With respect to the ammo. It's more correct to say they changed the rate of twist of the rifling to accomodate the heavier bullet. Either barrel can fire either ammo type, just not optimally.
+Grapthars Hammer M-855 has no real advantage over 55 grain ammo in fact the m-193 ball has better wounding capability as M-855 was designed by a swiss ballistician to comply with the Hague convention and is the only round of ammo to ever do so it icepicks and tracks straight through a target
You are correct. 1:12 twist for the M16, very slow twist which shoots m193 55gr well. The M4 uses a 1:9 or even 1:7 nowadays to optimize the rifle for 62 gr and higher grain ammo. The whole thing about m855 being designed to ice pick and only wound not kill is the STUPIDEST thing people keep perpetuating. It was designed to DEFEAT LIGHT ARMOR or helmets at even 300 yards, hence "LAP" or light armor penetrating. It is just a side effect that m855 tends not to yaw or tumble because it is too stable when going through soft targets, whereas m193 55gr is more likely to yaw or tumble or fragment on soft targets but socks against light armor.
Wrong, M-855 ball ammo is NATO SS-109, a round designed in Switzerland to Comply with the Hague treaty on weapons of war, sorry, I participated in some of the testing of that round .
The problem is M-4 CARBINE, nor A-2 rifle which is about 6 inches longer and vastly more efficient with 3-5oo FPS more nuzzle velocity. The second thing is all the Tacticool none sense permitted on it, the only addition I, and it's just my opinion, is the trijicon tritium illuminated reflex sight
Sir the 1st gen of this weapon was called the CAR 15 or Colt Automatic Rifle. It was a stubby of the M-16. Military Dog handlers were issued these awesome weapons in the late 60's and early 70's. Just FYI
Its amazing to me, a combat veteran myself, that saw several gunfights OIF/OEF, and a WOMAN automatically gets a SILVER STAR for her 30 min gunfight, when MEN of a typical 82nd Airborne Division Combat Unit, who gets into a firefight like that on a regular weekly basis, for the months that they were deployed, are ONLY awarded an Army ARCOM, or a Bronze Star at most, at the end of their tour of duty. DISCRIMINATION MUCH?!!!
Correct me if wrong, but they said she was an mp, doing escort duty correct? In WWII, there were cooks and other non-combat role personnel who were awarded higher medals because they did join the fight, and did well. If you are a regular old grunt, and want a medal, you better dive on the grenade that would take out your unit. If you did that, and still don't get a medal, then .... who knows.
my dad was in Vietnam at the battle of xom Bo, search and destroy attached to the big red 1. dad was attached to the forward observer who went down and my dads position was over run to the point where the enemy was in front and behind and all around. he defended his position killing enemies ,took over the radio, called in artillery and airstrikes and carried wounded off the battlefield. he was awarded a bronze star with a v-device and a second bronze....that at 18 or 19 yrs old. they actually did search and DESTROY ,wiped that whole regiment out, slaughtered them. my dad gives respect to our armed service but it upsets him they called Vietnam a CONFLICT and everything else a war. Hats off and much appreciation to all who serve and all who has, heroes in my book!!
Ironstorm Agreed. The ATF's BS attempted ban on M855 for it being AP created a whole host of demonstrations showing XM193 and M855 have a negligible difference in penetration of armor (including plates).
Ironstorm personally i would rather have a small bullet go through me, than a big bullet not go through me. because if a bullet doesnt go through you, it will take your ribs and smash them all the way to your spine.
skibum1610 according to the description for the M4A4 in CSGO, the m4a4 is best in mid-range combat, however it can be mastered for long range as well as CQC scenarios.
zonkeys9000 CSGO is a game, if you got to a video about a karambit or M9 bayonet you'll see CSGO kiddies talking about the game because the knife is in the game.
+BlaZe ViPr that's the civilian version of the m4. It doesn't have automatic capabilities because that takes extra licensing, the military does not use that weapon.
An AK 47 will be too hot to handle yet it will still continue to fire...our soldiers should have rifles that dont fail just because they are "too hot".
@@Rick-tb4so you shoot any rifle in full auto and it isnt very accurate. Also no conventional army uses the "ak47" as a primary rifle. Countries that provide their infantry with Russian rifles would issue them with a 5.45 variant making it far more accurate and a very flat shooting rifle. All this "Ak47 iSn'T accUrATE bEcAUsE it HaS LoOse toLEranCeS" argument is clutching at more than 60 year old straws. The platform has been tweaked and improved just as much as the ar-15 platform. That's why both weapons are issued to armies. If a weapon was atrocious governments would look for a replacement standard issue rifle.
i stopped subscribing to the military channel because the content is written for forth graders. i believe the MC is owned by Discovery channel, which explains a lot, i miss the old (hitler) History channel days, TV just plain sucks these days.
+Ha Re TV only sucks now because of the pc college kids who will bitch and complain about anything that they could call offensive, so all tv now has to be dumbed down to a fourth grade level for them.
+Lynn Kramer or 5 things you might or might not know about the m4 carbine since everyone in the world probably won't really know a lot about the m4 carbine :D
newdefsys Fact: I only have dogs as pets. Fact: I don't have cats as pets. The second is a superfluous fact, it's just a space filler and therefore lazy and a disappointment
Wes Davis The original M16 was built using a 1:12 twist barrel and it was called the AR15. The M16 and M4 both have 1:7 twist barrels. There is another variation in service called the MK12 and it has a 1:8 twist barrel. There are some NATO countries that still have 1:12 twist barrels, but none of them are in the US military. In fact the green tips commonly found on 5.56 ammunition are on there so that countries that are using 1:12 twist barrel know to avoid the ammunition in their rifles. A 1:12 twist barrel will not stabilize bullets used in M855 62gr ball ammunition. The M193 5.56 round uses a 55gr bullet. It may be possible for some 1:12 barrels to stabilize it, but would not be 100% reliable. The slow twist rate and relative short barrel length associated with the M16 and M4 would cause bullets to tumble in flight. Most US issue carbines and rifles of the Stoner design have 1:7 twist barrels in lengths from 14.5" to 20". Just so you know 1:12 twist barrel seem to work best with 45gr bullets.
stupidasso77 The original AR15 designed by stoner utilized a 1/14 twist rate appropriate for 55 grain m193, however this was increased to 1/12 in the M16 and m16A1. It remained this way until the evolution of the A2. The a2 at first was going to utilize a 1/9 which is the preferred rate for 62 grain bullets but was standardized by NATO at a 1/7 across all NATO countries for one reason, to improve ballistic performance over long distances NOT to improve accuracy. By the way the Mk12 mod 0 has a 1/7 twist Douglas barrel. The military arms channel recently compared the accuracy of the 1/12 and the 1/7 twist rate and found NO DIFFERNCE in accuracy while using everything from 55 grain to 77 grain. in fact it can be argued that The 5.56mm cartridge is the most effective in a 1/9 twist rate. The slower rate means the bullet is more easily upset in soft tissue which is the selling point in the Newer general issue rounds being used by the military m855 a1 m318 and mk262. "fact the green tips commonly found on 5.56 ammunition are on there so that countries that are using 1:12 twist barrel know to avoid the ammunition in their rifles." I have no idea where you heard this at but it is only partly true. The green tip is a NATO standard to denote the difference between the M855 and M193. While some NATO countries are still using 1/12 the green tip was placed there to prevent confusion since m855 is considered to be "more human" then its smaller 55 grain cousin.
I served in I corps Vietnam 67-68. I had a choice of a M16a1 or a M-14 with selector. I picked the M-14 and it was the best thing I could have done. M-14 was by far superior to any M-16 ever produced. I could take out things with one shot that took three by an M-16. The 7.62x51 round will go thru an 8-10 inch tree and still take out charlie on the other side. The M-16/M-16a1/M-16a2, M4 are all pieces of junk when it comes to a fire fight, and while things are happening the few extra pounds don't make any difference. Yeah I carried as much ammo as most guys did with a 16, but I never noticed the difference. Other than an M-14 the only other rifle that is any good is an FN FAL, an they issued 30 rd mags with these. And by the way having a selector on my weapon I could use full auto and support the rest of the squad, either on a bi-pod or from the waist I could keep it pretty well on target. This country should have never went with the M-16 or the 5.56 round. Big mistake. But like everything in this country the all mighty dollar dictates what our people will use. Always has always will. The M-14 had the shortest issue life, why, because not alot of money could be made. Oh another thing the 7.62 cartridge is to much for woman and the sissy-boys to handle. This country should adopt a weapon similar to an AK and with similar ammo. Israel makes a good weapon, just beef it up and use a 7.61 round just a little shorter, not as short as th standard AK round but something in between.
Accuracy sucked with 193, I have had M-16's with God only knows how much ammo down the bore hold 1-3 minutes of angle at 300 meters off the bench. that sound like poor accuracy to you? incidentally those were from the first 60000 purchased for the AirForce by Curtis Lemay
Grew up poor in then South learned to shoot at an early age, taught by my Dad a disabled WW2 vet who went to work every day even when he was hurting, as I said we were poor so I learned not to waste ammo, enlisted in the Air Force at 18 16 years in got in money trouble lost my clearances got an Honerable discharge though
Was very familiar with M16, I was Vietnam Era to past Desert Storm and can still assemble disassemble the rifle in my sleep. The improved M4 basically a shortened M16 and a very smart concept, take what they already know and change moderately so you improve the function and preserve the soldier's basic knowledge. Very revealing. Also, my congrats to Sgt. LeAnne who bagged all those insurgents. US Army all the way!!! 25 years on my watch and I hope many of you enjoy the same length of career I had a privilege to serve in. Peace soldiers!!!
As far as my opinion of the M4 platform as a whole, I feel it is a valuable tool in our arsenal that has its limitations just like every other tool we have. For CQB equipped with someOf the specialized rounds like the mk262, it has shown to be very effective. However with the standard M855 green tip load, we have seen a number of cases where rounds are just going through and through enemy targets and multiple rounds are needed to stop a threat. This is what initially transitioned some of the other cartridges such as .300 blk, .458 SoCom etc. I feel that for close encounters as well as limited mobility encounters (road blocks, IED sweeps etc) it is an excellent platform and with all of the advancements made in other calibers and such I don't see the M4 platform losing popularity any time soon. Lastly, I can personally attest to the ever changing technology for this platform being a lifesaver; as a close friend of mine is here today thanks to a well placed .458 round that immediately stopped a target who had already taken the last 4 rounds of M855 out of a magazine and was a mere second away from firing a fatal 7mm round when the big SoCom tore into his abdomen and put him down flat.
During the famous "Blackhawk Down" incident in Somali, soldiers complained of these M855 green tipped rounds that were designed to penetrate body armor as passing straight through the enemy. Since the majority of these enemy were high as kites on "Khat" (which is a plant they chewed and had the affect of amphetamines) check spelling, unless the green tipped rounds hit a majority organ eg heart lung spine head etc the enemy often would just keep coming only feeling the effect of the wound until after.
Henry Kinssinger it happens in Iraq and Afghanistan too. I've seen it many times, usually them shooting and running away. It might have penetrating power but no stopping power. just passes through... I'm sure they die later.
both M16 and M4 rifles are great i had used both in the Army however the M4 is more suitable for close combat. its not easy clearing a building with a M16A2 rifle. My major issue with these rifles are that you have to constantly maintaining them clean and lubed otherwise you will be jamming that rifle. Iraq sand(more like tan talcum powder) gets into everything! that needs to be addressed.
