# Possible changes DITCHING THE M4



## RJAMES (Dec 23, 2016)

Who could have known a short barrel good for house to house engagements not so good for longer ranges.

We buy weapons and train to fight the last war. I do think we should look at a infantry weapon with a longer range and have he ability to issue a short barrel verses a longer barrel weapon to battalions depending on deployment / theater of operations. Perhaps some thing that has the controls - forward assist, safety/selector switch , magazines , triggers the same - same heaver round but have two rifles one with a short barrel one with a longer barrel and better scope.

Or perhaps a heavier round than 5.56 but changeable barrels.

anyway here is an article criticizing the M4 's use in Afghanistan. https://www.stripes.com/news/expert...-ammo-to-replace-the-m4-1.468940#.WR3f-fnyvIV


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

A jack of all trades is a master of none. Best to have an utterly reliable weapon and have specialist units for deployment on specialized things. Imperfect but where is the do it all weapon? Logistics of a changeable platform or multiple weapons as well as traing funds?


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

It sure is a fire breather when the fight is up close and personal. I have fired one on full auto, during training; and emptied at least 6 mags, as fast as I could. It was impressive.


----------



## Maol9 (Mar 20, 2015)

Nice, hadn't heard this yet. It seems though SOCOM is out in front on this one, like usual...

I posted about it awhile back. http://www.prepperforums.net/forum/handguns-pistols-revolvers-long-rifles-shotguns-sks-ak-ar/71921-they-aren-t-saying-7-62-actually-sucks.html

This one is good article too:

SOCOM Is Looking For A New Multi-Caliber Sniper Rifle


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

I keep a 5.56/.223 rifle handy around the homestead as a "grab quick" varmint rifle. A Mini 14 Ranch Rifle, actually.
I have used the 5.56 in a military role, and it's OK. But there are better choices against humanoids and animals larger than a dog, at least for me, since I don't have to hump the boonies anymore.


----------



## Gunn (Jan 1, 2016)

You guys are probably sick and tired of hearing it from me, 6.5 Grendel !!! Up close or at 800 meters it does not matter.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Now, what's that cartridge that will fit in an AR15 platform and has the power of the old 45-70 Government?
It's a 50 cal, but I'm drawing a blank.


----------



## Gunn (Jan 1, 2016)

My 450 bushmaster fits that bill. But you might be thinking of the 458 SOCOM.


----------



## tango (Apr 12, 2013)

How about a Garand?


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Gunn said:


> My 450 bushmaster fits that bill. But you might be thinking of the 458 SOCOM.


I remember -- .50Beowulf.
A 50 caliber, 300 grain slug at almost 2,000 fps.
The same ballistics as a 300 grain 47-70.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50_Beowulf

Check out the picture of the 50 vs 5.56 :vs_lol:


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

Gunn said:


> You guys are probably sick and tired of hearing it from me, 6.5 Grendel !!! Up close or at 800 meters it does not matter.


YES!

The 7.62x51 NATO will do the job, it has since being fielded.

The 30/06 will perform better if uploaded to modern standards, less washout with this round.

It stills does the job just like the 7.62 NATO.

The 6.5 case configuration will not do for tube life and high volume fire such as from a saw.

I will stick with the 308.


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

tango said:


> How about a Garand?


Ahh, yup, it will do quite well, I have 12 of them, 6 in Cal 30 and 6 in 7.62 NATO.

Have plenty of 30 AP M-2 for them.


----------



## jim-henscheli (May 4, 2015)

I really don't know who sucked who to make the change from .308 to .223, but it was pointless. .308 mags had fine capacity, and the rounds not to heavy. It's good fro 0-1k yards, don't fix it if it isn't broke. 
We see it starting all over now with the army adopting the p320.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Training time is limited KISS. Inspector gadget type weapons are a pain in the ass. Light infantry and CAV seldom fight man to at 500 meters. We have other weapons for that. If they decide to play the game and go 6.5 so what. . We will always have the designated marksman, that will have weapons and and extra training for longer reach.
Heck even the M4A4 with all the stuff you can hang on it is a dam nightmare. An infantry soldiers is carrying enough weight as it is . Longer range heavier weapons are generally a no/go
So if we go 6.5 for the rifleman we would need to do the same with the SAW. And if that is the case then why not 6.5 the 240 also and call it done.


