User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:22:45 PM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup. The M4A1 can do those long strings of automatic fire without the gun destroying itself. and add the "Gucci" trigger parts and still come in cheaper. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This. $3000 VS $600 per rifle. And the Corps has the smallest budget. And for less than a grand, as an individual, I can upgrade an M4A1 to do the same things the M27 does for a rifleman. FF rail, Geissele trigger, LMT BCG, the works. And it'll still be a quarter pound lighter, and balance better. Yup. The M4A1 can do those long strings of automatic fire without the gun destroying itself. and add the "Gucci" trigger parts and still come in cheaper. How does the 416 destroy itself? Does it die quicker than a regular "DI" AR? Haven't really read anything indicating that it does indeed have a shorter life, but I recall that the bolts seem to last longer? Someone can correct me. Although I agree that the M27's enhancements can be applied to the M4. Swap in a better trigger, get rid of the burst trigger group, possibly a new rail, and if they want a new barrel profile. More or less the things that make the most difference in the M27. Compared to as an issued M4 I suppose it is superior, but applying some upgrades and making an "M4A2" would probably be just as effective. But considering the M27 is already in the system, it is probably easier to order more than select components, test them, buy them, and then get them installed on the entire M4 fleet. Or maybe not; I wouldn't know. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:27:49 PM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How can the USMC afford this? R0N said himself that the USMC's point of view was the M4 offered almost just as many benefits, and at 1/3rd the cost of the IAR. Really fucking dumb, IMO. And I'm not even sure if the article is accurate. President Trump has said he's about to pour money into DoD, so this doesn't surprise me if true. I wish R0N would come back. I can only imagine how much shit is flying around at HQMC while the CMC (along with other service chiefs) are being told "present a budget of what you want based upon the now-official doctrine of fighting one war, deterring another, and maintaining military security on our soil". The next few years will be a total, 180 degree change from "bend over and prepare to get fucked, because you've had it *too good* since 9/11 so you better get to cutting your force structure, or we'll do it for you warmonger. Oh and you better be able to still fight and win whatever war we get America into after we rape the defense budget too, fuckers". It's a good time to be in again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:30:27 PM EST
[#3]
Interesting to note from the Henderson Defense thread here. That the H&K piston had the same reliability as the Colt M4. The H&K cost twice as much. The reliability was the same. Give the Colt an HBAR like the H&K, and accuracy will be the same also.
I had a piston once, cleaning it was not that much better. The tube still got super dirty and was very hard to clean. Is it really worth twice as much to get the same reliability? I think the money should go to an American company. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:31:06 PM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How does the 416 destroy itself? Does it die quicker than a regular "DI" AR? Haven't really read anything indicating that it does indeed have a shorter life, but I recall that the bolts seem to last longer? Someone can correct me. Although I agree that the M27's enhancements can be applied to the M4. Swap in a better trigger, get rid of the burst trigger group, possibly a new rail, and if they want a new barrel profile. More or less the things that make the most difference in the M27. Compared to as an issued M4 I suppose it is superior, but applying some upgrades and making an "M4A2" would probably be just as effective. But considering the M27 is already in the system, it is probably easier to order more than select components, test them, buy them, and then get them installed on the entire M4 fleet. Or maybe not; I wouldn't know. The point of the M27's adoption was it could do really long sessions of automatic fire. And for a time, the M27 was probably better at that than the M4. Because the US Army used the M4 as a RIFLE, not a squad automatic weapon. So the Regular Army never had any issues with M4s killing itself. However, SOCOM did use the M4 as a quasi squad automatic weapon, because they move around in small numbers. So to make up for the firepower gap, they ran their M4s hard until they'd destroy the gun. So SOCOM looked at the SCAR program to replace the M4 with a weapon that could handle a rifle being treated like a automatic rifle. And frankly, because of the volume of training rounds that SOCOM gets, they probably run their rifles harder than most units run their actual M249 SAWs. But SOCOM went back to the M4 and upgraded a few things like the barrel profile, and changes to the heat treating. And BAM, now they had a rifle that could do every bit as good as they could possibly expect. So they gave up on the 5.56 SCAR as a replacement and went with the M4A1. So yeah, the M27 is super expensive overpriced automatic rifle that doesn't do anything better than the M4A1 now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:31:31 PM EST
[#5]
But,it, but everyone told me the HK416 breaks in half and is worse than the M4!!!