+jeffv2074 Not enough to justify it as a general issue weapon, it has to many problems associated with it's shorter overall length like short sight radius overheating due to shorter gas tube leading also to a more violent slamming of the bolt group because of operating at higher gas pressures,. lower muzzle velocity and less kenetic energy shorter effective range resulting from that. nope I would say its the M-16 NOT pertfected
+jeffv2074 A-2 Rifle Never had a problem with it, In and out Vehicles of all sorts and no reliability issues with what I personally believe the best basic sight system of any issue weapon in any army today.
+8aleph My MP unit was trained in SRT at Ft. Drum, some soldiers were having issues during our training and would get caught up, the same went for mount training the barrels would get caught on the front passenger seat belts when trying to exit quickly from the HUMMWV. however we overcame it. its a good rifle but it must be maintained. i used MK19 grease on my M16 which performed better then breakfree oil, i only used the oil to clean the rifle.
Being qualified on both the M16A4 and the M4A1 Carbine. It is all based on the situation, the mission. Personally I don't think our soldiers should be limited to just a certain weapon system. Our troops should have a wide range to choose from, based of experience and preferences. Although the M16 series, the M4 Carbine are over all great weapon systems. A soldier and his weapon system, is like driving. Best performance is through experience, comfortability, preference, and situations. For the weapon system can simply be the difference between his life, or the enemies. The weapon system is the soldiers life LITTERALLY! No perfect weapon system will ever exsist.
Ok. I'm going to call bull-shit on #3. Both rounds defeat soft body armor, but neither comes even close to denting body armor plates. All center-fire rifle rounds will zip through soft body armor but only .50 cal AP rounds will penetrate plates. Not even 30-06 AP will defeat proper plates. This "green tip designed and defeating body armor" is BS because all typical rifle rounds defeat soft armor, so all the ignoramus' hearing this think green tip is dragon slayer ammo that "normal folk" don't need and therefore we can ban it. This idiocy was stopped last year when ATF suggested they ban green tip because it was AP, but luckily people rose up and stopped them. Let's not push propaganda for the left and say green tip is AP, ok there you?
I am way to the left of what you pillocks call left. But you are getting all bent out of shape over one of his few accurate, though worthless, statements. What he said was it was designed to defeat body armor, he didn't say it was designed to defeat the current generation of NATO body armor. Development of the new NATO standard round started in 1970 and the SS109/M855 was adopted in 1980. Long ago and far away as they say. Back then hard trauma plates didn't exist and soldiers didn't hump body armor around with them, much less wear it. The M855A1 is both lead free and more consistently effective than the M855, but still leaves you firing a varmint round at big game. I have five AR15s, all built myself, I actually like the 6.8SPCII best of what I have, but I'd still take the FAL if I could only take one. I thought you loony right wing testosterone poisoned freaks knew your onions?
+Bentley What do you want to know? First one was A G20C, replaced the barrel with an unported one. Most recent is a Springfield 1911, swapped out the stupid and unnecessary full length guide rod and got Pachmayer grips.
The M193 round can indeed penetrate soft body armor. The M855 has a steel penetrator that is designed to enhance penetration at longer ranges than the M193 cartridge.
muddlemann Have you heard about the XTP rounds for 5.56mm, 7.62mm and 9mm calibre type? XTP = Xtreme Terminal Penetration. its a non armor piercing round with a star shaped tip...easily penetrates Type IV Armor inclusive with the blunt trauma pads. Not sure if it is in use, was implemented but got rejected due to the massive injuries during an aftermath. No field medic would be able to perform any effective field work if one got hit. You can imagine the exit wounds....GAWD
rudy arif Are you talking about the ones made by Hornaday?They made them in lots of calibers but,last I heard,they quit making them.They were pretty common in most gun stores in the 90s.I don't see why they would be viewed any differently than,say,a Hydra-Shok or Golden Saber.Any JHP that reliably expands is going to do a lot more damage than an FMJ round of the same caliber.
Steven Nunez the interceptor body armor (standard of US army) is only comparable to NIJ III but that doesnt really apply anyway since that standardization is only used for law enforcemrnt and not military, the esapi plates currently in use with the interceptor armor can stop up to 3 HITS from 30-06 AP, ceramic is very hard but very brittle, good luck on trying to survive a center mass full auto burst
this video sucks. 1. the thumbnail shows an m16 2. this video says what I DON'T know. well, it's a carbine. which means shortened version of a said rifle. which means that all carbines are designed for cqb. so why is that included? 3. no its not always used with green tip ammo. in fact. it rarely is. 4. no its maximum effective range on its own is only 300m. 600m only with a SAW, in a squad level. 5. no it doesn't offer more effective fire at longer ranges than the m16. the m16 is literally the exact same rifle just with a longer barrel ffs. 6. of course the m4 has pretty much the same parts as the m16. that is because it is the CARBINE version of the m16 7. the m855 Greentip round is not an armor piercing round but an enhanced penetration round. 8. both cartridges he described are both 5.56 x45mm NATO and can be used in either rifle. that doesn't make the m4 better because it has nothing to do with the m4. they did tighten the twist rate of the m4 to 1in7" twist but they did the same on the next version of the m16. this helps the rifle propell a heavier bullet more effectively by spinning it faster. 9. a heavier barrel does not help to dissipate heat. it simply absorbs more heat. stays more rigid. and warps less easily. 10. how do you know? 11. They're called ar-15s. which were designed by armalite originally in the 50s. this design was sold to colt who made the m16 and m4. ar-15s are not m-forgeries because the ar-15 existed long before the m4. 12. any rifle can get white hot from too much shooting and therefore malfunction. this doesn't make it inferior. 13. if you're going to make a video. get educated on the subject first
My dad said in a prolonged fire fight you set the m4 to semi-automatic so it has time to cool and in a pinned down position you rotate soldiers to the heaviest fighting if you can to conserve on ammo and prevent over heating of their m4 rifles thats all he could figure out because they just don't cool well
The M-4 is designed for cqb, with that being said I much prefer the M-16 on the range. Its a lot easier to hit targets over 200m with an M-16 than an M-4.
+Ian Jacob That's not even close to the reason, every country has a lot of debt nowadays, they equip the M4 because it's cheap, reliable, and it's similiar to the M16, it's the same platform anyways.
The M16, AR15, M4 rifle platform does an incredible job and does it very well. So well in fact it's here to stay, no reason to replace it at all. The rifle only requires proper maintenance and replacement of any worn part's! Far more accurate and versitile than it's advisary.
the title really should be "five intreasting facts that normal people possibly do not know about the m4 carbine." or "5 intreasting facts about the m4 carbine"
The M4 is suitable for combat if you're not using a "spray and pray" approach to combat. Dumping one mag after another isn't what it's intended to do. As the video indicated, it's a light CQB gun. If you want to sustain fire, you need a heavier gun, bigger barrel, etc. And a slower rate of fire would be good too. You can do 300-350 rpm with a good binary trigger. Heck, with just a Geissele SD3G you can get nearly 200 in SEMI auto. Yes, your finger will get tired.
M855 green tip can only be armor piercing when fired through a 18 inch barrel as it's original intent. That's a big reason why the m855 is kind of ass with the carbine.
Personally I think that the currently manufactured M-16/M-4 series of rifles is the best rifle that the U.S. has ever been issued. The fact that the weapons will continue to fire non-stop (even with malfunctions) in a long battle is a testament to Mr. Stoners design. Any weapon will malfunction if not properly maintained or put through a complete stress/abuse in long engagements. But the M-16/M-4 series has yet served our nation for 50+ years and shows no sign or reason to be replaced. No disrespect to other weapons designers or the weapons designs themselves. but the M-16/M-4 platform is one of the greatest weapons ever made. In fact i own an old school full sized Post '94 ban Colt example, and I love the rifle, I also own a Smith&Wesson 15-22 and it to is a fine rifle not only for traingin and target shooting, but for small game hunting and pest control.
The main reason is that the US could resort to say, a bullpup design, or an ACR or something, but they are using a rifle that is made of 50 yr old parts, apart from that the benifits of a bullpup design are collossal and substantially impact close quarters and stealth as well as ranged combat.
james williams But a Bullpup design does have issues, an SBR or SMG (9mm) that would accept Glock mags would be a better option for CQB situations while still using the AR platform in a delayed blowback configuration that uses a closed bolt.
+james williams benefits of a bullpup? They are horrible in pretty much every way. Ergonomics suck, efficiency sucks, LOP sucks, trigger pull sucks, mag changes suck ext. If they were good teams would be running them already, while the vast majority of spec ops around the would run some variant of the M4.
+nmdiesel89 smaller, less recoil, less material wasted, but without dropping the overall power, range, accuracy and integrity, just remember, your nation is using something that consits of old parts, the m4 is pretty much obselite now, things like the aug, the l85, the famas, the ksg and the barret m95 are prime examples of how the old method of placing the trigger group behind the magazine, the l85 was actually sonaccurate that the british army had to re invent its accuracy test, which the m16 had previously been tried on
james williams Obsolete? Tell that to SF, Delta, Seals, British/Aus SAS, SBS, and virtually every tier one team out there. So a obsolete gun is the gun of choice of the top spec ops teams, says alot about bull pups doesn't it? less recoil, unless the laws of physics have changed, no. Felt recoil is dependent on the weight of the gun, so unless they are heavier the recoil is the same. Less material wasted, what on a m4/ar15 platform is wasted material? Range? Really? They are terrible to shoot at long range due to their crap balance and horrible trigger pull. Accuracy? Again really? Just check out the Tavor, a $1000 AR will out shoot it out of the box with plenty of tests to show it. A decent AR with good ammo will shoot close to 1 moa. The bull pup is a great design.... on paper... and only on paper. They have horrible balance, humans tend to balance things between their hands, not behind them. The triggers are junk (please count these two things as to why long range shooting is difficult with a bull pup). Reloads are cumbersome and slower. Their not left hand friendly. Their ergonomics and layout is retarded. Length of pull is insanely long. The thing about the traditional layout is.... it works! Has for a long, long time. The bullpup, gives up so much to gain so little.
I've shot tons of guns. I've been to machine gun shoots, pistol matches and various competitions as well as shooting firearms owned by friends and family. The M4 is my favorite weapon overall. Everything has it's pros and cons. Personally for me....M4. Everyone has their own opinion and different things work for different people.
My M-16a1 was VERY UNRELIABLE . I served in USMC 1975-1979. The military made improvements to the AR platform, bringing in the shortened M-4 carbine, BUT still not reliable as the AK. LOVE my civilian M-4 as a sporting rifle. BULLPUP is the next evolution of military rifles.
+aaron perkins Dear baby Jesus, someone else who actually listened during their military training. I literally had to stop reading the posts. The info was wrong from the video, everyone keeps saying 600 yds and it's 600 meters, idiots not converting 600 meters to yards correctly (it's 656 yds btw), a full blown discussion about the HK 416 and most SOF don't even use them any more because of bolt carrier tilt problems, and blah blah blah. What an awful thread of misinformation, error, and stupidity. At least I found one post that was correct.