----------



## 8301 (Nov 29, 2014)

Keep in mind that the philosophy behind the 5.56 is that if you kill an enemy the rest keep coming but if you wound an enemy 2 of his buddies will carry him away effectively removing 3 from the battle for a while.

More powerful weapons tend to kick harder making some soldiers less accurate and the ammo weighs more. The 5.56 (about 1300 ft/lbs energy) relies on hydraulic shock to increase damage which requires tremendous speed so a longer barrel is better but at close in fighting a short barrel is handier. From what I understand most combat in the sandbox is long range so the 5.56 looses too much speed over 400+ yards to create much hydraulic shock. Personally I like the 6.8mm (about 1700 ft/lbs energy) as a nice compromise. A 30-06 has about 2900 ft/lbs energy and each shell weighs almost 3 times as much as a 5.56 shell.

An option would possibly be to issue the AR in 5.56 with a long barrel but if urban fighting is expected swap the barrel over to a short barreled .300 blk (takes 2 minutes) retaining the entire lower and reload the 5.56 mags with .300 blk.


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

@John Galt, I will take it you have never been in the military or in combat arms.

You talk about recoil, I mentioned wimp asses.

People think the AR has recoil, I present to you wimp ass *******.

Give the little bastards a 1903A3 and let them shoot it,

it takes a man to shoot that rifle and any other 30 cal bolt gun, not metrosexuals.

Now you talk about changing out a 5.56 upper for a 300 BO? never happen in our army, further militarily speaking, the round is useless.

The US Army would NEVER ALLOW anyone to swap out rounds in a mag like you propose.

I spent a lifetime working in the development and manufacturing of military weapons, I have a real good idea what they will consider.

SPECOP'S people can try whatever they want, and they should, but crap wildcats will never make it army wide.

I have watched 50 years of the perfect rounds come and go.

They could have picked the 222 REM MAG instead of the 223 in the beginning, not, it died because tube life was 30% less than the 223.

The 280em2 would have been better but Uncle makes the choice for NATO, my way or I take the ball and go home.

The 276 Pederson would would have even been better and we were less than a year from adopting it when 7 December 41 happened.

The 276 makes the 6.5 Grendel look like a 22 hornet.

I laugh every time I see someone touting some GD wildcat as the world's best for the rifleman.


----------



## Maol9 (Mar 20, 2015)

My, MY, MY...

Stirring this pot is about as fun as it gets LOL

I run .308 and 5.56, but I sure am thinking a lot about a 6.5 of some flavor. I do mean a lot! Remember though that I am a private citizen, not some nation 's military.

Where I am from, the 300 Win-Mag is the upstart King that deposed the venerable 30-06. The 270 is the aging Crown Prince assassinated by the 7mm Mag, and the 243 is naught but a soiled Princess. The .308? it is treated like a bastard hermaphrodite red-headed step child, and the 223/5.56 is just a varmint round

Does the .308 work? Damn skippy! But...

IT EXCELS AT NOTHING!

That's right nothing!

Distance and wind? Beat by everything except the 204/223/5.56

Smack? It is beat by everything except the 204/223/5.56, though it is only tied by some of the 6.5/7mm flavors.

Mag capacity? Rifle size and weight? Beat by everything worth considering, they are all lighter with more capacity, and all of .308's bigger siblings are far to long and heavy.

Well if the .308 sucks so much why can't we get rid of it?

We made a choice decades ago and our grandchildren are destined to live with the consequences. That is how big that decision was. I will say this... 

Maybe it should have been a 6.5, but it wasn't. I'll just have to get over it, I might still buy myself a 6.5, but...

Of everything available to me right now in our personal home battery or that will be in the foreseeable future; and then you tell me I can take only one rifle... I guarantee it will be one of those sucky .308's

Just saying...


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

The M4 and 5.56 round will continue to have a lot of value in the military. I do think that many folks forget that most soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen are not combat arms and remfs. An M4 and 5.56 is perfectly adequate for the remfs. With that said, it does make sense to give the fighting troops a more capable caliber. I like the .308 and also the 6.5 Grendel. The 6.5 creedmore without a doubt makes a lot more sense for snipers than the .308 round.


----------



## The Tourist (Jun 9, 2016)

Another thing most people forget--or never think of in the first place--is that a deployed soldier is not an independent mercenary. He is a team member, he is assigned mission critical duties.

