The M4 discussion

| February 20, 2014

RM3(SS) sends us a link from the Washington Times entitled “Troops left to fend for themselves after Army was warned of flaws in rifle” a rather long article about the controversy surrounding the Army’s standard battle rifle, the M4, particularly the Colt version;

Mr. Traudt, of Green Mountain Defense, said the military paid his company a decade ago for ideas for fixing the M4. He produced his company’s product, a 2001 technical report titled “Carbine extended life barrel and selected reliability improvement components identification.”

“The M4s were substandard,” he said. “The Army paid us to find a way to improve them, improve them cheaply with a little bit of extra engineering and metallurgical changes to make a gun that was markedly more reliable than the Colt weapon. The Army took our advice and did nothing with it.”

[…]

Retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert Scales, an artillery officer who earned the Silver Star in Vietnam, is a prominent M4 critic.

He said its 5.56-caliber bullet is too small and the gas-piston firing system is prone to stoppage. He said better weapons — the German Heckler-Koch G36 and Russian AK-74 (a version of the venerable AK-47) — use superior firing systems.

“Frankly, this whole thing is scandalous,” Gen. Scales said. “We send soldiers into close combat with lousy weapons and we’ve done it since World War II and nobody complains. It’s a national outrage.

“It has no penetrating power,” he said of the M4. “It’s ineffective against vehicles, against bunkers. It’s ineffective against virtually anything except a man in the open. Put a flak jacket on the enemy and it’s virtually useless.”

I was a fan of the M16A2. It was a perfect weapon, but I guess it was too long for the close-in fighting we’ve seen in recent years. I’m heartened that the Marines still use the M16. I have a civilian version of the M4 (not the Colt – I’m not made of money) and of course, I don’t use it under combat conditions or fire thousands of rounds through in a few minutes (again, I’m not made of money) and it gets cleaned in my living room before and after firing it. So, I guess I’m trying to say that I’m no expert on the M4 just because I own one. I also have an AR pistol that I built (from all non-Colt parts). But I’d like to hear what you guys have to say about it.

Like I said, I left the Army when the M16A2 was the issued weapon and I liked that it was structurally more reliable than the M16A1 and more accurate at longer ranges. We spent a lot of time cleaning it, but, then that’s what good soldiers do, isn’t it? I’ll admit that I like the idea of a 7.62 version. My friend has one and it has a more satisfying recoil than the M4, meaning better penetration and improved target impact. But I want to hear what you think of it, you have more experience with it in combat than me.

Category: Big Army

62 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
MJN1957

With 4 active deployments and 16+ years as a LEO TAC officer, and many years as a security contractor, all armed with the M4. I’ve personally fired tens-of-thousands of rounds through various and sundry M4s in training and in-action. Once firing almost every single round I carried on my person (nearly 300) during a QRF response to haul a convoy out of an ambush. I am both a military and LE instructor and have seen untold thousands of rounds fired out of M4s.

The ONLY systemic problem I have ever seen with the M4 is a lack of lubrication, which is purely operator error. A M4 is a machine with moving parts, moving parts need lubrication…period…and it is IMPOSSIBLE to over-lubricate.

The lube doesn’t need to be anything esoteric…quality synthetic motor oil works just fine…just keep it lubricated. My M4s might get cleaned every few thousand rounds…maybe…but they weep oil from every hole, seam, and slot and it has been years since I have had a weapon-related malfunction (ammo and/or mag, yes…of course…but not weapon related).

#46, Mr. Blue has it right…in your price range, Colt, Daniel Defense, or BCM and my preference is DD right now. Each follows mil-spec where it matters without shortcuts, DD just has a couple of features that are incrementally ‘better’, plus their barrels make Colt’s look like amateur work. You can spend half-again as much and not really get any material improvement in quality of parts, assembly practices, or testing over any of those brands.

A Proud Infidel

I own a Bushmaster M4 that I clean religiously after I get back from the range, and I use RemOil on it like Ido my other firearms. I’ve considered buying and using Militec on them, what do y’all say?

Sparks

@45 The Honorably Retired, and former, SSG Medzyk

Thank you sir for your very well informed post. I agree, the bottom line is that any weapon is a mechanical nightmare if not maintained properly. In my industry of telecommunications, the electronics account for 5% of failures, the mechanical systems, the other 95% of failures. Every time it has to do with worn parts, age, or most of the time…lack…of…maintenance! On the part of ill trained and/or lazy techs. The same holds true for cars and anything mechanical. Thank you again sir. Your post helped me a lot regarding the issue at hand of weapons.

Seadog

Thanks. I’ll have to look into them (Daniel).

MJN1957

#53 Militec, or any of the ‘specialty’ lubes are simply too expensive for most non-subsidized people to use in adequate quantity.

The one characteristic that so many harp about relative the the Stoner system is that the ‘engine’ that runs the gun is inside the upper receiver (inside the bolt carrier actually). That is not good or bad, it is just one characteristic of the Stoner system.