+Mayday317 I don't have the TM or FM in front of me, but I'm very sure the M4 is indeed listed as 500m point 600m area effective. The specs aren't the gospel though. None of our cars get the exact MPG per the manufacturer specs. Maybe more or less depending on a lot of things. I remember when ACOG optics became standard issue for my infantry unit. From lots of range time and training we could hit silhouettes at 800m fairly consistently. This was not the case with the M68 optic.
The M4A1 is near perfect. It corrects any flaws the M16 has. Especially the 3-round burst feature. Those Army soldiers used the M4 non stop. They malfunctioned just like ANY other rifle glowing white hot and malfuntioning. The M16 did the same in Vietnam. And is still in service. This has more to do with over use or misuse of the weapon than anything else.
The M16 series has greater range and FAR better accuracy. Not to mention the Israelis FIXED everything that was broken with the AK series. Its called the Galil. (Dominic bursts into flame from being burned by decades old facts.)
+Dominic Ybarra Uhh no shit, because those are all dedicated MACHINE GUNS designed to fire full-auto for longer periods with heavier barrels and better cooling abilities. (ignoring the AK, since you are simply wrong about that). So that's basically comparing apples to oranges..... And even those will still over-heat if you continuously fire them for too long.
M4 is a great weapon, we don't need to replace it, we just need to upgrade it, better, more reliable material, and replace the direct impingement gas system with the short-stroke gas system .
M193 out of the M16's 20" barrel will defeat level III body armor, out of the M4's 14.5" barrel it will not. M855 will not defeat level III out of either barrel. The reason is the M193's 55 grain bullet is leaving the barrel faster than the M855's 62 grain bullet.
Fired about 200 rnds during firefight and my M4 started to malfunctioning. I think an M4 if brand new will sustain the rigor test of 2-3k rounds. But after multiple deployments and a few thousand rounds the M4 become not as reliable.
+stevensnake02 You don't owe me a thank you. I thank this country for giving me the life and freedom I enjoy today. I owe you the people who provided me with the tools to accomplish my mission. Thank you
We were offered the M-16 carbine when I was in the service and after trying it we went back to our regular M-16s. The longer barrel gave us better accuracy but, to be fair, we weren't in close quarters much. The SF team that we trained with loved it for the three round burst but, they also traded us their 1911s for our M-9s. Guess it's just a matter of preference.
@@dorianvujica3946 that's not necessarily true. The term "carbine" refers to the length of the gas system, not the barrel length. It is possible to have a carbine length gas system on any length of barrel greater than 7 inches.
+Domus deBellum All a piston is one more unneeded part to add weight with zero gain in weapon effectiveness, a part I might add that, if it is damaged renders a weapon useless. plus direct impingement has worked since the beginning on the M-16, the Vietnam era problems were due to Ordinance department not wanting that weapon and attempting to ruin it as you can see didn't happen and the -16 has served longer than any other US service rifle , plus in my years I've never run across either a folding or telescoping stock worth a piece of used toilet paper.
I never had one in the Marines, we had the M-14 and M-60! But the M4 looks really cool I would love to own one! God bless America, Semper Fidelis forever! Oohrah
I used the M4 in Iraq under a DOD Security contact I loved the M4 it is light compact and can easily engage a target out to 600 meters with a good tactical scope
I think you should speak to some men who have actually been in combat about the penetration capabilities of M193 vs M855. The fact of the matter is, from a 20" barrel the m193 has enough of a velocity advantage over the heavier & slower m855 coming out of the short 14.5" barrel which equalizes the playing field. In the real world, (read: in combat) there is no body armor the m855 fired from aN M4 will penetrate that the m193 fired from an M16 will not. This is all hype, and I personally think you are furthering this myth by repeating that statement. The new M855 rounds are a different story, but the cold hard fact is that green tip M855 and M193 are both equally capable at penetrating most SOFT armor from standard barrel lengths and both equally incapable of defeating hard body armor from standard barrel lengths. Moving along to a 24" barrel in say a Rem 700, and standard M193 can defeat hard level 3 plate armor due to sheer velocity. The green tip round with its steel penetrative tip is merely to keep the lead core from fragmenting on thin materials such as sheet metal automobile panels, auto glass etc. That is the extent of its capability and it is NOT an armor penetrating round.
Joe Doole M193 being a 55gr projectile reaches higher velocities than M855 in the same length barrel an can therefore punch through even most level 3 steel plate body armor at close to medium ranges. M855 cannot even with the steel penetrator core, velocity is what defeats body armor. This video got it complete backwards m855 was never designed as armor piercing ammo but more of a barrier/cover penetrator and to carry more energy at further ranges with the heavier projectile. While both can easily punch through all soft body armor, the M193 actually has more of a chance of penetration with hard plate armor due to its higher velocity. Hope that clears it up, both projectiles have their advantages and disadvantages.
Robert Schmidt Your talking about actual AP ammunition (black tip). Obviously any AP ammunition isn't going to rely on velocity so much as its hardened steel core which is actually designed specifically to go through armor. What I was discussing was why M193 being a lead core bullet can still push through armor due it's high velocity vs the steel core M855. M855 is not designed as an AP round despite common misconception. And even though it has a steel projectile it does not reach the velocity that the M193 does that makes it possible to punch through most level 3 steel body armor.
All combat rifles in mass production have their melt-down point. What stops this is tactics, stress innoculation training, strong field command leadership and position and fire superiority in the theater of operation Sectors and cyclic rate of fire control is the safeguard against melting barrels, etc.
They got white hot during the firefight because their barrels we're already shot out in multiple deployments and then reused in training before that particular squad ever left home. The rifles should have been gone through and rebuilt/refurbished before shipping out over seas. DOD never puts enough emphasis on refurbishment and proper maintenance schedules.
Come on.. Everyone knows basically the whole US special operations uses the M4. I think the M4 is good, but there are many other rifles that are way better for service. Try looking at a proper bullpup for example. It would be way more compact.
+GamePhysics Like what? Bullpup design is primarily for VERY CLOSE quarter combat, like buildings. They are popular in Israel because majority of their engagements are in cities which are even smaller in terms of size than say Iraq. Bullpup has its uses but none of them are time tested. Tavor in some ways yes, but compared to an M4 with a shorter barrel it doesnt offer that many advantages. I wouldnt consider any other bullup viable because none of them were used in long term conflicts, especially deserts (other than Tavor)
The same old arguments that put forth when the military went from .30 Cal/.308/7.72 NATO to 5.56....."Wars have changed...Its all close quarters now..."......."The troops can carry more ammo with 5.56".....Translation.........(Especially during Vietnam...)...."We don't want to invest any extra time and effort to train you to be an expert marksman.....(with 7.62) so we're going to give you a plastic rifle that shoots on "rock and roll" so you don't have to aim much......and its damn cheap to make..... Oh yeah....the new ammo is nice and light so you can carry a lot of it....... What a joke....
Military always fight the last war. In jungles where ease of movement was a priority, ok. But in the sandbox most firefights are in much longer distances and there are on branches and vines to restrict free movement
The M4 does the job just fine. I carried the M4 in Iraq in 2006-07, 2008-09, and in Afghanistan in 2010-11, and it never let me down as long as I kept it lubed. The only negative that I have for it is the ammo. I would have rather carried 55gr M193 as opposed to the M855, because the 193 fragments and blows up in soft tissue alot better than the Green Tip. Former 11B.
legba eshu I'm surprised that not a single feminist decided to ride your ass for this one. But, its no lie that Canadian/American forces are plagued with this feminist crap.
Isaac Burton Yup. I have no problem with having a women for a boss, a coworker or women in the military. I figure if they want to play with the boys in a male dominant environment and then expect special treatment because they are a woman THEN I HAVE HUGE PROBLEM WITH IT.
I can personally say that at least one rotation of Canadian soldiers saw a year's ADDITIONAL training, purely for deployment into Afghanistan at Fort Bliss Texas, for a nine month deployment. And, yes, this doesn't include the regular training, drill, and operational retinue. You or I may shit ourselves in that situation, but commonwealth/north american forces tend to be better trained than us. Have you heard of the engagement, where a British unit ran out of ammo when engaged, so they went for a bayonet charge?
Many of these lovely insurgents don't realize that many westerners, myself included, would be happy to introduce them to some of our modern comforts. Like the C7 battle rifle (assault rifles are a myth of the media, guns are for killing and control, not assault).
Maybe add a heavier, quick-change barrel to allow more continuous fire and to prevent the barrel from melting. And perhaps issue either quad-stack magazines or drums to those with this M4-LMG
They considered it a 'monopoly' in a gun. It could be modified to play the role of a Rifle, Carbine, Auto-Rifle, and Designated Marksman Rifle, all on the same platform. It was all about money.
Any weapon that would melt down in a prolonged fire fight while in the hands of our Military personal depending on that weapon for their life, should be scrapped for junk, And we should develop a weapon worthy of our military personals willingness to put their lives on the line with that weapon, Any weapon our armed forces takes into battle should never have catastrophic failures under any circumstances in combat,
because if you know how guns operate then you should know that every system has a point where the metals start melting aks had em m16 had em alot of M4 variants use metal in them guess what? they melt too plus the Russians had aks in the middle east look how that turned out
With the high fire rate and thin barrels the M4 will always have heat problems. Trade offs of barrel weight vs carry weight depends on the mission in my opinion. I don't think it is a one size fits all kind of thing. Get in and get out is one thing and the lightweight weapon s suited best for that purpose. If it is going to be a sustained firefight my preference would be a full length rifle. Of course this is only my opinion as I have never seen combat.
I have a lot of respect for american soldiers exposing their lifes , but me being familiar with the function of the M4, I would never ever go to war with a stock M4 like the ones the army issues, the strange thing is that if soldiers take further apart the weapon, they'll go to jail for what I've heard.... that sucks
MADMAX MASON Yeah, but these US troops are hardwired to hearing AK fire and connecting it with it being a threat. If you just drop your M4 and pick up an AK47, you'll most likely be subjected to friendly fire. This ain't a video game.
***** I was saying the worst case scenario. But what MadMax was saying is totally incorrect when you apply it to the real world. Would you really drop your weapon that you would have experience and knowledge of than a weapon you just picked off a dead insurgent? I don't know about you, but I wouldn't.
DesertCamo32 I have used AK47's and a few AK74's that I "picked up off the ground" while in Iraq. It is true that US soldiers know the sound of the AK and it can make our skin crawl. Never the less that does not mean you are guaranteed to become the victim of fratricide. You are on the right track though, because our enemies recognize the sound of the AK too. I have seen them literally walk right up and get captured because they thought a building was a strong hold for their people. As for knowing the weapon the AK weapon system, it is pretty simple. In fact part of what makes it such a great weapon is that an illiterate 12 year old conscript can easily put it in to service and be effective. Most of us that were in combat arms jobs encountered them frequently and got to shoot them on the range while in country. There were some commanders that realized it benefited soldiers to not only be familiar with the sound and appearance of the enemy's weapons; but also know how to proficiently use them. Most soldiers carried a minimum of 210 rounds for their rifles. While that is a respectable load out and can be easily expanded upon, it is still not a lifetime supply of ammunition. I am also yet to meet a guy who had been in a gunfight that said, "you know what Stu Pidasso, I just wish I had less ammunition." The ability to use any weapon on the battlefield serves as a real force multiplier for soldiers of any military.