If I was hiding in a trench by myself, and a platoon of jihadists were vectoring in on my position, yeah, I might view the M4 as the slingshot of my impending death. But that is not how armies engage. Even in The Southern Struggle, officers sought a 3 to 1 advantage before engaging the enemy.

I'm sure ordnance companies are now working on a superior rifle, time marches on. But for the tens of thousands of soldiers now, the M4 is not a bad weapon.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Who the heck as an infantry soldier as standard issue is going to carry a 13 pound rifle with the requirements of today No one. As for the M1 Garand ,had it' s day and that is long gone. Heck with this sniper sniper shit . We have a long list for good rifles for them, the few there really are. The 2010 300 WM 1800 meter kills is just one. The M24 was making 1000 yard kills in the late 60's. By the way it was a 308.
The M4 5.56 is a close quarters combat weapon not a daydreams movie rifle. The difference between a 16.5 inch barrel and a 20 inch M16 with the correct ammo is almost meaningless. Try moving in the real world combat scene with a long rifle. Loading up in a Bradly,m113, 5 ton. Try clearing buildings with one. The M4 has served well and will do so as long as it must.
The SAW is 5.56 dam good reason common ammo. Just how much ammo do you thing a soldier can really carry along with other gear? The M60 was ditched because it weighted 23 pounds and was a 308. The SAW was a good replacement. The 240 came back to replace the dropped M60 when a longer range 308 machine gun was needed. Every single pound counts.
No infantry soldier has much use for a 800 meter weapon in direct fire. The machine gunner takes care of suppression fire. Up close to maybe 400 meters is the game plan. Yes well trained rifleman with ACOG's do hit 800 meters with a M4. But that is mostly just to prove a point. Should mission require longer range over watch we have the designated marksman trained in the use of weapons like the M14. News flash they most often used in FOB security and check points.
The m14 great weapon it is did not meet the needs as a personal issue weapon . To big , to heavy, ammo to heavy . That is why it was shifted to a different duty. Yes we still have them in inventory for issue.


----------



## Redneck (Oct 6, 2016)

Maybe you infantry sorts can explain (I just carried a dinky .38 in the missile business) but why couldn't we keep the M4 and simply change out the upper, depending on the need? If you have a specialty assignment/mission, would not a bigger caliber/longer barrel work on the existing lower? I personally swap between 5.56 carbine & 300 blackout SBR uppers. Just seems there is no one perfect choice so why make one choice? Why not have some limited options?


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

******* said:


> Maybe you infantry sorts can explain (I just carried a dinky .38 in the missile business) but why couldn't we keep the M4 and simply change out the upper, depending on the need? If you have a specialty assignment/mission, would not a bigger caliber/longer barrel work on the existing lower? I personally swap between 5.56 carbine & 300 blackout SBR uppers. Just seems there is no one perfect choice so why make one choice? Why not have some limited options?


 The 300 BLK is a joke and fun thing for folks to play with. Zero use for combat.
Soldiers need to train with the weapons platforms they will use. There is not one day of training time to be wasted on weapons that will not be used.Hands gun and infantry are just a minor side line. Server no real use never really have. Machine gunner carries one as a last resort. Some officers and low threat security.
The 5.56 in the M4 platform is a compromise that fits a wide range of deployment. Contrary to what you hear it has and still does a great job.
There is no real world advantage between a M4 with a 16.5 barrel and a 20 inch. The reports of more accurate shots is due to the distance between iron sights and not really any advantage to the barrel length.
Iron sight shooting is yesterdays news. Long sense been replaced with reflex sight/Red Dot that place more rounds on target faster. In the require ranges.
Preach iron all anyone wishes it is at best second place and that is a distant second.
The m4 platform works.
The m16A4 version the last of the M16 was a basic M16 with the muilt use rail system. What you now see in the M4. When they compared the 20 inch to the M4 it did not take long for the M4 to win out . Keep your eyes open once in awhile you will still see an M16A4.
At one time or another I carried every version of the M16 and the M4. Carried an M14, and an M24 for a short time. If I am heading out I grab a M4 with a aim point or ACOG .
The M4 could be improved with a gas piston system. That however causes another issue, more parts. The DI system is one that has proven it's self with less parts. Any advantage the Gas piston offers is lost to that. Big difference in what you take to the range and carry every single day in a deployment.


