US Army acquires rights to M4

Your absolutely right, that's why we need a general with balls that can make major changes that cancel these people out of the equation.

That sort of change would be impossible at the CDS or regular Departmental DM level. That kind of overhaul would require cabinet approval, which is unlikely to happen anytime soon since as far as the government is concerned, things work well enough and there is no feasible alternative.
 
There junk compared to anything from H&K!

Dude, your doing a Jim Jones with that CoolAid...

Keep in mind from the Dust Tests - ALL - (yeah HK with XM-8, and Hk416, FN with Mk16, and Colt M4) barrels where crapped out at the end of the test and headspacing was so worn on ALL guns that they where unsafe.


Testing in a lab or range only shooting give you a very poor idea of the capabilties of the system.
 
Dude, your doing a Jim Jones with that CoolAid...

Keep in mind from the Dust Tests - ALL - (yeah HK with XM-8, and Hk416, FN with Mk16, and Colt M4) barrels where crapped out at the end of the test and headspacing was so worn on ALL guns that they where unsafe.


Testing in a lab or range only shooting give you a very poor idea of the capabilties of the system.

The first round of testing also only had some 300 jams as opposed to the 800 of the second round of testing... Same style M4s, same lubrication, same testing conditions, just done a year apart.

Something went really screwy with the testing.
 
Dude, your doing a Jim Jones with that CoolAid...

Look KevinB, I have been buying H&K for many reasons now for a little while.

The quality from Germany is never lacking, and most importantly things are made properly from the start, as far as I'm concerned.

Although I support, and buy products made from here in North America as well, I do this because I feel a need to support our firearms related manufacturing here in NA.

I have never been let down by H&K, they are a true leader in firearms development, its as if their company is filled with Stoner type people.
Although it is German, and my background is German, I prefer their design performance.


Conclusion =
H&K does it right the first time.
Other manufactures just copy what they have done, in one form or another!

Well Colt & other manufactures are more interested in selling more parts down the line, and basically milking their customer.

As for "Kool Aid" and keeping up with Jones, I was purchasing firearms based on experience & performance.

I love many other manufactures but European firearms(H&K, Steyr,Sig) have been the best to me when putting large amounts of ammo down range or out in the bush.
 
Ian Hogg in one of his books expressed the opinion that infantry small arms have reached a plateau in development and cannot be advanced any further without either a huge technological breakthrough and/or huge money, and it is not justified.

Look at any new military rifle. All are mix and match bits of existing designs. Most look like copies of the G-36 or AR/H&K416. Stoner rotating multi-lug bolt or Kalashnikov bolt, AK style gas system, or AR-18 style short stroke piston etc etc. Other than Optics and polymer materials, not much new. FN has managed to make an ambidextrous bullpup, but not much else. The H&K caseless was cool, but too expensive, not NATO STANAG.

All the money spent on SPIW, SCAR, and all the other projects were unable to get an infantry weapons system that would perform in any way significantly better than the M-16A2 in the hands of the average soldier. Fancy radio controlled proximity fused 20-25mm buck rogers guns are too heavy and too expensive. Flechettes and duplex rounds etc did not produce enough of a performance increase to justify the cost.

Any modern AR/M-4/H&K etc will shoot more accuartately out of the box with good ammo than any soldier can actually shoot them in combat, and all are about as reliable as you need them to be. Torture testing that says rifle "x" has a MRBF of 5,500 while rifle "y" has a MRBF of 6,000 so rifle "y" must be better doesn't really mean anything in a practical sense.

If you spend the money to replace the M-4 with SCAR or ANYTHING else, will you get better performance? The accuracy won't be any better. The terminal ballistics won't be any better. You might get a marginal improvement in ergonomics, but not so you will really notice it on the target.

The Iraq war and the emergency purchases of M-4s in large quantity for general issue saved Colt's ass! They were in deep doo-doo up until that point. FN and other built cheaper M-16s, but the M-4 was exclusively available from Colt (see the last chapter of American Rifle: A Biography by Alexander Rose).

The US Army is not going to get a new rifle system for general issue anytime in the near future because of the reasons I gave at the beginning of my post. SOF may get 416s or whatever else they want, but they already do that.