The M855 was designed for better barrier penetration, not armor penetration since it has a mild steel tip. Really, the round kind of just sucks all around compared to the M855A1 and the M193. I don't really agree with the definition of an M4 and M16 being separate rifles. There are small differences of course such as the feed ramps and shorter barrel lengths but they are both still AR-15s. They just have two separate military designations.
I recently purchased a brand new M4 from Gander Mountain, and I must say that of all my other rifles, pistols, and shotguns in my collection, the M4 is the most fun to shoot. It is also incredibly easy to field-strip for cleaning. I highly recommend the M4 (or any other AR15 style rifle or carbine) to anyone who can afford one (I paid about $930 for mine) and legally own one. I also bought a new Aimpoint PRO red dot optic for it, which was about half the cost of the M4! But keep in mind that you will pay a lot for a quality product, and Aimpoint makes top-quality optics.
the woman was awarded because she was there at the right time and engaged in a firefight and i believe she was awarded in recognition of her in actual firefight. What about her male counterparts? no award for them? Is she the one who did the real fight against the insurgents? Maybe she was curling in her space while the male soldiers were doing the firefight; and then she will also shoot from time to time. Did she really killed some of the insurgents? who told it? In my country Communist insurgent women were known to shoot it out with government soldiers who uses mortars and howitzers including aerial bombings against them.
I heard that the M855 doesn't yaw and loses that tumble effect. And the ammo we get doesn't have a full steel core giving it less tumble therefore becomes an over penetration problem, without body armor piercing ability.
The M855 is designed to provide better terminal ballistics when fired from a shorter barrel. It is not generally better at penetrating body armor. Both of them will defeat kevlar body armor easily. The M855 has some edge when it comes to polyethylene body armor and if you fire it from the full length M16 barrel it may do a bit better against ceramic but ceramic will usually stop either round. For steel body armor (which I don't think any military uses but is used in some of the cheapest rifle-rated body armor), the M193 fired from the full length barrel is better than the M855 fired from either the M4 or M16 barrel length. The M855 is sometimes called "light armor penetrator" but that is a misnomer. The tip is only mild steel. The real purpose of the tip is to move the center of mass of the bullet backwards (steel being less dense than lead). The M855A1 changed over to a hardened steel tip and does do a bit better at penetrating marginal ceramic body armor.
with my little experience with the m4 (4 years of shooting multiple ar15s) if you cheap out and buy a cheap shitty rifle you get what you pay for and its going to have FTF but if you get a decent one and not cheap out you will have an amazing shootee
+mitchell brenner Lots of the problems from cheap, off the shelf ARs is they over gas them & use crappy springs. If you install a heavier buffer & a quality spring kit like Tubbs or Wolff you will get a reliable shooter. It won't last as long as high end components (you do get what you pay for) but it will feel better & be reliable. lol Over the years I have had many friends bring me an old Bushy, RR, or other consumer grade AR complaining about reliability issues & a good H2 buffer with a new, quality spring kit gets them running great. It kind of amazes me they don't come that way from the factory. Most people don't shoot enough to realize they won't last as long & if they were reliable out of the box, so to speak, they would have better reputations.
M4 is nothing but a shitty weapon M16 is WHHHYY better and plus the M16 has better velocity, accarucy, and reliability than M4 and M4 jams and heats up more than the M16...and I thought I was the only one who loved the M16 over M4
I love the carbine M4........as a PDW. I am Ex-US Army Infantry circa 1983-86 and carried an M16A1. I was 18-21 then, and was happy with it. Now I'm eye-balling wheelchairs, so shorter is better for me.
The ammunition comment is incorrect. They can both fire both rounds the only difference is the twist rate. We still have m16(a4) that fire m855. Also the m855 is not designed to defeat armor, it has a a mild steel penetrator in the tip that helps the round stay solid after penetrating hard targets. The m193 55GR ball round has more velocity and usually has a better chance of going through armor but without the penetrator comes out the back side in pieces vs a solid projectile.
I don't like rails they lead to tacticool weight gain with no increase in usability. if I'm going to carry extra weight it's going to be 6" more barrel and a fixed butt and a tritium illuminated reflex sight
Video is about m4
Shows m16 in the thumbnail
*SEEMS* *LEGIT*
The m4 carbine is a shorter version of the m16a2 assault rifle
@Erwin i knew that
Maybe they didn’t know how to change the thumbnail so that frame was randomly selected
Hate to be that guy but it’s an m16a1
👉 there wouldn't be an m4 without the m16
With respect to the ammo. It's more correct to say they changed the rate of twist of the rifling to accomodate the heavier bullet. Either barrel can fire either ammo type, just not optimally.
+Grapthars Hammer M-855 has no real advantage over 55 grain ammo in fact the m-193 ball has better wounding capability as M-855 was designed by a swiss ballistician to comply with the Hague convention and is the only round of ammo to ever do so it icepicks and tracks straight through a target
You are correct. 1:12 twist for the M16, very slow twist which shoots m193 55gr well. The M4 uses a 1:9 or even 1:7 nowadays to optimize the rifle for 62 gr and higher grain ammo. The whole thing about m855 being designed to ice pick and only wound not kill is the STUPIDEST thing people keep perpetuating. It was designed to DEFEAT LIGHT ARMOR or helmets at even 300 yards, hence "LAP" or light armor penetrating. It is just a side effect that m855 tends not to yaw or tumble because it is too stable when going through soft targets, whereas m193 55gr is more likely to yaw or tumble or fragment on soft targets but socks against light armor.
Wrong, M-855 ball ammo is NATO SS-109, a round designed in Switzerland to Comply with the Hague treaty on weapons of war, sorry, I participated in some of the testing of that round .
its a good gun but its getting up there in age thats the issue
The problem is M-4 CARBINE, nor A-2 rifle which is about 6 inches longer and vastly more efficient with 3-5oo FPS more nuzzle velocity. The second thing is all the Tacticool none sense permitted on it, the only addition I, and it's just my opinion, is the trijicon tritium illuminated reflex sight
I learned 5 things I already knew about the M4 from the video, and about 50 things I didn't know about the M4 from the comments.
Doubt
Lol...I guarantee it.
Right ha
😀😃😄😁😆😅👍👍
Sir the 1st gen of this weapon was called the CAR 15 or Colt Automatic Rifle. It was a stubby of the M-16. Military Dog handlers were issued these awesome weapons in the late 60's and early 70's. Just FYI
Nomadman or we call it the xm177 that's the first model
Macv SOG used em too! They raved about them
Its amazing to me, a combat veteran myself, that saw several gunfights OIF/OEF, and a WOMAN automatically gets a SILVER STAR for her 30 min gunfight, when MEN of a typical 82nd Airborne Division Combat Unit, who gets into a firefight like that on a regular weekly basis, for the months that they were deployed, are ONLY awarded an Army ARCOM, or a Bronze Star at most, at the end of their tour of duty. DISCRIMINATION MUCH?!!!
I agree I thought that was their job to kill the enemy. Now we give out silver stars like candy it seems
tell me about it brother! smh
Correct me if wrong, but they said she was an mp, doing escort duty correct? In WWII, there were cooks and other non-combat role personnel who were awarded higher medals because they did join the fight, and did well. If you are a regular old grunt, and want a medal, you better dive on the grenade that would take out your unit. If you did that, and still don't get a medal, then .... who knows.
my dad was in Vietnam at the battle of xom Bo, search and destroy attached to the big red 1. dad was attached to the forward observer who went down and my dads position was over run to the point where the enemy was in front and behind and all around. he defended his position killing enemies ,took over the radio, called in artillery and airstrikes and carried wounded off the battlefield. he was awarded a bronze star with a v-device and a second bronze....that at 18 or 19 yrs old. they actually did search and DESTROY ,wiped that whole regiment out, slaughtered them.
my dad gives respect to our armed service but it upsets him they called Vietnam a CONFLICT and everything else a war.
Hats off and much appreciation to all who serve and all who has, heroes in my book!!
here here! wtf is up with that?
I have never fired the M-4 Carbine.
I was issued an M16-A1 with a 40mm M-203 grenade launcher during the Vietnam War.
It worked well enough for me.
Thank you Perry. And a belated welcome home!
The M855 is an enhanced penetration round. Not an armor-piercing round.
Almost any 556/223 will defeat soft bodyarmor.
Ironstorm Agreed. The ATF's BS attempted ban on M855 for it being AP created a whole host of demonstrations showing XM193 and M855 have a negligible difference in penetration of armor (including plates).
Agreed. I also felt the need to post a comment to clarify this as well
Ironstorm personally i would rather have a small bullet go through me, than a big bullet not go through me. because if a bullet doesnt go through you, it will take your ribs and smash them all the way to your spine.
not almost, any all of them will. but the pussies who are scared of guns don't need to know that.
Was going to point out the same thing. WOW...you would think the history channel would actually know what they are talking about.
Brace yourself.... video game references are coming...
Battlefield 4
zonkeys9000 CSGO
UARAF16 huh?
skibum1610 according to the description for the M4A4 in CSGO, the m4a4 is best in mid-range combat, however it can be mastered for long range as well as CQC scenarios.
zonkeys9000 CSGO is a game, if you got to a video about a karambit or M9 bayonet you'll see CSGO kiddies talking about the game because the knife is in the game.
"M-Forgeries". lmao. Never heard that one before.
Same
I thought they were preferably called AR-15s
+BlaZe ViPr same
+BlaZe ViPr that's the civilian version of the m4. It doesn't have automatic capabilities because that takes extra licensing, the military does not use that weapon.
I know, but I've never heard someone call them an M-Forgery.
Shoot any full auto gun long non stop, It's going to heat up too much at some point.
An AK 47 will be too hot to handle yet it will still continue to fire...our soldiers should have rifles that dont fail just because they are "too hot".
TELL PEOPLE SOMETHING THEY DON'T KNOW !
@@TarmanTheChampion ..AK 47 is a loose built design which means not very accurate..
@@Rick-tb4so you shoot any rifle in full auto and it isnt very accurate. Also no conventional army uses the "ak47" as a primary rifle. Countries that provide their infantry with Russian rifles would issue them with a 5.45 variant making it far more accurate and a very flat shooting rifle. All this "Ak47 iSn'T accUrATE bEcAUsE it HaS LoOse toLEranCeS" argument is clutching at more than 60 year old straws. The platform has been tweaked and improved just as much as the ar-15 platform. That's why both weapons are issued to armies. If a weapon was atrocious governments would look for a replacement standard issue rifle.
AK-47 :"let me tell you pal"
i stopped subscribing to the military channel because the content is written for forth graders. i believe the MC is owned by Discovery channel, which explains a lot, i miss the old (hitler) History channel days, TV just plain sucks these days.
+Ha Re TV only sucks now because of the pc college kids who will bitch and complain about anything that they could call offensive, so all tv now has to be dumbed down to a fourth grade level for them.
Even more now 🤣
Your series should be titled "5 THINGS EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS ABOUT _____".
