I carried an M4 in Afghanistan and Iraq as an infantryman and paratrooper, and I never had an issue with it. Granted, I never fired more than a magazine or two at one time, given we had mounted heavy weapons, but even in training I found it reliable and accurate.
I never went to combat but used it a lot in training at Campbell. It always worked and even with high volumes of fire I never noticed a big shift in accuracy. To be honest, I think this guy tends to get lost in the sauce on specifics. I think if the rifle has 3 to 4 MOA while hot, it is "good enough" for most 11B or 19D. Even then, my PSG said it best, "Your M4 is a personal defense weapon. If you aren't bringing up the 240 and calling in mortars after you dump a mag, you're doing it wrong." Even then, most Soldiers or Marines carry between 210 and 300ish rounds spread between 7 to 10 mags. Your basic dude who isn't a group hotshot isn't going to be dumping ammo fast enough to notice the benefits of the SOCOM barrel IMHO. They'll notice the weight for sure. But again, I was always within a few hundred meters of my truck and the .50 or Mk19 mounted on top. Plus the two 240's we had in each team at the section level.
@@ThrainiteBut isn't that part of the issue? Soldiers don't really "notice" what could be better or not, but usually are told to make do with what you have. Besides, I think U.S. Ordnance usually is crappy. Just look at U.S. Ordnance history...
I carried the M16 (604), GAU-5/XM-177, M16A2, M4 & M4A1 in my career. Nothing really beat the original M16. The 604 was light, handy, and very maneuverable. All business
@@georgewhitworth9742 I think replacing the .50 and M240 would have done far more for our warfighting capability than reinventing the wheel with the current sig 6.8mm. Nor would trying to alter the M4 to make it heavier than it needs to be when it is already heavier than my dad's M16. Soldiers do know a few things. Like how your basic Joe isn't dumping more than his standard load out unless he wants to break his knees and back over water, food, wet wipes, spare socks and 240 belts. Or that just lightening the load is preferred over adding more gear that won't be maintained or carried. But no one ever asked me or the 11B's in my sister battalion. The regular dudes sleeping in dirt usually are just told what to carry 85% of the time.
@@Thrainite The original M4 barrel was just fine and I prefer it over the SOCOM profile any day of the week. I shot high volume sessions, like 1100 rounds within 4hrs doing CQM training at Bragg with no issues whatsoever. The SEALs who were running their M4A1s like LMGs on AUTO were the culprits for the SOCOM profile. You should never be placing an M4A1 on AUTO, so it was a moot point.
32:24 Wow. Compared to all the videos I've seen that talk about mundane differences like velocity and projectile weight, that has to be the most interesting thing I've ever learned about this cartridge and ammunition in general. This channel is an incredible asset for firearms education.
I was a rifleman the first half of my tour in the korengal valley Afghanistan. I’d say we shot half a combat load every other day and sometimes every day. I don’t think my infrared laser which was mounted behind the front sight post ever had issues losing zero. I don’t think I ever had heat distribution problems. I don’t think anyone had problems with our rifles. Nor did we have problems with SAW weapons either. Either we were lucky or the rifles are actually made better than we think.
1. The SAW is Trash because my SAWs were trash lol. TBF early GWOT was a different animal. My SAW was probably 12 years old by the time i got it. You cleaned the Saws with Brillos (yes, I am very aware) because you had to because they were so old. 2. My unit was a transitionary unit for the M4 ie we saw all iterations. I came in after the fixed carry handles, the MPs were the only ones that still had them. We had M4s with half OG hand guards and this picatinny half hand guard for the gangster grip. I was a SAW gunner when the Unit got the RIS system. I really didnt think much of it because to me it was a less optimal over the arms system that you mounted the PAQ4 or PEQ2 to that was mounted through the top handguard to the barrel. Barrel harmonics wasn't even heard of in the unit outside of the snipers. We popped the heatshields out from habit from the og handguards and the half rail because they would rattle. 3. Boresighting the lsaers was part of our PCC/PCIs. The loss of zero was ALWAYS known. It was known because during the transition from car15 to what you carried, you removed your night vision and lasers during the day to prevent observation from enemy and adversarial forces. We didn't want everyone to know everyone had night vision, let alone everyone had targeting capabilities at night. 4. EVERYONE hated the buttstock change from the colt CAR style to the M4 Stock. It lost the sling retainer and was too bulky. 5. They HATED it when you tried to retrofit your rifle. I was a VC for a stryker and i got tried of my rifle not fitting in the rack so i went into the Arms room and pulled the OG hand guards, screw on Irons (not enough acogs and naw to the 68) and barrel mounted a paq4. My PSG hated it but for the situation i loved it because of how light it was. To make sure i fixed it, they issued me an izlid. "oh you want to make your rifle light wieght and fit in things , huh?"
