Possible changes DITCHING THE M4 - Page 2
Register

Welcome to the Prepper Forum / Survivalist Forum.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Possible changes DITCHING THE M4

This is a discussion on Possible changes DITCHING THE M4 within the HandGuns, Pistols and Revolvers, Long Rifles, Shotguns, SKS, AK, AR forums, part of the Weapons, Protection, Self Defense, Hand to Hand Combat category; Originally Posted by Gunn You guys are probably sick and tired of hearing it from me, 6.5 Grendel !!! Up close or at 800 meters ...

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 37
Like Tree45Likes

Thread: Possible changes DITCHING THE M4

  1. #11
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    PDRUS
    Posts
    4,714
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunn View Post
    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.
    Last edited by SOCOM42; 05-18-2017 at 08:28 PM.
    Maol9, dwight55 and RedLion like this.

  2. #12
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    PDRUS
    Posts
    4,714
    Quote Originally Posted by tango View Post
    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.
    Last edited by SOCOM42; 05-18-2017 at 07:02 PM.
    RedLion likes this.

  3. #13
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    643
    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.
    RedLion likes this.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PrepperForums.net
    Advertisements
     

  5. #14
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    SE Wisconsin
    Posts
    11,527
    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.
    RedLion likes this.
    Karl Marx said, "Destroy their culture, rewrite their history. Ruin their art and literature, and defame their heroes, by offering fabrications to scandalize that which they considered good.
    After reading this Obama said I am on it.

  6. #15
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,514
    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.
    RedLion likes this.
    Talk is cheap, actions count.

  7. #16
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    PDRUS
    Posts
    4,714
    @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 faggots.

    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.
    RedLion and rice paddy daddy like this.

  8. #17
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    849
    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...
    SOCOM42 and RedLion like this.
    "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet." - 'Mad Dog' James Mattis - Call Sign 'Chaos'

    "In the land of milk and honey you must put them on the table" - Steely Dan

  9. #18
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    4,415
    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.

  10. #19
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    280
    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.
    RedLion and Smitty901 like this.

  11. #20
    Senior Member


    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    SE Wisconsin
    Posts
    11,527
    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.
    Last edited by Smitty901; 05-19-2017 at 09:58 AM.
    MisterMills357 likes this.
    Karl Marx said, "Destroy their culture, rewrite their history. Ruin their art and literature, and defame their heroes, by offering fabrications to scandalize that which they considered good.
    After reading this Obama said I am on it.

 

 
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back to Top