+Lynn Kramer agreed
+legokingiscool agreed as well
who would have thought that 80% of the m4 and m16 were the same...oh wait everyone does
+Lynn Kramer or 5 things you might or might not know about the m4 carbine since everyone in the world probably won't really know a lot about the m4 carbine :D
This kind of videos are for people that like weapons but aren't hardcore into their history, "stats",etc
Agreed. I have a set RUclips policy to give a thumbs down to any video that tells me I don't know something that I do know
Why are they making it so important that the M4 is desingned for the M855 and the M16 for the M193 while both can shoot both of the cartriges.
newdefsys Can't they be non-superfluous facts?
newdefsys
Fact: I only have dogs as pets.
Fact: I don't have cats as pets.
The second is a superfluous fact, it's just a space filler and therefore lazy and a disappointment
Wes Davis The original M16 was built using a 1:12 twist barrel and it was called the AR15. The M16 and M4 both have 1:7 twist barrels. There is another variation in service called the MK12 and it has a 1:8 twist barrel. There are some NATO countries that still have 1:12 twist barrels, but none of them are in the US military. In fact the green tips commonly found on 5.56 ammunition are on there so that countries that are using 1:12 twist barrel know to avoid the ammunition in their rifles. A 1:12 twist barrel will not stabilize bullets used in M855 62gr ball ammunition. The M193 5.56 round uses a 55gr bullet. It may be possible for some 1:12 barrels to stabilize it, but would not be 100% reliable. The slow twist rate and relative short barrel length associated with the M16 and M4 would cause bullets to tumble in flight. Most US issue carbines and rifles of the Stoner design have 1:7 twist barrels in lengths from 14.5" to 20". Just so you know 1:12 twist barrel seem to work best with 45gr bullets.
stupidasso77 correctamundo
stupidasso77 The original AR15 designed by stoner utilized a 1/14 twist rate appropriate for 55 grain m193, however this was increased to 1/12 in the M16 and m16A1. It remained this way until the evolution of the A2. The a2 at first was going to utilize a 1/9 which is the preferred rate for 62 grain bullets but was standardized by NATO at a 1/7 across all NATO countries for one reason, to improve ballistic performance over long distances NOT to improve accuracy. By the way the Mk12 mod 0 has a 1/7 twist Douglas barrel.
The military arms channel recently compared the accuracy of the 1/12 and the 1/7 twist rate and found NO DIFFERNCE in accuracy while using everything from 55 grain to 77 grain. in fact it can be argued that The 5.56mm cartridge is the most effective in a 1/9 twist rate. The slower rate means the bullet is more easily upset in soft tissue which is the selling point in the Newer general issue rounds being used by the military m855 a1 m318 and mk262.
"fact the green tips commonly found on 5.56 ammunition are on there so that countries that are using 1:12 twist barrel know to avoid the ammunition in their rifles."
I have no idea where you heard this at but it is only partly true. The green tip is a NATO standard to denote the difference between the M855 and M193. While some NATO countries are still using 1/12 the green tip was placed there to prevent confusion since m855 is considered to be "more human" then its smaller 55 grain cousin.
almost as good as the History channel... the sarcasm is real
+Michael Grant Didn't Charlton Heston have something to say about those who are "in the arena"?
+Michael Grant yes you love to imagine
I served in I corps Vietnam 67-68. I had a choice of a M16a1 or a M-14 with selector. I picked the M-14 and it was the best thing I could have done. M-14 was by far superior to any M-16 ever produced. I could take out things with one shot that took three by an M-16. The 7.62x51 round will go thru an 8-10 inch tree and still take out charlie on the other side.
The M-16/M-16a1/M-16a2, M4 are all pieces of junk when it comes to a fire fight, and while things are happening the few extra pounds don't make any difference. Yeah I carried as much ammo as most guys did with a 16, but I never noticed the difference. Other than an M-14 the only other rifle that is any good is an FN FAL, an they issued 30 rd mags with these. And by the way having a selector on my weapon I could use full auto and support the rest of the squad, either on a bi-pod or from the waist I could keep it pretty well on target.
This country should have never went with the M-16 or the 5.56 round. Big mistake. But like everything in this country the all mighty dollar dictates what our people will use. Always has always will. The M-14 had the shortest issue life, why, because not alot of money could be made. Oh another thing the 7.62 cartridge is to much for woman and the sissy-boys to handle. This country should adopt a weapon similar to an AK and with similar ammo. Israel makes a good weapon, just beef it up and use a 7.61 round just a little shorter, not as short as th standard AK round but something in between.
Accuracy sucked with 193, I have had M-16's with God only knows how much ammo down the bore hold 1-3 minutes of angle at 300 meters off the bench. that sound like poor accuracy to you? incidentally those were from the first 60000 purchased for the AirForce by Curtis Lemay
They finally get a little instability in 855? it needed something to transfer a little energy into a target otherwise it just icepicked a hole
Grew up poor in then South learned to shoot at an early age, taught by my Dad a disabled WW2 vet who went to work every day even when he was hurting, as I said we were poor so I learned not to waste ammo, enlisted in the Air Force at 18 16 years in got in money trouble lost my clearances got an Honerable discharge though
Thanks for being there Brother, we need more like you. sorry about the M-4.
I like those made today, the originals were pure fecal matter in fact I wish I could afford one but unfortunately I have a wife and bills to pay
Was very familiar with M16, I was Vietnam Era to past Desert Storm and can still assemble disassemble the rifle in my sleep. The improved M4 basically a shortened M16 and a very smart concept, take what they already know and change moderately so you improve the function and preserve the soldier's basic knowledge. Very revealing. Also, my congrats to Sgt. LeAnne who bagged all those insurgents. US Army all the way!!! 25 years on my watch and I hope many of you enjoy the same length of career I had a privilege to serve in. Peace soldiers!!!
This was posted 3 days ago... I knew all these things
The M4a1 isn't used by seals the HK 416 is, just a little heads up there.
skibum1610 You watched the video too?!
No way!
Dan Kano I am a SEAL (discharge date 9/14) we use many rifles but the HK416 is rarely used. Almost never....
Dont belive you.... show me something to prove that. The M4A1 is a outdated plat form the KAC rails are also outdated. Seals use MK18s...
Dan Kano Then what did the SEAL's use BEFORE the H&K? huh huh?... dumbass.
As far as my opinion of the M4 platform as a whole, I feel it is a valuable tool in our arsenal that has its limitations just like every other tool we have. For CQB equipped with someOf the specialized rounds like the mk262, it has shown to be very effective. However with the standard M855 green tip load, we have seen a number of cases where rounds are just going through and through enemy targets and multiple rounds are needed to stop a threat. This is what initially transitioned some of the other cartridges such as .300 blk, .458 SoCom etc. I feel that for close encounters as well as limited mobility encounters (road blocks, IED sweeps etc) it is an excellent platform and with all of the advancements made in other calibers and such I don't see the M4 platform losing popularity any time soon. Lastly, I can personally attest to the ever changing technology for this platform being a lifesaver; as a close friend of mine is here today thanks to a well placed .458 round that immediately stopped a target who had already taken the last 4 rounds of M855 out of a magazine and was a mere second away from firing a fatal 7mm round when the big SoCom tore into his abdomen and put him down flat.
The M4 is far too busy. They should build an extra lane and improve the junction with the M5 at Bristol.
During the famous "Blackhawk Down" incident in Somali, soldiers complained of these M855 green tipped rounds that were designed to penetrate body armor as passing straight through the enemy. Since the majority of these enemy were high as kites on "Khat" (which is a plant they chewed and had the affect of amphetamines) check spelling, unless the green tipped rounds hit a majority organ eg heart lung spine head etc the enemy often would just keep coming only feeling the effect of the wound until after.
Henry Kinssinger it happens in Iraq and Afghanistan too. I've seen it many times, usually them shooting and running away. It might have penetrating power but no stopping power. just passes through... I'm sure they die later.
Jason hogan
Yeah but them dying later doesnt stop them from continuing to fire and you and your buddies huh.
Henry Kinssinger absolutely, they still have fight in them for a bit, I was just confirming this still happens.
both M16 and M4 rifles are great i had used both in the Army however the M4 is more suitable for close combat. its not easy clearing a building with a M16A2 rifle. My major issue with these rifles are that you have to constantly maintaining them clean and lubed otherwise you will be jamming that rifle. Iraq sand(more like tan talcum powder) gets into everything! that needs to be addressed.
+jeffv2074 Not enough to justify it as a general issue weapon, it has to many problems associated with it's shorter overall length like short sight radius overheating due to shorter gas tube leading also to a more violent slamming of the bolt group because of operating at higher gas pressures,. lower muzzle velocity and less kenetic energy shorter effective range resulting from that. nope I would say its the M-16 NOT pertfected
+8aleph i agree with you. what alternative would you recommend?
+jeffv2074 A-2 Rifle Never had a problem with it, In and out Vehicles of all sorts and no reliability issues with what I personally believe the best basic sight system of any issue weapon in any army today.
+jeffv2074 never had problem with AK
+8aleph My MP unit was trained in SRT at Ft. Drum, some soldiers were having issues during our training and would get caught up, the same went for mount training the barrels would get caught on the front passenger seat belts when trying to exit quickly from the HUMMWV. however we overcame it. its a good rifle but it must be maintained. i used MK19 grease on my M16 which performed better then breakfree oil, i only used the oil to clean the rifle.
Being qualified on both the M16A4 and the M4A1 Carbine. It is all based on the situation, the mission. Personally I don't think our soldiers should be limited to just a certain weapon system. Our troops should have a wide range to choose from, based of experience and preferences. Although the M16 series, the M4 Carbine are over all great weapon systems. A soldier and his weapon system, is like driving. Best performance is through experience, comfortability, preference, and situations. For the weapon system can simply be the difference between his life, or the enemies. The weapon system is the soldiers life LITTERALLY! No perfect weapon system will ever exsist.
That's the most insightful comment so far.
Too bad it would be expensive if they had a lot of choices, some guns are more expensive than others.
Ok. I'm going to call bull-shit on #3. Both rounds defeat soft body armor, but neither comes even close to denting body armor plates. All center-fire rifle rounds will zip through soft body armor but only .50 cal AP rounds will penetrate plates. Not even 30-06 AP will defeat proper plates. This "green tip designed and defeating body armor" is BS because all typical rifle rounds defeat soft armor, so all the ignoramus' hearing this think green tip is dragon slayer ammo that "normal folk" don't need and therefore we can ban it. This idiocy was stopped last year when ATF suggested they ban green tip because it was AP, but luckily people rose up and stopped them. Let's not push propaganda for the left and say green tip is AP, ok there you?
I thought all the left wingers wanted us to go green.
+Unit 1058 That's why its green and not black. Its a perpetrator not AP. Because of that BS factoid I now hate this channel.
right on
I am way to the left of what you pillocks call left. But you are getting all bent out of shape over one of his few accurate, though worthless, statements. What he said was it was designed to defeat body armor, he didn't say it was designed to defeat the current generation of NATO body armor. Development of the new NATO standard round started in 1970 and the SS109/M855 was adopted in 1980. Long ago and far away as they say. Back then hard trauma plates didn't exist and soldiers didn't hump body armor around with them, much less wear it. The M855A1 is both lead free and more consistently effective than the M855, but still leaves you firing a varmint round at big game. I have five AR15s, all built myself, I actually like the 6.8SPCII best of what I have, but I'd still take the FAL if I could only take one. I thought you loony right wing testosterone poisoned freaks knew your onions?
