Flaws in the M4, M4A1?

[dorminWS]

Troops left to fend for themselves after Army was warned of flaws in rifle

http://www.conservativeactionalerts.com ... -in-rifle/

[Jakeiscrazy]

There seems to be a real lack of details in this article. Despite going on about failure after failure they don't ever mention which such "failure" may entail other than to say something about a "barrel failure" which could really mean anything.

[MarcSpaz]

I agree. Not enough detail. I definitely don't want to blame guys in harms way, but I need to ask... what were the conditions the weapon was being used in? Was it 120+ and the guys were doing back to back full-auto mag dumps to provide cover fire or was it an 80 degree day and popping of some burst during a firefight?

I ask because in high temps with dry, sandy air and heavy use... maybe a heavy barrel running an open bolt might have been a better choice. Not that the weapon was bad or the men were abusing them... but simply the wrong design choice was selected to send with the men for those missions.

Am I making sense? Right tool for the job mentality?

[dorminWS]

I know a little bit (not much) about AR-15s, but nothing about M4s. Don't own one; never shot one.
What I found puzzling about this was the timing. With all that furor about body armor and unarmored vehicles that was in the press at the height of the fighting, I don't ever remember hearing a peep about the M4. Now it comes out at this late date. Anybody else find that to be a little odd?

[BertMacklin]

Article complains about needing to run an M4 (possibly thinner barreled and 3x burst) like a M4A1(supposedly thicker barrel), both running full auto will overheat fairly quick. Could go with an HK, or other piston, or just not burn ammo until the barrel melts and the gas tube explodes. Good point about 10 years without many complaints, though the contract for rifles has been thrown around quite a bit to little affect. Does anyone make open bolt rifles anymore?

[MarcSpaz]

I though the SCAR-H is an open bolt shoulder fire rifle. The M249 SAW is out there... heavy son of a gun, though. I know there are conversion kits for the SCAR-H, SCAR-L and AR15/M4 platforms.

LWRC is making a new open bolt M4.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=962_1296537927

[BertMacklin]

Guess I was naïve in thinking no one would want an open bolt. Makes sense with the M249, the bolt slamming home each time isn't going to affect the accuracy much cause the rest of the gun is too damn heavy. I may be wrong on this too but wasn't sure open bolts, here for civilians at least, could be owned without a machinegun stamp. The first Cobray's and Intratec's were originally open bolt but had to change per ATF demand, so I've heard. If they want better rifles they should drop that contract, most gun makers would jump through hoops to make something up to snuff.

[MarcSpaz]

I think it's funny the BATFE said they can be easily converted to full auto fire, so they are regulated as full auto fire. The truth is, idiots make the gun laws and clearly have no idea what they are talking about. Damn near every semi-auto (auto-loading) firearm ever made can be converted to full auto with minimum effort and either very cheap or free, depending how handy you are in the garage.

[grumpyMSG]

dorminWS people have been complaining about Stoner's rifle for almost half a century. Just for you though, I suggest you google M4 and "Senator Coburn" . Just to be specific about the M4s, I will give you a brief description about each of the models principal differences and some of the similarities.
M4- the second generation of M16/AR15 family carbines, the first was XM177 and it's variations. It was originally only issued to Rangers, Special Forces and others in the special operations community. it's principal difference with the M4A1 is it is capable of fully automatic fire, just like the M16 and M16A1.
M4A1-it is the rifle "big Army" got until recently, 14 1/2 barrel, similar diameter as the M16s and M4 underneath the handguard. Both the original M4 and early M4A1s came with fixed carrying handles, all were later converted to flat-top uppers. The M4A1 came with the same trigger group as the M16A2 and M16A4, with safe, semi and 3 round burst. It originally didn't come with the now standard rail system.
M4 SOPMOD- (Special Operations Peculiar MODification)The jokes about Barbie are only slightly inappropriate, I think it is more like Mr Potato Head.

The big difference between the SOPMOD and the M4 is the heavier barrel under the handguard/ rail. There are also several different rail systems in use that are free floating, which the M4A1s don't usually get. Most of the original M4s were upgraded to SOPMOD standards. This is now the standard that the Army wants all of it's rifles to meet.

Now for a little explanation of a few less than commonly known things about the M4/ M16 family. The whole burst versus automatic came about at the Marine Corps insistence while the M16A2 was in development, The burst counter mechanism uses a cam system with two sets of three notches, what happens is you end up with a slightly different trigger pull on each notch. That is why most people who use a burst trigger and take some pride in their shooting skill hate them. They also insisted on the longer buttstock that ended up on the A2. They didn't get the optimal length they wanted, they had to settle for what they got so it would fit in the same rifle racks. Now with everybody having to wear body armor most of the time, they are looking at adjustable length stocks. The Marines also pushed for the elevation/ tool free windage adjustable rear sight on the M16A2. The difference between the barrel profile on the M16A1 and M16A2 is limited to the portion between the front sight post and the flash suppressor. The sole purpose of the notch machined out of the barrel on the M4 is to mount a grenade launcher under the barrel, on the M16s the front sight was far enough forward and it clamps on behind the sight where the barrel is thinner.

For the folks who are wondering why the rifles are not open bolt weapons, it is for two reasons: accuracy and dirt. Pulling the trigger on an M4 and waiting for the bolt and buffer to slam forward before firing is not going to help accuracy. Dirt also comes into play with a rifle because the tolerances to achieve acceptable levels of accuracy from a rifle are tighter than they are for a machinegun. The M249 even though it is an individual weapon is in fact a light machinegun not a rifle. A machine gun relies on dispersion to hit the target. A machine gun fires, creating a cone of fire, that is somewhat similar to shotgun's pattern in that it spreads as it goes further. A good SAW gunner can control how many rounds he fires so that at short range he may fire 2-3 rounds and fires more at a target further away.

[MarcSpaz]

That's good info... Thanks Greg.