View Full Version : M4A1 SOCOM
wild_wild_wes
01-26-13, 22:19
Let us discuss the Army's latest version of the M4A1, with 12.5" RISII handguard and 14.5" heavy barrel.
By and large a mistake, IMHO.
Start with the barrel: yes the "M4" profile is quite stupid, but the M4A1 barrel, which corrects the "completion backwards priciple" M4 profile, is heavier than need be. Something along the lines of the Noveske N4 would have been much better.
Handguard: it also is too heavy. I had a RISII but sold it because the removable lower section made it a lot heavier than the Lite. I prefer the DD Lite rail because it is...light! I think the requirement for a removable lower rail to accomodate the M203 is bogus. Why compromise everyone's rifle just for a specialist's needs? I think the grenade launcher should be a stand-alone weapon anyway. Give the grenadier a supplementary Mk18 instead.
So...vets or M4A1 cloners, what say you?
You correctly sumed it up, solid advice.
sinlessorrow
01-26-13, 23:44
Let us discuss the Army's latest version of the M4A1, with 12.5" RISII handguard and 14.5" heavy barrel.
By and large a mistake, IMHO.
Start with the barrel: yes the "M4" profile is quite stupid, but the M4A1 barrel, which corrects the "completion backwards priciple" M4 profile, is heavier than need be. Something along the lines of the Noveske N4 would have been much better.
Handguard: it also is too heavy. I had a RISII but sold it because the removable lower section made it a lot heavier than the Lite. I prefer the DD Lite rail because it is...light! I think the requirement for a removable lower rail to accomodate the M203 is bogus. Why compromise everyone's rifle just for a specialist's needs? I think the grenade launcher should be a stand-alone weapon anyway. Give the grenadier a supplementary Mk18 instead.
So...vets or M4A1 cloners, what say you?
You do know the RIS II free floats the M203 right? How does that compromise the rifle in any way? This is also not a Army thing, its a SOCOM thing. SOCOM uses the SOPMOD package, the Army does not.
The SOCOM barrel has also been in use by SOCOM in the M4A1 for a long long time.
wild_wild_wes
01-27-13, 00:15
You do know the RIS II free floats the M203 right? How does that compromise the rifle in any way? This is also not a Army thing, its a SOCOM thing. SOCOM uses the SOPMOD package, the Army does not.
The SOCOM barrel has also been in use by SOCOM in the M4A1 for a long long time.
I meant that requiring that all rifles be able to mount the M203 compromises their distinct individual mission. As I said, a handguard that does not need to have a removable lower rail is lighter, and simpler too.
The Army is moving to modify all its M4s to the SOCOM M4A1 configuration.
The SOCOM barrel is too thick for its role. The M4A1 is not unreasonably heavy; but it is needlessly heavy.
sinlessorrow
01-27-13, 00:40
I meant that requiring that all rifles be able to mount the M203 compromises their distinct individual mission. As I said, a handguard that does not need to have a removable lower rail is lighter, and simpler too.
The Army is moving to modify all its M4s to the SOCOM M4A1 configuration.
The SOCOM barrel is too thick for its role. The M4A1 is not unreasonably heavy; but it is needlessly heavy.
The main reason for upgrading to M4A1's is a few things.
1. It's easier, its in the system.
2. The FCG is far better than the M4's.
3. The barrel is a response to outrage by certain senators after Wanat and their poor fire discipline. A more rigid barrel will also hold MOA better during long firing sessions.
as to the RIS II I see no issue with it. I have had one before and it was not insanely heavy, its around 1lb which is alot but its mounting system is one of the best I have seen in a long time and it answered the need of SOCOM. Also did you see the other entrants for the RIS II??? The DD was the best option.
wild_wild_wes
01-27-13, 01:07
The main reason for upgrading to M4A1's is a few things.
1. It's easier, its in the system.
2. The FCG is far better than the M4's.
3. The barrel is a response to outrage by certain senators after Wanat and their poor fire discipline. A more rigid barrel will also hold MOA better during long firing sessions.
All that is true!
The first point you made in particular...
IZinterrogator
01-27-13, 06:24
I meant that requiring that all rifles be able to mount the M203 compromises their distinct individual mission. As I said, a handguard that does not need to have a removable lower rail is lighter, and simpler too.Your personally owned rifle may have a distinct individual mission; the Army's rifles do not. M203s get swapped frequently due to depot maintenance, reassignment of grenadiers, or lateral transfers between units. Making grenadier rifle configurations and standard rifle configurations instead of one configuration also hurts economies of scale in purchasing.