The studies and reports of the overheating happening mostly came out of socom. the few reports that came out of big army the troops were in similar circumstances. and almost all of them were from engagements were guys expended 2/3x a soldiers normal combat load.
I'm a Filipino fan of your channel and Im just glad our Armed Forces got I think the largest acquisition (around 60,000 of M4A1 SOCOM barrel made by Remington (R4) outside of US. This is very important since our soldiers fighting in the southwest of our country could end up engaging the enemy usually lasting for hours if not a whole day and 2 basic load of ammo spent is possible.
"Well, I'll just say it -- this was a stupid design." I literally laughed out loud. Also 100% agree, it was a baffling choice that has made me paranoid about barrel thickness.
I think the proliferation of barrel profiles like the BA Hanson or the Faxon gunner have been pretty forward thinking designs. Especially in the era where lights, lasers, suppressors, etc... add quite a bit of weight to the front end. I don't know of the US adopting any such pattern though.
GoldenWebb does barrel meltdown tests on his channel. The tests are completely unrealistic and yet there is still information to be gleaned from them. Government profile barrels are always the first to fail. Usually they fail by barrel deformation and then rupturing as it can no longer contain a projectile. In one of the tests the barrel failed so spectacularly the catastrophic ventilation blew out through the handguard. The handguard was completely mangled.
@@LRRPFco52until you put a can it, I’ve watched a lot of “lighter weight” barrels once the weight of a suppressor is added the accuracy opens up 1-2 moa
@publicpersuaders I've been shooting suppressed since 1998, covering a pretty wide variety of cans from the KAC NT4 to Ase Utra, BR Tuote, European Brugger & Thommett, AEM5s, AAC, YHM, SiCo, TBAC, Form 1 cans, etc. Typically we see accuracy and precision tighten-up as long as the bore is concentric and the can is made right. They act as a harmonic dampener usually. In rare cases, the addition of the can will increase erratic harmonic resonance and open up the group.
Would love a video on just barrels. Material, contour, lining, rifling methods and treatments companies do can sometimes be a bit overwhelming because they all do serve a specific purpose.
My Colt M4 served me very well in Iraq in 2005. Never had an issue. When I first got in the Army in 1997 at my first unit only squad leaders and up got an M4 and lower had an M16A2. Got to the 82nd and everyone had the M4. Noticed a difference in rifle qual for sure.
Almost identical to the one I carried except with a comp m2, no ambi.. (05-08 gwot timeframe) But 3 years with the same rifle and I can’t recall ever having an issue with it.. many many rounds.. but they were religiously cleaned being I was a grunt and that’s our favorite past time. We never used burst. 🤷🏻♂️
@@Landoftheignorant The Stoner muzzle devices of the late 1950s were quite different than what Colt produced from 1959-forward. Flash Hider design was driven by DoD after 1962 with no involvement that I'm aware of from Stoner.
The M4A1: The most reliable and effective combat carbine ever fielded. It is the APEX of modularity and it is superior to all other systems and platforms. God bless Mr. Eugene Stoner for providing the free world with such an outstanding series of rifles and carbines which continue to save countless lives.
Great seeing reviews from someone who speaks with real knowledge! I'm tired of seeing reviewers without any gun knowledge talking about firearms. Hope your channel grows and becomes really successful!
Not only are these rifles dated, but what is more sobering is that the majority of these rifles have remained unchanged in terms of new or replacement parts aside from the m4 to m4a1 product improvements, even after years of heavy use.
I read in Chris McNab's Book The M4 Carbine, that the M4 was first type classified in 1987 from the Colt Model 777, but that the US congress denied founding and therefore the M4 was put on hold, until in 1993 the need for a carbine has reemerged and the Colt Model 920 was bought as the M4 in large numbers. In that true?
The date discrepancy is due to the service which did the type classification: USMC versus the US Army. The USMC approved the XM4 (Model 720) for service use in January 1987. This can be confirmed in Ed Ezell's "Small Arms Today, Vol 2" and in congressional testimony regarding the USMC's FY1988 budget. Congress used the Army's exit from the XM4 program against the USMC. The US Navy killed the USMC's follow-on budget requests.
I have taken a m4a1 to its overheating temp. It took 300 rounds fired fully automatic in 5 round bursts to do so and it cooked the bluing off. My standard m4 was entirely reliable except with blanks and then you had to fire a combat load before the carrier speed was reduced enough to impart malfunctions
This is all fascinating stuff to me. I got out in late '93 so my primary issue rifle was the M16A1 and A2. I never got a chance to experience the M4 series.
