Was replacing the M16A4 with the M4A1 a mistake ?
Was replacing the M16A4 with the M4A1 a mistake ?
No. End thread
Has the M16 been completely phased out? What a shame, the fixed butt stocks are my fetish.
Yes. There was absolutely no need as the rifle was fine. Just another money suck by the military
>caliber designed for a 20" barrel
>chop the barrel down to 14"
>ice picks and doesn't fragment along with shit ballistics
Durr my tacticool short barrel.
No. Anyone who says it was a waste of money always operates without the idea it also costs money to replace and buy new M16A4's. Eventually they'd need to be replaced anyways, and there was no benefit for the grunts to continue buying more of a firearm that they already found to not be useful in the tactical situations they found themselves in (Fallujah/other CQC environments).
Yes. It was designed for mongoloid negroes and noodle-armed women
The Army replaced the M16A2 with the M4, it was the Marines who continued to use the M16 as the M16A4.
Not at all.
>16 + 4 = 20
>4 + 1 = 5
it's pretty obvious which is better
>caliber designed for a 20" barrel
You mean, projectile and powder load designed for 20" barrel. All it needed was an optimized loading for that barrel length and it was fine.
The Army had the M16A4 before the universal M4 Adoption, it just didn't see the need to outfit anything but combat units with them
Replacing the M14 with a pea shooter was a mistake, no doubt about it. But the boffins at the top have to justify their 6 figure salaries, so what can you do?
youre onto something here..
Nogunz europoors get the fuck out.
>M14
>good
Found the Boomer, guys!
Consider gassing yourself. The 20" barrel is necessary only if it is an old as fuck 1:12 twist and you are shooting 55g bullets. In other news since the 1970s, this is not the case anymore. Barrels are commonly 1:9 or tighter twists which work at damn near any length and with heavier rounds.
You are the same fucking idiot who will claim that a 10.5" SBR is not accurate. I would gladly invite you to stand 200 yards down range and find out.
If we weren't so reliant on getting into and out of vehicles with tons of gear on, they probably would have kept the M16. It is cheaper to just shorten the barrel than to build vehicles to accommodate the length of a rifle.
Provided urban warfare continues to dominate, then it was the right move. I do love those 20 inch barrels tho...
>200M SBR
>get hit
>don't even notice
If a bullet hits and no notices is it a kill?
Yes if you're shooting a big fucker like this
not completely, no.
You willing to stand at 200m and test your theory?
M4 should be mid length gas system with 14.5", 16", and 18" barrels available depending on the mission
A 14.5 mid length free float, a MK12, and a MK18 are the only 3 AR's you would need for any situation ever.
> Lighter, easier to add useful shit
> Still kills as reliably as M16A4
Yeah
It was just
No
We're not talking about accuracy bruv. It's about fragmentation velocity.
and thats why 300 blackout is the king of short barrels, it absolutely destroys 5.56 out of a short barrel.
>buy weapon with complete modularity
>update it to shorter barrel for cqc situations found in one operational environment we frequent
>meanwhile in another operational environment, we have trouble delivering effective fire at distance
>oh well, guess we gotta find a whole new weapon!
Can't we just issue the 20" uppers to joes on patrol in the mountains? And 300 memeouts to people doing cqc? Isn't that the point of modularity? So you can tailor your weapons to your needs at the moment? I get they don't like multiple logistics streams, but then why bother to ask for modularity in the first place?
>be out on patrol in shithole county
>8hrs of walking winning hearts and minds
>hear a pop and *zing*
>magdump in general direction till black on ammo
>butter bars cries broken arrow into squak box
>2 gunships drop $1.5mil worth of ordence on some hill
>”mission accomplished”
we might as well issue 10/22’s at this point since it’s every engagement ever
Was OP's mother not swallowing a mistake?
for what the military does no, it was a good choice
20 inch barrels only give roughly 50 extra yards of effective range.
my entire deployments summed up in this faggots green text
BUT ITS NOT OPTIMAL YOU LOSE PEAK FRANGIBILITY EARLIER DON'T THEY UNDERSTAND THEY'RE VOTING AGAINST THEIR OWN INTERESTS IT WAS HER TURN CHRIST I'M HAVING A STROKE
And the difference between 14.5 and 18" ballistics is exactly what? Keep it simple. 14.5" is a compromise that everyone can live with.
This is so real it hurts.
No but replacing the m16a1 was a mistake.
>forgetting the MK11
10 lashes in public square user
If you've got a mk12, you dont need a mk11. If you're ever shooting at ranges that a mk12 is ineffective, you may as well get a .338 since you've already fucked the 3 uppers-one lower system, so theres no point in settling for an AR10.