Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 50

Thread: Colt M4 Carbine's Future Uncertain: Dark Clouds Forming

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    27,214
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    I tend to agree with rob_s on both rankings.

    At almost every class I attend, the instructors will point out that Cops in general, can't shoot worth a shit. These comments come form the L.E. instructors themselves.

    I've been in classes where the instructors are almost gleeful at the effort put forth by students who actually want to be there!

    I'm not crapping on Cops or Soldiers at all. I worship them both! But it is what it is!
    "You people have too much time on your hands." - scottryan

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    UT
    Posts
    4,596
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    I would have been happy to see their office burned to the ground that day. The CEO at SIG got a call from Sauer gleefully blaming him for losing this huge contract that he'd never heard of. He in turn ripped my boss, the VP for Gov/Mil sales, a new hole. My boss in turn called me and read me the riot act for being ignorant of this huge sale. I was at the Crimson Trace Master Trainer Summit at the time, and had to bow out of some of the activities while I gathered "proof" that no such sale occurred.

    Dont you just love days like that
    Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
    What Happened to the American dream? It came true. You're looking at it.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,827
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by rob_s View Post
    I guess I only come in contact with the ones that can't shoot.
    Maybe that is why they are at the class?

    Very few soldiers are actual trigger pullers, and few cops are. Sure it is an important skill, but if it is not the skill you use most of the time at your job, you will most likely not be very good at it.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SE FL
    Posts
    14,148
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    Maybe that is why they are at the class?

    Very few soldiers are actual trigger pullers, and few cops are. Sure it is an important skill, but if it is not the skill you use most of the time at your job, you will most likely not be very good at it.
    Oh, I agree completely.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,239
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    "The M4's trigger is lousy and not condusive to good marksmanship. The M4A1 is a much smarter idea and its trigger is far superior. If you don't believe me, ask members of the U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (AWG). Don't take my word for it."

    Any chance we could get a comment on this? Ive never fired an m4 with three round burst so i wouldnt have any idea what the trigger pull or firing experience is like.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    27,214
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    Very few soldiers are actual trigger pullers, and few cops are. Sure it is an important skill, but if it is not the skill you use most of the time at your job, you will most likely not be very good at it.
    Reminds me of my original CCW qual many years ago. There was a lady next to my for the shoot portion. In AZ there's no time limit and the qual is very forgiving and short range. And quite frankly, many people there don't do much shooting so they're pretty iffy in the marksmanship department.

    Anyway... I shot a nice little group... being a shooting fanatic an all.... and the old lady next to me told me says... "YOU SHOULD BE A COP!" As though that was all I'd need to be a Cop... good shooting skills!
    "You people have too much time on your hands." - scottryan

  7. #27
    Dano5326 Guest
    "Defense Review" aka David Crane is an ill informed self important tool with delusions about his relevance. Anything spewing from that gutter is of no import.

    Burst trigger groups suck.. different pull each time.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,239
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    I was under the impression that was by design so that you could pop off two rounds instead of three if you have a steady finger.

    Again, bare in mind that i have NO experience with burst triggers or automatic weapons so i probably shouldnt even be opening my mouth here.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by defrev View Post
    Thekatar, three questions:

    3) Are you one of the owners of M4Carbine.net, or just a moderator?
    Yes he is.



    C4

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    20
    Feedback Score
    0
    Thekatar, thank you for responding so quickly to my post. I appreciate it.

    However, again, do you have any specific beef with my article that was reprinted at the beginning of this thread? Did you find something erroneous in it?

    Regarding your "tabloid" assessment, our reporting accuracy and content/information are as solid as anyone's, and better than most. We're also often the first to a story. Just one example (and a relatively recent example at that) is our piece on 5.56 Optimized/Brown-Tip ammo here:


    Another article that, according to one of our sources, caused a minor shock wave in Army circles (again, due to its detail and accuracy) is this piece:

    http://www.defensereview.com/modules...ticle&sid=1111 -- HK416 Carbine/SBR Confiscation Program Unleashed on U.S. Army AWG

    Those are just two examples.

    Just FYI, we "typically" sit on/withhold sensitive information all the time for OPSEC. Believe me when I tell you that many of our articles would be even more interesting if we included all the info to which we're privy, but that would violate OPSEC.

    Since I have some free time this morning (I'm on a short vacation), I'll try to address your specific examples/concerns:

    1) The .45 GAP/Marine Corps thing is ancient history and really tired. That happened over four years ago, now, and is the only mistake we've (and specifically, I've) ever made of that type. When we realized we'd been duped (which is what happened), we immediately retracted the story, immediately publicly apologized to our readers, and instituted new protocols to prevent a recurrence of that type of error. And we haven't made the same or a similar mistake since that incident. To date, that's the only retraction DefenseReview has ever had to print in 7 years of publishing, and we plan to keep it that way. Very simply, we made a mistake, and adapted accordingly so as not to repeat that mistake--and we haven't repeated it since. What more would you have us do on that? Seriously, what would you do?