I don't see the XM7 fully replacing the M4; too heavy, fewer rounds on-hand, logistics concerns. That being said, LC is ramping up .277 production, which is a big deal.
I got a good deal on a BCM M4 SOCOM barrel and was going to build out a nice M4 clone with some improvements. I wanted the RAS rail, but when Chris explained the issues with it, I decided to go with the BCM QRF. Not only did I get a free float quad rail that weighs the same, but at 1/4 of the price. The KAC RAS rails are going for ridiculous money simply because people want to clone what the military issues.
I paid 300$ for a used KAC quad rail that was used gov sn when I built my clone but my colt 6920 was a piece of junk terrible quality it was after,colt was sold
There is really no reason to use a RAS/RIS today unless you enjoy clone builds. Though that being said I still have one on my first AR that I picked up for the princely sum of roughly $30-$40 (I suspect it fell off a truck) and it has been rock solid so I have never felt the need to replace it.
Early in my AR experimenting I had a rifle length KAC. Yeh, it was well made and solid but Cripes! it was heavy. Accessories seem to double in weight when mounted on an AR. Depending on the barrel, scope/mount, handguard mounted hardware, it wasn't hard to end up with a 12 pound rifle.
Hearing safe with 5.56 is pretty impressive. I run my 12.5" with a silencerco omega. Its rated for up to 300wm, i went with it for 300blk of course but, i use it on my 5.56 too. Its for sure louder on the 5.56 than 308 win...which i did not expect. I just assume its because of the end cap being sized for .30 cal.
The Army has a long history of picking the wrong rifle & cartridge back to the 1860s. Never understood what possessed them to pick such flawed weapons.
You never have anything positive to say about A.R.M.S. handguards. I understand but I'm old and not interested in keeping up with new products so I'm holding on to them anyway. Most all of my add-ons on all of my rifles are from a Dick Swan design and "out of date" but I'm still happy with them. Ah the price you pay for doing this in the early 2000's. All my BUIS, scope rings, handguards, mounts and even FSP is a 41-B and I love them. Again, you put out the most informative ACCURATE videos on rifles I have ever heard. Thank you Chris!
Sir, I am VERY fond of ARMS, Inc. Dick Swan was a personal friend for over 10 years right when he passed. He was ground breaking. The SIR system was the first production free float rail. It was rather bulky but he solved that with the Spartan. Just when he was making evolutionized models, he became sick. When he passed ARMS ceased to make anything new. His BUIS are still some of the best made. I am a big fan.
If you can please review the Colt commando, not sure if you have any good info or if you guys made them while you worked there, any info would be awesome
The semiauto ones I've owned have been the most accurate and reliable long guns. Also the most accurate. Hated the one I was issued but over the years, the design grew on me.
I Greatly enjoy your videos Chris. A wealth of information and not a paid for and by the latest and greatest must have trinket we are flood with from the Super Cool Club of TH-cam pranksters [IMO]. The debate over internal vs external is getting old and worn out for me. I have a number of both and I lean to external because of running Cans and cleaning. Most any AR on the market now days can shoot better than I am able to shoot it. Thank You for the great work you give us as always well done. Your work is greatly appreciated and enjoyed.
This DI system is still the best overall. Has drawbacks but the Stoner AR system has a lot of benefits over all these other rifles that don't offer much improvements. Really just need a mid length gas system and a free float handguard on this. I am pretty sure that doubled the service life of the barrel and cut down on a lot of malfunctions. I am just quite surprised that those upgrades have not happened on a large scale yet. And agreed, the M7 is not the right choice for every soldier. I still predict it will end up being rechambered to 7.62 nato and used as a DMR role.
How would you design an M16A5 upgrade program to improve the M16A4 and M4 carbines used by the Marine Corps that is not prohibitively expensive? I think I’d start with a mid length gas system on a 16 inch mid weight barrel and a low profile gas block, add in a free floated hand guard, full auto fire control group, ambidextrous safety and issue them with those rubberized ladder type rail protectors instead of the very rattly and wiggly KAC rail covers. Save as many parts from the existing M16A4 or M4 it’s made from and if it’s an M16A4 then it’ll need an M4 carbine stock and buffer system as well. The end result should be a lightweight rifle that is a cheap upgrade that gives everyone the same barrel length and shooting characteristics as an M27 IAR, but far less durable in the sustained fire role. This would help in optics zeroing all being the same since they now have the same barrel length and now every rifle performs the same in the short term. The grunts will still have the much more durable rifle for sustained fire, but now everyone else can do the same thing for a short while and better than they could before with legacy M4s and M16A4s. Your thoughts?
