M4 - Overpriced?

Coeloptera · 04-21-2008, 02:49 PM

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?

Darkfront · 04-21-2008, 02:54 PM

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?

Pred · 04-21-2008, 03:05 PM

HK416, enough said.....

Rex Kramer · 04-21-2008, 04:04 PM

M14 ~ nuff said

tlarkin · 04-21-2008, 04:18 PM

whatever happened to the XM8?

XM8 rifle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

knightRider · 04-21-2008, 04:22 PM

p90 , m14 , fal

nuff said

neophyte · 04-21-2008, 04:23 PM

Coeloptera: Sir; a good read. Thanks

Coeloptera · 04-21-2008, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tlarkin

whatever happened to the XM8?

XM8 rifle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Apparently bogged down in red tapeand cancelled. I know, I thought it had potential to be a great weapon for the front-line troops as well. Very light and easy to swap out parts on the fly for different objectives.

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

madcratebuilder · 04-22-2008, 07:25 AM

Pred · 04-22-2008, 07:58 AM

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.

YugoM59/66 · 04-22-2008, 10:33 AM

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.

CrazyIvan · 04-22-2008, 11:15 AM

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.

USMC · 04-22-2008, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YugoM59/66

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.

I agree 100%

RMTactical · 04-22-2008, 09:09 PM

$1,500?

Not really... at least not for a stock M4.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tlarkin

whatever happened to the XM8?

XM8 rifle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They melt...

jmp8927 · 04-22-2008, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RMTactical

They melt...

The stock, pistol grip, and foregrip on an M16/M4 will melt just as easily. My opinion is, if temperature get so hot that your polymer parts will melt, that rifle will be the least of you worries.

lefty o · 04-22-2008, 09:16 PM

i dont care what gun your talking about, if the U.S. government bought it, it is way over priced. anybody, but the government gets huge discounts when buying 10's of thousands of anything.

sell33 · 04-22-2008, 09:52 PM

how bout magpul masada/bushmaster acr??

Ferroflame · 05-02-2008, 12:06 AM

I have a solution.

It's called the Tavor TAR.

Just make it shoot a bigger bullet, and you're good to go. ;]

Billyz · 05-02-2008, 12:22 AM

Im with knightrider M14, FAL

ghost_raven · 05-02-2008, 01:20 AM

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.

04-21-2008, 02:49 PM	#1
Coeloptera Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 1,882	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, 04:22 PM	#6
knightRider Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: you know where Posts: 2,683 Images: 19 Blog Entries: 11	p90 , m14 , fal nuff said __________________ I'm part kalishnakov, part heckler and Koch.

04-21-2008, 04:23 PM	#7
neophyte Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Charlotte, NC Posts: 3,539 Blog Entries: 2	Coeloptera: Sir; a good read. Thanks __________________ Craig By the standards of most

04-22-2008, 07:25 AM	#9
madcratebuilder Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Northern Orygun Posts: 577	__________________ The difference between a hot dog and a weenie is a fine line.....

04-22-2008, 10:33 AM	#11
YugoM59/66 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 139	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

04-21-2008, 02:54 PM	#2
Darkfront Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 162	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, 03:05 PM	#3
Pred Banned Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Kentucky Posts: 3,873 Blog Entries: 3	HK416, enough said.....

04-21-2008, 04:04 PM	#4
Rex Kramer Senior Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 395	M14 ~ nuff said

04-21-2008, 04:18 PM	#5
tlarkin Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 1,579	whatever happened to the XM8? XM8 rifle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

04-22-2008, 07:58 AM	#10
Pred Banned Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Kentucky Posts: 3,873 Blog Entries: 3	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, 11:15 AM	#12
CrazyIvan Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Englewood, CO Posts: 2,357	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, 09:16 PM	#16
lefty o Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: mn Posts: 4,789	i dont care what gun your talking about, if the U.S. government bought it, it is way over priced. anybody, but the government gets huge discounts when buying 10's of thousands of anything.

04-22-2008, 09:52 PM	#17
sell33 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Ohio Posts: 1,194	how bout magpul masada/bushmaster acr??

05-02-2008, 12:06 AM	#18
Ferroflame Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Kentucky Posts: 382	I have a solution. It's called the Tavor TAR. Just make it shoot a bigger bullet, and you're good to go. ;]

05-02-2008, 12:22 AM	#19
Billyz Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 105	Im with knightrider M14, FAL __________________ COG #47

05-02-2008, 01:20 AM	#20
ghost_raven Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 408	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.