And there is no way the HK416 could ever replace the M4. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:37:07 PM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup. The M4A1 can do those long strings of automatic fire without the gun destroying itself. and add the "Gucci" trigger parts and still come in cheaper. That's exactly what the Army's M4A1+ program was going to do--FF rail and premium trigger but it was shitcanned because the brass said it wasn't worth doing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:38:25 PM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The point of the M27's adoption was it could do really long sessions of automatic fire. And for a time, the M27 was probably better at that than the M4. Because the US Army used the M4 as a RIFLE, not a squad automatic weapon. So the Regular Army never had any issues with M4s killing itself. However, SOCOM did the M4 as a quasi squad automatic weapon, because they move around in small numbers. So to make up for the firepower gap, they ran their M4s hard until they'd destroy the gun. So SOCOM looked at the SCAR program to replace the M4 with a weapon that could handle a rifle being treated like a automatic rifle. And frankly, because of the volume of training rounds that SOCOM gets, they probably run their rifles harder than most units run their actual M249 SAWs. But SOCOM went back to the M4 and upgraded a few things like the barrel profile, and changes to the heat treating. And BAM, now they had a rifle that could do every bit as good as they could possibly expect. So they gave up on the 5.56 SCAR as a replacement and went with the M4A1. So yeah, the M27 is super expensive overpriced automatic rifle that doesn't do anything better than the M4A1 now. Yeah, I think this is a good starting place: 
Replace the trigger and I believe the DD rail weights a bit less. Remove fixed front sight because they're issued ACOGs, throw on a cheap back up sight. Think it still allows for an M203 or M320 to be attached to. Maybe change the barrel to, but I believe the USMC still uses the M203 so they will probably want to keep the notch in the barrel? Anyways, seems like most of the advantages of the M27 over the standard issue M4 can be applied as an upgrade fairly easily. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:42:47 PM EST
[#8]
Alternative possible explanation for the RFI: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/02/10/usmc-releases-rfi-11000-iars-rumors-abound-pure-fleeted-m27-standard-rifle/
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:43:18 PM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So yeah, the M27 is super expensive overpriced automatic rifle that doesn't do anything better than the M4A1 now. You're "requesting information" USMC desk weenies? There you go, everything you need to know. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:44:15 PM EST
[#10]
System Reliability. The system should demonstrate 15,000 Mean Rounds Between
Essential Function Failure (MRBEFF) for Class III malfunctions (i.e., for non-operator correctable malfunctions which cause the loss of essential functionality) and 900 MRBEFF for Class I and II malfunctions combined. Class I malfunctions are operator clearable within 10 seconds, whereas Class II malfunctions require more than 10 seconds but less than 10 minutes (for 95 percent of all Class II malfunctions that occur) to clear but can be corrected by the operator with available equipment. That requirement puts the M4 out of the game. It neither has 900 MRBS nor is it capable of 15,000 rounds before something breaks on it. Barrel Life. The system barrel should have a service life of 24,000 rounds minimum with
MK318 Government ammunition. The M4A1 is also not capable of 24,000 rounds barrel life. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:50:13 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're "requesting information" USMC desk weenies? There you go, everything you need to know. Just was wishing R0n was here to confirm it. But I took him for being "company man", and probably would defend it. Even if he felt deep in his heart that it is the wrong move. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:50:49 PM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But,it, but everyone told me the HK416 breaks in half and is worse than the M4!!! And there is no way the HK416 could ever replace the M4. Oh. There you are. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:51:05 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That requirement puts the M4 out of the game. It neither has 900 MRBS nor is it capable of 15,000 rounds before something breaks on it. Horseshit. Given real, unbiased testing it certainly is. The M4A1 is also not capable of 24,000 rounds barrel life. So spend 6 times the money on a barrel that might last twice as long. Now that's thinking strategically.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:52:26 PM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So spend 6 times the money on a barrel that might last twice as long. Now that's thinking strategically. The M4 has a barrel life of 8,000 rounds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:53:48 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh. There you are. Did you see the requirements? 900 MRBS 15,000 MRBEFF 24,000 round barrel life. The M4A1 doesn't come close to those numbers. In the ICC the M4A1 only had. 500 MRBS 6,000 MRBEFF. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:55:36 PM EST
[#16]
What is it with the .mil's obsession with small arms right now?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:56:17 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I wish someone would explain to me how the M27 IAR offers increased firepower over the M4. The only difference I see is the M27 IAR utilizes a short-stroke gas piston and has a barrel 2" longer than the M4. Maybe the barrel is a full-length HBAR, I don't know. They want to issue 3 per squad? I don't get it. The operator can't very well provider suppressive fire if he's swapping out mags every 5 seconds. It has a full auto trigger group, instead of the burst trigger group in the M4 & M16. Since it's the mil, might as well buy a whole different rifle instead of a few small parts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:56:22 PM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Did you see the requirements? 900 MRBS 15,000 MRBEFF 24,000 round barrel life. The M4A1 doesn't come close to those numbers. In the ICC the M4A1 only had. 250 MRBS 6,000 MRBEFF. We get it. You don't understand that an M4 could be upgraded, and the M4A1+ was loved by the people testing it. You know more than the experts. You know more than the people who tested the fucking guns. We get it dude. You have the biggest dick, and the smartest brain in the room. Got it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:58:45 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The M4A1 is also not capable of 24,000 rounds barrel life. Does HK have some kind of monopoly on "super" barrels or something?
