

And that $1500 probably includes the rail system, the lasers and the optics.

Kharn

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:16:23 AM EDT

[#25]

They've paid up to 1100 for the rifle, and the rip-off KAC rail costs around 400 with three panels and a vert grip.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:17:06 AM EDT

[#26]

I see no reason why our nation should buy weapons from any other nation. If the M4 needs to be replaced, then it should be replaced by an American design.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:17:52 AM EDT

[#27]

M4: Colt Defense's M4 carbine is a direct descendant of the company's M16 first used during the Vietnam War. At 33.6 inches long and weighing 7 1/2 pounds when loaded, it is shorter and lighter than the M16 but shoots the same 5.56 mm round. (The round is about the size of an AAA battery.) The M4's compact design makes it ideal for troops traveling in Humvees or fighting in confined areas. An M4 costs about $1,500. The weapon is used by all the U.S. military branches.

HK416: Designed by Germany's Heckler & Koch, the HK 416 carbine is slightly heavier than the M4, but otherwise similar in appearance and feel. Heckler & Koch advertises its weapon as more rugged and accurate than the M4. At $1,425 each (2007 prices), the HK416 costs about the same as the M4. It also shoots a 5.56 round. Elite U.S. military units such as the anti-terrorist Delta Force are using the HK416. Norway selected the rifle last year for its military forces.

CHEAPER?!?!$#!#?@$#?!

Com'on guys, now you're just getting silly...

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:24:13 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
They've paid up to 1100 for the rifle, and the rip-off KAC rail costs around 400 with three panels and a vert grip.

Source?

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:24:20 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

Not even fucking close.

Possibly, with mags, spare parts, maintainence.

Maintenance?

What do you think Colt does, sells them an extended warranty like Circuit City?

Maybe maintainence is the wrong word, but I'd bet they are "warrentied" and if there is a problem from the factory [defect] it will be repaired or replaced on Colts dime.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:25:44 AM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

Not even fucking close.

Possibly, with mags, spare parts, maintainence.

Maintenance?

What do you think Colt does, sells them an extended warranty like Circuit City?

Maybe maintainence is the wrong word, but I'd bet they are "warrentied" and if there is a problem from the factory [defect] it will be repaired or replaced on Colts dime.

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about, so I'll save you all the thought and just tell you that the price is wrong. Period.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:29:03 AM EDT

[#31]

Sen. Coburn may be a good senator and may be a good guy.

Clearly he knows nothing about weapon design, and needs to butt-out from the discussion.
His time would be alot better spent by authoring a bill to repeal the MG Ban of 1986.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:29:56 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

Not even fucking close.

Possibly, with mags, spare parts, maintainence.

Maintenance?

What do you think Colt does, sells them an extended warranty like Circuit City?

Maybe maintainence is the wrong word, but I'd bet they are "warrentied" and if there is a problem from the factory [defect] it will be repaired or replaced on Colts dime.

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about, so I'll save you all the thought and just tell you that the price is wrong. Period.

Actually,I thought they were around $900-$1000, maybe a bit more with the mag package and whatever they figured into the contract.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:34:07 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

Not even fucking close.

Possibly, with mags, spare parts, maintainence.

Maintenance?

What do you think Colt does, sells them an extended warranty like Circuit City?

Maybe maintainence is the wrong word, but I'd bet they are "warrentied" and if there is a problem from the factory [defect] it will be repaired or replaced on Colts dime.

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about, so I'll save you all the thought and just tell you that the price is wrong. Period.

Actually,I thought they were around $900-$1000, maybe a bit more with the mag package and whatever they figured into the contract.

https://aais.ria.army.mil/aais/award_web_04/W52H0904D00860030/02.pdf

This is all public domain information, stop your guessing.

It's not even $900 INCLUDING all the mags, blah blah whatever other bullshit is included.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:35:54 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
I see no reason why our nation should buy weapons from any other nation. If the M4 needs to be replaced, then it should be replaced by an American design.

That kind of bullshit got us the M60 and the M14.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:36:44 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Quoted:
They've paid up to 1100 for the rifle, and the rip-off KAC rail costs around 400 with three panels and a vert grip.

Source?

