Is It Time For The M-4 & M-16 Rifles Be Retired From Service?

reply to post by DaddyBare

Daddybare, if it were just us, and we could start from scratch, there's a number of rounds that would be much more effective.

The .338 Remington Ultra Magnum pushes a 250 grain bullet at 2,900 feet per second, puts 2440 ft/lbs of energy on target at 400 meters, which is more energy at 400 meters than a 30.06 with a 180 grain bullet at 100 meters.

The problem is, it needs to be a "one size pretty much fits all."

Minimal recoil with maximum energy.

And there's not much that can match the .308 in gathering in all the variables.

reply to post by DaddyBare


I'll say this first part to get to my actual point:

You may call me naive or whatever but I'm still going to defend my 7.62x39 SKS. I may be a little biased though because it is the weapon I have the most experience with and the best results with.

So far she has been an extremely reliable weapon. I will say she jammed a lot before I purchased a decent clip, but now she'll fire every time. Very accurate too. (I have tactical optics on it though which makes a huge difference in that aspect.)

With that said:

Basically what I'm saying is instead of trying to design an entirely new weapon, why not expand off of a tried and true design? There are several weapons out there that out perform both the M16 and the M4A1 in both accuracy and reliability (both which would matter more than stopping power). Why don't they design a weapon utilizing perhaps a combination of tried and true designs? There are weapons that can fire full of sand and underwater.

Or perhaps adopt an already existing weapon with better attributes for desert warfare?

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Since I already have your attention, can you answer a question for me? When joining the USMC do you have the option to bring your own weapon rather than using thiers?

[edit on 21-10-2009 by DaMod]

reply to post by DaMod

Actually, there is a weapon in existence that takes the best parts of the AK and the best parts of the M-16, and blends them.

It's the Galil.

Comes in .308 and .223.

Reliable, accurate, and rugged.

reply to post by dooper


Yeah the Galil, I know that one. Kinda forgot about it for a sec tho. Great weapon there.



[edit on 21-10-2009 by DaMod]

Originally posted by DaddyBare
reply to post by dooper

 

Between you and me I would go one step further... I build a new system around the 7.62 x 63 mm AKA 30-06

Go take a look at this bad boyM110 this maybe the best weapon we currently have available...

I can tell you it is not as wonderful as it seems, its not bad its just not great, and I wouldnt want one as my standard rifle.
I have no complaints about the M4, its not "the best money can buy" I suppose but Im comfortable enough with it. I would love to use these though

I'd say they should either go with a piston AR-10s system, or a piston 6.5 Grendel...although the later would not go over so well as it is not a standard round

reply to post by AnonymousMoose

I agree with the piston system.

And you're correct - there's a number of better rounds. Because the .223 absolutely, positively, sucks.

Just doesn't have enough "grunt."

reply to post by dooper


"....The 6.5 MPC (6.5×42mm) utilizes the standard 5.56×45mm NATO/.223 Rem. case, which must be shortened by three (3) millimeters. However, to maximize powder capacity (and thus projectile velocity and ballistic/terminal performance), Mr. Jones pushed the case shoulder back a tad and increased the size of the case neck so it would accept a 6.5mm bullet. The result? A 95-grain "SSK Solid" bullet travelling at a muzzle velocity (MV) of approx. 2600 fps out of a 12-inch (12") barrel and approx. 2800 fps out of a 20-inch (20") barrel. So, were’ guessing around 2700 fps out of a 16-inch (16") barrel (unconfirmed/unverified)....."

www.defensereview.com...