+Bentley What do you want to know? First one was A G20C, replaced the barrel with an unported one. Most recent is a Springfield 1911, swapped out the stupid and unnecessary full length guide rod and got Pachmayer grips.
Kyle loves his , it saved his life on 3 occasions and he thanks God for that forward assist .
The M193 round can indeed penetrate soft body armor. The M855 has a steel penetrator that is designed to enhance penetration at longer ranges than the M193 cartridge.
muddlemann
Have you heard about the XTP rounds for 5.56mm, 7.62mm and 9mm calibre type?
XTP = Xtreme Terminal Penetration.
its a non armor piercing round with a star shaped tip...easily penetrates Type IV Armor inclusive with the blunt trauma pads.
Not sure if it is in use, was implemented but got rejected due to the massive injuries during an aftermath. No field medic would be able to perform any effective field work if one got hit. You can imagine the exit wounds....GAWD
rudy arif Are you talking about the ones made by Hornaday?They made them in lots of calibers but,last I heard,they quit making them.They were pretty common in most gun stores in the 90s.I don't see why they would be viewed any differently than,say,a Hydra-Shok or Golden Saber.Any JHP that reliably expands is going to do a lot more damage than an FMJ round of the same caliber.
Bullshit on #3, m193 can defeat soft body armor just fine. m855 or m193 both cant defeat level 4 or 5 plates.
Steven Nunez good thing we now use M855A1
M855a1 ain't going through 4 or 5 plates either. Those are ment to stop 7.62 AP so m855a1 ain't gonna do much
Steven Nunez but what armies are even using lvl 4 or 5 armor and how heavy must is be compared to the already standard body armor
Uploader24 it's issued to all us troops and allies. anyone can buy it here or abroad. it's not that bad, I've worn it
Steven Nunez the interceptor body armor (standard of US army) is only comparable to NIJ III but that doesnt really apply anyway since that standardization is only used for law enforcemrnt and not military, the esapi plates currently in use with the interceptor armor can stop up to 3 HITS from 30-06 AP, ceramic is very hard but very brittle, good luck on trying to survive a center mass full auto burst
I'm absolutely lovin' this channel
The M4 is a great weapon when used properly. I loved mine!
this video sucks.
1. the thumbnail shows an m16
2. this video says what I DON'T know. well, it's a carbine. which means shortened version of a said rifle. which means that all carbines are designed for cqb. so why is that included?
3. no its not always used with green tip ammo. in fact. it rarely is.
4. no its maximum effective range on its own is only 300m. 600m only with a SAW, in a squad level.
5. no it doesn't offer more effective fire at longer ranges than the m16. the m16 is literally the exact same rifle just with a longer barrel ffs.
6. of course the m4 has pretty much the same parts as the m16. that is because it is the CARBINE version of the m16
7. the m855 Greentip round is not an armor piercing round but an enhanced penetration round.
8. both cartridges he described are both 5.56 x45mm NATO and can be used in either rifle. that doesn't make the m4 better because it has nothing to do with the m4. they did tighten the twist rate of the m4 to 1in7" twist but they did the same on the next version of the m16. this helps the rifle propell a heavier bullet more effectively by spinning it faster.
9. a heavier barrel does not help to dissipate heat. it simply absorbs more heat. stays more rigid. and warps less easily.
10. how do you know?
11. They're called ar-15s. which were designed by armalite originally in the 50s. this design was sold to colt who made the m16 and m4. ar-15s are not m-forgeries because the ar-15 existed long before the m4.
12. any rifle can get white hot from too much shooting and therefore malfunction. this doesn't make it inferior.
13. if you're going to make a video. get educated on the subject first
No the effective range is 600 and the effective area range is 500.
you nailed it from a old marine.
No it isnt. Just bc it has a carry handle dosnt make it a m16. The barrel is also too short
@@mannman627 M16 has short barrel because the hanguard is long and the m4 has longer barrel because the hanguard is too short
@@esplooze no the m4 has a 14.5 in barrel and m16 has a 14.5 to 20 inch barrel.
My dad said in a prolonged fire fight you set the m4 to semi-automatic so it has time to cool and in a pinned down position you rotate soldiers to the heaviest fighting if you can to conserve on ammo and prevent over heating of their m4 rifles thats all he could figure out because they just don't cool well
The M-4 is designed for cqb, with that being said I much prefer the M-16 on the range. Its a lot easier to hit targets over 200m with an M-16 than an M-4.
Isn't guns like the Scar, ACR, f2000 or HK416 more suited than the M4? i mean in tests the Scar did out perform the m4
+Freakface99 yeah but those are way more expensive the m4 is cheap
The U.S. has a lot of debt and has to consider the price above anything els.
+Ian Jacob That's not even close to the reason, every country has a lot of debt nowadays, they equip the M4 because it's cheap, reliable, and it's similiar to the M16, it's the same platform anyways.
+Ian Jacob I think the debt values politicians talk about are misleading.
Don't forget the xm8
this is becoming my favorite you tube channel
The M16, AR15, M4 rifle platform does an incredible job and does it very well. So well in fact it's here to stay, no reason to replace it at all. The rifle only requires proper maintenance and replacement of any worn part's! Far more accurate and versitile than it's advisary.
No it jams retardedly easy. We should switch over to 6.8mm with a piston.
No. It does not. MYTH
Just don't get shot trying to clear a double feed!
@@mannman627 No, it doesn't
@@MasterVideoStudios 6.8 is still better tho
says 10 things you didnt know about m4 carbine thumbnail is m16 "RIFLE" And the extremly subjective title lead me to waste my time learning nothing
sorry 5 things my mistake
seriously i came here to say the exact same thing...i looked at the thumbnail and face-palmed.
Me, too! One look at the title and the thumbnail and had to blink twice to check my vision. LOL!
Agreed
the title really should be "five intreasting facts that normal people possibly do not know about the m4 carbine." or "5 intreasting facts about the m4 carbine"
The M4 is suitable for combat if you're not using a "spray and pray" approach to combat. Dumping one mag after another isn't what it's intended to do. As the video indicated, it's a light CQB gun. If you want to sustain fire, you need a heavier gun, bigger barrel, etc. And a slower rate of fire would be good too.
You can do 300-350 rpm with a good binary trigger. Heck, with just a Geissele SD3G you can get nearly 200 in SEMI auto. Yes, your finger will get tired.
"5 things everyone already knows about the M-4 carbine"
6:18 sounds like a trigger discipline problem to me
M855 green tip can only be armor piercing when fired through a 18 inch barrel as it's original intent. That's a big reason why the m855 is kind of ass with the carbine.
Personally I think that the currently manufactured M-16/M-4 series of rifles is the best rifle that the U.S. has ever been issued. The fact that the weapons will continue to fire non-stop (even with malfunctions) in a long battle is a testament to Mr. Stoners design. Any weapon will malfunction if not properly maintained or put through a complete stress/abuse in long engagements. But the M-16/M-4 series has yet served our nation for 50+ years and shows no sign or reason to be replaced. No disrespect to other weapons designers or the weapons designs themselves. but the M-16/M-4 platform is one of the greatest weapons ever made. In fact i own an old school full sized Post '94 ban Colt example, and I love the rifle, I also own a Smith&Wesson 15-22 and it to is a fine rifle not only for traingin and target shooting, but for small game hunting and pest control.
The main reason is that the US could resort to say, a bullpup design, or an ACR or something, but they are using a rifle that is made of 50 yr old parts, apart from that the benifits of a bullpup design are collossal and substantially impact close quarters and stealth as well as ranged combat.
james williams But a Bullpup design does have issues, an SBR or SMG (9mm) that would accept Glock mags would be a better option for CQB situations while still using the AR platform in a delayed blowback configuration that uses a closed bolt.
+james williams benefits of a bullpup? They are horrible in pretty much every way. Ergonomics suck, efficiency sucks, LOP sucks, trigger pull sucks, mag changes suck ext. If they were good teams would be running them already, while the vast majority of spec ops around the would run some variant of the M4.
+nmdiesel89 smaller, less recoil, less material wasted, but without dropping the overall power, range, accuracy and integrity, just remember, your nation is using something that consits of old parts, the m4 is pretty much obselite now, things like the aug, the l85, the famas, the ksg and the barret m95 are prime examples of how the old method of placing the trigger group behind the magazine, the l85 was actually sonaccurate that the british army had to re invent its accuracy test, which the m16 had previously been tried on
james williams Obsolete? Tell that to SF, Delta, Seals, British/Aus SAS, SBS, and virtually every tier one team out there. So a obsolete gun is the gun of choice of the top spec ops teams, says alot about bull pups doesn't it?
less recoil, unless the laws of physics have changed, no. Felt recoil is dependent on the weight of the gun, so unless they are heavier the recoil is the same.
Less material wasted, what on a m4/ar15 platform is wasted material?
Range? Really? They are terrible to shoot at long range due to their crap balance and horrible trigger pull.
Accuracy? Again really? Just check out the Tavor, a $1000 AR will out shoot it out of the box with plenty of tests to show it. A decent AR with good ammo will shoot close to 1 moa.
The bull pup is a great design.... on paper... and only on paper. They have horrible balance, humans tend to balance things between their hands, not behind them. The triggers are junk (please count these two things as to why long range shooting is difficult with a bull pup). Reloads are cumbersome and slower. Their not left hand friendly. Their ergonomics and layout is retarded. Length of pull is insanely long. The thing about the traditional layout is.... it works! Has for a long, long time. The bullpup, gives up so much to gain so little.
The M4 is a great gun I usually use it on the range and some how it's perfect for Mid range targets and OK for long ranges
Clearly you don't shoot enough guns, if your favorite gun is M4
+Cody Mike look who's talking
+Sir. Drift I don't know you?
+Cody Mike well that was a dumb reply
I've shot tons of guns. I've been to machine gun shoots, pistol matches and various competitions as well as shooting firearms owned by friends and family. The M4 is my favorite weapon overall. Everything has it's pros and cons. Personally for me....M4. Everyone has their own opinion and different things work for different people.
I always liked the enhanced version of the M-14 with its 7.62 round -reach out and touch somebody.
With a 240 you can reach out and touch everyone at the same time so nobody feels left out.
My M-16a1 was VERY UNRELIABLE . I served in USMC 1975-1979. The military made improvements to the AR platform, bringing in the shortened M-4 carbine, BUT still not reliable as the AK. LOVE my civilian M-4 as a sporting rifle. BULLPUP is the next evolution of military rifles.
John Budesa The AK isn't reliable.
Throw it in the dirt and it'll fail just like that.
"The AK isn't reliable"
.....
.....
.....
ok
600 meters AREA TARGET!! 500 POINT!! Get it right...
+aaron perkins Dear baby Jesus, someone else who actually listened during their military training. I literally had to stop reading the posts. The info was wrong from the video, everyone keeps saying 600 yds and it's 600 meters, idiots not converting 600 meters to yards correctly (it's 656 yds btw), a full blown discussion about the HK 416 and most SOF don't even use them any more because of bolt carrier tilt problems, and blah blah blah. What an awful thread of misinformation, error, and stupidity. At least I found one post that was correct.
+Mayday317 I don't have the TM or FM in front of me, but I'm very sure the M4 is indeed listed as 500m point 600m area effective. The specs aren't the gospel though. None of our cars get the exact MPG per the manufacturer specs. Maybe more or less depending on a lot of things.
