Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 102

Thread: Commandant throws in a plug for the M16A4

  1. #41
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    2,331
    Feedback Score
    26 (100%)
    If I had to hit something with a stock, I'd use a sully stock.
    "Life is short, but the years are long." - Robert A. Heinlein

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    8,685
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    The ACE SOCOM stock is made to hit people with.
    • formerly known as "eguns-com"
    • M4Carbine required notice/disclaimer: I run eguns.com
    •eguns.com has not been actively promoted in a long time though I still do Dillon special
    orders, etc. and I have random left over inventory.
    •"eguns.com" domain name for sale (not the webstore). Serious enquiries only.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    4,177
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Riverine View Post
    The full comment, emphasis mine.

    "Marines like that M4 carbine because it looks cool. Translation: 'My opinion of the rank-and-file Marine is THAT low. I'm an occifer, and I Know Things, man... Things!' And I've had some Marines complain to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff saying 'you know, the officers are getting these things, but we're still having to carry this rifle.' Well, the Marine Corps will always be a rifle Marine Corps. The carbine is an extension of the pistol, not a reduction of a rifle. That was the freakin' M1 Carbine, you @$^&*@#$. It's the 21st @#%#^% Century! And in the Afghanistan scenario where you're shooting long distances you gotta be able to reach out and touch 'em. And a carbine is just not designed to do that." I don't have enough ink in my pen to write about what you don't know about what your Marines and their M4s would be capable of, if only you Old Guard Luddites stop letting the 'traditional' competitive shooters hold sway over the USMC marksmanship program.

    Good god, we're hosed. SO hosed. No wonder we can't get a goddamned thing done for the Marines, the anchorweight behind the institutional inertia is just too big, and it's title is 'Commandant.'

    That's it, stop the Corps. I wanna get off. We're Big Army, now. Slow, plodding, methodical, risk-averse, mired in the past and the Fulda Gap scenario.

    This man knows his shit.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    5,795
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Riverine View Post
    The "stuck in his ways" aspect is systemic, not limited to one person, but the person in this case, de jure and de facto, acts as a mouthpiece for the entire USMC. On the whole, I think the Corps is somewhat better than Big Army when it comes to doctrinal shifts to match the changing times....(Snip..)
    Agreed, however, the backward thinking mindset is not only restricted to the Marines, it is the senior NCOs and Officers across all the services. They all need to revisit critical adaptive thinking.


    A main causal factor behind the thought process (specifically, that the M4 isn't capable of bringing enough ass to a fight in the engagement distances found in Afghanistan) is a training issue, not a material one. The gun is capable, and this quantifiable. <snip...>
    Totally agree. Not enough trigger time and range estimation prior to deployment, then sustaining that skill in country. It's safe to say that the average Infantryman, cannot effectively engage Tangos beyond 300M, regardless of the Service.
    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. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    32
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Skyyr View Post
    But therein lies the problem: even though there are many things better than the M4/16 in each category, few in any can do ALL of the roles at the same time AND do them better. That's why we have the M4/16 - versatility. Not that I agree with it, but logistically, it does make sense.
    I don't get that from what I've sen on the testing. What I see is that All 4 other rifles do ALL of these things Better than the M4 or M16.

    Is the M4/M16 90% reliable? Couldn't prove it by me. But I don't frankly care if it is. If there's something better, which Army testing says there is plenty of, then I want the guys watching my back while I waltz my happy butt up to that bomb to have the best gear available.

    I may get no additional use from Any rifle over my 1911 (I'm a lousy shot), but I'm the guy fiddling with the bomb, not the guy shooting the guy with the cell phone looking at me.

    With the previous spin-off about new 1911s, Every combat unit is requesting a return to 1911s. The M9 isn't cutting it and never has. That move was made purely because of NATO. Of course, a switch to, say, Springfield XDMs would be good, too. Frankly, just need a heavier caliber, more reliable handgun in a combat situation. Cost us a lot of lives to learn that lesson 100 years ago.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Aiken, SC
    Posts
    1,132
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Taran,
    Your all over the place.

    The Army testing showed some guns were "better" in one specific area, the dust chamber, not across the board.
    90% reliable? your right not by me either, it would be more like 99.9% by my experience.

    There are far to many real deal, trigger pullers, putting bad guys in the ground, with M4's and the 5.56, for me to buy all the standard tired old BS about we need 7.62/M14's and 1911's. Its all BS.

    Guys want 1911's, because it what the cool guys used to use, because its the only alternative, they "know" of. Again, its a perceived need, and your falling into the trap.
    Every unit is not requesting 1911's, in fact one unit, dumped theirs. The XD has been found wanting, btw.

    How about we learn to properly maintain( as in lubricate, and replace worn parts) the weapons we have, learn to put rounds on target, and then maybe we can worry about seeing if we need a shiny new toy.

    Bob
    " Some people say..any tactic that works is a good tactic,...I say, anything can work once" former ABQ swat Sgt.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    5,795
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Taran View Post
    I don't get that from what I've sen on the testing. What I see is that All 4 other rifles do ALL of these things Better than the M4 or M16.

    Is the M4/M16 90% reliable? Couldn't prove it by me. But I don't frankly care if it is. If there's something better, which Army testing says there is plenty of, then I want the guys watching my back while I waltz my happy butt up to that bomb to have the best gear available.

    I may get no additional use from Any rifle over my 1911 (I'm a lousy shot), but I'm the guy fiddling with the bomb, not the guy shooting the guy with the cell phone looking at me.

    With the previous spin-off about new 1911s, Every combat unit is requesting a return to 1911s. The M9 isn't cutting it and never has. That move was made purely because of NATO. Of course, a switch to, say, Springfield XDMs would be good, too. Frankly, just need a heavier caliber, more reliable handgun in a combat situation. Cost us a lot of lives to learn that lesson 100 years ago.
    That's some major Fail there. You might want to read some of the XD threads around here. It is no where near reliable for combat use, let alone law enforcement. Maybe personal use, but not anyone here would recommend them for that. It's a Bubba gun, recommended by self proclaimed (read uninformed) gun experts (Brother in law, Friend, Gun shop guy, gun show snake oil salesmen, former ex Navy Seal Sniper friend of a friend, etc...).

    Get a cup of coffee and read the XD threads in the handgun reference forum.
    Last edited by RogerinTPA; 03-31-10 at 00:27.
    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

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    760
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    We should go back to the M1 Garand! It has a piston!

    http://vuurwapenblog.com/2009/10/21/...on-the-garand/

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    under a rock
    Posts
    2,138
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    I watched a show the other Night on history channel (I think) and it was talking about units Breaking out the M-14 for the Moth Balls and trying to Mod them in to a new platform (rails,retractable stock)they said they needed long distance and the M-14 fit that job

  10. #50
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    DFW, TX
    Posts
    185
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by xrayoneone View Post
    Easy, don't use a short eye relief ACOG. Hard to believe but people do make hits past 50 yards with iron sights.

    I am well aware that there are some stellar shooters that use irons, but do you really think they are the best option?

Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... 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
  •