A friend who orders parts a lot.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:40:07 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:

Quoted:
They've paid up to 1100 for the rifle, and the rip-off KAC rail costs around 400 with three panels and a vert grip.

Source?

A friend who orders parts a lot.

Your friend is wrong. KAC isn't charging the feds 1.5x as much for the RAS as they are charging the commercial market, and the feds also aren't paying $1,100 a piece for M4s not including the rail.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:48:07 AM EDT

[#37]

"All I know is, we're not having the competition, and the technology that is out there is not in the hands of our troops," says Jack Keane, a former Army general who pushed unsuccessfully for an M4 replacement before retiring four years ago.

Maybe we would have more competition if the Federal government wasn't actively destroying the firearms industry with draconian regulation and mafia strong-arm tactics.

Posted: 4/20/2008 10:59:47 AM EDT

[#38]

and

Posted: 4/20/2008 11:04:52 AM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

Not even fucking close.

Possibly, with mags, spare parts, maintainence.

Maintenance?

What do you think Colt does, sells them an extended warranty like Circuit City?

Do you have any experience with purchasing M4s? Do you know how contracts are done, with the cost of the weapon, magazines, cleaning kit, 5 years worth of parts for scheduled maintenance and training for X number of small arms repairers are purchased at one time?

Posted: 4/20/2008 11:12:32 AM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

Not even fucking close.

Possibly, with mags, spare parts, maintainence.

Maintenance?

What do you think Colt does, sells them an extended warranty like Circuit City?

Do you have any experience with purchasing M4s? Do you know how contracts are done, with the cost of the weapon, magazines, cleaning kit, 5 years worth of parts for scheduled maintenance and training for X number of small arms repairers are purchased at one time?

I posted a link to the contract!

How much more do you want me to spoon feed you?

Posted: 4/20/2008 11:31:59 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:

Quoted:
That article is clearly a turd laden hit piece, but I do have one question.

Does DOD really pay $1,500 / M4?

Not even fucking close.

Possibly, with mags, spare parts, maintainence.

Maintenance?

What do you think Colt does, sells them an extended warranty like Circuit City?

Do you have any experience with purchasing M4s? Do you know how contracts are done, with the cost of the weapon, magazines, cleaning kit, 5 years worth of parts for scheduled maintenance and training for X number of small arms repairers are purchased at one time?

I posted a link to the contract!

How much more do you want me to spoon feed you?

That is "A" contract, done by TACOM on behalf of the Air Force. One contract that purchased M4 Carbines without carry handles and had Colt install the Aimpoint sights.

Find a contract for complete M4's and come back and spoon feed me that

Edited to say, Find a contract, not a contract modification like what you posted.....

Posted: 4/20/2008 12:18:34 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Do you have any experience with purchasing M4s? Do you know how contracts are done, with the cost of the weapon, magazines, cleaning kit, 5 years worth of parts for scheduled maintenance and training for X number of small arms repairers are purchased at one time?

I posted a link to the contract!

How much more do you want me to spoon feed you?

That is "A" contract, done by TACOM on behalf of the Air Force. One contract that purchased M4 Carbines without carry handles and had Colt install the Aimpoint sights.

Find a contract for complete M4's and come back and spoon feed me that

Edited to say, Find a contract, not a contract modification like what you posted.....

I posted a link to a delivery order that had the pricing information, which was what this thread seems to be about if I recall correctly.

Here's the 086 Contract.
https://aais.ria.army.mil/aais/Award_web_04/W52H0904D00860000/DAAE2003R0216/0000.pdf

Look under Section A-7 to find...

7. The M4 and M4A1 Carbine System consists of the Carbine, Combat Sling and One 30 Round Magazine. The contractor will be responsible
for furnishing the following items to be overpacked with each weapon.
a. Combat Sling, NSN 1005-01-368-9852, Part Number 12011996
b. One 30 Round Magazine, NSN 1005-00-921-5004, Part Number 8448670
c. Blank Firing Attachment, NSN 1005-01-361-8208, Part Number 12597837
d. Rifle Cover, NSN 1005-00-809-2190, Part Number 8448213
e. Magazine Cover, NSN 1005-00-193-8306, Part Number 8448464
f. Muzzle Cap, NSN 5340-00-880-7666, Part Number 8445067
g. Small Arms Cleaning Kit, Attachment 007

That what you're looking for? The "stuff" that gets packed with the weapon?