Great vid as always, throughout the videos it seemed like the greates challenge this rifle overcame was the decisions of the US military. Don't count the internal piston out, Knights Armament won the contract for the new UK Ranger regiment rifle.
It's interesting concerning bolt and carrier issues. It made me think of the Ruger SFAR .308 rifle and the use of a small face bolt, and some "miracle" steel that can take the stresses of a much larger cartridge, instead of the large AR10 bolt. Maybe the small bolt is out sourced from LMT or Geissele?
NGSW/XM7 is currently intended to only replace the M4A1s for combat troops while the rest of the Army keeps M4A1s, just like how you said it was initially meant to be issued. I guess the reason for the new M4 orders is to replace worn out weapons. The Army is ordering XM7s, but the weapon and more importantly the ammo manufacturing lines are still being built up to support the desired number of weapons. There's no point in replacing all the M4s for grunts when the ammo isn't available.
XM7 will fail and miserably. Half the duty positions in an Infantry Line Company would only be hindered if they had to carry it. Everyone that actually shoots their weapons will have a significantly-reduces basic load due to magazine size, capacity, and weight. It’s not even a good DM Carbine because it only shoots 2-4 MOA. What an abortion.
Hi Chris, Thanks for a thorough and informative video. In addition to my 5.56 rifles, I’m hanging on to my LWRC SIX8-A5 (6.8 SPC). Seems to me to hit that “sweet-spot” between 5.56 and 7.62. Why do you think that the 6.8 SPC lost traction? Lastly, do you find it at all fishy that Sig has become almost a “sole-source” supplier of some very questionable, poorly-tested weapons?
When Russia invaded Ukraine there was wild variety of small arms and machine guns. AK based variants mostly in 5.45 with eclectic collections of attachments which sprouted as the war went on. The hodge podge of donated hardware like the M14 (Estonia), G-3's, SCARs, Mosin 91/30's for the meat targets, some STG44's. Also a surprising number of privately purchased AR rifles of HBAR and A2 all scoped. One rifle I never saw was the FN FAL which you'd think would show up being so widespread around the world. The frontline weapons narrowed down to AK styles in 5.45 and the US M4 style. The guys in the trenches are primarily AK equipped and the high speed low drag units. The lower tiers like Territorial Guards, Border Guards and local defenders still have the eclectic varieties like US M1919 LMG and water cooled model and WW1 Maxim MG for static positions. One Maxim was said to be made before WW1. One of the most memorable moments was during a rant by the head of the Wagner Group. He was in a coal or salt mine in Russia occupied eastern Ukraine. As he was ranting and being a drama queen the camera did quick sweeps of the mind boggling amount of military crates of RPGs, ammo and rifles. He then opened the lid of the crate nearest him and it was a full crate of brand new US made Thompson SMG WW2 models. Still in storage from Lend-Lease.
Adopting URGI uppers, piggybacked ACOGs, and magpul MOE stocks with QD sockets would be the smartest thing the army could do right now instead of entertaining the XM-7 nonsense.
I get the mechanics of "Over the Beach" but can someone explain how an external piston system mitigates Bore Obstruction better than an internal piston system?
That was my question that never got a answered..The other weapons have an extractor support nub in the barrel extension that allows the weapon to pass the over the beach test..This same modification should work with the internal piston as well..
It was considered by SOCOM. They did a report on the benefits of the mid length gas system and how it did everything better. But getting it in production is a bureaucratic and logistical nightmare. Also it was argued they could not use the M9 bayonet. This is a change that should have been made in my opinion,
@@SmallArmsSolutions Thanks. I figured it was pretty much an admin problem, like keeping the A2 barrel thin to fit the M203--it seems like simply changing the clamp on the launcher would have been simpler.
@@SmallArmsSolutions I remember that video. Just watched again in fact. I was hoping to get your thoughts on the Daniel Defense Ris II handguard. Really, the only thing you said was that it was heavy. I hope you get your hands on a URGI as well. Would love to hear your thoughts on that variant of the M4.
@@SmallArmsSolutions Wouldn't the water just get pushed into the piston and force a premature extraction? H&K offers OTB features on the 416 but they're not a default configuration.
@@SmallArmsSolutions The external piston AR rifles use an extractor support nub in the barrel extension that prevents this..Couldn't the M4 do the same?
