FN gets M4/M4A1 contract

More
11 years 8 months ago - 11 years 8 months ago #19411 by VTIT
FN gets M4/M4A1 contract was created by VTIT
This is huge. $77 million huge!
kitup.military.com/2013/02/army-awards-m4m4a1-contract-fn.html








(moved it to 10MOA for ya... :wave: Sharkey..)
Last edit: 11 years 8 months ago by Sharkey.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 years 8 months ago #19418 by LebbenB
Replied by LebbenB on topic FN gets M4/M4A1 contract
It's certainly a big financial blow to Colt. However, with the sequester on the horizon any and all currently funded programs could come under the axe.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 years 8 months ago #19422 by VTIT
Replied by VTIT on topic FN gets M4/M4A1 contract
I "believe" this is already funded. Finding a replacement to the M4 is not. I don't think they want to replace it anyway. With all the anti-gun legislation coming out of Connecticut and New York I wonder if Colt and Remington are going to move out of those states. The fact that they are both union states may have something to do with it also.

Things could get interesting. Look at what one other military arms producer is doing: tinyurl.com/b6qfux3

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 years 8 months ago #19517 by OleCowboy
Replied by OleCowboy on topic FN gets M4/M4A1 contract

VTIT wrote: This is huge. $77 million huge!
kitup.military.com/2013/02/army-awards-m4m4a1-contract-fn.html

What I find interesting is the dropping of the 3 rd burst in favor of full auto. I would like to know the rationale for that?

Maybe they should have asked someone who has some combat time about that. I am no fan of FA for all soldiers. On patrol the first 3 guys, were assigned FA duties. This was the guy on point, and the guy to his left and his right. FA serves a purpose and that is to pin down the enemy while giving the rest of the patrol the time to find cover and concealment and identify the targets and shoot to kill while the first 3 guys are reloading.

When everyone blows off a mag at FA there is a lull while it only lasts a few seconds it gives the enemy time to find us....

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 years 8 months ago #19518 by jtallen83
Replied by jtallen83 on topic FN gets M4/M4A1 contract
I guess I don't have the real world experience myself but all the guys doing the training when I was active had CIB's and they hated FA. They drove home trigger control for getting short, accurate bursts.
After a "getting to know you" period I never had any trouble getting short bursts on FA with an M16 or M60. I always felt the burst setting was a redundant idea meant to substitute for training.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 years 8 months ago #19520 by VTIT
Replied by VTIT on topic FN gets M4/M4A1 contract
Not to sound argumentative but I disagree with the whole FA vs 3 round thing. The reasons I have are these; 1) The military stays with the 5.56 round so that soldiers can carry more rounds and magazines. I say let them use them as they see fit. 2) Limiting soldiers to 3 round bursts is throwing a mechanical solution at a training problem. If soldiers on the battlefield are abusing the FA feature train them when and why they should use it. Don't cripple them by taking away a feature that may save their life one day. 3) Teach soldiers how to shoot. Train more. If you want a more deadly soldier and one that doesn't throw away ammo teach them how to shoot. Don't waste time making soldiers clean their weapons for a white glove inspection that is actually counter productive. Anyone that cleans an AR gas impingement type weapon that clean (and dry) in the field is asking for a weapons failure. Use that time to train more on shooting skills. Don't use it to eat up time so soldiers don't get in trouble. 4) OleCowboy you make a great point on giving the first 3 guys FA weapons. Problem is those first 3 positions should be getting rotated and that means throwing a weapon in the hands of someone that isn't used to it. It may not be there normal carry weapon and/or sighted in for them. I would rather assign a weapon to a soldier and have them use that weapon until it is engrained in their muscle memory. Even to this day I shoot better with a 1911, because I shot one while in the military. If all the weapons the normal soldier uses are FA then they keep THEIR weapon, they know how accurate it is, when it was cleaned last, how good the maintenance has been on it, etc. I don't want to take someone else's word on how good a weapon is when my life is on the line. I'd rather keep the one I KNOW will work when the SHTF.

Sorry if this sounds like a rant. I guess it kind of is. This has been a sore point with me for a while.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 years 8 months ago #19522 by mrraley
Replied by mrraley on topic FN gets M4/M4A1 contract
This is my opinion and that is all this is...

The military went to the 3 rd burst to help conserve ammo and better controle.

In a squad formation, you already have an auto wether that being the M249 or the M240 if not both. (or the M60 for some)

I spent 14 years in various Infantry units and trained on all the weapons. We worked on the marksmanship training, CQB, dime washer drills, (as much as I hated it) miles gear, and other various range courses too.

So I think the 3 rd burst should still be used, especially in units that dont train enough to use FA and can controle it.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 years 8 months ago #19523 by mrraley
Replied by mrraley on topic FN gets M4/M4A1 contract
As for FN getting the contract...

FN already had the contract for the M16 series for some time now, so it wasnt much to change to a shorter barrel... if not doing both.

Colt will still be producing rifle for the military, so it's not like they lost everything, just probably needed the help in production.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 years 8 months ago #19524 by mlotziii
Replied by mlotziii on topic FN gets M4/M4A1 contract
If any of you are familiar with Adcor Defense, my understanding is they do subcontract manufacturing for Colt as well.

Adcor had improvements to the rifle and created their own line.

Why isn't ArmaLite building the new M4's? ;)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
11 years 8 months ago #19526 by LebbenB
Replied by LebbenB on topic FN gets M4/M4A1 contract

...What I find interesting is the dropping of the 3 rd burst in favor of full auto. I would like to know the rationale for that?

The sear interrupter creates a heavier trigger pull and results in reduced accuracy as compared to an FA sear.

...So I think the 3 rd burst should still be used, especially in units that dont train enough to use FA and can controle it.

Agree. CS/CSS units should retain the M4 w/three round burst.

FN already had the contract for the M16 series for some time now, so it wasnt much to change to a shorter barrel... if not doing both.

In reference to barrels, the M4A1's barrel has a thicker profile under the handguards for better heat dispersion and - I think - no step for an M203 due to the introduction of the EGLM, which mounts to the RIS/RAS.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.