Like all engines, it’s lube has to be replenished during use. Relatively high-cost lubes, especially if paid for out of pocket by the shooter, tend to not get applied as often as is prudent.

In my experience, one can not do much better than a good quality synthetic motor oil (Mobile 1 is a great choice). Instead of a few dollars for ounces, synthetic motor oil is a few dollars a QUART so liberally applying it and keeping it liberally applied is never an issue of cost.

A Proud Infidel

So, would I get better results if I used, say, Royal Purlple Synthetic? I use it in my pickup and get 15,000 miles in between oil changes. I used Militec on my M4 in A-Stan before going to a range, and cleaning my weapon afterward was a breeze! Another NCO in my platoon says he used it on his rifle when he was in Iraq, and after a few months, he was able to do a good cleaning on his weapon with baby wipes. I like to pack my M1911 most of the time I carry, I field strip and clean it once a week whether I fire it or not due to Florida humidity, would using synthetic motor oil be a good choice to use on that and the .357 Magnum I like to carry?

MJN1957

Proud, I use Royal Purple synthetic exclusively, adjusting viscosity for wherever I’m going to be. I didn’t mention it because I’ve had some folk advise that they can’t find it in their area.

Militec, et al are generally great lubes and in a .mil environment where someone else is paying the bill I’d consider dousing my ARs with it exclusively. For the record though, I stopped ‘cleaning’ my ARs a LONG time ago. The only inspection they need to pass is mine and all I’m looking for is unusual wear. I MIGHT wipe the lube off a bolt carrier group once or twice ever couple of thousand rounds and I don’t remember the last time I punched an AR bore.

I use RP synthetic on all my firearms where oil is recommended. To me, quality oil is quality oil and the various additives that help keep an engine working don’t hurt when used in a firearm.

Nigel

“He said its 5.56-caliber bullet is too small and the gas-piston firing system is prone to stoppage. ” First off the M-16/M-4 is a Direct Gas Impingement rifle and has no gas piston. DI rifles more prone to stoppage when dirty. If the Army really wanted to improve their M-4s/M-16s they would get some piston kits (from someone like Osprey) and have important parts like the bolt carrier and barrel Nitrided or Chromed. “Frankly, this whole thing is scandalous,” Gen. Scales said. “We send soldiers into close combat with lousy weapons and we’ve done it since World War II and nobody complains. It’s a national outrage.” Yeah it is scandalous to have an inferior rifle or handgun or weapon, when there are better options. That last bit about calling the M1 Garand a “lousy weapon” is load that proves he doesn’t know what he is talking about. The M1 Garand is the one of the best rifles ever conceived, I seem to remember Gen. Patton saying that. Also the AK-47 is just a bastardized design based of an M1 Garand and that German STG-44. Find youtube videos of both being field stripped and you can tell the similarities. Kalashnikov did the world a favor and combined the 2 designs. That said the 5.56X45mm has its uses. And so does 7.62X51mm. could a better cartridge and bullet be had? Yes. would the Army want to transition to another cartridge? Hell no, just like back in the day when the M1 Garand was chambered in .276 Pedersen, then Gen. MacArthur said it was to be chambered for all the US cal 30 M2 ball we had laying around. I think the ideal cartridge would be a 7mm bullet for a better ballistic coefficient and the 110gr-140gr bullets it can fire. Make it a 51mm long case and then submit it for testing and see how it does. Should be lighter than the 7.62mmX51mm and not as prone to wind drift. There was nothing wrong with the good old US cal 30 (what became commercially 30-06 and was then loaded hotter). Just like… Read more »

NHSparky

I’m still torn. Yes, I loved shooting my dad’s .308 as a kid. It was the first “big” rifle I felt comfortable using, and it was dead-on-balls accurate. But at the same time, I liked the M-16 when I was in the Navy. Nothing fancy, didn’t get to use it a whole lot, but still enjoyed it.

And now I have a Sig-Sauer M400. Awesome rifle. Just a pure pleasure to shoot, very accurate even without optics.

So I guess the question comes down–in the case of an everyday rifle, should we have the M-16, the M-4, or should we have stayed with a variant of the M-14?

Not sure I can answer that, but I do know that the smaller, faster, flatter bullets of the Colts do make for some far more accurate shooting. YMMV.

A Proud Infidel

@57, THANKS, MJN1957, I’ve always been “anal” about oiling my rifle while it’s still hot after leaving the firing line with the thought that as the metal parts cool, they’ll absorb the oil as well as dislodge the soot and carbon, thus making cleaning much easier. Those that thought I’m nuts for doing so have also asked me how I got the weapon cleaned so quickly. One more stupid question, I live and work in Florida, so what grade do you think I ought to use, or does it matter? Should I use the same 5W20 I use in my pickup, or should I use, say, good ‘ol SAE30?

David

I have to agree with John on this one. I’m a huge fan of the 300 AAC blackout. Works very well in the AR platform and the guys over at 2ndefense.com are working on an AK version as well. It’s got better ballistics than the 5.56 at range, and even beats the 7.62×39 at the barrel.