I had a SOCOM barreled upper with a 12" RIS II and it's ok, but it is heavy. With a buis, light, laser and a switch it's a nose-heavy beast.
I'd much rather carry a regular M4 with a 7" rail and nowhere to put my hand. The Block II gets really nose-heavy and clumsy after being shouldered for awhile.
Let us discuss the Army's latest version of the M4A1, with 12.5" RISII handguard and 14.5" heavy barrel.
I like it. I love that rail, and I'd Love to get me a SOCOM barrel.
wild_wild_wes
01-27-13, 08:21
I had a SOCOM barreled upper with a 12" RIS II and it's ok, but it is heavy. With a buis, light, laser and a switch it's a nose-heavy beast.
I'd much rather carry a regular M4 with a 7" rail and nowhere to put my hand. The Block II gets really nose-heavy and clumsy after being shouldered for awhile.
I had a build with a Centurion 16" midlength midweight barrel (which weighs about what the M4A1 barrel does) and RISII. As you say it was nose-heavy and clumsy.
My ideal configuration for general-purpose use is a 14.5" LW barrel with 9" rail. I find that gives me plenty of places to grip.
wild_wild_wes
01-27-13, 08:23
I like it. I love that rail, and I'd Love to get me a SOCOM barrel.
What do you love about the RISII?
I'm surprised the SOCOM barrel is not more available.
mastiffhound
01-27-13, 15:31
My brother who was in supply told me this about his Army experience:
1. No one is special unless they are of higher rank.
2. You get what everyone else gets unless number 1 is true.
3. Supplying everybody sucks, keeping track of everything sucks.
4. Any time you or those in charge can make things the same for most your job gets easier.
Some may not like so called improvements, but it makes things easier when it comes to outfitting everybody with gear. A lighter rail and a little lighter profile barrel would be nice I'm sure. How many companies have the manufacturing capabilities to fill an order for parts for every M4A1 or M16 that the Army has?
Commonality is your friend. My brother said he would have hated to have his job in WWII. 30-06, 30 carbine, .45 acp, ammo and enbloc clips, 30 carbine mags, 1911 mags, Thompson mags, grease gun mags and everything else would have been a big job. He was happier when he switched to driving trucks. My family wasn't, all you ever hear about is IED's. I remember the time between emails or phone calls was tuff. Man I miss my little brother. Anyways, this is what I can remember, which is less and less each day unfortunately.
jonconsiglio
01-27-13, 15:41
I have RIS II's on a couple of my rifles and really like that hand guard. It's extremely robust and not that heavy compared to many other options. Compare it to a Geissele SMR.
I don't care for the heavy barrel, but I would much prefer that to a lightweight for that kind of work. For LE or normal use, lightweight seems ok, but I'd still prefer the Noveske N4 or the Centurion mid weight. Which is two ounces lighter than a standard profile and two ounces heavier than a lightweight.
I can rip through a shoot house all day without issue using a 14.5 standard profile barrel and a RIS II. I've been in the field for a couple days at a time with this rifle and never had an issue. My times at the end of the day for first round hits (after shooting all day) are about the same between my Mk18 10.5" and my 14.5" with a RIS II.
After breaking a URX II, I prefer how solid the RIS II is and how well it handles abuse. The profile is perfect for me. If I do another 14.5" mid length, I might go with the centurion cutout, but just to try it, not because the RIS II is too heavy.
mkmckinley
01-27-13, 16:22
One thing I can say about the A1 barrel is that it's pretty accurate and consistent over a long string of fire. That might be a positive biproduct of the retarded idea that an M4 should be capable of sustained full auto rates of fire but its there nonetheless.
wild_wild_wes
01-27-13, 17:34
Does anyone have the exact weight of an M4A1?
The heavy barrel should have been left for specialists. It does help with long range accuracy but you still have to carry and point it.
Blaming Leg Army M4 Carbine Wanat failures on the weapon itself is pure and unadulterated HORSE SHIT. Leg Army M4s didn't even HAVE full-auto triggers. You're trying to tell me their carbine failures and melt-downs had to do with guys going cyclic, 3-rounds per burst until failure? Come on. We should have been able to see the stack of Hajji bodies from space then.
