2
2
0
The Army announced that it concluded its Individual Carbine competition without selecting a winner to replace the M4 Carbine.
“None of the carbines evaluated during the testing phase of the competition met the minimum scoring requirement needed to continue to the next phase of the evaluation,” according to a June 13 Army press release.
This was done on the heels of another round of budget cuts; however, a bill was passed to continue funding the project in Oct 2014.
What do you think, is the M4 the best or is the best just too expensive?
“None of the carbines evaluated during the testing phase of the competition met the minimum scoring requirement needed to continue to the next phase of the evaluation,” according to a June 13 Army press release.
This was done on the heels of another round of budget cuts; however, a bill was passed to continue funding the project in Oct 2014.
What do you think, is the M4 the best or is the best just too expensive?
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 15
I think the M4 is a great platform that just needs some tweaking. The Army could improve the platform and save a ton of money by dropping M855 ammo in favor of MK262 open tip match rounds (as used in the Mk 12) and replacing the trigger group with something a little closer to match grade. I shoot similar ammo from my AR's exclusively, and have them equipped with TAC-CON triggers. Full floating forestocks are a marked improvement as well, and Nickel Boron coated bolt carrier groups also increase performance and make cleaning a breeze. I bet just about any infantry guy would trade his M4 for mine in a heartbeat after a few shots.
(3)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
Cpl Dennis F., not discounting your experience, and the ballistic data does not take into account the TYPE of bullet used, which has a major affect on terminal effectiveness. (FMJ sucks and the M1 carbine round does not deform or fragment like spitzer shaped bullets do so the wound profile is not as catastrophic). Not saying the M1 carbine is a death ray. Just saying that some of the prejudice against it comes from folks expecting it to do things it was not designed or intended to do. There are A LOT of our enemies who achieved ambient temperature because of that little gun. And loaded with good JHPs, that little thing can be nasty and inside 200m I would not feel underarmed.
(3)
(0)
SFC Royce Williams
The hard part is not every Soldier takes as good care of his rifle as he/she should. If you start putting match triggers etc in a weapon that gets passed around from joe to joe every two years you have to replace those more expensive custom parts. It is time to find a better weapon. It just has to not only hold up to the mud test and water test but also the e-1 Private test.
(0)
(0)
SGT Richard H.
SFC Royce Williams, fair point about the performance parts, but there are also parts that are just plain better without the fickleness. They're pricey, but far cheaper than the price of a malfunctioned weapon when it counts.
(1)
(0)
SFC Royce Williams
I agree. I've had a malfunctioning weapon in a firefight and would give everything and anything to have a working weapon. If it can be realistically done I'm all for it.
(0)
(0)
I think we should just equip every Soldier with an M1 Abrams Main Battle tank and a crew!!
(3)
(0)
CH (MAJ) (Join to see)
I like the way you think. It reminds me of a great military quote. "If it's worth dropping a 500lb bomb on it, it's worth dropping two 500lb bombs on it."
(3)
(0)
Personally, I want a weapon like the one from the original Robocop....."State of the art bang bang"
(2)
(0)
Cpl Dennis F.
Travis talks about HSP's year in 300 Blk Out. He also takes to opportunity to discuss their findings and explain their justification of the round as a multi ...
SSG John Bacon SFC Mark Merino The ,300 Blackout is just that. All that is required is a rebarreling. It uses the same mags, BCG and receivers and out performs the 5.56 M4 and the AK. I have built two and can't say enough good things about it. Take a look.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgKjbySsAik
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgKjbySsAik
(3)
(0)
(0)
(0)
Read This Next