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

Thread: M16A2's with M4 Stocks?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Free State of Nebraska
    Posts
    5,427
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by jwfuhrman View Post
    I believe it is the Vltor A5 system.
    That isn't correct.
    "Not every thing on Earth requires an aftermarket upgrade." demigod/markm

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    27,214
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by scottryan View Post
    That isn't correct.
    Indeed. The A5 was being developed and tested for the USMC...
    "You people have too much time on your hands." - scottryan

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Western Canada
    Posts
    704
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    The Canadians have been using a configuration like that for a while. Though I have never handled one per se, I can see where it has it's merits.
    Just as a follow-up to commentary on the merits vs the homosexuality of this configuration...

    I am not by any stretch a particular expert on our (Canadian, I mean) small arms but it does allow for a slightly shorter rifle, and adjustable LOP, while retaining max velocity for fragmentation purposes.

    I would guess about half of my circle of friends have dragged one around in red talcum powder at some point in the last few years and most like the setup fairly well. It's a pretty popular rifle and what it gives up in looks, it gets back in fragmentation range.

    Anyway those are the merits that are well liked up here. As a work of art...not so much. As a tool, I think it's not a bad configuration. For dedicated cqb, maybe not...but we've mainly been shooting people in Afghanistan, and for that I think the extra range is probably worthwhile. Of course ours come with the Diemaco/Colt Canada barrel, which is kind of a bonus, I guess.

    Anyway our experience with the rifle in Afghanistan has been pretty good...makes me wonder if possibly seeing these configurations in the US may be related to increased US involvement in Afghanistan? Purely guessing, of course. But they are more suited to open country.
    Last edited by misanthropist; 10-20-11 at 12:09.
    Full disclosure: I'm the editor of Calibre Magazine, which is Canada's gun magazine. In the past I've done consulting work for different manufacturers and OEM suppliers, but not currently. M4C's disclosure policy doesn't seem to cover me but we do have advertisers, although I don't handle that side of things and in general I do not know who is paying us at any given time.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Decatur, IN
    Posts
    1,854
    Feedback Score
    89 (97%)
    I would think for A-Stan a 16in Middy with a 1-4 optic and a Carbine stock would work really well for those distances..... but then again, ya'll are stuck with M855.....(idk about Canadians, but its probably the 62gr ammo).... If everyone got the MK262 Mod 1, a 16in with 1-4 and a carbine stock would be the perfect combo for CQB and the longer ranges of A-stan, but thats just me, and thats what I run in 3gun and more so anymore as my go to gun.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Flyover State...thank God
    Posts
    539
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    The Canadians have been using a configuration like that for a while. Though I have never handled one per se, I can see where it has it's merits.
    A number of years ago, I remember helping a friend zero a new upper. He did not yet have a lower, but was excited to shoot it. It was a 20 inch, government profile flattop...nothin' fancy (as Nutnfancy would say )

    So, I grabbed a lower I had laying around and we slapped 'em together. The lower was standard...M4 stock and whatnot.

    The rifle handled pretty well, actually. It didn't seem quite as front heavy as I imagined it would be. I would have no problem using one for serious social intercourse IF I HAD TO. I DO think there are better alternatives out there.

    Does it look a little goofy? Yeah...but who friggin gives a shite. My face looks goofy as hell...but it's still effective at doing the things that faces are suppose to do.
    Last edited by Animal_Mother556; 10-20-11 at 15:38.
    -

    Evey -- Are you like a...crazy person?
    V -- I'm quite sure they will say so.


    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity. And, I'm not sure about the universe" -- Einstein

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    186
    Feedback Score
    21 (100%)
    I did this (with permission from my cmdr), to my A2/203 before we went to AFG back in '06. At the time I didn't know much about buffers/springs/tube and put a regular M4 stock kit on my rifle. It shot fine, but at the last minute we were issued M4's and it sat in the arms room stateside.