By taking over the rights, the army will get to tender out any new procurement, and so get a better volume discount that they do buying exclusively from Colt under the now expired sweatheart deal. So really, this proves that the M-4 is here to stay for the forseeable future.


do we forget metal storm?
http://ww w.youtube.com/watch?v=OqW5bG2M3x4

if they made a metal storm pistol why not a metal storm carbine?

or for that matter replace out current one shot&toss shoulder fired rocket with a 4 tube shoulder fired rpg stystem, if you listen to what he says about the pistol only the
"magazine-barrel in one" is needed. imagine a soldier being able to put 6 clusters of 4 40mm grenades in a phone book at 200 yards in under 2 seconds!:eek:... i should copywrite that idea lol
 
http://rpginn.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=443&Itemid=39

HK416 with a gemtech supressor, they're stress testing the supressor.

1st magazine: Perfect operation.
2nd magazine: Perfect operation.
3rd magazine: perfect operation.
4th magazine: 2:30, stoppage after brief full auto. Looks like a stovepipe, but then he has to go into full remedial.
5th magazine: Perfect operation
6th magazine: perfect operation.
7th magazine: perfect operation.
8th magazine: 5:00, stoppage after brief full auto. Looks like a double feed .


1 jam per 4 magazines, doesn't seem that much more reliable... especially for a gun designed specifically to be more reliable then an M16 when using a suppressor.

I have no qualms about admitting the HK416 is a good weapon. It might even be a little better then the C8 or the M4, but there's nothing inherently wrong with the M4; the money would be much better spent buying pmags for standard issue.


Oh and on a sidenote... aparently the dust tests that the M4 failed at, they were using off the shelf guns. Including off the shelf lowest bidder USGI M4 magazines... The 416, SCAR, and XM8 were using their own magazines made specifically for the trials.
 
The quality from Germany is never lacking, and most importantly things are made properly from the start, as far as I'm concerned.

...

H&K does it right the first time.
Other manufactures just copy what they have done, in one form or another!

Is this why you keep looking for HK 416 magazines despite being told by many there are far cheaper and better alternatives out there?
 
do we forget metal storm?
http://ww w.youtube.com/watch?v=OqW5bG2M3x4

if they made a metal storm pistol why not a metal storm carbine?

or for that matter replace out current one shot&toss shoulder fired rocket with a 4 tube shoulder fired rpg stystem, if you listen to what he says about the pistol only the
"magazine-barrel in one" is needed. imagine a soldier being able to put 6 clusters of 4 40mm grenades in a phone book at 200 yards in under 2 seconds!:eek:... i should copywrite that idea lol

In case you hadn't noticed, metal storm has not been adopted by anyone for any purpose other than testing. Which makes me suspect that it has some issues, otherwise we would all be using it by now.
 
Stretch To 500 Yards

I next set some targets at 500 yards and fired another four five-shot groups. This was done prone off a rest using only Black Hills 77-grain Mk262 Mod 1 load. Even with a 12 mph full-value crosswind I was immediately rewarded with a tight five-shot group that measured just 3.7 inches. The SCAR 16S went on to average an impressive 4.2 inches at this distance.

link to this article


http://www.tacticalgunfan.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=555&Itemid=1

Not sure I understand your point. A 5.56mm rifle, capable of shooting around 1 moa at 100, manages to shoot a bit under that at 500. With an optic. So what? I would expect any modern rifle to do that, or close to that out of the box. Even if a new M-4/C-7 etc was only half as accurate, we are talkng 2 inches at 100, and 81/2 inches at 500. How wide is a human torso?

As KevinB pointed out, most reliabilty issues can be solved with better mags and appropriate lubrication. How much do you want to spend on a new rifle that is only marginally more reliable (perhaps) than what you have now? With the current quality of barrels, ammo and optics have more to do with long range accuracy in Assault rifles than anything else.

I doubt that if I were to go onto the MTR and shoot "combat condoms" from 0-300, or even to 500 metres that I would be able to measure the difference between the SCAR and a C-7, at least in my hands, or the hands of the "average trained soldier".

M-416, SCAR etc may be superior for SF use, and the SF gets 416 if they want them, but for the average grunt, the M-4/C7-8 is plenty "good enough".
 
Some of you should keep in mind that very few organisations in the CF actualy does any buying of substance. PWGSC does all of the buying for all of the Government of Canada.

PWGSC is all about lowest complinant cost and avoiding litigation. In my mind, this is a comflict of interest with military procurement imperatives, but it is still the reality of what the CF has to contend with.