SF failures requiring the heavy barrel could also be pinned on some units doing double taps until their barrel got past the "Safe - Makes sense" rate to where the base steel changed. Other instances (doing the "Australian Peel" counter-ambush immediate action drill) several times over is also a deliberate individual weapon punishment.
RogerinTPA
01-27-13, 19:31
Once upon a time, I was considering this barrel as a future replacement, but couldn't justify the additional weight since I wasn't going to use it as a belt fed replacement.
Anyone know if the barrel on the BCM Standard 16" C8 SFW (Special Forces Weapon) Upper Receiver Group is the same medium contour as the SOCOM barrel?
Coal Dragger
01-27-13, 19:43
I have a civilian copy of this setup, a Colt LE6920 SOCOM II. I like the DD fore end quite a bit, and don't find the heavier barrel to be obnoxious at all, but I like long guns that are a bit muzzle heavy. Between the free floating of the barrel, and the heavier contour mine seems to shoot quite well.
I suppose if I had my druthers the barrel would be closer to a DD S2W contour.
I like it. I love that rail, and I'd Love to get me a SOCOM barrel.
I know that mine was a sample of one, but... It held 2MOA at 100yds the last time I shot it. It had right at 10K through it and had been cleaned once at around 5K. I never shot anything but decent FMJ and never did any mag dumps or anything idiotic with it.
Damn good barrel.
sinlessorrow
01-27-13, 20:37
Once upon a time, I was considering this barrel as a future replacement, but couldn't justify the additional weight since I wasn't going to use it as a belt fed replacement.
Anyone know if the barrel on the BCM Standard 16" C8 SFW (Special Forces Weapon) Upper Receiver Group is the same medium contour as the SOCOM barrel?
Im almost certain the L119A1 barrel is a M4 profile with the beefed up foreend to accept their L17A1
The heavy barrel should have been left for specialists. It does help with long range accuracy but you still have to carry and point it.
Blaming Leg Army M4 Carbine Wanat failures on the weapon itself is pure and unadulterated HORSE SHIT. Leg Army M4s didn't even HAVE full-auto triggers. You're trying to tell me their carbine failures and melt-downs had to do with guys going cyclic, 3-rounds per burst until failure? Come on. We should have been able to see the stack of Hajji bodies from space then.
SF failures requiring the heavy barrel could also be pinned on some units doing double taps until their barrel got past the "Safe - Makes sense" rate to where the base steel changed. Other instances (doing the "Australian Peel" counter-ambush immediate action drill) several times over is also a deliberate individual weapon punishment.
Make sense or not, Wanat set off a shit storm of epic proportions and they all focused on the M4 as the reason for those soldiers deaths. Also soldiers saying their barrels ran white hot didnt help.
After breaking a URX II, I prefer how solid the RIS II is and how well it handles abuse. The profile is perfect for me. If I do another 14.5" mid length, I might go with the centurion cutout, but just to try it, not because the RIS II is too heavy.
Off topic but Im curious on how you broke the URXII.
Ragincajun
01-28-13, 11:18
I have the RISI II and rifle length URXII and while the RISII weighs more it's a great rail. I like it. Had a 16" SOCOM profile barrel with a RISII once upon a time and it was great, slightly heavy, but very accurate. I like the RISII shape much more than the thin Lite Rail.
jonconsiglio
01-28-13, 11:42
Off topic but Im curious on how you broke the URXII.
Took a hard fall down some steps. Didn't realize there was any damage other than the broken front sight at first. Even after checking taking a close look at everything.
What had happened was the barrel nut somehow stripped. After then breaking a second URX II's front sight, I moved away from them. I am interested in the new URX rails though and think there's a steel barrel nut option.
Having said that, KAC has been great the few times I've needed them.
For now, it's DD and Centurion though, especially for a work rifle.
Magic_Salad0892
01-28-13, 15:26
Took a hard fall down some steps. Didn't realize there was any damage other than the broken front sight at first. Even after checking taking a close look at everything.
What had happened was the barrel nut somehow stripped. After then breaking a second URX II's front sight, I moved away from them. I am interested in the new URX rails though and think there's a steel barrel nut option.
Having said that, KAC has been great the few times I've needed them.
For now, it's DD and Centurion though, especially for a work rifle.