    Looking back that was probably a blessing in disguise.


    "Warriors"

    Out of every 100 men, ten shouldn't even be there, eighty are just targets. Nine are the real fighters and we are lucky to have them for they make the battle. Ah, but the one...one is a Warrior, and he will bring all the others back.

    -Heraclitis

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    3,055
    Feedback Score
    21 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by jwfuhrman View Post
    I believe it is the Vltor A5 system.

    It improves the weapon function tremendously. Any weapon system its on it improves the function, except ive heard it causes issues with the 14.5 Middy guns.
    Quote Originally Posted by Clint View Post
    I'd say the A5 provides the same great performance as the rifle buffer in the smaller carbine package.
    Quote Originally Posted by jwfuhrman View Post
    every gun I've put it on it has smoothed out the action even more than a rifle buffer. IMO, it improves the function of every gun. didnt work so well with a 14.5 middy though, not sure why.
    Fair enough.

    The A5 may indeed be a slight improvement over the rifle buffer, but in the grand scheme of things, it's much closer to a rifle buffer than a CAR buffer.

    IMO, either is a big improvement over the CAR buffer.
    Black River Tactical
    BRT OPTIMUM HFCL Barrels - Hammer Forged Chrome Lined 11.5", 12.5", 14.5"
    BRT OPTIMUM Barrels - 16" MPR, 14.5" MPC, 12.5" MRC, 11.5" CQB, 9" PDW
    BRT EZTUNE Preset Gas Tubes - CAR and MID
    BRT Covert Comps 7.62, 5.56, 6X, 9mm
    BRT MarkBlue Gas Tubes - BRT EXT, EXC and PDW Lengths
    BRT MicroPin Gas Blocks - .750" & .625"
    BRT MicroTUNE Adjustable Gas Blocks
    BRT CustomTUNE Gas Ports

  8. #28
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Fort Drum
    Posts
    13
    Feedback Score
    0
    I'm currently out here in Afghanistan and have an A4 as a DMR and have been trying to get one these kits, but thanks to the Army's budget we can't even order a box of pens for our company right now.

    At 5'7" and with a plate carrier on, the A2 buttstock is just too much. I've learned to adapt to it, but this would be a godsend in the ergonomics department, regardless of how it looks.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    265
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    So if a rifle buffe ris over 5 oz., and you went to a carbine length buffer system, wouldn;t you probably want to run a H3? I believe the Canadians run an H2 in this configuration? Would the rifle system, being longer, generate more pressure or less pressure?

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northern NY
    Posts
    730
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Guys I'll post the NSN latter. The "Collapsible Stock Kits" are AAL now for the M16A2/A4. You can order them and have them installed by you direct support maintenance unit/BSB. BSN pricing is around $100 for the whole kit.

    The kit is basicly a M-4 receiver extension and stock, carbine buffer spring and a "H-6" buffer. They are not VLTOR A5's. I believe that they are also authorized for branches other than the Army, but I'm not posative.

    Info added
    PS 703
    JUN 11
    Hybrid Buttstock Authorized
    A new hybrid buttstock kit is now available for the M16-series rifle. You couldn’t get away with it before, but now it’s authorized. It reduces the length of the weapon for improved flexibility in confined spaces or close combat. The new buttstock is also more ergonomically friendly.
    Order the buttstock kit with NSN 1005-01-569-6938. It’s authorized by CTA.
    Support will install the buttstock following the instructions in WPs 0021 and 0025 in TM 9-1005-319-23&P. They need to pay special attention to Step 13 in WP 0025-8, which gives the correct torque for the buttstock’s round plain nut.
    Armorers need to keep the old buttstock. When an M16 is turned in, it must be returned to its original configuration, which means the old buttstock must be put back on.
    The original article in PS Mag had an error in the art work. It looked like a UBR, but they have since published a correction.
    Last edited by DMR; 10-22-11 at 21:21.
    pro-patria.us

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
  •