I remember when ACOG optics became standard issue for my infantry unit. From lots of range time and training we could hit silhouettes at 800m fairly consistently. This was not the case with the M68 optic.
I worked with the m-16a1.The two years in the Infantry,my m-16a1,never let me down.Keep it clean and lubricated and it ran like a deer.
The M4A1 is near perfect. It corrects any flaws the M16 has. Especially the 3-round burst feature. Those Army soldiers used the M4 non stop. They malfunctioned just like ANY other rifle glowing white hot and malfuntioning. The M16 did the same in Vietnam. And is still in service. This has more to do with over use or misuse of the weapon than anything else.
ShadesMP5 AK, PPK, RPK, RPD all are able to function much longer with continuous automatic-fire. (Drops the microphone and walks away)
The M16 series has greater range and FAR better accuracy. Not to mention the Israelis FIXED everything that was broken with the AK series. Its called the Galil. (Dominic bursts into flame from being burned by decades old facts.)
Jacob B. Whoops thanks, I meant PKP
+Dominic Ybarra Uhh no shit, because those are all dedicated MACHINE GUNS designed to fire full-auto for longer periods with heavier barrels and better cooling abilities. (ignoring the AK, since you are simply wrong about that). So that's basically comparing apples to oranges.....
And even those will still over-heat if you continuously fire them for too long.
+ShadesMP5 the galil is too heavy
Ak47 is better...grabs popcorn
Megálos Epitychia A whole week and no one has taken the bait! WOW
arrowspike100 that's because it's true, and no one dares to argue with that.
Megálos Epitychia AK74 > AK47
*feels butt hurt*
The m4 seems a bit more tactical than ak47 but then there are tactical aks being made
Long before the M-4, there was the CAR-15/XM-177 (Vietnam era). The M-4 isn't a "new" weapon, just improved.
I think the government should get rid of the M4 and sell them all to me.
Wouldn’t it be better if they gave them away?
No me
Them good ole mean green tips :D
M4 is a great weapon, we don't need to replace it, we just need to upgrade it, better, more reliable material, and replace the direct impingement gas system with the short-stroke gas system .
+TQLCVNCH like a bolt
Whelp time to tell the military to go replace all their upper receivers, that will be a fun thing to explain to the taxpayers.
M193 out of the M16's 20" barrel will defeat level III body armor, out of the M4's 14.5" barrel it will not. M855 will not defeat level III out of either barrel. The reason is the M193's 55 grain bullet is leaving the barrel faster than the M855's 62 grain bullet.
You are wrong. Some body armor can stop the 55 grain and not the 62 grain. Some can stop the 62 and not the 55. And some level 3 can stop both.
Fired about 200 rnds during firefight and my M4 started to malfunctioning. I think an M4 if brand new will sustain the rigor test of 2-3k rounds. But after multiple deployments and a few thousand rounds the M4 become not as reliable.
+Tyson Vu thank you for you service
+stevensnake02 You don't owe me a thank you. I thank this country for giving me the life and freedom I enjoy today. I owe you the people who provided me with the tools to accomplish my mission. Thank you
+Tyson Vu would this have happened If u had a 416?
+Tyson Vu Is it true that some soldiers, when they can, use captured AK's as backup, in case the M4's don't work?
+Flavio Rodrigues No, it is not true.
We were offered the M-16 carbine when I was in the service and after trying it we went back to our regular M-16s. The longer barrel gave us better accuracy but, to be fair, we weren't in close quarters much. The SF team that we trained with loved it for the three round burst but, they also traded us their 1911s for our M-9s. Guess it's just a matter of preference.
all I want for christmas is an M4 carbine, and a 20" one too thats all
20" barrel would make it not a Carbine
@@dorianvujica3946 that's not necessarily true. The term "carbine" refers to the length of the gas system, not the barrel length. It is possible to have a carbine length gas system on any length of barrel greater than 7 inches.
@@fkraft92 So like just fuck carbine bolt action rifles then right?
This was fairly comprehensively uninformative for anyone who knows anything about the M4.
During Vietnam Colt also produced the shorter CAR 15 which was used by Special Forces and others. I am sure that this had some influence on the M4.
One of these days we will get away from the direct impingement system and switch to a gas piston system.
personally I like the piston because you can then have the stock to be folding if they made it so....
+Aaron Jussen that is but one advantage to gas piston over gas impingement.
+Domus deBellum All a piston is one more unneeded part to add weight with zero gain in weapon effectiveness, a part I might add that, if it is damaged renders a weapon useless. plus direct impingement has worked since the beginning on the M-16, the Vietnam era problems were due to Ordinance department not wanting that weapon and attempting to ruin it as you can see didn't happen and the -16 has served longer than any other US service rifle , plus in my years I've never run across either a folding or telescoping stock worth a piece of used toilet paper.
+Aaron Jussen For the most part, not in a piston AR. Though you can have a folding stock on an AR, you just wouldn't be able to fire it.
Johanid no they came up with folding stocks for gas impingment
your female silver star grabbers story was later revealed not to be accurate
Hey when it comes to Hester the molester, it's not who you know, but who ya blow!
@@garrisonjones9340 LOL and most females were doing the blowing and getting pregnant just like in Desert Storm.
I never had one in the Marines, we had the M-14 and M-60! But the M4 looks really cool I would love to own one! God bless America, Semper Fidelis forever! Oohrah
I used the M4 in Iraq under a DOD Security contact I loved the M4 it is light compact and can easily engage a target out to 600 meters with a good tactical scope
Just picked up my Ruger M4 556 today!
+Tonio Yendis I got mine a few weeks ago. love it, its very accurate and fun to shoot.
***** i havent decided if im gonna change my trigger yet or not.
Brilliant vid, keep 'em coming.
Any weapon is going to get shitty after such sustained fire. If the barrels were "white hot", I wouldn't expect anything less than malfunctions.
But you're forgetting that AK 47s can become too hot to handle from sustained fire yet they will still be able to fire when the trigger is pulled...
*Shows a M16 in the thumbnail*
The M16 is great no need to ever replace that system. Just keep on improving it over time.
I think you should speak to some men who have actually been in combat about the penetration capabilities of M193 vs M855. The fact of the matter is, from a 20" barrel the m193 has enough of a velocity advantage over the heavier & slower m855 coming out of the short 14.5" barrel which equalizes the playing field. In the real world, (read: in combat) there is no body armor the m855 fired from aN M4 will penetrate that the m193 fired from an M16 will not. This is all hype, and I personally think you are furthering this myth by repeating that statement. The new M855 rounds are a different story, but the cold hard fact is that green tip M855 and M193 are both equally capable at penetrating most SOFT armor from standard barrel lengths and both equally incapable of defeating hard body armor from standard barrel lengths. Moving along to a 24" barrel in say a Rem 700, and standard M193 can defeat hard level 3 plate armor due to sheer velocity. The green tip round with its steel penetrative tip is merely to keep the lead core from fragmenting on thin materials such as sheet metal automobile panels, auto glass etc. That is the extent of its capability and it is NOT an armor penetrating round.
Joe Doole why ur comment
soo long?
Joe Doole M193 being a 55gr projectile reaches higher velocities than M855 in the same length barrel an can therefore punch through even most level 3 steel plate body armor at close to medium ranges. M855 cannot even with the steel penetrator core, velocity is what defeats body armor. This video got it complete backwards m855 was never designed as armor piercing ammo but more of a barrier/cover penetrator and to carry more energy at further ranges with the heavier projectile. While both can easily punch through all soft body armor, the M193 actually has more of a chance of penetration with hard plate armor due to its higher velocity. Hope that clears it up, both projectiles have their advantages and disadvantages.
Robert Schmidt Your talking about actual AP ammunition (black tip). Obviously any AP ammunition isn't going to rely on velocity so much as its hardened steel core which is actually designed specifically to go through armor. What I was discussing was why M193 being a lead core bullet can still push through armor due it's high velocity vs the steel core M855. M855 is not designed as an AP round despite common misconception. And even though it has a steel projectile it does not reach the velocity that the M193 does that makes it possible to punch through most level 3 steel body armor.
All combat rifles in mass production have their melt-down point.
What stops this is tactics, stress innoculation training, strong field command leadership and position and fire superiority in the theater of operation
Sectors and cyclic rate of fire control is the safeguard against melting barrels, etc.
That's right, Cuz.
They got white hot during the firefight because their barrels we're already shot out in multiple deployments and then reused in training before that particular squad ever left home. The rifles should have been gone through and rebuilt/refurbished before shipping out over seas. DOD never puts enough emphasis on refurbishment and proper maintenance schedules.
Come on.. Everyone knows basically the whole US special operations uses the M4.
I think the M4 is good, but there are many other rifles that are way better for service. Try looking at a proper bullpup for example. It would be way more compact.
I agree
+GamePhysics Like what? Bullpup design is primarily for VERY CLOSE quarter combat, like buildings. They are popular in Israel because majority of their engagements are in cities which are even smaller in terms of size than say Iraq.
Bullpup has its uses but none of them are time tested. Tavor in some ways yes, but compared to an M4 with a shorter barrel it doesnt offer that many advantages. I wouldnt consider any other bullup viable because none of them were used in long term conflicts, especially deserts (other than Tavor)
Igor Leonov Here's actually an American Long Range bullpup.. I bet you're pleased with that.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrett_XM500
GamePhysics If only it took 30 rounds and had less recoil id be all in
Igor Leonov Oh yeah, because every .50 BMG sniper rifle has a 30 round mag and limited recoil.
The same old arguments that put forth when the military went from .30 Cal/.308/7.72 NATO to 5.56....."Wars have changed...Its all close quarters now..."......."The troops can carry more ammo with 5.56".....Translation.........(Especially during Vietnam...)...."We don't want to invest any extra time and effort to train you to be an expert marksman.....(with 7.62) so we're going to give you a plastic rifle that shoots on "rock and roll" so you don't have to aim much......and its damn cheap to make.....
Oh yeah....the new ammo is nice and light so you can carry a lot of it.......
What a joke....
Military always fight the last war. In jungles where ease of movement was a priority, ok. But in the sandbox most firefights are in much longer distances and there are on branches and vines to restrict free movement
Nice video. I have been carrying the M4A1 for years now with no issues whatsoever.
this is my favourite gun ever
Clearly you don't shoot enough guns
+Cody Mike its an opinion...
carbeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeen
?????????????????????????
Yeah that’s a way to pronounce Carbine
Title: M4 carbine?
Thumbnail: M16A1?
Me: AR-15?
My Dad: *Vietnam flashbacks*
Hotel: trivago
Effective range of 600 meters? hahahahahhaa
Ivan Sotomayor People can land some hits at that distance.
Maybe, bro...
Ivan Sotomayor Is it effective? Negligible. Is it accurate? Reasonably for a shorter barrel.
I'll take a 10mm out of a 16 inch barrel till about 500m then it's between .308 and .408 after that
Ivan Sotomayor The rifle length barrel (20") works well at 400 m. That's about it.
Title: m4 carbine
Thumbnail: M16A1
Ean Cola maybe they didn’t know how to change the thumbnail so it randomly landed on that frame for the thumbnail
The M4 does the job just fine. I carried the M4 in Iraq in 2006-07, 2008-09, and in Afghanistan in 2010-11, and it never let me down as long as I kept it lubed.
