Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Interesting analysis of the M14 from Congressional Research Service dtd 2010

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Location
    Cradle of the Confederacy
    Posts
    240
    Feedback Score
    0

    Interesting analysis of the M14 from Congressional Research Service dtd 2010

    https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a524245.pdf M4 Carbine background and issues.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,522
    Feedback Score
    2 (75%)
    And here we are 10 years later still primarily running M4s...
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaykayyy
    And to the guys whining about spending more on training, and relying less on the hardware, you just sound like your [sic] trying to make yourself feel superior.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Lowcountry, SC.
    Posts
    6,232
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)
    On the subject of Soldiers wanting better weapons and bigger bullets: Most are not engineers or ballisticians. Honestly, I feel like if I rounded up 30 Soldiers sourced randomly from the entire US Army, locked them in a room, and told them to have candid discussion about rifles, it would be less productive than a quick glance at TOS.

    Most are not even professional shooters; they have a rifle for the same reason you have a CWP. The vast majority have never, and will never fire a live round outside a very basic and unrealistic training range, unless the have a ND. When shooting at humans, statistically, most rounds miss and sometimes these misses, or marginal hits, get confused with poor lethality. Bad mags get used for training (all the effing time), or worse yet, issued. Due to all of the above, and because Snuffy likes to talk, rumors and legends get circulated and inflated, eroding some Soldiers’ confidence in their weapon.

    Some of the concerns in the article were legitimate, at one time, and as noted, were more likely to be a problem for SOF than Big Army, due to actually having ammo to burn, and suppressors. The M4 and its ammo have improved over its lifetime, resulting in improved reliability, usability, and lethality.

    The article also mentioned 75RR testing the SCAR-L, and maybe deploying with them. A portion of 75RR did test that weapon for a training cycle and a combat deployment. The only useful thing to know about this is that they kept their M4A1s after that.
    RLTW

    “What’s New” button, but without GD: https://www.m4carbine.net/search.php...new&exclude=60 , courtesy of ST911.

    Disclosure: I am affiliated PRN with a tactical training center, but I speak only for myself. I have no idea what we sell, other than CLP and training. I receive no income from sale of hard goods.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,279
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)
    After 57 years of PIP's it's going to take some doing to come up with a rifle that's a big enough improvement to warrant replacing other than a caliber change. Its been tried before many times and the M4 is still standing, we will have to wait and see if the push for 6.8 turns into something useful or just another dud.
    “The Trump Doctrine is ‘We’re America, Bitch.’ That’s the Trump Doctrine.”

    "He is free to evade reality, he is free to unfocus his mind and stumble blindly down any road he pleases, but not free to avoid the abyss he refuses to see."

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Location
    Cradle of the Confederacy
    Posts
    240
    Feedback Score
    0
    FWIW I was told by the guy that trained me that the staging time to convert to a new caliber was five years AFTER THEY DECIDED IT WAS A GO. I seem to remember they started talking 6.8 maybe ten years ago?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    581
    Feedback Score
    10 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by 1168 View Post
    On the subject of Soldiers wanting better weapons and bigger bullets: Most are not engineers or ballisticians. Honestly, I feel like if I rounded up 30 Soldiers sourced randomly from the entire US Army, locked them in a room, and told them to have candid discussion about rifles, it would be less productive than a quick glance at TOS.

    Most are not even professional shooters; they have a rifle for the same reason you have a CWP. The vast majority have never, and will never fire a live round outside a very basic and unrealistic training range, unless the have a ND. When shooting at humans, statistically, most rounds miss and sometimes these misses, or marginal hits, get confused with poor lethality. Bad mags get used for training (all the effing time), or worse yet, issued. Due to all of the above, and because Snuffy likes to talk, rumors and legends get circulated and inflated, eroding some Soldiers’ confidence in their weapon.

    Some of the concerns in the article were legitimate, at one time, and as noted, were more likely to be a problem for SOF than Big Army, due to actually having ammo to burn, and suppressors. The M4 and its ammo have improved over its lifetime, resulting in improved reliability, usability, and lethality.

    The article also mentioned 75RR testing the SCAR-L, and maybe deploying with them. A portion of 75RR did test that weapon for a training cycle and a combat deployment. The only useful thing to know about this is that they kept their M4A1s after that.
    I second this opinion, especially the first paragraph. Well said.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,308
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    It’s like back when they complained about .30 carbine lethality in the Korean War, when the problem was people were just not making hits.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Location
    Cradle of the Confederacy
    Posts
    240
    Feedback Score
    0
    Did you hear about the 30 carbines blowing up in Korea?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Patron State of Shooting
    Posts
    4,396
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Humpy70 View Post
    Did you hear about the 30 carbines blowing up in Korea?
    What happened?
    The obedient always think of themselves as virtuous rather than the cowards they really are.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Location
    Cradle of the Confederacy
    Posts
    240
    Feedback Score
    0
    Carbines are notorious for bolt cracking at the locking lug interface.



    Note the hairline crack running from locking lug interface to 4:00 o'clock on the bottom of the extractor.



    Same bolt photographed from above. Note top of crack running from 3:00 on extractor straight across.



    This problem is documented in Army TM. There is no mention of deaths from this in Army Ordnance archives and is only known there were because the guy that trained me had a brother in infantry in Korea and after one attack he helped put at least 15 bodies in bodybags with bolt lug parts in-bedded in their foreheads.

    When I was at the Fed Law Enf Tng Center a carbine bolt let go and Bureau of Prison's student got the extractor in forehead but it did not kill him. I was tasked with the failure analysis on that incident and got a commendation letter from the Director of Training.

    Whatever you do if you are reloading don't approach max loads for the Carbine.
    Last edited by Humpy70; 03-10-20 at 08:38.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •