View Full Version : US Army's M4 options
Looks like a whole lot of folks are interested in this one:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/11/army_carbineday_112308w/
Very cool - I missed the photos the first time I read that.
Littlelebowski
11-25-08, 16:09
I wonder if the XCR is there. Pretty interesting about S&W's choice. This is going to be one interesting test. Wish I could go see the rifles; I'm right down the road.
Nice mag in that Colt...
;) :cool:
I wonder if the XCR is there. Pretty interesting about S&W's choice. This is going to be one interesting test. Wish I could go see the rifles; I'm right down the road.
Yep.....it looks like they submitted their version also.
If you click on the media link in the second paragraph, it shows you a few of the submissions.
Jay Cunningham
11-25-08, 16:36
http://www.militarytimes.com/multimedia/photo/replacing_the_m4/
Sort of neat.
AirmanAtwood
11-25-08, 16:50
Only 4 of them had pmags.....those other companies are a little slow eh?
what's with the superior arms sp1 clone in there:confused:
Jay Cunningham
11-25-08, 17:35
what's with the superior arms sp1 clone in there:confused:
That IS bizarre...
BushmasterFanBoy
11-25-08, 17:53
;) :cool:
I'd be happy to see you guys take 'em to task for that. I'd hate to see Colt try to edge you guys out with their platform and using your mags as part of it.:mad:
I'd be happy to see you guys take 'em to task for that. I'd hate to see Colt try to edge you guys out with their platform and using your mags as part of it.:mad:
Hey, either way, it's a contract.
I'd be happy to see you guys take 'em to task for that. I'd hate to see Colt try to edge you guys out with their platform and using your mags as part of it.:mad:
We're happy to have our gear on the guns, even if they might technically be "competition". As long as the winner is chosen based on their product's performance instead of politics, I'm happy. This should be very interesting...
I wish that SIG 556 Classic was what we got instead of that tapco f*cked Ar wannna be! Thats a NICE looking rifle!
I wish that SIG 556 Classic was what we got instead of that tapco f*cked Ar wannna be! Thats a NICE looking rifle!
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
HEY! What's the matter with you!?
Don't you think our forces need good looking, sexy rifles???:D
But there was also an undercurrent of skepticism by many small-company officials who wondered if the Army’s process would treat them fairly and not favor larger small-arms companies the service has dealt with in the past, said several individuals who asked not to be identified for fear of retribution.
When asked about this concern, PEO soldier commander Brig. Gen. Peter Fuller said “it’s better to be fair like this through the whole process. We are going to have another industry day; we have the big guys, but we want to see more small guys because small guys can come up with these great new and innovative ways to deal with things.”
Meaning:
"We will see all the great stuff the smaller companies offer, then have the big, in-bed company(ies) copy it, then give them the contract."
:rolleyes:
HEY! What's the matter with you!?
Don't you think our forces need good looking, sexy rifles???:D
Im refering to SIGs CIVILIAN release of the 556 seperate of military service and my personal preferences, nothing more! So save the sarcasm! :rolleyes:
http://www.militarytimes.com/multimedia/photo/replacing_the_m4/
Thanks for posting that, Katar. I am wondering why Colt hasn't entered their piston.
MisterWilson
11-25-08, 23:35
Thanks for posting that, Katar. I am wondering why Colt hasn't entered their piston.
I'd wager that they saw no significant advantage of the piston system over the DI.
variablebinary
11-26-08, 00:09
Yep.....it looks like they submitted their version also.
If you click on the media link in the second paragraph, it shows you a few of the submissions.
I only wish Robarm sold it in FDE like in that pic, because that is damn cool looking.
It's good to see American arms makers in their swinging however, and actually doing a damn good job of being competitive without the deep pockets associated with FN and HK
Isn't kac sorta... "it"?
Also, how much interest does magpul have in the ACR anymore? Is it purely bushmasters property now? Just curious. Not sure if the deal's particulars were ever made public. :confused:
My only wish is that the test isn't conducted as gay as the others. I truly want to see the weapons being used by personnel who have used them and not some POGUE who drives a cubicle.
The weapon should be evaluated on everything from its' function failure rate (or lack thereof) and the amount and ease of maintenance. This thing will probably turn into another political handjob to make someone feel good.
Thanks for posting that, Katar. I am wondering why Colt hasn't entered their piston.
Found this quote in the article..."Colt officials declined to be interviewed by Army Times at the event. The company had more than a dozen weapons on display, including an “advanced” line with both direct gas system and piston-driven gas systems."
So Colt did show its piston rifle. My thought is that of the rifles shown in the link for pictures, no LMT MRP upper rifle is pictured??? Maybe, they didn't have a picture or just didn't mention it. I really like the LWRC PDW 8" 6.8 though!!!!!:D:cool:
As much as I love the AR, it's ridiculous to only see a few weapons that are not in the AR category.
Even Sig isn't going anything new, Hk just added a piston.
It would be nice to see a few more completely new designs.
I'd love to see that 1" barrel on the SCAR.;)
decodeddiesel
11-26-08, 14:45
some of the entries look like a joke. I think the key players here are Colt, Bushmaster/Remington/Magpul/Cerebus, HK, FN, and maybe LWRC.
