Firearm Forums - Arms Locker banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,382 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Part 2 relates to the M4 carbine currently in use by the United States Military and a few other nations.

Here are comments from guys and a gal that have used the M4 in combat:

"Our convoy was hit south of Bagdad, the M4 performed quite well at the ranges we were making contact at. Most of the insurgents were anywhere from 30 yards to 450 yards. For the longer ranges we counted on the Marines who were armed with the M14's while we covered them from the close range fire."

"The only thing I don't like about the carbine is the 3 shot burst limiter. If we'd been able to get the A1 version, I'd have been a lot happier. Still, the little gun is quite accurate and pleasant to shoot. It's quick and easy to use in close confines. The M203 on mine was great but the change in ergonomics was uncomfortable for a while."

"My dad had heard a lot of bad stuff about the M4. He decided I needed a better sidearm just in case the carbine failed to take out the bad guys. I don't know how he did it but he got me a Colt 1991 along with ammo and mags in country. I kept the pistol but I had to let him know that the M4 was working okay. The main thing about the gun is that the smaller round demands good shot placement to take out the enemy. It's not like hitting them with a Garand or an M14."

"Our unit had the M4's with the Knights suppressors. The can's didn't perform as well as we needed them to so we arranged to get Gemtech QD suppressors for the guns. It took some doing but the effort was well worth it. I think the 14.5 inch barrel is a little short for the 5.56mm round. We were very limited in how accurate the rifle was at anything over 500. It just didn't have the umph to make kills."

"When I joined the guard unit, I was given an M4. I noticed that the gun had been modified with the burst control cut out of it. The cyclic rate was very high and the gun had some extraction problems. It was quite accurate about 300 meters out but beyond that, the body armor worn by some of the Palistines would defeat the round. We had to let them get closer unless one of the snipers was present."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
just like all the punks bitched about the 1911, about the .30 Carbine, about the M14, about the M9, about the M60, About the BAR, about the Spld. grunts are always bitching about SOMETHING.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,989 Posts
IMO, 14.5” should be the lower-end limit for the military, and ranges should be recognized as limited, if using the 62-grain FMJ load which seems to be the thing now.

We civilians have substantially better ammo options than the GI does, so that opens up our envelope a little more. To be honest, if stuck with fmj ammo, I’d want the 55’s, even in a full-size 20” gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,805 Posts
The Army has a program underway which will rebarrel all M4 carbines with 16.5 inch barrels. This program will go into effect unless DOD approves the replacement of all M16s and M4s with the M8.




oD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,989 Posts
Are we still standardized on the 62-grain ball? Seems like the faster 55-grain would be a much better choice for a short-barrel gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
u forget the twist rate is already set at 1 in 7, and we have the longer, heavier tracer ammo in the battle zones already, John. The military never was too swift, nor too concerned about anti-personnel effectiveness. they know that most hits are accidental (indeed, richochets) most hits are poor ones, most guys can't kill face to face, and most who do are RUINED by it. So they just go with keepig heads down, random fire, and figure on belt feds, and fragmentation weapons getting the job done. The rifle only accounts for 10% of the casulties on the modern battlefield. That was true even in WW2. Guys use cover, dodge, fire and maneuver, use armor, etc. half of the guys who do deliberately shoot somebody end up being either casulities from the stress, or later, end up gettig disability checks for the psych damage done. The guys who CAN kill face to face, with individual weapons, with no psych damage, typically, have felony records before they ever enter the military. All this is why the troops fire 50,000 rds for every KILL made with the rifle. 3 out of 4 or more casulties are NOT kills.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,275 Posts
andy said:
u forget the twist rate is already set at 1 in 7, and we have the longer, heavier tracer ammo in the battle zones already, John. The military never was too swift, nor too concerned about anti-personnel effectiveness. they know that most hits are accidental (indeed, richochets) most hits are poor ones, most guys can't kill face to face, and most who do are RUINED by it. So they just go with keepig heads down, random fire, and figure on belt feds, and fragmentation weapons getting the job done. The rifle only accounts for 10% of the casulties on the modern battlefield. That was true even in WW2. Guys use cover, dodge, fire and maneuver, use armor, etc. half of the guys who do deliberately shoot somebody end up being either casulities from the stress, or later, end up gettig disability checks for the psych damage done. The guys who CAN kill face to face, with individual weapons, with no psych damage, typically, have felony records before they ever enter the military. All this is why the troops fire 50,000 rds for every KILL made with the rifle. 3 out of 4 or more casulties are NOT kills.
These pearls of wisdom from someone who's never heard a shot fired in anger. Psych damage? Are you drunk? I know plenty of Infantrymen that killed close enough to see they're enemies faces and were glad as hell it was him and not them. Felons aren't accepted in the Armed Services, didn't you know that? Who would want them? Like felons are some superior form instead of the cowardly bottom feeders that they are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,950 Posts
"Palestines"

??

Wonder what problems they had with the KACs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,279 Posts
Dad has stated that the only thing he felt after taking the life of someone who tried to kill him was a great happiness that he was still alive and in one piece. Thats not the statement of a psycho or a felon but a real live human being.

RIKA
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,950 Posts
x

sorry, done sharing that
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,794 Posts
Various Ballistics of currently employed ammunition. See gunkid, your wrong again!
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
andy said:
u forget the twist rate is already set at 1 in 7, and we have the longer, heavier tracer ammo in the battle zones already, John.
The 1:7 twist is just fine for 55-gr ammo, and to John in AR's question, yes, we still have M193 in stock for NG units that use M-16A1s with the 1:12 twist.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,927 Posts
Garand, why on earth is the BC for 77gr OTM lower than for 68? Typo or is there something I should know about?

While the initial MVs and Fragmentation Velocities seem correct, I still would like to see a source citation. 75 (Asside from the now abbandoned mk262 mod 0) and 68gr are not to my knowledge being used in the military, so its not seemingly a military quick reference chart.

Was this the origional source, Garand? http://www.ar15.com/content/page.html?id=173

It also seems that the mk262 is loaded with a 77gr Matchking, which according to Sierra has a BC of .362 as long as its above 1800 fps. For what its worth, Berger boasts its 75gr series to have a BC of .447. Id expect the 77gr to be at least the value Sierra labels it to be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,794 Posts
I've had it awhile, I do believe that it was the original source.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top