It would be like the average CGNer describing to his wife a 416 upper (without naming it), and leave her to do the shopping for it. What do you guys think she would return home with?

The procurement process as it is today is wrong for the military (in my opinion), but it isn't the fault of the guys trying to get the kit to the soldiers.


That is a gross over simplification. The faults rest not with PWGSC but with DND. I have personally witnessed tendering of weapons and ammunition where the requested specifications looked to have been drafted by kindergarden students. It seems to me that DND lacks the expertise in the right spots to generate timely and appropriate acquisitions.
If the specifications are for a weapon system and they accurately and completely list the performance requirements in terms of reliability, life span, accuracy, terminal effects, and dimensions/weight, then we should be buying the system from the lowest bidder, as it meets the stated requirements.
Unfortunately, specifications are often drafted by inexperienced or incompetent individuals. And unfortunately sometimes they are also drafted to force a particular piece of equipment into service for political or personal reasons.
 
Look KevinB, I have been buying H&K for many reasons now for a little while.

The quality from Germany is never lacking, and most importantly things are made properly from the start, as far as I'm concerned.

Although I support, and buy products made from here in North America as well, I do this because I feel a need to support our firearms related manufacturing here in NA.

I have never been let down by H&K, they are a true leader in firearms development, its as if their company is filled with Stoner type people.
Although it is German, and my background is German, I prefer their design performance.


Conclusion =
H&K does it right the first time.
Other manufactures just copy what they have done, in one form or another!

Well Colt & other manufactures are more interested in selling more parts down the line, and basically milking their customer.

As for "Kool Aid" and keeping up with Jones, I was purchasing firearms based on experience & performance.

I love many other manufactures but European firearms(H&K, Steyr,Sig) have been the best to me when putting large amounts of ammo down range or out in the bush.

1. this thread is about military procurement not an individual putting at most a few thousand rounds out while camping or whatever one likes to do. The HK you buy and the HK a country buys are not entirely the same, nor the same application. BTW I generally like HK stuff too.

2. Although I'm sure Colt likes parts sales I doubt you will find HK denying sale of parts because "the end user will never need them". All machines break including ones made in Germany.

3. Stoner did create the M16, the same one that initially failed horribly in Viet Nam (yes I know the M16 is now a fine rifle so back off) If all of the people at HK are like Stoner then... Ugg well you get the point.

4. HK does not always get it right the first time. Look at the G36, a very nice rifle with some fantastic innovations. But... the sleek simple cocking handle design ruins all of that. Standard optics are hard to mount without interfering with the cocking handle and forget co-witnessing setups unless you want a horrible cheek weld. etc etc. HK steel magazines are poop in the real world and on and on we go. Everyone make mistakes and sometimes our solutions are worse then the problem.

5. Every HK product I've seen is about 1.8 times the price or more of a similar product made in the US or Canada. Yes HK stuff is good but you also pay through the nose for it. Sometimes the quality does not justify the price for HK stuff. HK416 being a fine example. (Kevin, I like you but don't forget before you went to work for KAC you had nothing but praise for the 416 :eek::D)
 
Is this why you keep looking for HK 416 magazines despite being told by many there are far cheaper and better alternatives out there?

There excellent magazines, and i have not had the problems that KevinB has mentioned. I own these mags, and want more. I also like Tapco mags and of course Pmags as well. I need the new Emags as well too.

keep in mind when the SA/80 mag came out it was top dog, H&k was going to make plastic mags for it too, but the US army didn't want them from what I herd.(I know that is not Fact, but it from a knowledgeable source of mine).


Compared to so many other mags i have used they are the best, but so many company's now have been making newer better stronger versions in the last 5 years, so who cares.

Also I find it amazing how many people just say this particular item is crap without even using it or even holding it. People just base there opinion on one individual who works for the competition.
 
1. this thread is about military procurement not an individual putting at most a few thousand rounds out while camping or whatever one likes to do. The HK you buy and the HK a country buys are not entirely the same, nor the same application. BTW I generally like HK stuff too.

2. Although I'm sure Colt likes parts sales I doubt you will find HK denying sale of parts because "the end user will never need them". All machines break including ones made in Germany.

3. Stoner did create the M16, the same one that initially failed horribly in Viet Nam (yes I know the M16 is now a fine rifle so back off) If all of the people at HK are like Stoner then... Ugg well you get the point.