The only negative that I have for it is the ammo. I would have rather carried 55gr M193 as opposed to the M855, because the 193 fragments and blows up in soft tissue alot better than the Green Tip.
Former 11B.
Indeed
Jul u ut ffy
So the woman did her job...
Who gives a fuck
legba eshu I'm surprised that not a single feminist decided to ride your ass for this one. But, its no lie that Canadian/American forces are plagued with this feminist crap.
Isaac Burton Yup.
I have no problem with having a women for a boss, a coworker or women in the military.
I figure if they want to play with the boys in a male dominant environment and then expect special treatment because they are a woman THEN I HAVE HUGE PROBLEM WITH IT.
I can personally say that at least one rotation of Canadian soldiers saw a year's ADDITIONAL training, purely for deployment into Afghanistan at Fort Bliss Texas, for a nine month deployment. And, yes, this doesn't include the regular training, drill, and operational retinue.
You or I may shit ourselves in that situation, but commonwealth/north american forces tend to be better trained than us. Have you heard of the engagement, where a British unit ran out of ammo when engaged, so they went for a bayonet charge?
Isaac Burton Fix bayonets or We are about to show the enemy we have completely gone insane.
Many of these lovely insurgents don't realize that many westerners, myself included, would be happy to introduce them to some of our modern comforts.
Like the C7 battle rifle (assault rifles are a myth of the media, guns are for killing and control, not assault).
Call mine M-Forgeries, ARs, Black Rifles or infamously an "assault rifle" ...what ever, it still does the job. Im not going into battle anytime soon.
Let's hope not. But always best to have one and not need it, than need one and not have it.
Maybe add a heavier, quick-change barrel to allow more continuous fire and to prevent the barrel from melting. And perhaps issue either quad-stack magazines or drums to those with this M4-LMG
I thought they would have found a replacement for our boys by now, why was the xm8 canceled btw!?
xm8 is over priced plastic
XM8? Thats going way back, but because 9/11. and HK charges too much.
They considered it a 'monopoly' in a gun. It could be modified to play the role of a Rifle, Carbine, Auto-Rifle, and Designated Marksman Rifle, all on the same platform. It was all about money.
M-4 is reliable. Did me good.
Boneheadedbruhs During the testing phase of the xm8 it proved to be more reliable than the m4, no offense
Any weapon that would melt down in a prolonged fire fight while in the hands of our Military personal depending on that weapon for their life, should be scrapped for junk, And we should develop a weapon worthy of our military personals willingness to put their lives on the line with that weapon, Any weapon our armed forces takes into battle should never have catastrophic failures under any circumstances in combat,
so your saying all guns are trash?
because if you know how guns operate then you should know that every system has a point where the metals start melting aks had em m16 had em alot of M4 variants use metal in them guess what? they melt too plus the Russians had aks in the middle east look how that turned out
M14s didn't melt ask My Brother who packed one in nam , the Government said it was to heavy so they traded that for the junky ass M16, !
MAD DOG the newer version does not as easy as the M4 or AK but can the Vietnam version was heavy but your right
MAD DOG Well, pretty much no Assault Rifle will be able to fire full auto bursts consistently for 30 Minutes straight and still work just fine.
As a US Army infantry Man I love and trust my life with my M4A1. Nothing comforts me more then laying 5.56s down range.
With the high fire rate and thin barrels the M4 will always have heat problems. Trade offs of barrel weight vs carry weight depends on the mission in my opinion. I don't think it is a one size fits all kind of thing. Get in and get out is one thing and the lightweight weapon s suited best for that purpose. If it is going to be a sustained firefight my preference would be a full length rifle. Of course this is only my opinion as I have never seen combat.
I have a lot of respect for american soldiers exposing their lifes , but me being familiar with the function of the M4, I would never ever go to war with a stock M4 like the ones the army issues, the strange thing is that if soldiers take further apart the weapon, they'll go to jail for what I've heard.... that sucks
MADMAX MASON
Yeah, but these US troops are hardwired to hearing AK fire and connecting it with it being a threat. If you just drop your M4 and pick up an AK47, you'll most likely be subjected to friendly fire.
This ain't a video game.
*****
I was saying the worst case scenario. But what MadMax was saying is totally incorrect when you apply it to the real world. Would you really drop your weapon that you would have experience and knowledge of than a weapon you just picked off a dead insurgent? I don't know about you, but I wouldn't.
DesertCamo32 Well, the soldier may have trained with the AK before entering service.
DesertCamo32 I have used AK47's and a few AK74's that I "picked up off the ground" while in Iraq. It is true that US soldiers know the sound of the AK and it can make our skin crawl. Never the less that does not mean you are guaranteed to become the victim of fratricide. You are on the right track though, because our enemies recognize the sound of the AK too. I have seen them literally walk right up and get captured because they thought a building was a strong hold for their people.
As for knowing the weapon the AK weapon system, it is pretty simple. In fact part of what makes it such a great weapon is that an illiterate 12 year old conscript can easily put it in to service and be effective. Most of us that were in combat arms jobs encountered them frequently and got to shoot them on the range while in country. There were some commanders that realized it benefited soldiers to not only be familiar with the sound and appearance of the enemy's weapons; but also know how to proficiently use them. Most soldiers carried a minimum of 210 rounds for their rifles. While that is a respectable load out and can be easily expanded upon, it is still not a lifetime supply of ammunition. I am also yet to meet a guy who had been in a gunfight that said, "you know what Stu Pidasso, I just wish I had less ammunition." The ability to use any weapon on the battlefield serves as a real force multiplier for soldiers of any military.
DesertCamo32 the marines do train on akm's after basic training.
Awesome vid! Thanks for posting.
The M855 was designed for better barrier penetration, not armor penetration since it has a mild steel tip. Really, the round kind of just sucks all around compared to the M855A1 and the M193.
I don't really agree with the definition of an M4 and M16 being separate rifles. There are small differences of course such as the feed ramps and shorter barrel lengths but they are both still AR-15s. They just have two separate military designations.
The m4 was issued in small numbers in Vietnam. It existed long before the mid 90's.
+C. Welch Well no, what you're thinking of is a CAR-15. The M4 is an improved version of that.
+VulpeRenard OK, I knew I'd seen it in Vietnam ERA film footage. I had thought it was the M4. Thanks for the correction.
+VulpeRenard Also known as Xm 177 and Colt Commando
ar-15s existed in Vietnam my good friend and not m4's
+Emilio Cornejo I was corrected. It was the car-15.
I recently purchased a brand new M4 from Gander Mountain, and I must say that of all my other rifles, pistols, and shotguns in my collection, the M4 is the most fun to shoot. It is also incredibly easy to field-strip for cleaning. I highly recommend the M4 (or any other AR15 style rifle or carbine) to anyone who can afford one (I paid about $930 for mine) and legally own one. I also bought a new Aimpoint PRO red dot optic for it, which was about half the cost of the M4! But keep in mind that you will pay a lot for a quality product, and Aimpoint makes top-quality optics.
the woman was awarded because she was there at the right time and engaged in a firefight and i believe she was awarded in recognition of her in actual firefight. What about her male counterparts? no award for them? Is she the one who did the real fight against the insurgents? Maybe she was curling in her space while the male soldiers were doing the firefight; and then she will also shoot from time to time. Did she really killed some of the insurgents? who told it? In my country Communist insurgent women were known to shoot it out with government soldiers who uses mortars and howitzers including aerial bombings against them.
sucks that our military can't afford a better AR15 with a gas piston system (LWRC now own by Colt)
why would the military want to by the civilian version of the M4?
I heard that the M855 doesn't yaw and loses that tumble effect. And the ammo we get doesn't have a full steel core giving it less tumble therefore becomes an over penetration problem, without body armor piercing ability.
I preferred the M16A2 as I am to dam tall for a M4.
I am the same way, always preferred an m16
yeah me to but I also like the stoner m13
Although, if you needed to clear rooms, a shorter M4 is much easier to fit through a doorway with it's 14.5" barrel over the 20" barrel of the M16.
I prefer the M16A4.
Same here
The M855 is designed to provide better terminal ballistics when fired from a shorter barrel. It is not generally better at penetrating body armor. Both of them will defeat kevlar body armor easily. The M855 has some edge when it comes to polyethylene body armor and if you fire it from the full length M16 barrel it may do a bit better against ceramic but ceramic will usually stop either round. For steel body armor (which I don't think any military uses but is used in some of the cheapest rifle-rated body armor), the M193 fired from the full length barrel is better than the M855 fired from either the M4 or M16 barrel length. The M855 is sometimes called "light armor penetrator" but that is a misnomer. The tip is only mild steel. The real purpose of the tip is to move the center of mass of the bullet backwards (steel being less dense than lead). The M855A1 changed over to a hardened steel tip and does do a bit better at penetrating marginal ceramic body armor.
with my little experience with the m4 (4 years of shooting multiple ar15s) if you cheap out and buy a cheap shitty rifle you get what you pay for and its going to have FTF but if you get a decent one and not cheap out you will have an amazing shootee
shooter*
+mitchell brenner Prices fluctuate wildly, so if you build it yourself you can get a pretty good, mil-spec or better AR for
+mitchell brenner Lots of the problems from cheap, off the shelf ARs is they over gas them & use crappy springs.
If you install a heavier buffer & a quality spring kit like Tubbs or Wolff you will get a reliable shooter. It won't last as long as high end components (you do get what you pay for) but it will feel better & be reliable. lol Over the years I have had many friends bring me an old Bushy, RR, or other consumer grade AR complaining about reliability issues & a good H2 buffer with a new, quality spring kit gets them running great.
It kind of amazes me they don't come that way from the factory. Most people don't shoot enough to realize they won't last as long & if they were reliable out of the box, so to speak, they would have better reputations.
m-4 is alright but... M16-A4 FOR LIFE!
M4 is nothing but a shitty weapon M16 is WHHHYY better and plus the M16 has better velocity, accarucy, and reliability than M4 and M4 jams and heats up more than the M16...and I thought I was the only one who loved the M16 over M4
I love the carbine M4........as a PDW. I am Ex-US Army Infantry circa 1983-86 and carried an M16A1. I was 18-21 then, and was happy with it. Now I'm eye-balling wheelchairs, so shorter is better for me.
chris lund that is understandable
PixelWolf155 :p M27 IAR
m16 is fucking gay
The ammunition comment is incorrect. They can both fire both rounds the only difference is the twist rate. We still have m16(a4) that fire m855. Also the m855 is not designed to defeat armor, it has a a mild steel penetrator in the tip that helps the round stay solid after penetrating hard targets. The m193 55GR ball round has more velocity and usually has a better chance of going through armor but without the penetrator comes out the back side in pieces vs a solid projectile.
Hk 416? Anyone
best thing and the most expensive one. xD
416. all the way.
+Jeff Philipp the 416 is 👌🏻but soooo expensive and the rail looks weird to me
I don't like rails they lead to tacticool weight gain with no increase in usability. if I'm going to carry extra weight it's going to be 6" more barrel and a fixed butt and a tritium illuminated reflex sight
I say a better replacement for the M4 Carbine would be the Galil Rifle and Carbine.