04-21-2008, 02:49 PM
| #1 |
| Senior Member  | M4 - Overpriced? Military's gun of choice under fire - Military - MSNBC.com That's what one Senator says. Some people claim it's not robust enough, including US Special Operations Command in FL. Opinions? |
|  |
|
04-21-2008, 02:54 PM
| #2 |
| Senior Member  | I'm not going to hear it from a Senator. If anyone is allowed to make that remark, it should only be the boys in the field. Everyone seems to speak on their behalf but I never hear direct comments from them. Having never shot a person with my AR, I'm going to say it's not overpriced and I love it. If the SHTF and I'm forced to take someone down, I sure hope that it will. Also, what's this stuff in the article about Colt's exclusive production agreement? I thought FNH handles a large portion of production of the M4 in their factories too? |
| |
|
04-21-2008, 04:18 PM
| #5 |
| Senior Member  | |
|
| |
|
04-21-2008, 05:27 PM
| #8 | |
| Senior Member | Quote:
I think the really interesting question reaised by this article was simply this - Do the troops know they have a potentially wider choice and, if they did, would they choose something different? The M4 may very well be good enough right now, but is there something better currently available for the same price? I keep seeing the SCAR mentioned, and FN does make good stuff, but I know nothing about it, really. And speaking of FN, Knightrider, isn't the P90 more of a rear-deployment weapon, I thought? What do you all think of SOCOM's comments, though? Maybe they just like to be different, but the weapons they've selected in the past have been top-notch. - Coeloptera | |
|
| |
|
04-22-2008, 07:58 AM
| #10 |
| Banned | This truly goes back to the whole AR vs. AK argument. The AR suffers from two fatal flaws(in stock form anyways). One, as long as you keep your rifle clean, it will work fine. But you get mud, sand, dust, dirt, or anything else in it and miss a cleaning date, you could very well be screwed. The second, there is a huge difference between a .30-06 and .308, and then the .223. Big difference between the .223 and 7.62x39. A miss placed .223 will do little more then piss someone off, a miss placed .308 will take an arm off. The AR is a very accurate weapon and can be changed around in seconds. But, the AK can be dropped in mud and still function just fine. Ammo is easier to find, but it really lacks the accuracy and range an AR does. If your going to stick with a .223, go with the HK, if not, short barreled M1A's would work just fine. I read reports that our military actually took away HK416's from soldiers because they were not standard issue, even though they are a superior weapon. Our troops should have the final word. If they want the M4, fine, if not, fine. But give them what works best, not what makes someone a lot of money. |
|
| |
|
04-22-2008, 10:33 AM
| #11 |
| Senior Member | It boils my blood that a weapon is "too expensive." Now personally I am perfectly happy with my M4. Over half of my company still has M16's though. I've seen the stopping power of a 5.56 firsthand. They dont expect us to drop a guy one shot. They teach us controlled pairs and failure to stop drills. Until they can find a round that is just as accurate with more stopping power(which maybe there is) but my M4 has never jammed under fire. Now I'm a machine gunner so most of the time i had my m240g rocking and rolling but there is barely any recoil with an M16/M4. It is easy to get on target and stay on target. accurately hit what your trying to hit. Half the time you cant even see where your getting shot from. I'll keep my M4 until I have something in my hands thats just as accurate, just as easy to shoot, and just as maneuverable in trucks.
__________________ "Freedom is not free, but the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share." Ned Dolan |
|
| |
|
04-22-2008, 11:15 AM
| #12 |
| Senior Member  | Why don't we hear similar comments about Halliburton? They are making massive profits from Iraq and Afghanistan... Another hit on firearms, that's all. Don't take these goofballs seriously. As soon as a lot of soldiers die because of weapon malfunction, we will hear about it. But, with 170,000 troops on the ground in Iraq, there are undoubtedly going to be a few firearm malfunctions. I doubt ANY weapon produced that many times and given to that many people are going to work 100% of the time. Each and every consumer product has at least a .1% failure rate. For 170,000 troops, that is 170 bad apples. I don't think 170 of the deaths in Iraq can be attributed to weapon failure. All I can say is be sure you have your sidearm ready, in case you end up being one of those 170. But, with 170 failures, chances of you being one of those 170 and chances of you being in a firefight when the failure happens is very unlikely. Possible, but very unlikely. Last edited by CrazyIvan; 04-22-2008 at 11:34 AM. |
|
| |
|
04-22-2008, 11:21 AM
| #13 | |
| Senior Member  | Quote:
__________________ ModulARweapons.net | |
|
| |
|
04-22-2008, 09:09 PM
| #14 | |
| Senior Member  | $1,500? Not really... at least not for a stock M4. Quote:
__________________ rockymountaintactical.net Last edited by RMTactical; 04-22-2008 at 09:10 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost | |
|
| |
|
04-22-2008, 09:14 PM
| #15 | |
| Senior Member  | Quote:
__________________ Doing the unexpected makes the unexpected the expected and thus the expected becomes the unexpected. | |
|
| |
|
05-02-2008, 01:20 AM
| #20 |
| Senior Member  | My objection is that I wish they would open up the contracts to companies other than Colt. It would encourage Colt to stay more competitive in prices, and more importantly, quality.
__________________ The First Amendment defines America, the Second Amendment defends it. |
|
| |
