Newer carbines outperform M4 in dust test
- Thread starter Scarecrow
- Start date
Wow, you completely missed my point. The fact that the guns were wet made the dust stick all over them and form a paste inside it, that plus mixed with carbon. I think that is crucial to the number of stoppages registered.
Fraser J20,
TDC mentioned that the test wasn't fair. It's above your post. Others here have eluded to the test not being fair as well. I for one would put any of the other systems up against the M4 in a reliability test and bet money on it.
Now before the DI guys start to fight to the death, it doesn't mean the Colt M4 is bad, just that the other systems are more reliable. U.S. CAG (Read Delta) did not switch to the HK416 to look cool. They did so because it's a better weapon. O ya, they tested it in more than just dust and no they will not release test data to civillians, no matter how much you want it.
On a side note, I was at SHOT last year and this year. On both occasions I questioned the FN people about the similarities between the SCAR bolt/bolt carrier and the G36 bolt/bolt carrier. The damm parts are so close they look like they will interchange between the two. I was quietly told that there's nothing wrong with taking a great product and making it better. The new SCAR now has a polymer lower as well. Well thought out, good gun. I can see why it won the SOCOM trials.
yohann160,
There's a lot of updated info and data out there on lubing weapons. Check out Vicker's Tactical site. The original idea and meathods of keeping the M4 / C7 dry or with little lube has changed a bit. The big Army is slow to change sometimes.
Rich
TDC mentioned that the test wasn't fair. It's above your post. Others here have eluded to the test not being fair as well. I for one would put any of the other systems up against the M4 in a reliability test and bet money on it.
Now before the DI guys start to fight to the death, it doesn't mean the Colt M4 is bad, just that the other systems are more reliable. U.S. CAG (Read Delta) did not switch to the HK416 to look cool. They did so because it's a better weapon. O ya, they tested it in more than just dust and no they will not release test data to civillians, no matter how much you want it.
On a side note, I was at SHOT last year and this year. On both occasions I questioned the FN people about the similarities between the SCAR bolt/bolt carrier and the G36 bolt/bolt carrier. The damm parts are so close they look like they will interchange between the two. I was quietly told that there's nothing wrong with taking a great product and making it better. The new SCAR now has a polymer lower as well. Well thought out, good gun. I can see why it won the SOCOM trials.
yohann160,
There's a lot of updated info and data out there on lubing weapons. Check out Vicker's Tactical site. The original idea and meathods of keeping the M4 / C7 dry or with little lube has changed a bit. The big Army is slow to change sometimes.
Rich
The overall reliability of other systems when compared to the M4 is an area where data is lacking. The above test only serves as a comparison for one specific environmental factor. I would not be surprised to hear that other systems on the whole are more reliable than the M4. As Rich LPS said, the test does not indicate the the M4 is crap. So far, soldiers and contractors are putting their AR15/M16 platform rifles to good use with good results and have been for 40 years.
I'm interested in more information from all systems.
TDC
I'm interested in more information from all systems.
TDC