----------



## Redneck (Oct 6, 2016)

I was not suggesting the military use 300 blackout... just stating what I shoot. Seems the M4 shooting 5.56 does a fine job in many situations, so why not just have a different upper for when the mission calls for something more specific, such as longer range engagements?


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

This was a hot topic in 2000-2003 then deployments again drowned it out. There is always talk about the next plat form. Our involvement with NATO drives some of that. That is why we ended up with the 9mm.
As for switching barrels dual use weapons never pan out. Soldiers train for the weapon they use. They also train on the other weapons in their unit. There is no room for adding more confusion. 
Our forces have weapons that cover every need and do it well. The naysayers are just that. Our use of the M4 platform has come out on top time and time again. 
Soldier today have a almost endless list of options for the weapon they have now. Heck we even refer to the M4 as a weapons system. It is all soldiers can do to keep up with that. I still remember when we had nothing but iron sights. Then specialized reddot reflex sights some times, Then one sight issued per Squad . The one for every soldier and on and on. The days of an infantry soldier with boots and rifle have long sense been over. Now they even carry Ravens with them. And again forget the internet BS they work. The weapons need to fit the fight and most of these high end specialized rifles don't. The M4 5.56 still does.


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

300BLK has its place. Its not a joke of a round. The 300blk met certain requirements, CQB suppressed, and supersonic its not a bad round either, has pretty darn good ballistics better than a 556.
But, to each his own.
Military , US, should stick with what it has in stock, and train train train more for shooters.


----------



## 8301 (Nov 29, 2014)

Now Socom, I don't claim to be the master armorer that you are nor have I even been in the military but as an NRA certified instructor for over 35 years I do have some experience in how recoil affects some shooters. As a life long hunter I have some experience with carrying an overweight overpowered rifle when a lighter weight rifle would do. Time and wisdom has taught me there is little need for a 30/06 on the local deer and even a subsonic .300blk cleanly drops that 130 lb target at 80 yds.

Now you may choose to lug that 11 lb. rifle with it's 80 heavy shells over yonder hill but I'd prefer to carry a weapon that is adequate to the task, and the lighter weight weapon allows for a larger ammo load out. I'm sure in your many fierce battles over decades slogging through the mud and snow there may have been a time or two when you wished the ammo weighed a bit less so you could carry more.

Long ago a 230 gn Ashtray at 850 fps was the ultimate man-stopper and I still love mine but... Modern ammunition and bullets now allows a lightweight 9mm to be just as effective. I believe in taking advantages of proven modern advances. If you haven't already seen one try a horseless carriage sometime. They are really convenient and there is no asshole to fart at you like that mule pulled cart you usually ride along in.

how about we just agree to disagree? @SOCOM42


----------



## 8301 (Nov 29, 2014)

DAMN,,, that last paragraph was a good one! I'm almost proud of it. But SOCOM,,, all respect. And thank you for your service.


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

What civilians choose for their own long gun and caliber is all together different that fielding 4 million rifles in combat with a standard cartridge.

You may may be an NRA instructor, so was I in the past, also a military small arm instructor.

I am not arguing with you and the deer hunter, I agree with you.

My viewpoint is from a military perspective.

The flawed point you made was upper swap out, fine for a civilian, NEVER HAPPEN in the standard (straight leg) military.

Also the military does not give a damn if the recoil bothers you, how many survived it in 1898, WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan?

Millions, again millions, 30-40 Craig's, 1903's, 1903A3's, Johnson Automatics, M1 Garands, M14's, 

was simple, live with it and lean to shoot it or die on the battlefield.

No need for you to be a smart ass on my background or what slogging I have done, unlike you, I and others here did it.

Your right I did have times when I wished I could have carried something lighter, and it was an M60, at least I carried something.

To enlighten your ignorance, the rifles did not weigh 11 pounds, 9-1/2 for the Garand and 8-1/2 for the M14.

Further your round count is off also, 80 in the cartridge belt 48 in a bandoleer, and 8 in the rifle was standard for the M1.

For the M14 it was 20 in rifle 80 in 4 mags and one bandoleer of 60.

I'll tell you this and RPD can back it up, at 3-6 hundred yards you hit someone with either they are going down.