FN set the industry standard on hard use barrel life with their m249 SAW barrels. And these are the guys using those same processes to make M4A1 barrels. FFS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:59:03 PM EST
[#20]
Marines are sick of the M16 and M4.
they are sick of countless hours cleaning a DI system. Is it really better? Maybe maybe not. I could care less either way, one thing I like is the young Marines being able to clean their rifles in 15 mins vs 1-2 hours. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 5:59:46 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We get it. You don't understand that an M4 could be upgraded, and the M4A1+ was loved by the people testing it. You know more than the experts. You know more than the people who tested the fucking guns. We get it dude. You have the biggest dick, and the smartest brain in the room. Got it. The brass decided the M4A1+ wasn't worth pursuing. No sense in could a, shoulda, woulda. Is it easier to buy a COTS rifle vs running multiple procurement programs to replace every part on the M4 that needs and upgrade. The M27 is here and it works. Or we could run a RFP for the BCG, rail, trigger, etc, etc. A COTS rifle is infinitely easier. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:00:45 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Does HK have some kind of monopoly on "super" barrels or something?
FN set the industry standard on hard use barrel life with their m249 SAW barrels. And these are the guys using those same processes to make M4A1 barrels. FFS. M249 barrels are CHF and double hard chrome lined. The M4A1 has a button rifled chrome lined barrel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:01:03 PM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We get it. You don't understand that an M4 could be upgraded, and the M4A1+ was loved by the people testing it. You know more than the experts. You know more than the people who tested the fucking guns. We get it dude. You have the biggest dick, and the smartest brain in the room. Got it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Did you see the requirements? 900 MRBS 15,000 MRBEFF 24,000 round barrel life. The M4A1 doesn't come close to those numbers. In the ICC the M4A1 only had. 250 MRBS 6,000 MRBEFF. We get it. You don't understand that an M4 could be upgraded, and the M4A1+ was loved by the people testing it. You know more than the experts. You know more than the people who tested the fucking guns. We get it dude. You have the biggest dick, and the smartest brain in the room. Got it. This is the point here. Although how is barrel life measured? How can the M27 have a life that much longer? Is the profile of the M4 that inefficient, or does the extra thickness really help that much? In any case, a thicker barrel can be applied to a regular AR, but I thought a heavy barrel was out of favor for standard issue carbines. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:01:25 PM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Marines are sick of the M16 and M4. they are sick of countless hours cleaning a DI system. Is it really better? Maybe maybe not. I could care less either way, one thing I like is the young Marines being able to clean their rifles in 15 mins vs 1-2 hours. Yep DI is on its way out. Stoners AR-18 was just a infinitely better system |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:03:17 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The brass decided the M4A1+ wasn't worth pursuing. No sense in could a, shoulda, woulda. Is it easier to buy a COTS rifle vs running multiple procurement programs to replace every part on the M4 that needs and upgrade. The M27 is here and it works. Or we could run a RFP for the BCG, rail, trigger, etc, etc. A COTS rifle is infinitely easier. The idea behind a rifle as modular as an M4 is that you don't need to replace the whole fucking thing when you want to upgrade stuff.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:03:45 PM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
M249 barrels are CHF and double hard chrome lined. The M4A1 has a button rifled chrome lined barrel. Couldn't possibly fix that. Nope. Totally fucking impossible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:04:48 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Marines are sick of the M16 and M4. they are sick of countless hours cleaning a DI system. Is it really better? Maybe maybe not. I could care less either way, one thing I like is the young Marines being able to clean their rifles in 15 mins vs 1-2 hours. So maybe the leadership can pull its collective head out of its ass and stop that dumb shit. The M4's sure as shit don't need it, and all it does is give SNCO's wood and kill parts faster. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:05:12 PM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Marines are sick of the M16 and M4. they are sick of countless hours cleaning a DI system. Is it really better? Maybe maybe not. I could care less either way, one thing I like is the young Marines being able to clean their rifles in 15 mins vs 1-2 hours. Come on now. You know the military's mentality. A rifle is "never" clean. Troops will not be able to save any time on this system with cleaning. They'll still be cleaning the fuck out of those things and getting the white glove bullshit. If you shoot any piston gun, like an AK47/74. You'll notice that you still gun a TON of carbon inside the receiver and action. I got like a milimeter or 2 of carbon inside my AK74. If I put my finger inside that thing, it comes out black. Or the 249 and 240, both got real dirty inside the receiver and on the bolt carrier assembly. Piston guns are NOT cleaner than "DI" rifles like the M16 family. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:06:27 PM EST
[#29]
I don't have a problem with this if the DI rifle cost Marine lives and this is a more reliable rifle. If truely better I want them to have the best.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:07:12 PM EST
[#30]
Spreads the firepower around to all members of the fire team.
