Question about the m4a1

[Aculaud 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Assault (CAN) @ June 27 2002,22:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The problem with the M4 (and other) carbines preferred by Special Forces is that the barrel is so short that the bullet doesn't maintain enough velocity to be truly effective.<span id='postcolor'>

The M4 isn't 1-shot effective past 200 meters, yet they send people into the desert with it. Does anyone else see a problem here?<span id='postcolor'>

Totally. If i was ever in a combat situation, i wouldnt take anything less than stopping power. I wouldnt want my enemies to come closer, i'd want them to get knocked back on their ass!

Sniper rifles use them for a reason - 7.62mm NATO all the way!

[Aculaud 0]

I can understand the weight issue too, but one thing that i dont have to be in the army to know is that accuracy rules - if you can't hit your target, it still has the ability to kill you. I would think that a lighter weight weapon like the M4 would give a bigger kick than a heavier weapon firing the same round. Never shot one before, so feel free to prove me wrong, but i would want to go for something i could control.

[168GRN HPBT 0]

The big problem with 5.56 as some one touched on is penetration, an Australian Army test pointed out that in order to shoot through a double brick wall you need a penetrater round , where as with 7.62mm nato (not 308 win THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING they are very close) first round always goes through ,

Also a centre mass hit will in almost 90% of hits due to hydraulic shock, will kill (found that in an old {1980} Australian army manual),

A last point is that study in the 1950’s looked at all the calibres used in ww2 mainly the .303 – 30-06 and the Jap 6mm , the study found that 7mm projectiles had a better transference of energy to the wound , this resulted in the M14 in the US, and later on the FN-FAL in the rest of the world .

This study was dragged up again in the early stages of the Australian army looking at 5.56 but due to the fact our army is run by academics (book worms) they decided that it would be better to be able to carry more ammo, and also that chicks could carry a F88 , so the people with the experience in the field where dismissed .

Me thinks this not good

also some of the ballistics data place here was for 168GRN projectiles most of the words army's used 140-150grn-FMJ slugs (allot different to 168).168 is a match grade round, sniper's use it because of the accuracy factor , and really 2 holes is a kill (entry, exit) . I have used them hunting on pigs and roos and they don’t get back up, even rabbits

Enjoy my rant all it’s a bit off the topic but it dose relate to 5.56 nato

[FetishFool 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (168GRN HPBT @ June 29 2002,04:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">this resulted in the M14 in the US, and later on the FN-FAL in the rest of the world .<span id='postcolor'>

The M14 was made in response to the FAL. Not the other way around.

The FAL was designed after WW2 by Italians and was chambered for the German 7.92x57mm cartridge at first. But since German technology was considered evil, the FAL was changed to chamber 7.62x51.

168GRN HPBT basically gave you the reason why the world is using the 5.56N round.

The decision was made by book worms that have never been to war, not soldiers.

The theory was that more shots = better. But what soldiers ended up doing was spraying and praying and wasting more ammo than every anticipated.

[pathfinder 0]

My M14 is awkward as hell in my woods. I go for walks and sometimes take a weapon with me. And the M14 and 7 mags make my AR15 and 7 mags feel like a feather. If you add a paratrooper stock to an M14 you might get what your looking for. I hope to get my hands on one of those soon.

But if you wanna snipe ,a Parastock might not be for you.

If you don't want to leave the M4 type family, you might want an AR-10....it's got stoping power!!!

[Mister Frag 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Assault (CAN) @ June 27 2002,22:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><Snip>

Here are some energy and velocity charts:

5.56x45 NATO (.223 Rem)

7.62x39 Russian

And just for the hell of it:

7.62x51 NATO (.308 Win)

Tyler<span id='postcolor'>

Just be aware that the .223/5.56mm ballistics charts you posted links for are not for military ammo, they are for after-market hunting rounds. The 55gr. and 62gr. military ammunition is somewhat hotter, developing more pressure, velocity, and energy.

[Mister Frag 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (pathfinder @ June 28 2002,03:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><Snip>

If you don't want to leave the M4 type family, you might want an AR-10....it's got stoping power!!!<span id='postcolor'>

Plus, there are upper receivers or conversions for the M16/AR15 that are chambered in different pistol and rifle calibers: .22LR, 9mm, .40S&W, .45ACP, 10mm, .44 Mag, .440 CorBon Mag, .50 AE, 6x45, 7.62x39, 30KKF, 6mm BR, .458 SOCOM, .50BMG., .300 Whisper.

I'm sure there are more, but these are the ones I know of off the top of my head.