Submariner
11-26-08, 16:23
From where will the money come to do this?
Are there enough congresscritters who will benefit from a new service rifle?
Jay Cunningham
11-26-08, 16:34
From where will the money come to do this?
Are there enough congresscritters who will benefit from a new service rifle?
Maybe Colt will get a bailout!!
You do see PMAG's in KAC's online cataloge...
I was hoping to see an "upsized" KAC PDW in 5.56mm and 6.8 entered.
I would tend to think that most of the 5.56mm M16FOW systems would enter the gun with PMAG's as its a no brainer to increase the system's weak link (the mag).
I was surprised that VLTOR and Daniel Defense did not submit entries.
I feel adopting a new weapon based off of current ammunition would be a waste. If the new rifle can not be lighter, more reliable , and have increased lethality/hit probability at shorter and or longer range replacing the M4 would not be justified. You will not find info on what many companies proposed "out on the web".
I feel adopting a new weapon based off of current ammunition would be a waste. If the new rifle can not be lighter, more reliable , and have increased lethality/hit probability at shorter and or longer range replacing the M4 would not be justified. You will not find info on what many companies proposed "out on the web".
Thanks for your input!!!!!!!!! Your unique knowledge is extremely valuable in this particular thread and I for one am glad you made it on to give some in site. I too agree that a better cartridge/weapon system should be adapted, if not, at least a better choice for cartridge. I won't get into the who's is better contest as I won't have a say anyway:), but, if the decision is to keep the M4 lower and just replace the uppers, there are several good choices out there.
"You will not find info on what many companies proposed "out on the web"." is a particularly good morsel of information. Are you free to 'help' us poor internet users as to what some manufacturers are showing up with???
Thanks again for your input.
Kelly
I'll say what I always say when I see the comments by politicians about weapons and gear for the military...
Where were they 10 or 15 years ago, when I couldn't get 7 magazines and cleaning kits for my men. Now, they are all high and mighty about getting "our boys" the best, please.
Having said that, at least its happening. Even though I don't necessarily think the M16fow is the pos some people would have you believe, and know many recent combat vets, who are more then happy with both the M4 and the 5.56.
I'll agree with III, though, if we are going to switch, lets do it right. Identify our needs, research the best solution, and implement it. If its just another 5.56 carbine, it may not be worth the effort. We should address specific shortcomings in the round and platform, all of them. That would most likely call for an entirely new platform and cartridge.
Bob
I'll agree with III, though, if we are going to switch, lets do it right. Identify our needs, research the best solution, and implement it. If its just another 5.56 carbine, it may not be worth the effort. We should address specific shortcomings in the round and platform, all of them. That would most likely call for an entirely new platform and cartridge.
A new platform sure, but a new round?
As a side note, I'm really surprised the XCR isn't entering the competition. I feel it would be exactly what the Army wants.
As a side note, I'm really surprised the XCR isn't entering the competition. I feel it would be exactly what the Army wants.
The XCR is there: http://www.militarytimes.com/multimedia/photo/replacing_the_m4/
Why do you think it's exactly what the Army wants? The Army doesn't even know what it wants...
The XCR is there: http://www.militarytimes.com/multimedia/photo/replacing_the_m4/
Why do you think it's exactly what the Army wants? The Army doesn't even know what it wants...
lol. Great minds..... yadayadayada.
The XCR is there: http://www.militarytimes.com/multime...lacing_the_m4/
Why do you think it's exactly what the Army wants? The Army doesn't even know what it wants...
ahh, how could I have missed it.
I'll give it a go and say the Army wants a new design that fixes every problem the M16 platform has ever had and then some.
When I look at the XCR, I see a rifle whose manual of arms hardly change from the M16, maybe even considered better. The operating system is more than you could ever want. It has more rails than New York subway lines. It's also very modular like the AR. What's there to lose?
What's there to lose?
Accuracy and reliability ;)
Accuracy and reliability
What was the accepted MOA from a US infantry rifle? Like 4 moa maximum accepted? We know the XCR isn't anywhere near 4moa. This is an assault rifle they are considering replacing anyway, not a precision marksman rifle.
Reliability? You're saying the AK system in which Robinson Armament has carried over to their rifle has reliability issues? You have to go further and tell me what's going on.
variablebinary
11-27-08, 00:24
What was the accepted MOA from a US infantry rifle? Like 4 moa maximum accepted? We know the XCR isn't anywhere near 4moa. This is an assault rifle they are considering replacing anyway, not a precision marksman rifle.
Reliability? You're saying the AK system in which Robinson Armament has carried over to their rifle has reliability issues? You have to go further and tell me what's going on.
The XCR has plenty of accuracy. General consensus among experienced XCR shooters, myself included is 1.5 MOA at 100 yards.
Reliability has been solid. The Gen 1 models, circa 2006 had hiccups, but the Gen 2 models, which were introduced in early 2007 had some great enhancements to the gas system, firing pin design and new QC methods to ensure reliable operation. Durability is a given. If you've ever seen the internals of an XCR, you know you'll need a sledgehammer to literally break something. All XCR's shipped now are Gen 2 models.