    Let me ask you, have you ever screwed up in your life, Thekatar? Did you take the appropriate action to immediately correct it and prevent it from recurring? Has the injured party forgiven you for it? I certainly hope so. None of us are perfect, man. I'm certainly not. I'm always learning, and have tried to learn from my mistakes so as not to repeat them.

    2) EVERY professional assaulter/operator who's tested Le Mas ammo, or seen it tested in person, to a man, attests to its performance on target (live targets and steel plates) and their belief in its terminal ballistic capabilities--and I'm talking about some pretty heavy duty people with SF and/or Special Operations backgrounds, people who are very highly respected in the community and personal contacts of mine, with no financial ties to LeMas. They swear by the ammo's performance, and I believe them when they say it works as advertised.

    3) I don't remember second-guessing Gary Roberts' (DocGKR) knowledge of terminal ballistics, particularly as it relates to ballistic gelatin testing. On the contrary, I find him to be quite knowledgeable, intelligent, and good at what he does. He seems like a very capable professional to me. In fact, I don't have any issue with the substance of his arguments regarding bullet composition, metallurgy, etc. For all I know, his research and test methods are all rock-solid and beyond reproach. However, most if not all of his terminal ballistic performance testing on Le Mas ammo, to my knowledge, has been conducted using ballistic gelatin.

    LeMas, on the other hand, has on multiple occasions performed live animal testing in front of professional observers, including SF, Special Operations, and medical/surgical personnel. Everyone I've ever spoken with who has attended these tests has told me that the ammo does exactly what Le Mas claims it does, and that they've witnessed it with their own eyes. Again, these are professional trigger pullers.

    So, I guess what I question is the viability of ballistic gelatin as a test medium for Le Mas ammo, and its relevance considering Le Mas ammo's established terminal ballistic performance on live animals. It seems to me that the two sides (anti-Le Mas and pro-Le Mas crowds) are talking past each other.

    As it happens, Dr. Roberts and I have had an amicable professional relationship for the last few years, and have spoken by phone and written via email to each other on numerous occasions in that time. Sometimes he's called or written me about something, and sometimes I've called or written him him about something. By the way, I just saw Gary at NDIA Small Arms Systems Symposium in Dallas where he gave a presentation. He did a nice job.

    Bottom line, I've got no problem whatsoever with Gary professionally or personally and I respect him and his work.

    4) With regard to Dragon Skin, let's just say that if I were you, I'd be a little more circumspect about the so-called "evidence" the Army presented in its case against Dragon Skin. I would direct you to this article:

    http://www.defensereview.com/modules...ticle&sid=1140 -- Army Acquisition Capos Fraudulently Alter Body Armor Test Results

    The fact is, the Army issued an SOUM on Level IV Dragon Skin before they even conducted the FAT (First Article Testing), and, from numerous accounts they didn't conduct the FAT fairly. The Army (PEO Soldier/U.S. Army Natick) controlled that test, it was a closed test, and there were some shenanigans that went on. It would appear that there were also some aspects of the Army's post-test presentation to the public and Congress that may have been less than truthful.

    DefenseReview and MANY others want fair, independent and open testing with government and/or civilian oversight (non-Army oversight).

    And, by the way, Level III Dragon Skin passed all NIJ testing and achieved NIJ Level III certification before the Army pressured DOJ/NIJ to subsequently pull the certification in unprecedented fashion for a bullshit warranty issue that they invented specifically for Pinnacle Armor. As far as I'm aware, to date, DOJ/NIJ still refuses to re-issue the Level III certification with no explanation, even though Pinnacle Armor subsequently--and pretty quickly--proved that their Level III Dragon Skin vests indeed meet the 6-year warranty requirement. Basically, it appears that they're following the Army's marching orders.

    One more thing: it appears that the Army is also behind the Air Force's debarment of Pinnacle Armor. Basically, the Army's punishing Murray Neal for his insolence (causing the Army unwanted scrutiny and public embarrassment). Basically, they want to crush Pinnacle, i.e. put them out of business and thus make an example out of them. In my opinion, Pinnacle Armor has a classic restraint of trade case against the Army, provided they can hold out long enough and retain and mount a proper civil lawsuit.

    Now, having written the above, IMO, Mr. Neal didn't handle that whole thing perfectly, to say the least. In hindsight, there was probably a smarter and more diplomatic way for him to deal with Big Green--but that doesn't make the Army right in what they did (SOUM, testing, and subsequent punishment--debarment, decertification, etc.).

    Bottom line, there's a whole back story to the Pinnacle Armor vs. U.S. Army situatation about which you may not be quite as well informed as you perhaps think.

    Thekatar, I hope the above addresses your concerns to some degree, and, in the future, Defense Review will do its best to live up to your obviously very high publishing and quality standards. We certainly appreciate your feedback, and welcome any assistance you can provide in this endeavor.

    Sincerely,

    David Crane
    Owner/Editor-in-Chief
    DefenseReview.com
    defrev@gmail.com
    http://www.defensereview.com
    Last edited by STAFF; 07-15-08 at 16:50. Reason: Items removed because of inaccuracies Staff

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •