PDA

View Full Version : US Ordnance modeM16M4 Carbine



smoothisfastmanila
12-12-10, 02:26
Hello everyone.

There is a lot of info re - Colt Mfg and FN Herstal supplying M4 carbines to the US military; however, I find it very hard to locate any readily available material leading to US Ordnance M4 Carbines (model M16M4) being issued to US Military. Am I correct to understand that US Ordnance M4 Carbines are not issued to US war fighters? If so, why? The US Ord Mk43 Mod 0 med. MG has a good reputation with US forces so why not put their M4s in the supply line too?

Your inputs are most welcome.

Thank you.

________

You are in the business because you are breathing. -- Louis Armstrong

markm
12-12-10, 09:14
FN has the 16 contract, and Colt has the M4 contract. Aftermarket companies can get DOD contractor business and foreign military business, but I don't think aftermarket companies can get US mil rifle business.

Never heard of US Ordnance. :confused:

Grumpy MSG
12-12-10, 09:23
The answer is contracts. Colt through whatever way, has managed to continue keep the M4 contract and is the sole provider of M4s and M4A1s. FN however does however make a lot of the M16A4s and the M16A2s before them. Congress has been doing a lot of pushing for the last several years and I wouldn't be surprised if that changes soon. Recently Colt won a contract to produce M240s, the better question is with US Ordinance being in the machinegun business, did they compete for the M240 contract?

RAM Engineer
12-12-10, 10:21
U.S. Ordnance is located just outside Reno in McCarran, NV USA. Since 1997, our corporation has built military small arms, machine guns and replacement parts. We sell NATO-sanctioned weapon systems, such as the M2HB, M2A2 (QCB system), M3, M48, M60E4, Mk43, M60D, M203, and the M4 Rifle systems, to U.S. governmental agencies and federally approved foreign leaderships and militaries.

Nowhere here does it say the US Military uses anything by these guys.

ghostman1960
12-12-10, 12:17
Never mind

bkb0000
12-12-10, 12:22
My first 14.5" BCM barrel was a darkish gray color with the markings stamped deep and neatly in one line across the barrel. My second 14.5" BCM barrel is black in color and the markings are in two rows across the top of the barrel and are very lightly stamped in a different font. The o in NATO is a square box for example. They do not line up in a straight line either.
Does this have any significance or is it just a different supplier that marks their barrels differently? I tried to get pics but the markings are so lightly stamped they cannot be seen in pictures. Not with my camera anyway.
I was just curious if anyone elses barrel is stamped this way. Thanks.
ETA the second barrel is a replacement barrel.

manufacturers change their stamping methods all the time. what does this question have to do with the OP?

ghostman1960
12-12-10, 12:25
manufacturers change their stamping methods all the time. what does this question have to do with the OP?

Sorry I messed up and thought I was starting a new thread after reading this one.

dewatters
12-13-10, 10:30
From what I've seen, US Ordnance has TACOM FMS contracts for non-standard M2 and M60/Mk43.

JChops
12-13-10, 13:49
From what I've seen, US Ordnance has TACOM FMS contracts for non-standard M2 and M60/Mk43.

This is correct info.

fdxpilot
12-13-10, 15:10
From what I've seen, US Ordnance has TACOM FMS contracts for non-standard M2 and M60/Mk43.

Just remember that in an FMS sale, the US military entity, in this case TACOM, is basically just administering the transfer. They are kind of like an FFL. They probably didn't have anything to do with selection of whatever weapons are being sold. That is strictly between the manufacturers and the buyer. It can be based on any number of factors, quality and function usually being low on the priority list behind price, kickbacks, and politics.

For instance, Bushmaster has sold thousands of ARs to third world countries through FMS sales, while having only 1 quickly cancelled contract with the actual US military.

smoothisfastmanila
12-15-10, 01:17
The answer is contracts. Colt through whatever way, has managed to continue keep the M4 contract and is the sole provider of M4s and M4A1s. FN however does however make a lot of the M16A4s and the M16A2s before them. Congress has been doing a lot of pushing for the last several years and I wouldn't be surprised if that changes soon. Recently Colt won a contract to produce M240s, the better question is with US Ordinance being in the machinegun business, did they compete for the M240 contract?

I'm with you there also. A bit OT here but the M240 is a formidable weapon design and in the hands of a decent gunner it will help any war fighter meet his end state.

_______

You are in the business because you are breathing. -- Louis Armstrong

smoothisfastmanila
12-15-10, 01:26
Just remember that in an FMS sale, the US military entity, in this case TACOM, is basically just administering the transfer. They are kind of like an FFL. They probably didn't have anything to do with selection of whatever weapons are being sold. That is strictly between the manufacturers and the buyer. It can be based on any number of factors, quality and function usually being low on the priority list behind price, kickbacks, and politics.

For instance, Bushmaster has sold thousands of ARs to third world countries through FMS sales, while having only 1 quickly cancelled contract with the actual US military.


You are right.

Its just odd why price, kickbacks, and politics drive the purchase or sale of a defense item and not often quality and function when all of us here are in the business of saving lives. The last two (i.e. quality and function) often assists to the success of servicemen in harm's way.

________

You are in the business because you are breathing. -- Louis Armstrong

dewatters
12-17-10, 11:58
Just remember that in an FMS sale, the US military entity, in this case TACOM, is basically just administering the transfer. They are kind of like an FFL. They probably didn't have anything to do with selection of whatever weapons are being sold. That is strictly between the manufacturers and the buyer. It can be based on any number of factors, quality and function usually being low on the priority list behind price, kickbacks, and politics.

For instance, Bushmaster has sold thousands of ARs to third world countries through FMS sales, while having only 1 quickly cancelled contract with the actual US military.

Yep, a prime example is when the Omanis ordered Carbon 15 via FMS.