XCR experience on this forum is very slim, with only of handful of people, myself included, who actually know the platform well enough to have a lucid opinion. I would recommend visiting XCRforum.com for additional input. It's not a fanboy hangout either. You'll actually find objectivity there.
I am on my 2nd XCR. I wrote a great deal about it in this thread http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=15115&highlight=Robinson
Charles Daly
11-27-08, 00:49
Not all of the "little guys" have been heard from yet! I would expect to see several more entries at the next stage of this process.
I know of at least one other company that will be submitting several designs, both DI and piston, for the Army's consideration. ;)
Not all of the "little guys" have been heard from yet! I would expect to see several more entries at the next stage of this process.
I know of at least one other company that will be submitting several designs, both DI and piston, for the Army's consideration. ;)
where you been? :D good to see you.
LibertyCola
11-27-08, 03:24
Not all of the "little guys" have been heard from yet! I would expect to see several more entries at the next stage of this process.
I know of at least one other company that will be submitting several designs, both DI and piston, for the Army's consideration. ;)
GOOD! I was worried for a second when I saw no Hesse entry, it's the gun of the special forces for gods sake!
SinnFéinM1911
11-27-08, 14:14
Don’t get all your panties into a bunch. All this is, is a "Sources Sought' nothing more. IF a draft requirement will come out, you prb won see that for at least 18 months to 2 + years.
This will be a long long process, and I’m sure fill with many congressional complaints with companies that believe they get bounced for no reason.
This will be a long long process, and I’m sure fill with many congressional complaints with companies that believe they get bounced for no reason.
Good, so there will be plenty of SCAR's (L & H) out on the Civ. market correct??? ;)
This is the first step toward a carbine competition the Army intends to open next year after Colt Defense LLC, the company that makes the M4, turns over the weapon’s technical data rights in June 2009. When that happens, the Army will have the opportunity to make major improvements to the M4 or buy a new carbine.
Soooo....what does this mean for Colt's LE guns such as the 6920 in terms of conforming to mil-specs? Will this change anything?
Razorhunter
11-27-08, 19:02
Did anyone notice that Katars link with all the pics lists the KAC SR15 IWS rifle as being "gas piston" and they also show the Troy gun as a "piston" gun.
Is this correct, or probably a typo???
Soooo....what does this mean for Colt's LE guns such as the 6920 in terms of conforming to mil-specs? Will this change anything?
Nothing -- what it means is that DoD can put M4 contracts to bid, as they will own the TDP, Colt will no longer with the sole source provider.
Guys,
Maybe you guys don't find this shocking, but I do. I lifted this text right from the link that started this thread.
"For more than a year, the M4 has been the subject of increased scrutiny by lawmakers on Capitol Hill concerned about whether soldiers have the best available weapon.
In late November of last year, the weapon finished last in an Army reliability test against other carbines. The M4 suffered more stoppages than the combined number of jams by the other three competitors: the Heckler & Koch XM8; FNH USA’s Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle, or SCAR; and the H&K 416."
I had no idea.
Razorhunter
11-29-08, 13:13
It's not that shocking at all really. For one, it's OLD news, and tests like that have been done since WAY back.
And secondly, it's fairly common knowledge that these two piston guns (the SCAR and 416) will CERTAINLY outlast a regular Direct Impingement system!
The only thing any M4 owner needs to do, to make their DI M4 run reliably longer, is KEEP IT LUBED! (which the Army trials did not do during the firing, as their test was to remain fair, and keep things equal)
OF course the piston guns run longer! They don't blow carbon gases back into the chamber like the DI guns do!
The SCAR was designed with this purpose in mind. It was designed to be MORE RELIABLE than the M4.
It's not that shocking at all really. For one, it's OLD news, and tests like that have been done since WAY back.
And secondly, it's fairly common knowledge that these two piston guns (the SCAR and 416) will CERTAINLY outlast a regular Direct Impingement system!
The only thing any M4 owner needs to do, to make their DI M4 run reliably longer, is KEEP IT LUBED! (which the Army trials did not do during the firing, as their test was to remain fair, and keep things equal)
OF course the piston guns run longer! They don't blow carbon gases back into the chamber like the DI guns do!
The SCAR was designed with this purpose in mind. It was designed to be MORE RELIABLE than the M4.
Heretic. ;)
RAM Engineer
11-29-08, 22:25
Guys,
Maybe you guys don't find this shocking, but I do. I lifted this text right from the link that started this thread.
Shocked as in "Casablanca" shocked or more like a "I haven't kept up with the news for the last year and I'm the last person to find out" shocked?
Captain Renault: I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!
[a croupier hands Renault a pile of money]
Croupier: Your winnings, sir.
Captain Renault: [sotto voce] Oh, thank you very much.
Shocked as in "Casablanca" shocked or more like a "I haven't kept up with the news for the last year and I'm the last person to find out" shocked?
I guess sort of, well, regular shocked.
I try to live in a media vacuum. My only rifle info comes from this site and TOS. Because of that, I have come to believe that my Colts are the nastiest sons o' bitches out there.
Now this?!
;)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.