Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 58

Thread: Why do folks like the M4 barrel profile?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    1,156
    Feedback Score
    238 (100%)
    What is sad, my LWRC 16" upper does not have one and it almost seems wrong. We are so used to the M4 profile it seems the norm.
    Glocks are functional tools and nothing else, hence they have no soul - Rob S.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Deep South Texas
    Posts
    2,521
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by C4IGrant View Post
    Govt profile is about the same weight without that goofy step in it (which does not help accuracy in ANY way).

    C4

    Grant,

    Is the excessive machining (goofy step) the cause of accuracy detioration of the m4 profile??

    I know the extreme short range accuracy guys used to detest any turning of the exterrior bbl blanks as it could cause warping or memory issues...as I remember it.
    "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass."
    Japanese Admiral Yamamoto, 1941




    "A wise man's heart directs him toward the right, but a foolish man's heart directs him toward the left."
    Ecclesiastes 10:2:

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,770
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Beat Trash View Post
    The first three of the four years I spent in the Marine Corps were with M16A1's. My first AR15 after getting out was a Colt SP1 (Think M16A1 w/o the full auto and forward assist.) Both had what would now be called pencil barrels.

    We were told the reason for going to a larger diameter barrel on the M16A2 was because barrels were being bent behind the front sight base by individuals using their M16A1's with bayonet attached to pry open packing crates. Of course we were told this only happened in the Army, as a Marine would never do something as stupid with their rifle...

    I do not know if this is true, but yes, I could easily see this being an issue...
    Hmm funny I was told in the Army we swapped over to the A2 because the Marines kept complaining they didn't have the M-14 Thats why the A2 got target sights, extra long butt stock and a heavier barrel so the Marine Corp could shoot there bulls eye paper targets.
    Last edited by Thomas M-4; 10-08-09 at 16:04.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    5,795
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas M-4 View Post
    Hmm funny I was told in the Army we swapped over to the A2 because the Marine's kept complaining they didn't have the M-14 Thats why the A2 got target sights, extra long butt stock and a heavier barrel so the Marine Corp cold shoot there bulls eye paper targets.
    That's what we were told in the 82d when we swapped out our A1s for A2s. To be compatible with the other ground forces (Marines) and they were too concerned about better ergros and better accuracy for punching paper for rifle matches.
    For God and the soldier we adore, In time of danger, not before! The danger passed, and all things righted, God is forgotten and the soldier slighted." - Rudyard Kipling

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    171
    Feedback Score
    0
    Because it looks cool.
    Last edited by Killjoy; 10-07-09 at 21:59.
    The opinions expressed on this board are mine and mine alone. They do not represent any departments or organizations I may be a member of.


    "Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions." - ILN, 4/19/30

    "He is a very shallow critic who cannot see an eternal rebel in the heart of a conservative." - Varied Types

    G.K. Chesterton

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    213
    Feedback Score
    0
    M4 barrel profiles are probably cut by CNC program on a lathe - I doubt a separate machine would be necessary for each profile. I could be wrong.

    What I have seen posted around the i-net by some is the assertion that an M4 profile is milspec and therefore intrinsically superior because of it. Therefore it's the only possible choice for a genuine M4gery. Ah huh.

    Personally, the Gov't forcing the barrel to conform to the M203 mount rather than vice versa is a prime example of the way some decisions can be made in hierarchal bureaucracies. Was it really cheaper to make every barrel with a narrow section rather than fix the mounts? I guess.

    Perhaps someone in on the groupthink or pulse on the line item expeditures might chime in.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,432
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Artos View Post
    Grant,

    Is the excessive machining (goofy step) the cause of accuracy detioration of the m4 profile??

    I know the extreme short range accuracy guys used to detest any turning of the exterrior bbl blanks as it could cause warping or memory issues...as I remember it.
    Theoretically it can be, as it creates a (theoretical) weak point for the barrel to flex around as it heats up. One of my .pdfs has the "shoot 'til destruction" tests for the M4 and M16, wherein it described where the barrels would first fail. Gonna have to check it to see if the M4's barrel fails nearer that little notch (curiosity on my part).

    I have no special fascination with the M4 profile, and would frankly rather not have it at all. Reading Lilja's articles about barrels has done quite a bit to influence what I want in a barrel (a consistent contour that promotes overall stiffness, for example, rather than the multiple steps or tiers of the M4 profiles).


    -B
    RIP, Jeff Dorr: 1964 - July 17, 2009


    "When young men seek to be like you, when lazy men resent you, when powerful men look over their shoulder at you, when cowardly men plot behind your back, when corrupt men wish you were gone and evil men want you dead . . . Only then will you have done your share." - Phil Messina

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    139
    Feedback Score
    0
    My SP1 Colt CAR back in the 80s had the light barrel, which I liked. Rather foolishly I got rid of it. The highly inferior (?) BM I now just came with the M4 profile. I don't dislike it intensely but neither do I need the weight. Comes the day I will replace it with a light "pencil barrel".

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SE FL
    Posts
    14,148
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    I actually don't think most buyers really care, from the safe-stuffer and internet-picture-poster to the "hard-use" guys, I don't really see much preference across the board. Yes, you have the replica builders that care, but beyond that there's little concern for the barrel profile.

    I do think that there is a perception in the industry that buyers want a visually identical gun to what they see on CNN, I just don't think that "want" is really as strong as many think.

    One could easily look at picture threads here and on TOS and make the assumption that everyone "wants" that profile, but it's much more common that people buy what they find available.

    Manufacturers are coming around. BCM's midlength uppers are "government" profile with a thin .625" barrel under the handguards and a fatter .750 outside. Paul has posted that they will be putting out barrels that keep that .625"+/- all the way out. Take a look at Grant's thread on Colt 6520 barrels and you'll see a lot of people with interest in them. CMMG's "pencil" barrels were very popular as well.

    To be sure, there are people that don't care either way. They don't mind the extra weight, or maybe even prefer it, but as Grant posted consumers are becoming more educated and are looking for things like the Noveske N4 barrel (which maintains the same overall weight but in a more sensible profile) and the 6520 or other .625" diameter barrel that is a more sensible profile AND lighter.

    So yeah, I'm sure that somewhere out there you can find people that bought the M4 profile on purpose just because that's what they saw on CNN (or even what they were issued), but I truly don't think that most people really care. And if they did care at the initial purchase, it only takes 3 hours of a basic drills night to totally change their mindset.
    Last edited by rob_s; 10-08-09 at 06:48.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    40
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by tirod View Post
    Personally, the Gov't forcing the barrel to conform to the M203 mount rather than vice versa is a prime example of the way some decisions can be made in hierarchal bureaucracies. Was it really cheaper to make every barrel with a narrow section rather than fix the mounts? I guess.
    Since the M203 is used on both the full sized rifle and the M4, they would have to stock two different sized mounts if the M4 barrel wasn't stepped (the full sized rifle is smaller under the handguards where the M203 clamps on).

Page 3 of 6 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
  •