The 249 really did not perform well in the sand. The M27 should also be a much better suppressor host than the M4, and that seems to be the way the Marines are heading. What's not to like? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:11:10 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How does the 416 destroy itself? Does it die quicker than a regular "DI" AR? Haven't really read anything indicating that it does indeed have a shorter life, but I recall that the bolts seem to last longer? Someone can correct me. Although I agree that the M27's enhancements can be applied to the M4. Swap in a better trigger, get rid of the burst trigger group, possibly a new rail, and if they want a new barrel profile. More or less the things that make the most difference in the M27. Compared to as an issued M4 I suppose it is superior, but applying some upgrades and making an "M4A2" would probably be just as effective. But considering the M27 is already in the system, it is probably easier to order more than select components, test them, buy them, and then get them installed on the entire M4 fleet. Or maybe not; I wouldn't know. It is easier to just order more M27's and spare parts. But it is more expensive, short term and long term, since HK charges an arm and a leg. Ordering new components and switching them out would be cheaper, but it'd take longer, require more brain cells, and no one would get a sweet retirement gig out of it. 
Everyone says the M27 is more durable; I call BS. If you take an M4A1 and shoot it until it fails, you will melt the gas tube somewhere between 800 and 1400 rounds, I've never seen a Socom barrel burst. This turns it into a single-shot rifle, but it still functions. Gas tube is a $10 part, maybe $5 for the Army or Marines. On piston AR's, including the 416 and M27, when shot to failure, the BCG strike face tends to deform/fracture around 1200 rounds, somewhere in that area. That's when it causes issues, I saw one break off pieces and bind up the FCG. I've seen bent op rods, damaged springs, and once, I saw an op rod ejected from the weapon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:13:53 PM EST
[#32]
It also means that the guns can only be upgraded with proprietary parts.
It's a sweet deal for HK. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:16:50 PM EST
[#33]
Comments on that are interesting. Theres a Ron there, might be the guy being talked about in this thread, he seems to have some insider knowledge. One interesting thing he said:
Early Marine experiment showed that a PIP of the M4 and A4 with free floating hand guard, geisselle trigger and “match” barrels they could get very close to the M27’s capability |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:17:53 PM EST
[#34]
So every Marine is an Autorifleman now? I thought we were just getting carbineman but we've gone full autorifleman.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:18:38 PM EST
[#35]
Not understanding the pros over a M4a1. Can the IAR use Magpul D60's? 100 rounder surefire mags? The heavy barrel more accurate? Rail free-floated?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:25:54 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We are finally realizing that the full-auto part of the assault rifle concept is kind of useful? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:26:05 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It also means that the guns can only be upgraded with proprietary parts. It's a sweet deal for HK. Once the military moves to the 416 the civilian market will adjust as well. HK is also expanding its US factory to push out more civilian stuff. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:26:24 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh. There you are. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
But,it, but everyone told me the HK416 breaks in half and is worse than the M4!!! And there is no way the HK416 could ever replace the M4. Oh. There you are. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:29:01 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That requirement puts the M4 out of the game. It neither has 900 MRBS nor is it capable of 15,000 rounds before something breaks on it. The M4A1 is also not capable of 24,000 rounds barrel life. Quote HistoryQuoted:
System Reliability. The system should demonstrate 15,000 Mean Rounds Between
Essential Function Failure (MRBEFF) for Class III malfunctions (i.e., for non-operator correctable malfunctions which cause the loss of essential functionality) and 900 MRBEFF for Class I and II malfunctions combined. Class I malfunctions are operator clearable within 10 seconds, whereas Class II malfunctions require more than 10 seconds but less than 10 minutes (for 95 percent of all Class II malfunctions that occur) to clear but can be corrected by the operator with available equipment. That requirement puts the M4 out of the game. It neither has 900 MRBS nor is it capable of 15,000 rounds before something breaks on it. Barrel Life. The system barrel should have a service life of 24,000 rounds minimum with
