What's all this business about the M4 being inadequate for combat?

[Remphoto]

Seems to be a a new rash of stories regarding M4 failures (especially when the gun is hot from firing a number of rounds). A recent firefight in Afghanistan re-ignited the debate.

http://www.nola.com/military/index.ssf/2009/10/m4_suspected_in_deaths_of_us_s.html


I know there are many AR fans on here (myself included) and wondered what your thoughts are? Also, what, if anything, would be reliable main battle rifles?

[rjrivero]

I've read these reports. Getting a M4 hot enough to turn the barrel WHITE HOT? I don't think the rifle can stand that kind of use. It doesn't dissipate heat that fast. Fully automatic, 12 magazines and then it decides to stop functioning. Suppression fire is one thing, but every once in a while, you should line up that nub on the front with your intended target! :eek:

In fairness sake, these guys were drastically out numbered. They were probably just lighting up the area with as many rounds as they could pump out, as fast as they could. They just plain out paced the AR's capacity. 90% of the military state that the AR is adequate for their intended use. They bring up this "M4 Failure" to divert attention from the heart of the matter: Why is one of our forward bases under staffed to the point of being so badly out numbered? Answer me that, Mr. President.

[Dframe]

That is a result of the "Small footprint" strategy so beloved of our clueless vice president. Using the absolute mimumum of troops to try and do a job that actually requires a lot more soldiers. Inadequate troops and inadequate supplies. Thats the hallmark of democrat "Use" of our military. Troops are also frequently sent in where there is NO American national interest.

[rjrivero]

That is a result of the "Small footprint" strategy so beloved of our clueless vice president. Using the absolute mimumum of troops to try and do a job that actually requires a lot more soldiers. Inadequate troops and inadequate supplies. Thats the hallmark of democrat "Use" of our military. Troops are also frequently sent in where there is NO American national interest.

I am quite familiar with the Democratic "Do more with less" philosophy when it comes to serving a Democratic President. I served during the Clinton Administration, and it was frustrating to say the least. Morale was at an all time low. When G.W. took office, I was with the Second Marine Expeditionary Force in Camp Lejune. Our XO took Clintons picture off the wall and "qualified" with it on the range. His words, "I've been waiting a LONG time to do this."

[Remphoto]

Our son is heading over to Afghanistan with his SF group first part of next year. I wasn't as concerned during his last 3 tours to the sandbox, but I have a real sick feeling this time for the reasons both of you mentioned. Before the election, we visited his unit and were told by the guys in no uncertain terms what their personal concerns were if the dem got in the White House. They have been sick about it ever since, but of course will do their duty to follow the orders of the CIC. i just wonder what it might do for the re-enlistment rate?

The report also mentioned failure of the M249. Our son was previously in the Air Force Security Forces and was squad M249 gunner (he was the smallest guy -- makes Military sense). He loves that weapon, could really throw down firepower in a relatively small package and said it was pretty-much idiot proof. Of course barrels have to be watched on it, too.

[mycar47562]

Right now i don't know of any gun that can pump the lead reliably and not have the barrel melt but still be a good gun.

Getting a piston driven ar has advantages but those advanteges are in the cleaning and bolt condition area's not barrel problems

[right$pecial]

Our son is heading over to Afghanistan with his SF group first part of next year. I wasn't as concerned during his last 3 tours to the sandbox, but I have a real sick feeling this time for the reasons both of you mentioned. Before the election, we visited his unit and were told by the guys in no uncertain terms what their personal concerns were if the dem got in the White House. They have been sick about it ever since, but of course will do their duty to follow the orders of the CIC. i just wonder what it might do for the re-enlistment rate?

The report also mentioned failure of the M249. Our son was previously in the Air Force Security Forces and was squad M249 gunner (he was the smallest guy -- makes Military sense). He loves that weapon, could really throw down firepower in a relatively small package and said it was pretty-much idiot proof. Of course barrels have to be watched on it, too.

Well the M249 comes with an extra barrel that can be changed in about a second and a half, plus the heat treatment on the barrel is outstanding...Regardless Rem I'm just praying for everyone I know that's about to go over and that includes your son even though I don't know him.

They had to throw that many rounds down range because they didn't have enough guys with them; that simple. It doesn't matter if the weapon was gas operated or piston driven because when you throw enough rounds through a barrel in that amount of time things will break. They need more people more than a new weapon system.

[Oriondk]

The main complaint I've heard about the M4 is that the .223 round is not as effective out of the short barrel. It also doesn't have the penetration or range that other calibers could give our troops. One of the reasons, I've heard, that they've assigned an M-14 equipped soldier to squads is to give them that greater range and penetration.

[Synseer]

I am quite familiar with the Democratic "Do more with less" philosophy when it comes to serving a Democratic President. I served during the Clinton Administration, and it was frustrating to say the least. Morale was at an all time low. When G.W. took office, I was with the Second Marine Expeditionary Force in Camp Lejune. Our XO took Clintons picture off the wall and "qualified" with it on the range. His words, "I've been waiting a LONG time to do this."

Same here...was on the other more conventional side of Pineland back in the Clinton days. Log ops ground to a near stand still and the training exercises we did go on were drastically low grade compare to previous, more robustly funded training exercises.

Our son is heading over to Afghanistan with his SF group first part of next year. I wasn't as concerned during his last 3 tours to the sandbox, but I have a real sick feeling this time for the reasons both of you mentioned. Before the election, we visited his unit and were told by the guys in no uncertain terms what their personal concerns were if the dem got in the White House. They have been sick about it ever since, but of course will do their duty to follow the orders of the CIC. i just wonder what it might do for the re-enlistment rate?

Interesting that you would bring that up; in my current occupation one of my responsibilities is to develop the funding models for groups like the one your son belongs to. In the middle of that process right now for the next fiscal cycle. It's a long process but this year it's not looking good for the home team. Budget cuts are everywhere and no matter how good our arguement is we still may not get anything near what is needed.

The main complaint I've heard about the M4 is that the .223 round is not as effective out of the short barrel. It also doesn't have the penetration or range that other calibers could give our troops. One of the reasons, I've heard, that they've assigned an M-14 equipped soldier to squads is to give them that greater range and penetration.

Only time I ever liked the M4 was when I was ruck marching 12 miles with it. Easier to carry with all my other gear over that long haul.