As much as I love KAC, and the URX rails, I have always hated the Aluminum barrel nut, and the flimsy front sight.
I'm glad they're moving away from that, and I find your observations spot on.
As to the general tone of this thread,
I actually feel really comfortable shooting the heavy SOCOM profile. Even in 14.5'' configuration. I've handled a 6920SOCOM that was outfitted with a DD RIS II rail, and it was really nose heavy as was mentioned.
I feel like it would be really good in a longer range role. But for general purpose work. The Gov't profile barrel should be fine.
... with the DD RIS II rail.
saddlerocker
01-28-13, 18:55
PSA has FN Hammer Forged 14.7" SOCOM barrels in stock.
Just a heads up to those looking (Markm)
http://palmettostatearmory.com/index.php/psa-14-7-hf-m4a1-5-56-1-7-barrel.html
I used to have a Colt M4a1 upper that I ran on my fullauto M16 lower. With an H2 buffer it was just an awesome rifle. Cyclic rate was subjectively perfect. It ran much smoother than my standard Colt M4 upper, Colt 6933 upper, and LMT 10.5 upper.
This is not scientific as I had a sample of one and all of this is completely subjective. I found it to be an awesome upper and regret selling it.
Recently got an email saying this was in stock:
BCM 14.5 SOCOM Barrel (http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/BCM-14-5-M4-Barrel-Stripped-SOCOM-p/bcm-brl-s-m4%20socom%2014%20std.htm)
My little brother just deployed with the 101st from Ft Campbell. His unit received new UPPERS in the M4A1 variant but have retained the same 3rd burst lowers. Why I have no idea but I can confirm this is true.
The barrel swap is handled on simple Modification Work Order (MWO). As an old gun comes in for checks, if the new ones are in stock it goes on.
Triggers will be the same once the Army writes the MWO for that and buys and stocks A1 triggers.
Make sense or not, Wanat set off a shit storm of epic proportions and they all focused on the M4 as the reason for those soldiers deaths. Also soldiers saying their barrels ran white hot didnt help.
Slightly off topic-
I am not going to say that there were no issues with the M4 at Wanat, but so much more was done, and not done, prior to the battle that it really doesn't make a shit if those guys there had M4A1-SOPMOD carbines or M1 Garands. There is a reason why that unit's command was found responsible (and not failure to enforce weapon maintenance procedure reasons). That COP should have never been there under those circumstances.
I am at work so I can't dig thru the google results to find the original 5 part blog I read about it, but this link does a good job of summarizing it.
http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2010-07/what-really-happened-wanat
EDIT- Actually the link above does a horrible job of summarizing it. Here is the link to the original 7 post Wanat series. Takes a lot of time but well worth the read IMO
http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/01/28/inside_an_afghan_battle_what_happened_at_wanat_last_july_i
Also, apparently the Letters of Reprimand that were given to the Company, Battalion, and Brigade Commanders were later rescinded once the unit left the CENTCOM AOR. The BN CDR later served as 75 RGR REGT DEP CDR. That is total bullshit.
Redbeardsong
02-12-13, 18:50
Daniel Defense has an M4A1 carbine I saw at Shot Show that is a distributor exclusive with Acusport. It's a pinned 14.5" with a 12" RISII rail. I don't know what the barrel profile is. I assume it's their govt profile. It was a nice setup! I really like the feel and look of the RISII rail better than the lite or Omega rails, but I like the new DDM4 rail best of all. The bottom of the RISII is closer to the barrel than the top. The DDM4 is the same, but smaller and lighter all around.
... I like the new DDM4 rail best of all. The bottom of the RISII is closer to the barrel than the top. The DDM4 is the same, but smaller and lighter all around.
Hell yes. I recently handled on of those new M4 rails and it's much slimmer/smaller in the hand. It's one of the nicest rails out there now. I don't see any reason for the lower rail profile on their other rails.
sinlessorrow
02-12-13, 19:54
Slightly off topic-
I am not going to say that there were no issues with the M4 at Wanat, but so much more was done, and not done, prior to the battle that it really doesn't make a shit if those guys there had M4A1-SOPMOD carbines or M1 Garands. There is a reason why that unit's command was found responsible (and not failure to enforce weapon maintenance procedure reasons). That COP should have never been there under those circumstances.