MK318 Government ammunition. The M4A1 is also not capable of 24,000 rounds barrel life. M27 ain't either, not with M855A1 nor Mk318. They'll go beyond 4 MOA before 20K rounds when you're doing a lot of automatic fire. Am I the only one who remembers that the XM8 trials and the ICC were rigged against the M4? They had brand new rifles with newly designed magazines, competing against previously-issued M4 carbines with older magazines. Not to mention, their standards of maintenance were "as little lube as possible" which is not SOP for the M4 carbine. Finally, a lot of the stoppages were operator-induced, since dipshits did not understand the M4's burst FCG and counted trigger resets as stoppages. IE, fire the last round in the gun on burst, then when you reload and pull the trigger, the gun will not fire three rounds because the burst mechanism has not fully reset. Whichever shitbird jackass came up with the burst trigger can eat a dick. Worst thing they ever did to the M16. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:29:23 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And are inevitably courting a lawsuit by HK. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
While the RFI describes the M27’s salient characteristics to a “T”, what may throw a monkey wrench in this plan is if another manufacturer or two claim they can build the weapons as well with a model based on a 416 clone. I wonder if LWRC is licking its chops. They've got lots of experience with piston ARs. And are inevitably courting a lawsuit by HK. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:29:33 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Once the military moves to the 416 the civilian market will adjust as well. The civilian market has already adjusted. They buy DI guns and shoot them fuck out of them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:30:14 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We are finally realizing that the full-auto part of the assault rifle concept is kind of useful? I would focus more on the free-float aspect of these rifles than full auto, although auto can have a limited usefulness for a trained shooter. Mag dumps like Russian sub machine gun battalions is not what we are talking about here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:32:05 PM EST
[#43]
What mags do they use with these things? Just 30 round mags or do they have drums like the DMAG?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:33:11 PM EST
[#44]
Quad Rails!!
Icky... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:35:34 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I wonder if the Trump administration will weigh in due to Made in Germany? MAGA  Made in USA. HK is turning up manufacturing here, in Georgia. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:36:30 PM EST
[#46]
ITT we learn who missed the epic thread with SME input.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:37:07 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOL, I remember so many people here saying this would never happen. I need to go tell my broker to start buying stock in Welch's because of all the sour grapes that are going to be needed. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:39:42 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What is it with the .mil's obsession with small arms right now? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:42:53 PM EST
[#49]
speaking from the point of view of someone who has had to carry a rifle everywhere they go for a year at a time...3 times. my first question is what does it weigh compared to the M4? I would be asking because piston guns tens to weigh more.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2017 6:44:46 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We get it. You don't understand that an M4 could be upgraded, and the M4A1+ was loved by the people testing it. You know more than the experts. You know more than the people who tested the fucking guns. We get it dude. You have the biggest dick, and the smartest brain in the room. Got it. Not going to validate the trolling, so I cut that part out. Our non-PIP'd, old school, pencil barreled M4s met those requirements. I've said this many times before, but some people refuse to accept real-wold facts, and continue to run with their monstrously retarded and bull-headed agenda for some reason, either stubbornness or financial reasons are involved. I've done courses with a lot of dudes left and right of me, on active duty, with the non-PIP M4 and M4A1s, where we burned through 800-1100 rounds in 4 hour sessions even, with no malfunctions. I've done courses of fire like that with 11.5" guns in the Arctic, in the dead of winter, with no malfunctions, over 3 day periods even, where AKs were crapping the bed left and right, FNCs wouldn't work, CZ75s broke the slide stop shafts due to embrittlement, and Glocks caked in ice did truck along like it was a summer day. 900 rounds MTBS/F in an old-school M4 pre-PIP was a breeze. You could do that day-after-day. 8,000 rounds barrel life? Lol! Someone's got the case of tard in their head, or financial interest in HK. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
