Article

2014-02-21 Government

Problems surface again with the US M4 carbine.

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Besoeker 2014-02-21 00:00|| || Front Page|| [6 views ] Top

#1 Frankly, this whole thing is scandalous, Gen. Scales said. We send soldiers into close combat with lousy weapons and weve done it since World War II and nobody complains. Its a national outrage.

Overreach there Gen. The M1 rifle was superior to the standard old bolt action rifles issued to the axis soldiers.

Posted by Procopius2k 2014-02-21 08:35|| 2014-02-21 08:35|| Front Page Top

#2 Ditto P2k. The M4's growing popularity among civilian shooters is indisputable. Try hitting a 300m head and shoulders pop-up target in 3-4 seconds with an AK.

No guarantee, but a helpful key to the retirement program is as always, a well maintained and lubed weapon.

Posted by Besoeker 2014-02-21 09:59|| 2014-02-21 09:59|| Front Page Top

#3 I have been under the impression that the purpose of the light rifle - M1 or M4 - was that people who had not built up their strength would be able to be effective riflemen quicker (without as much initial workout) and that physically strong people could go further faster?

(rounding, wiki, corrections accepted)
weight AR15: 6 to 9 lbs
weight AR10: 7 to 9 lbs

weight 5.56x54: 4g x 120 = 480g = 1lb 1oz
weight 7.62x51: 10g x 120 = 1200g = 2lb 10oz

Then there is almighty recoil, that strength must be built up as well. Also I don't know what a combat load would be as far as ammo; I do know I could go through 300 paintballs in less than 30 minutes with a pump action.

Posted by swksvolFF 2014-02-21 11:11|| 2014-02-21 11:11|| Front Page Top

#4 If they mean the M1 carbine, then yes, it is too light for much. Based on an old .32 caliber pistol cartridge ( .32 autoloader if memory serves) it was issued to people not expected to actually see combat ('nuf said).

M1 Garand is another thing entirely. The 30-06 cartridge fired out of that heavy rifle had very manageable recoil and that round is an absolutely deadly at 300 yds and beyond, and highly accurate. It's auto loading capability made it a much better combat rifle than Axis bolt guns, as P2K points out, except in sniper situations where the greater inherent accuracy of bolt guns is necessary.

The ability to carry lots of ammo must always be balanced against other attributes of a firearm. The move from the ought-six to the .308, followed by the move to .223, was motivated by things like recoil and number of rounds carried, and yet seasoned soldiers still had a preference for the Garand for decades.

Posted by no mo uro 2014-02-21 14:32|| 2014-02-21 14:32|| Front Page Top

#5 I'm not an expert but have read a whole lot on this subject. My old man was a SeaBee and as such carried an M-1 Carbine that he was never expected to fire.

The 30-06 is a he man of a cartridge as in the M-1 Garand that fired it. Played with those and they will kill at great distance. The M-16 came about as an answer to the AK-47 given the fact that jungle fighting doesn't really provide the environment that requires the big heavy gun and cartridge.

Posted by AlanC 2014-02-21 15:20|| 2014-02-21 15:20|| Front Page Top

#6 Left out of the debate has been the M-14, a superb rifle firing the 7.62 cartridge. Recoil was stiff, but manageable, especially in a shooting sling in the USMC prone position. With the basic load 20 round magazine and prone I pit 20/20 in a "D" target (upper torso) at 500 yds slow fire. Superb weapon, and the proof is that special ops brought it back as a sniper weapon that mixed range, firepower and engagement speed. 11 3/4 pds fully loaded. Had a selector switch (1968) for full auto, and the muzzle climb was a bear. I'm 6'6 and then was 220 in best shape of my life and after 4-5 rounds could not hold on target on auto. Great rifle but judged too long and heavy for the SE Asian games.

Posted by NoMoreBS 2014-02-21 18:37|| 2014-02-21 18:37|| Front Page Top

#7 IIRC the M-14 was the upgrade to the fundamental M1 design with the 'lessons' of Korea incorporated. Remember by the armistice they were facing off basically ridge line to ridge line, an environment that has a lot more in common with Afghanistan than close in terrain (urban or otherwise).

Posted by Procopius2k 2014-02-21 19:02|| 2014-02-21 19:02|| Front Page Top

23:15 M. Murcek
22:07 M. Murcek
21:32 Frank G
21:29 Anguper Hupomosing9418
21:28 Airandee
21:15 Airandee
21:09 Barbara
20:44 swksvolFF
20:30 swksvolFF
20:28 Procopius2k
19:30 Bobby
19:29 Bangkok Billy
19:26 Bobby
19:09 Redneck Jim
19:05 JosephMendiola
19:02 Procopius2k
19:02 JosephMendiola
18:48 JohnQC
18:45 Beavis
18:44 JohnQC
18:41 swksvolFF
18:37 NoMoreBS
18:28 Rambler in Virginia
18:23 DarthVader