Posted on Apr 27, 2015
Army seeks gun industry help on M4 carbine...your thoughts?
56K
374
232
11
11
0
The Army is asking the gun industry to build new components for its soldiers’ primary weapon — the M4 carbine — a move that experts say is a tacit admission that the service has been supplying a flawed rifle that lacks the precision of commercially available guns.
At a recent Capitol Hill hearing, an Army general acknowledged that the M4’s magazine has been responsible for the gun jamming during firefights.
On the federal government’s FedBizOpps.gov website, the Army announced a “market survey” for gunmakers to produce a set of enhancements to essentially create a new model — the “M4A1+.” It would include a modular trigger, a new type of rail fitted around a “free floating” barrel and other parts. The upgrade is supposed to improve the rifle’s accuracy and reliability.
I've been saying for quite a while that it's a great platform that needs to be produced with higher quality parts...the parts are out there. I know this because the ones I build are hands-down better quality than what the government is buying....let me know what you think.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/26/army-seeks-gun-industry-help-on-m4-carbine-in-taci/#ixzz3YXFKucxX
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
At a recent Capitol Hill hearing, an Army general acknowledged that the M4’s magazine has been responsible for the gun jamming during firefights.
On the federal government’s FedBizOpps.gov website, the Army announced a “market survey” for gunmakers to produce a set of enhancements to essentially create a new model — the “M4A1+.” It would include a modular trigger, a new type of rail fitted around a “free floating” barrel and other parts. The upgrade is supposed to improve the rifle’s accuracy and reliability.
I've been saying for quite a while that it's a great platform that needs to be produced with higher quality parts...the parts are out there. I know this because the ones I build are hands-down better quality than what the government is buying....let me know what you think.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/26/army-seeks-gun-industry-help-on-m4-carbine-in-taci/#ixzz3YXFKucxX
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Weapons
Government Contracts
Equipment
Army
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 55
1
1
0
off the top of my head some of the things that would improve it greatly.
-free floating barrel, US Army Marksmanship program already does this, why isn't it service standard?
-harder punch, not going to refight AK vs M16 of damage vs accuracy
-ambidextrous controls, US Army has stopped issuing right hand only soldiers
-better butt stock, anybody else have theirs rattle? or not lock in position completely?
-free floating barrel, US Army Marksmanship program already does this, why isn't it service standard?
-harder punch, not going to refight AK vs M16 of damage vs accuracy
-ambidextrous controls, US Army has stopped issuing right hand only soldiers
-better butt stock, anybody else have theirs rattle? or not lock in position completely?
(1)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
SPC Donald Moore to number 1, actually yes it can, I was trained in BCT to put my barrel on the sand bag to shoot, never got the 300m targets. When I got to my unit I got down and started to do that and the NCO behind me lost his shit saying "PVT just use your gd magazine" hit all the 300m targets was so stoked I flubbed the 100-150mm pair after it. When you put stress on the hand guard it can move point of impact 2 ft at 300m.
(0)
(0)
SPC Donald Moore
Thanks, I was hitting 600 meter targets in basic training at Ft. Benning.
What you had was bad technique due to substandard training. Your DS should have been fixing the problem in basic. You should not rest the weapon on the mag either because the mag can be damaged. I have had the experience.
What you had was bad technique due to substandard training. Your DS should have been fixing the problem in basic. You should not rest the weapon on the mag either because the mag can be damaged. I have had the experience.
(1)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
SPC Donald Moore The farthest you get with out going to SDM is 300m, and now a days with pmags and such the whole mag failure is mitigated. And it was my DS who was telling me to put it on the sand bag
(0)
(0)
SPC Donald Moore
I went through basic in 1991 and at that time we were using a 20" barreled M16A2.
We shot 600 meter targets all day. Your DS may have not explained it well or he may have been misinformed. I received very good training in basic and shot expert then and every time after. I have also received many more years of training after the military as I worked for a local police department.
You can rest the hand guard on a bag, but you should not apply any downward force against it. The best accuracy happens when your weapon is supported by hand at that back of the hand guard, right in front of the mag.
Under the force of recoil, the base plate of the old metal magazines would sometimes come off and dump all the ammo out of the bottom if you put them against the ground. If the p-mag is immune to damage, rock on, but I would not rest my mag on the ground because of the possibility of jacking up the weapon and I don't want it to take a dump when I need it.
We shot 600 meter targets all day. Your DS may have not explained it well or he may have been misinformed. I received very good training in basic and shot expert then and every time after. I have also received many more years of training after the military as I worked for a local police department.
You can rest the hand guard on a bag, but you should not apply any downward force against it. The best accuracy happens when your weapon is supported by hand at that back of the hand guard, right in front of the mag.
Under the force of recoil, the base plate of the old metal magazines would sometimes come off and dump all the ammo out of the bottom if you put them against the ground. If the p-mag is immune to damage, rock on, but I would not rest my mag on the ground because of the possibility of jacking up the weapon and I don't want it to take a dump when I need it.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I would like to add to SSG Ayscue's thoughts. I like the idea of a piston drive for the same reasons. I also think The army should consider a side charging handle. Bear Creek Arsenal in Sanford, NC produces the modified upper receiver and bolt carrier. I also like the M855A1 round that LTC Labrador discusses. In regard to accessories an optical sight and an aiming light really enhance an individuals marksmanship. These products continue to improve in capability, size, and weight. Having those on board is worth the weight. Thanks for posting!
(0)
(0)
SGT Richard H.
I thought the same thing, but after handling a gas piston AR for a day at the range I did find it to be a little bit fickle, so I'd either need more hands-on experience with one or would need to see some improvement to get more on board with it. I still love the overall idea of it, but have concerns about reliability based on that limited snapshot that I have to go on. I do love the idea of a side charging handle in today's "accessorized" environment, but because of the environments we operate in and the amount of time that one can go between actually firing the weapon, I would like to see a side-charged model that still has a dust cover.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Change the gas impingement system, not the most reliable and only cause the receiver to get more dirty from the carbon bold up. The M4 is already accurate and trusted so that my only opinion
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google