[USSoldier11B 0]

I am a 7.62 NATO man all the way. But I do really like the M4A1. It is the standard issued SOCOM weapon, while the rest of the army is stuck with the M16A2 or A4, most first tier units have switched to the M4A2 or A3. It's a great MOUT weapon and is pretty reliable. 5.56 is a little light for my taste but it is very light and screams at 3300 fps. Besides what are you gonna shoot at that is more than 300 meters away using iron sights? Ever shot at a human silhoutte target at 400 meters? The front sight post is bigger than the target. Most infantry combat occurs at less than 100 meters. Especially in the more MOUT orientded modern combat environment.

[red oct 2]

well as far as im concerned a gun is a gun, one shot can kill you no matter if its a .50 or a 22. so why debate ? and how many people here have been shot by a gun like a Ak or a M4? from what some people say, IT HURTS! so why debate about stoping power as well? if any gun was pointed at me i think i'd rather run for cover rather than find out if a m4 would kill me or not if the gunman was standing at x number of meters.

[Aculaud 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (pathfinder @ June 28 2002,03:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If you add a paratrooper stock to an M14 you might get what your looking for.     I hope to get my hands on one of those soon.

But if you wanna snipe ,a Parastock might not be for you.<span id='postcolor'>

See, thats the thing. All my tactics (for games at least) are based on advancing on my objective slowly and methodicaly, sniping as i go. If i was required to get to my objective as fast as possible, i'd sneak in undetected and take the place down from the inside. I'm also a one-shot-one-kill man all the way. I wouldnt want anything that wouldnt kill in one shot even at extended ranges with a good center mass strike.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (USSoldier11B @ June 28 2002,21:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Besides what are you gonna shoot at that is more than 300 meters away using iron sights?<span id='postcolor'>

I wouldnt. I'd shoot at (whatever) with this, or this

[USSoldier11B 0]

You gotta factor in adrenaline buddy. When you are pissed off and/or scared you aren't gonna feel it is much. I would be scared as hell to go into combat with a .22. If it doesn't blow a barn door in the back of them or zing around inside of them making their inards into swiss cheese, then i don't wanna use it.

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Besides what are you gonna shoot at that is more than 300 meters away using iron sights?<span id='postcolor'>

You name it.  

I can tell you from personal experience that a bone-stock, off-the-shelf A2 will hit a man-sized target from 800 yards out (provided the target has the common courtesy to hold still for a second).  We can argue about how much punch 5.56 will have left at that range, but I ga-ron-tee I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end.

In addition, Army MTU has been shooting competively with heavy-barrel A2's for over a decade, at the 1000-yard rifle matches.  Iron sights can be pretty darned effective.  

We're actually evaluating the M4 as a replacement for the A2, largely due to the reason USSoldier11B stated (increased likelihood of MOUT).  My question is, will we still be qualifying from 500 yards out?

Semper Fi

[Mister Frag 0]

I couldn't agree more.

While I criticized the M16/AR15s lack of long-range effectiveness earlier in this thread, I have three of them in my safe, and I think it does very well when used as intended, especially when used with a 20" barrel as found in the original M16 design.

The rifle I would grab without hesitation in a WTSHTF situation is my carbine with collapsible stock, 16" barrel, and 5x fixed magnification sight with a Bullet Drop Compensator. I know from experience that I can hit head-sized targets out to at least 400 yards on demand, and the rifle is quick and light. What else could you ask for?

[red oct 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (USSoldier11B @ June 29 2002,06:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You gotta factor in adrenaline buddy. When you are pissed off and/or scared you aren't gonna feel it is much. I would be scared as hell to go into combat with a .22. If it doesn't blow a barn door in the back of them or zing around inside of them making their inards into swiss cheese, then i don't wanna use it.<span id='postcolor'>

well i woudn't know if adrenaline would work very well as a pain killer. but i really wouldn't wana find out. even if it did it would only work of probaly like 2 mins?

[USSoldier11B 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I can tell you from personal experience that a bone-stock, off-the-shelf A2 will hit a man-sized target from 800 yards out (provided the target has the common courtesy to hold still for a second). We can argue about how much punch 5.56 will have left at that range, but I ga-ron-tee I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end.

In addition, Army MTU has been shooting competively with heavy-barrel A2's for over a decade, at the 1000-yard rifle matches. Iron sights can be pretty darned effective.

