PDA

View Full Version : Interesting report on the M-4


shadow116
July 13th, 2009, 10:15 AM
This is a Congressional Research Service report on the M-4 Carbine.

Nice read to pass the time.

http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/R522888_20090624.pdf

LostSoul
July 13th, 2009, 06:58 PM
Interesting read, thanks for the link!

Kevp
July 13th, 2009, 07:23 PM
Page 3, 2nd paragraph- I lived that ordeal for two years. I also wonder if a Senator or Representative from the great state of Virginia didn't have something to do with requesting this "research" after reading the summary- "Some ask why the Army doesn't just adopt the SCAR?" FN, Fredricksburg- get the picture?

GunnyHwy
July 13th, 2009, 10:29 PM
Good read. Thanks. I'm still not buying a SCAR for $2,900.

smokey0118
July 13th, 2009, 10:35 PM
it's been interesting to see the fn prices over the last year....remind me to build a time machine to go into the past and buy an assload of fn guns before they got ridiculous...scar's price and the fnar and the fnp line of pistols have all jumped like crazy

leroygibbs
July 13th, 2009, 10:39 PM
it's been interesting to see the fn prices over the last year....remind me to build a time machine to go into the past and buy an assload of fn guns before they got ridiculous...scar's price and the fnar and the fnp line of pistols have all jumped like crazy

Yeah, gotta figure the euro/dollar exchange hasn't helped any + silly panic stuff....

smokey0118
July 13th, 2009, 10:45 PM
The Army describes the Asymmetric Warfare Group (AWG), based in Ft. Meade, MD, as an
Army special missions unit consisting of carefully selected military, Department of the Army
Civilians, and contractors who “observe and collect information about the evolving asymmetric
operating environment by providing advisors to deployed and deploying forces in support in the
Global War on Terrorism.”15 The Army reportedly initially approved AWG acquisition and use of
HK-416s in lieu of M-4s, but then reversed this decision stating, “The AWG also advises units on
training, tactics, and procedures. In this capacity, the use of the standard issue M-4 is required. In
support of this mission set, the decision was made to transition to the M-4 and the AWG is now
turning in its H&K rifles.”16 A report maintains that AWG “fought to keep its several hundred
416s, arguing that they outperform the Army’s M-4 and require far less maintenance.” Because
the HK-416 operates in a similar fashion to the M-4 and has comparable performance
characteristics, it is unlikely that training, tactics, and procedures vary greatly between the two
weapons, thereby causing some to question the motives behind the Army’s decision to recall the
AWG’s HK-416s.
....hmmmm

smokey0118
July 13th, 2009, 10:55 PM
interesting..so the report basically says that the m-4 is just fine,but could shoot some heavier bullets and have better optics, but still the SCAR is the bees knees and they'll see how they do with the ranger's fielding 600 of them before moving on...