4. HK does not always get it right the first time. Look at the G36, a very nice rifle with some fantastic innovations. But... the sleek simple cocking handle design ruins all of that. Standard optics are hard to mount without interfering with the cocking handle and forget co-witnessing setups unless you want a horrible cheek weld. etc etc. HK steel magazines are poop in the real world and on and on we go. Everyone make mistakes and sometimes our solutions are worse then the problem.

5. Every HK product I've seen is about 1.8 times the price or more of a similar product made in the US or Canada. Yes HK stuff is good but you also pay through the nose for it. Sometimes the quality does not justify the price for HK stuff. HK416 being a fine example. (Kevin, I like you but don't forget before you went to work for KAC you had nothing but praise for the 416 :eek::D)

The reason there products are more expensive had mostly to due with the euro dollar, so that point is mute. Also they have all sorts of other legal issue and guidelines that are set from EU government, that they must abide by.

As for Stoner he did not make any mistakes that was the US military(some bean counter too) that screwed it up, there is ton's of material that explain that whole issue. Stoner was a genius.

Also for a side not for the "H&k we hate you crowd" ..H&K does not hate anyone, they love the civilian market, it's just difficult for them to meet the needs, and criteria of the laws that are all out of their hands.
 
When the German government only buys from HK, unlike in the US where there is a competition, it is essentially tax payers' subsidization of local defence sector. Why make less if your company is essentially sole sourced?

It is Porsche and Gucci marketing - the more expensive you make it, the more people will dig it for the prestige of owning it.

Does HK make good stuff, yeh, some of them. Is the price for their civilian too high - yeh, because European civilian markets have limited access to products. It is all business, price-volumn mix to maximize total profit. Why spend more to increase capacity to make volumn, while they can make more money by jacking up the price and saving the cost of increasing capacity, with less risk??
 
Unfortunately, specifications are often drafted by inexperienced or incompetent individuals.

I see this all the time. Writing specs is a pain in the ass, and can take for ever, so it always gets sent to the new guy or the least busy lackey to deal with. They bang something out and it gets rubberstamped with a looks good and off it goes. The other problem is the wrong people are often writing the specs. It's rarely the end user, usually someone in engineering or accounting.

And unfortunately sometimes they are also drafted to force a particular piece of equipment into service for political or personal reasons.

This too I see all the time and it makes me ####ing sick. This was how the liberals rolled, for far too long, and we're still dealing with it. Will be for years yet to come, I think.
 
Also I find it amazing how many people just say this particular item is crap without even using it or even holding it. People just base there opinion on one individual who works for the competition.

Actually it's the Army who's issued the directive to avoid the HK mags, not KevinB at Knights...

"FIELD PROBLEMS WERE IDENTIFIED WITH THE STEEL MAGAZINE(1005-01-520-5992). NO STEEL MAGAZINES WILL BE AVAILABLE UNTIL CORRECTIVE ACTION IS IMPLEMENTED & TESTED TO ASSURE PROPER OPERATION.
REQUIREMENTS FOR 30 ROUND MAG CAN BE FILLED WITH THE ALUMINUM MAGAZINE NSN 1005-00-921-5004."

...Plus I don't like them.
 
Leibermuster, nobody is saying they hate HK all that is being said is that HK isn't always as good as people like to think it is. Yes they make some good stuff but you're a fool if you actually believe they never screw up or that there aren't other companies making equally good products.

get over it.
 
There excellent magazines, and i have not had the problems that KevinB has mentioned. I own these mags, and want more. I also like Tapco mags and of course Pmags as well. I need the new Emags as well too.

keep in mind when the SA/80 mag came out it was top dog, H&k was going to make plastic mags for it too, but the US army didn't want them from what I herd.(I know that is not Fact, but it from a knowledgeable source of mine).


Compared to so many other mags i have used they are the best, but so many company's now have been making newer better stronger versions in the last 5 years, so who cares.

Also I find it amazing how many people just say this particular item is crap without even using it or even holding it. People just base there opinion on one individual who works for the competition.

No one said the HK mags were crap, out of all the steel magazines out there they're probably top dog.

The biggest grinding point is that the Pmag, which has shown to be superior to the HK magazines, costs $17 each... $35 for pinned mags up here. Comparatively, the HK magazines are $130. Each.
 
Back
Top Bottom