I am at work so I can't dig thru the google results to find the original 5 part blog I read about it, but this link does a good job of summarizing it.
http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2010-07/what-really-happened-wanat
EDIT- Actually the link above does a horrible job of summarizing it. Here is the link to the original 7 post Wanat series. Takes a lot of time but well worth the read IMO
http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/01/28/inside_an_afghan_battle_what_happened_at_wanat_last_july_i
Also, apparently the Letters of Reprimand that were given to the Company, Battalion, and Brigade Commanders were later rescinded once the unit left the CENTCOM AOR. The BN CDR later served as 75 RGR REGT DEP CDR. That is total bullshit.
Oh I have read all about Wanat, but it is one reason for the push for the SOCOM barrel for general Army, but there was so much wrong at Wanat that it is unreal, then again I always like to bring up Keating when I do Wanat since both were identical but Keating had a far different ending and some soldiers even fired more than 40 mags there with no problems.
I like the new DDM4 rail best of all.
What new DD M4 rail?
What new DD M4 rail?
Hope I don't get in trouble for this but here's a link to TOS with info on it: New DDM4 Rail (http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_2_382/220668_Daniel_Defense_releases_new_DDM4_Rail.html)
Not sure why they named it so similarly to their old M4 rail. Although I think I remember reading they were discontinuing the older one once they sell their remaining inventory.
It's a pretty nice rail. Pretty similar in profile to an LMT MRP upper.
I managed to get a new takeoff on the EE that I put on an upper with a 16" Centurion Midweight barrel.
As much as I like my SOCOM barrels, the overall feel and weight distribution of this upper seems better to me.
In comparison to my 14.5" Colt SOCOM/12" DD Lite upper.
http://i1237.photobucket.com/albums/ff469/nanners8390/016_zpse5656c60.jpg
16" Centurion Midweight upper mocked up with Aimpoint Pro from previous upper.
http://i1237.photobucket.com/albums/ff469/nanners8390/030-1_zps45be32b2.jpg
Hope I don't get in trouble for this but here's a link to TOS with info on it: New DDM4 Rail (http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_2_382/220668_Daniel_Defense_releases_new_DDM4_Rail.html)
Not sure why they named it so similarly to their old M4 rail. Although I think I remember reading they were discontinuing the older one once they sell their remaining inventory.
It's a pretty nice rail. Pretty similar in profile to an LMT MRP upper.
I managed to get a new takeoff on the EE that I put on an upper with a 16" Centurion Midweight barrel.
As much as I like my SOCOM barrels, the overall feel and weight distribution of this upper seems better to me.
Ok, there is a difference between a DDM4 rail, and a DDM4V1, they are two different rails.
I'm not sure why anyone is still selling large locking collar rails, they went the way of the Dodo years ago.
ETA- Why are we even talking about this in the M4A1 thread?
I'm not sure why anyone is still selling large locking collar rails, they went the way of the Dodo years ago.
So you think the new DD rail is obsolete?
thopkins22
02-13-13, 12:56
So you think the new DD rail is obsolete?
He's talking about the Daniel Defense M4 rail. Not what replaced the Omega X on the Daniel Defense rifles...which weirdly is called the DDM4 rail.
Things like the Daniel Defense M4 rail, the Larue rails, and so forth.
I could be wrong though....
He's talking about the Daniel Defense M4 rail. Not what replaced the Omega X on the Daniel Defense rifles...which weirdly is called the DDM4 rail.
Things like the Daniel Defense M4 rail, the Larue rails, and so forth.
I could be wrong though....
Oh ok, the kind with the round collar. Same as some of the Knight's rails too right?
What makes 'em obsolete? I thought it was a pretty stout mounting attachment?
The differences are minimal with this new M4A1 SOCOM. Accuracy is the same, weight is close, longer rail is better. They could do better, but they could do alot worse. I think it was fine as it was, and this didn't do much to change it.
sinlessorrow
02-13-13, 16:23
The differences are minimal with this new M4A1 SOCOM. Accuracy is the same, weight is close, longer rail is better. They could do better, but they could do alot worse. I think it was fine as it was, and this didn't do much to change it.
I think the DD RIS II as the best entrant in the running compared to the knights and ARMS entrants. There was also supposed to be a bolt upgrade but then the SCAR happened, it was detailed in some ndia slide.
That said I think the current SOCOM M4A1 is a great weapon.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.