If you look under the 0054 delivery order, you can get pricing information for the carbine system with the Knights RAS and BUIS installed as well...

https://aais.ria.army.mil/aais/award_web_04/W52H0904D00860054/000000.pdf

Still only $11XX.

My point is, the AP article is absolutely full of shit. If they're somehow comparing the retail cost of a single HK416 rifle, to the packaged contract cost of an M4 with accessories, and then taking into account spares and armorer training, then I'd say that's apples to oranges wouldn't you?

There's no excuse for the AP Article to be wrong if this information is all freely available. There's also no reason for folks to be "guessing" in this thread about the cost of the weapons system either.

Posted: 4/20/2008 12:21:55 PM EDT

[#43]

What's wrong with questioning whether our military has the best combat rifle in its arsenal? If we are going to send our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines into combat then we have an obligation to outfit them with the best weapon available. Regardless of whether its made in America or not. I don't care as long as its the best.

Our government is currently spending up to $1 Billion dollars to send out $40 Vouchers to people to make sure their TV will work in Feb. 2009 when TV Brodcasts are mandated to be all digital. So if we can spend money on useless bullshit like that then what the hell is the problem with spending a little extra money for the HK416, SCAR, etc. if they truly are a better wepaon.

I say they should outfit select Army and Marine, not Special Forces but standard Infantry Units, in Iraq and Afghanistan with the SCAR and HK416 for a trial period and then see how they compare against the M4. If this can be done without risk to the Soldiers and Marines. This would be a far better test than some silly ass test in less than real conditons. If one of them is clearly a better weapon, then tell Colt to go build a better rifle to compete against H&K or FN. If the M4 is better then tell H&K and FN to go back to the drawing board.

The bottom line is I don't give a shit who makes it. I want our Military to have the best. I don't drink Colt, H&K, or FN Kool-Aid. We owe it to our military to give them the best and if the M4 is not it than let's move on and put this issue to rest once and for all.

ETA: Flame Away.

Posted: 4/20/2008 12:30:45 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
I see no reason why our nation should buy weapons from any other nation. If the M4 needs to be replaced, then it should be replaced by an American design.

I am going to disagree with part of your statement. I think our troops deserve the finest weapons available, whether American design or not. However, i certainly want those weapons produced in a factory here.

i don't know what this Sen. problem is, but it seems to me like he is obsessed with getting another weapon. i just don't get the feeling he is doing it just for the sake of the troops, but i can't tell u why i feel like this. i just do.

Posted: 4/20/2008 12:57:27 PM EDT

[#45]

I thought the whole reason that the HK 416 and SCAR were going to SOCOM units was because of usage that isn't normal for a line unit.

Excessive heat from lots of FA.
Drain water easier than a DI gun.
Short-barreled guns.

Posted: 4/20/2008 1:04:05 PM EDT

[#46]

The look on my face the second I read this article.

Somebody wants a plant built in OK. It doesn't matter if it's American owned either.

What a sellout.

Posted: 4/20/2008 1:07:09 PM EDT

[#47]

I'll take an M-4, thank you very much.

Posted: 4/20/2008 1:30:10 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
I see no reason why our nation should buy weapons from any other nation. If the M4 needs to be replaced, then it should be replaced by an American design.

If the AR family is replaced then part of the contract will be that they are manufactured right here in the US, just like the M16A4s we buy from FN Herstal are not made in Belgium...but Virginia. Just like M9s are not made in Italy.

Not that I'm advocating a move away from the AR platfrom. I don't personally see a problem with a long term changeover to piston uppers if it is found that they are truly beneficial in long term testing.

Posted: 4/20/2008 1:31:49 PM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:
I'll take an M-4, thank you very much.

I'll take an M1 Garand or an M14

Posted: 4/20/2008 1:57:51 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
WEll if an air force "commando" working for HK can't be believed, who can?

PJ's > you...
the only spec ops group in the military who DOESNT go in on politics.
though, lets not forget combat controllers. those who call in airstrikes so you dont get filled with lead on the ground.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Colt's grip on military rifle market called bad deal (Page 1 of 2)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us