more like ... they didn't grease the right palms to get the contract ... its all about money
U.S. Army: M4 Replacement Candidates Weren't Reliable Enough
- Thread starter X-man
- Start date
Hopefully they will go ahead with further improvements to the system they have instead of waiting for the next miracle system.
The U.S. has a bad habit of not doing much to improve viable current weapons systems as to make their possible replacements look better in comparison.
Its only when those replacement systems fall through do they get serious about upgrading.
The U.S. has a bad habit of not doing much to improve viable current weapons systems as to make their possible replacements look better in comparison.
Its only when those replacement systems fall through do they get serious about upgrading.
The M855A1 round has a higher chamber pressure than the M855. It looks like they jacked it up from 55000 psi to 63000psi. That is a whooping 15% increase, and the effect of pressure (wear, timing...etc)is probably not linear to the increase in pressure.
Also, it looks like the steel tip penetrator is longer and extends to the part of the bullet where it is touching the barrel. The jacket is still copper, but it is like running on mat directly on concrete floor vs mat on rubber flooring. Concrete has no give. The barrel probably will go faster too, whether it is hammer forged or not. It is probably a byproduct of balancing the shape and composition of the dual core construction to calibrate the ballistic of the new bullet to the old one, so they can avoid a full scale change of the optical sights in the inventory.
These are the two reasons that probably render some of these weapons, that were designed on the normal M855 pressure, to fail to provide huge reliability+durability improvement over the M4.
Also, it looks like the steel tip penetrator is longer and extends to the part of the bullet where it is touching the barrel. The jacket is still copper, but it is like running on mat directly on concrete floor vs mat on rubber flooring. Concrete has no give. The barrel probably will go faster too, whether it is hammer forged or not. It is probably a byproduct of balancing the shape and composition of the dual core construction to calibrate the ballistic of the new bullet to the old one, so they can avoid a full scale change of the optical sights in the inventory.
These are the two reasons that probably render some of these weapons, that were designed on the normal M855 pressure, to fail to provide huge reliability+durability improvement over the M4.
The question is what is the M4/M4A1 MRBF using M885A1
Using a M855 table for an M4, and then using A1 for the IC candidates is not an apples to apple comparison.
I've been on record from the get go saying that IC was a boondoggle, and a bad idea, last year the Army (SRD Ft. Benning) said the Army was not going to buy a new brass cased firing weapon, so the IC was dead back then, its just not realized it own death till recently.
I don't understand how the army can waste so much money on trial and scratch their head how they can't do budget cut right.
There's no real large improvement in all those competitor. An HK416 upper is all you really need if you get fussy about reliability though replacing Aluminium GI with P-MAG would be a better choice.
There's no real large improvement in all those competitor. An HK416 upper is all you really need if you get fussy about reliability though replacing Aluminium GI with P-MAG would be a better choice.
Gunnerlove
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Vancouver Island
Has HK given the thumbs up to the 416 using M855A1?
Lol. This is why farmers turned rebels buy Ak47s and sks's. Cheap, reliable, idiot-proof,and more accurate than the shooter...
I still love them all, even with their shortcomings... which one would I take if I had to fight with it? Shhhh. Top secret, and I sold it recently to Mike in Canmore.
I still love them all, even with their shortcomings... which one would I take if I had to fight with it? Shhhh. Top secret, and I sold it recently to Mike in Canmore.
beavis_m305
Regular
- Location
- New Zealand
Does the M4 really suck that much though? Over the past 5 years or so all I have read are things like - as long as the gun is built properly, using good mags and ammo and run with generous lube it's fine.
That's an interesting tidbit of data.
I have some data in my reloading resources, that puts the actual pressure handling of a modern 223 chamber somewhere in that 60000+psi neighborhood.
However, the Saami spec is still something like 55000. I would imagine that modern metallurgy and alloys can allow for the safe operation at those higher 60+k pressures but saami has to maintain the lower spec for safe backward compatibility in older and inferior rifles.
I suppose the army has decided to try to get the most out of modern tech by ramping up the performance of their ammo to what a modern day rifle can handle.
Indeed if some of these new offerings are dialed in for a standard pressure rounds in the 55k range, then yeah turbo charging the ammo like that is bound to cause some issues in a semi auto.
From what I understand, a good 1911 will rattle like a bucket of bolts and rival a glock in terms of reliability.
It's only these new fangled tight match grade 1911 that are actually problematic to give the platform a bad name.
I'd have no idea what "fitting" philosophy went in to the Marnies 1911's tho'.
FWIW, my old colt 1911 warhorse rattles like a childs toy and feels like everything is gonna fall appart lol but its the only 1911 i ever owned that refuses to jam with a passion.