And with those rounds from the M1 and M14 you can turn cover into concealment.

The 5.56 and M4 does the job, perfectly? no but none ever will resolve all problems, that's what they have a 105MM Howitzer for. 

Oh, by the way, I am not claiming to be a master anything, but I was an instructor at an US army armorer's school.

Yeah I guess your right about a horseless carriage, How about a 2015 Grand Cherokee and a 2014 liberty?

Oh yeah my carriage is a 1955 Ford Thunderbird fully restored, my other carriage was a Piper PA28R200 full IFR.

I tried to convey the impracticality of your viewpoints, not to be an asshole, It was evident you had no clue and still don't.


----------



## Maol9 (Mar 20, 2015)

Not much to say after that!


----------



## Maol9 (Mar 20, 2015)

Well OK there is this!!!

Middle America Strike!!!

July 4th to July 11th!!!

The Mule sits down!!!!

Tell the Truth!!!

No More MSM Lies!!!


----------



## Maol9 (Mar 20, 2015)

Maol9 said:


> Well OK there is this!!!
> 
> Middle America Goes on Strike!!!
> 
> ...


Sorry I couldn't help myself!!!

So I did it again!!!

SOCOM you Rock !!! :arrow::arrow::arrow::violent::violent::violent:::clapping::::clapping:::spank::spank:


----------



## The Tourist (Jun 9, 2016)

What ever happened to that 6.8 project that was supposed to enhance the M4?


----------



## Redneck (Oct 6, 2016)

SOCOM42 said:


> The flawed point you made was upper swap out, fine for a civilian, NEVER HAPPEN in the standard (straight leg) military.


Please explain why. Why couldn't you swap uppers going from 5.56 to something like 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel? I truly want your input. Seems to me the AR platform works just fine nowadays but occasionally you hear folks say they need better range or better knock down power. I'm just confused because if that is so, can't you keep the platform & simply change the caliber and barrel? Curious why you have to reinvent the wheel just to provide flexibility.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

******* said:


> Please explain why. Why couldn't you swap uppers going from 5.56 to something like 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel? I truly want your input. Seems to me the AR platform works just fine nowadays but occasionally you hear folks say they need better range or better knock down power. I'm just confused because if that is so, can't you keep the platform & simply change the caliber and barrel? Curious why you have to reinvent the wheel just to provide flexibility.


 There is no need for the round change. Because folks say does not make it so. We have all the range the infantry can use. The 5.56 kills. We have a list of long range rifles if needed already. We still deploy the M2.. When they need direct fire long range kill and suppress it works just fine. They also have the mk19 just to name a few . Much more effect than some darn sniper rifle.


----------



## TacticalCanuck (Aug 5, 2014)

The isreal forces solved this problem with the tavor. 18 inch barrel but 4-6 inches shorter than a M4 with 16 inch barrel. Uses M4 mags and utterly reliable in every way. 62 grain 5.56 out to 600 yards with consistent results. AR/M4 is awesome. But those over in IWI know a thing or 2 as well. 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

******* said:


> Please explain why. Why couldn't you swap uppers going from 5.56 to something like 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel? I truly want your input. Seems to me the AR platform works just fine nowadays but occasionally you hear folks say they need better range or better knock down power. I'm just confused because if that is so, can't you keep the platform & simply change the caliber and barrel? Curious why you have to reinvent the wheel just to provide flexibility.


Apparently you misunderstood my poor attempt at communicating a point.

In fact, you can change out the upper for any of those you list and more.

What I was trying to convey is that the military will never go for it.

There are a lot of factors why it won't, but they far outnumber any of benefit.

For an individuals personal usage, you don't run into the failures or logistics.

As a former line officer you know about supply at company level.

Plus you can load some pretty good and extremely accurate stuff for them.

If I knew in advance that my use of 5.56 was inadequate, I would go directly to 7.62x51.

I have quite a few 15a2's and M4's, all in 5.56 and they will never get changed out for another round,

why? because I have over 50,000 rounds of M193 and M855 for them and other rifles in the same caliber.

As said next up is 7.62x51, if that can't cover it, I will move to the 50BMG.

I have other military rounds and the rifles and machine guns that go with them, all are combat proven combinations.


----------



## 8301 (Nov 29, 2014)

Well it seems that on this point Socom and I agree to disagree. The beauty of a democracy.


----------