<span id='postcolor'>

If you are shooting at thing 800 meters away, then you are just wasting ammo (unless you are laying down supressive fire. Those rifles they use in matches have match grade iron sights, they are not the standard ones. They are much finer and have slighter MOA adjustments. I doubt you could hit anything reliably at 1000 m with a 5.56 round. Hell, 1000 m is pushing it for a 7.62 when shooting for precision. Only the best can stay within the 10 inch V ring. I too have seen sombody hit a point target from 800 meters with an M-16. They guy was a sniper with the 82d Abn in Vietnam. So he had over 4 decades of shooting experience.

[Mister Frag 0]

By the way, to call the 5.56mm NATO a .22 is disparaging, and gives a completely inaccurate impression of the cartridges capabilities to the uninitiated. I realize that the bullet diameter is nearly the same as that of the .22LR, but that is where the similarities end.

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I too have seen sombody hit a point target from 800 meters with an M-16. They guy was a sniper with the 82d Abn in Vietnam. So he had over 4 decades of shooting experience.<span id='postcolor'>

Well hell, we were just a bunch of jarheads conducting FACIT* at a Ft. A.P. Hill machine gun range during a shoot-ex.  Admittedly, I've dabbled in competitive shooting a bit, but really, the shots weren't that hard (with a good prone position and a loop sling, of course).

*FACIT = F@#k Around, Call it Training

Semper Fi

[timmy 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Red Oct @ June 28 2002,11:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">well as far as im concerned a gun is a gun, one shot can kill you no matter if its a .50 or a 22. so why debate ? and how many people here have been shot by a gun like a Ak or a M4? from what some people say, IT HURTS! so why debate about stoping power as well? if any gun was pointed at me i think i'd rather run for cover rather than find out if a m4 would kill me or not if the gunman was standing at x number of meters. <span id='postcolor'>

in the book black hawk down, one person described being shot, like being hit by a baseball bat, but after that, felt nothing. Another person said it felt like being hit by a baseball bat, and having a hot poker stuck in you. Another person said he didnt feel it at all(he was probably trying to act tough )

my point is that i dont think anyone can descrive how it feels, because it is different for everyone, and adrenaline has a different effect on everyone.

I dont know how it feels to be shot, although i do know how it feels to be stabbed(long story) and some people have compared being shot to being stabbed, so i can brag

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">in the book black hawk down, one person described being shot, like being hit by a baseball bat, but after that, felt nothing. Another person said it felt like being hit by a baseball bat, and having a hot poker stuck in you. Another person said he didnt feel it at all(he was probably trying to act tough )

<span id='postcolor'>

Inexplicably, another said that "It tastes like chicken."

Semper Fi

[Aculaud 0]

Heres a little something i cooked up in photoshop. It would of course require a custom mount, but what do you think?

[USSoldier11B 0]

Mmmmmmm, Springfield Armory Super Match M1A with McMillan fiberglass stock. Have you seen a couple of their new additions?

New bush rifle model. Basically the scout modle with a composite realtree camo stock. $1529.00 USD

*drool* This has been out for a while but damn. Carlos Hathcock edition M-25 M1A. Match grade everything. $4190.00 USD

Probably gonna go with this, best compromise since me wants an M1A so bad. Match barrel and trigger.

Loaded Standard Model. 1 step up from the "meat and potatoes" classic model.

[Assault (CAN) 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just be aware that the .223/5.56mm ballistics charts you posted links for are not for military ammo, they are for after-market hunting rounds. The 55gr. and 62gr. military ammunition is somewhat hotter, developing more pressure, velocity, and energy. <span id='postcolor'>

I know, the Winchester ballistics info was easier to find, that's all. I just wanted to give some people an idea of what differing amounts of power those rounds posess.

Tyler

[FetishFool 0]

USSoldier11B, can't you get your hands on a mil-spec full-auto M14? Instead of a M1A.

A guy I met at an american shooting range found a reason why a US soldier would bring a rifle back home with him.

[Aculaud 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (USSoldier11B @ June 28 2002,23:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

you wouldnt happen to know where i could get a picture of that stock, would you? possibly bigger? i want to integrate it into my little project up there

[USSoldier11B 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">USSoldier11B, can't you get your hands on a mil-spec full-auto M14? Instead of a M1A.

<span id='postcolor'>

Sure, If I was willing to pay +10,000 USD for a full auto rifle.

Plus the $200.00 tax stamp price.

Have my name registered with the BATF and have my home subjected to searches by them at anytime. Not worth it to me. Plus the M14 performs pretty crappy in full auto, it is too light. Most of the G.I. issued M-14's were either built or retrofitted with a semi-auto sear. A full auto M-14 would be rare and expensive. The M1A is much higher quality than the original.