BlankDisc

Correction, 130fps. And the M4/m4a1 IS more MECHANICALLY accurate due to stiffer barrel (a function of O.D. over barrel length). The US designation for 62 grain ammo is the m855, m855a1, and m856. Effective ranges for both systems on a point target are 550m. Sights don't even go 800 on a m16a4 (unless factoring a rco-but 'book'/fm figures go off iron sights). M4 muzzle velocity is 2970fps. I'm not trying to dog you man, I was SDM instructor for a spell. if you're curious how the effective range is actually derived.Anyway :rolleyes:, moving on: Yeah Pretty much. I think modelling of different ammo types would be a much more fruitfull endeavor, ie m80 ball vs lr118. For example, HT-57's m193 ammo would have a bigger difference in performance vs m855 or mk262 than would m16vs m4. While a full on shooting simulator would be the bees knees, its never going to be 100% accurate, especially from different points of view. Personally, I dislike the button to hold breath as trained shooters do it naturally (as do most people when trying to preform a task that requires fine motor skill). Your aim should be refined to the point that when you begin to hold your breath (or more precisely reach the natural respiratory pause) all that is left is breaking the trigger, without disturbing sight alignment.

Q:What's the difference between an m16a4 and m4? A; About 100fps. And the M4 carbine is mechanically more accurate. So this issue/thread is kind of pointless, imho. The ballistic profile should be dictated by the ammunition type/load for the most accuracy/realism across the board vs work/manhours. Just as long as the ta31 reticle works properly, I'll be happy- I think they did fix it since the last time I played vbs2.