Replacing the M4

[scorpion_tyr]

These were the rifles that were presented to the US Army to possibly replace the M4. All are chambered in the .223 (5.56mm) except the Barrett Firearms MFG INC. REC7 PDW which is chambered for the 6.8mm. Which one would you like to see the army adopt to replace the M4?

Note: This information was taken from the 24 November 2008 issue of Army Times

 

[p99guy]

How Did you manage to leave out the FN MK16(SCAR L)? That really is being adopted as a M4 replacement in the special operations community.

1 vote for the SCAR

 

[IZinterrogator]

That would be the Mk 16 Standard model. Here are the candidates...

http://www.militarytimes.com/multimedia/photo/replacing_the_m4/

 

[p99guy]

SCAR L = SCAR "lite"(as in -5.56mm) a SCAR H(for Heavy is 7.62) The MK16 barrel can be changed out at operator level in about 5 minutes to suit the mission, and most will be issued with all 3 barrel assemblies.

 

[nate45]

The SCAR looks nice, but I have no actual experience with it.

My life doesn't depend on the M4 on a daily basis and I can use anything I want, but to me the 6.8 SPC looks like it would provide a significant improvement over the 5.56. I would call the DOD and pull a few strings, to help get something done, but I've used up all my favors at the Pentagon for this quarter.

The following is a very good article written on the 6.8.

Time for a Change

U.S. Military Small Arms Ammunition
Failures and Solutions

 

[SPUSCG]

barett 6.8, screw that wimpy .223 stuff

 

[Jager78]

Research the Robinson XCR
Outstanding weapon!

My second choice would have to be the HK416 and my third the SCAR (Very suprised that was not listed).

All are very reliable accurate weapons.

I have heard of too many failures with our standard M4. I'm sure that it is a fine weapon, but let's face it there are better battle rifles out there. Personally I'll take a XM-25 7.62 NATO any day of the week.

 

[IZinterrogator]

I wouldn't pick anything with a removable barrel, too many chances for the troops to mess with them and render them inoperable.

 

[Apone]

Research the Robinson XCR
Outstanding weapon!

I have one. I love it!

One alibi: Robarms is a small company, and I don't know, but I don't think they would be able to meet the demand of 100,000 or so carbines over 5 or so years to replace the M-4. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think I am. I have XCR SR 00086.

 

[Bauer]

dont do it!

 

[Caeser2001]

Barrett 6.8 in a non pdw version

 

[B. Lahey]

None of the above.

It should be replaced when something like the OICW is functional (and light enough to haul around). Replacing a functional 5.56 with another functional 5.56 makes no sense, but if you could trade for programable-fuse 30mm that could be an improvement.

 

[hoytinak]

I'll keep my M4.

 

[JohnnyCash1979]

They should go back to the M14, 1 of the greatest military rifles ever invented!! Heck I would rather have a M1 Carbine than the M16 M4 etc. [garbage]. Wonder how the M16 would have done in WW2 or Korea? Not to good!

 

[NWCP]

I like the gas piston HK 416 and 417, but then I'm not in charge of Military weapons procurement. The only thing that makes the M16 and M4 superior to anything the enemy is using against our boys today is their excellent training and marksmanship. They could be using M14s and still come out on top for the very same reasons. We have an outstanding professional military. I say God bless them all. Congress should be giving less money to their banker buddies and provide more funding to the uniformed services.

 

[rogertc1]

Why wasn't Daewoo on the list.

 

[10-96]

Daewoo didn't submit a specimen for testing.
If anyone can find a link to it, a fuller list of participants was on pages 14 and 15 of the Nov 24,2008 Army Times magazine/circular.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Well, the Barrett seems popular solely because of the 6.8 angle, even though the whole purpose of 6.8 is that you can easily convert any 5.56 rifle to 6.8 (especially easy with the Mk16, ACR and XCR).

What surprises me are how many of the entries are basically minor variants of the M4 itself:

Sabre Defence Industries LLC M5 Tactical - regular AR with midlength gas system
Heckler & Koch 416 - gas piston version of AR with slightly taller upper
Troy Industries M7A1 Close Quater Battle Covert Deployment Carbine - a really, really short barrelled AR in direct gas/gas piston as you prefer
LWRC International LLC M6A4 IAR - another gas piston AR
Colt Defense LLC Advanced Colt Carbine Monolithic - direct gas AR; but with a monolithic rail! Oooooooo.... that's only about four-five years old now.
Patriot Ordnance Factory Inc. Piston Driven Carbine - gas piston AR with much taller upper. Fancy "no lubrication" coating.
Smith & Wesson MP-4 - regular AR with midlength gas system
Barrett Firearms MFG Inc. REC7 PDW - gas piston AR with ARMS gear and a quite short barrel (which is probably why they used 6.8 to compensate).
Knight's Armament Co. SR-15 Integrated Weapon System - gas piston AR chock full of high-dollar Knights gear
Precision Reflex Inc. PRI Upper Receiver - regular old AR upper with PRI parts
Superior Arms Inc. S-15 - another gas piston AR entry

So as actual new, different rifles, we have:

FN Mk16
SIG 556
Bushmaster ACR
Robinson XCR

Now if I were buying a new rifle for myself and they were all priced in a similar range, there are several rifles on the list I would pick before I added another AR to the stable. However, for the military, you are swapping one highly reliable 5.56mm auto rifle for another 5.56mm auto rifle (and of the proposed replacements, only the HK416 and Mk16 have seen any extended testing by the military so far) of hopefully better reliability. As much as I like new gear and would love to see a homegrown American-made rifle oust the Colt/FN crowd, I just don't really see the value in buying a moderately improved 5.56 rifle - especially if we currently plan to replace that rifle with something significantly better in 2015.

 

[Apone]

especially if we currently plan to replace that rifle with something significantly better in 2015.

Hey, Bart, can you post some links/info on the 2015 replacement date, please. Thanks.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

The 2015 is just a vague goal (expressed as sometime after 2012); but you can get a good idea of the ongoing projects and the type of technology advances they are looking for by reading the NDIA Small Arms Symposium presentations for the last several years.