In your opinion, does a longer barreled rifle like the M16 have any utility as a primary service rifle anymore? As you said, in the past decade or so, all branches converted their infantry to carbines or 16" rifles like the M27
I think that since combat ranges are mostly under 300 yards, there is no benefit of the 20” over the 14.5”. Sure with the longer bbl you will get higher velocity and slightly more range. But how much would a soldier benefit? My guess is a negligible amount. Again, my opinion
25:30 The M60 was also a very poorly maintained weapon and probably never should have been replaced fun story if you have some time on the internet to watch gun videos about history
What are the provisions that other modern rifles have that prevent barrel rupture, when filled with water or obstruction? How are they related to the operating system - internal piston vs external that the operating system is the culprit? I didn't quite get the connection beteween one and the other. Thanks.
Does the AK have the same issues as the M4 with the Government profile barrel? You said the M4 A1 with the SOCOM barrel can run 180 rounds till cook-off, what can the AK do?
I am referring to its relevance in the modern military markets. It is still an ideal police rifle. The US Govt model lacks all the advancements of today. But this is what the US Govt asks for. Other rifles in internal piston have these features and are continuing to be sold worldwide. But the trends are moving in the external piston direction.
10:10 Honestly, I'm not surprised they still haven't figured that out. I mean, it took +30 years for the Marine Corps to figure out that Marines were cheating their crunches on the PFT. It went from doing 100 crunches to 105, 110, then 120. Yet somehow, Marines were still "doing all the crunches." There is no way that all Marines are so fit they can do all the crunches. In 2020, my last year in they switched from crunches to planks (timed event to avoid cheating. 4 minutes is a perfect score). The point of my comment is that it takes the military decades to figure stuff out unless it is of dire need. Like the first ever issued m16 that were supposedly self-cleaning.
I agree m4 will be replaced by a short stoke piston rifle sig spear lite 5.56 etc Sig spear lite 5.56 or mcx lite will probably be replacing those m4a1s due to their political connections of winning weapons contracts: Sig p320 and the m5 program Hopefully they will ask for a 16 ich barrel I doubt they will keep the m855a1 "green" round for their rifles due to excessive barrel wear, bolts breaking and sound suppressors shredding. Which means they are going back to old stockpiles or ammunition: m855, m193 ball etc. The 16 inch barrel will ensure letality on target unlike 14.5 inch barrels (those older ball ammunition need the extra barrel length to ensure legality on target)
![The M4 vs M7 Sig Spear NGSW [feat. GBRS Group]](/img/n.gif)
I carried an M4 in Afghanistan and Iraq as an infantryman and paratrooper, and I never had an issue with it. Granted, I never fired more than a magazine or two at one time, given we had mounted heavy weapons, but even in training I found it reliable and accurate.
I never went to combat but used it a lot in training at Campbell. It always worked and even with high volumes of fire I never noticed a big shift in accuracy. To be honest, I think this guy tends to get lost in the sauce on specifics. I think if the rifle has 3 to 4 MOA while hot, it is "good enough" for most 11B or 19D. Even then, my PSG said it best, "Your M4 is a personal defense weapon. If you aren't bringing up the 240 and calling in mortars after you dump a mag, you're doing it wrong."
Even then, most Soldiers or Marines carry between 210 and 300ish rounds spread between 7 to 10 mags. Your basic dude who isn't a group hotshot isn't going to be dumping ammo fast enough to notice the benefits of the SOCOM barrel IMHO. They'll notice the weight for sure. But again, I was always within a few hundred meters of my truck and the .50 or Mk19 mounted on top. Plus the two 240's we had in each team at the section level.
@@ThrainiteBut isn't that part of the issue? Soldiers don't really "notice" what could be better or not, but usually are told to make do with what you have.
Besides, I think U.S. Ordnance usually is crappy. Just look at U.S. Ordnance history...
I carried the M16 (604), GAU-5/XM-177, M16A2, M4 & M4A1 in my career. Nothing really beat the original M16. The 604 was light, handy, and very maneuverable. All business
@@georgewhitworth9742 I think replacing the .50 and M240 would have done far more for our warfighting capability than reinventing the wheel with the current sig 6.8mm. Nor would trying to alter the M4 to make it heavier than it needs to be when it is already heavier than my dad's M16. Soldiers do know a few things. Like how your basic Joe isn't dumping more than his standard load out unless he wants to break his knees and back over water, food, wet wipes, spare socks and 240 belts. Or that just lightening the load is preferred over adding more gear that won't be maintained or carried. But no one ever asked me or the 11B's in my sister battalion. The regular dudes sleeping in dirt usually are just told what to carry 85% of the time.
@@Thrainite The original M4 barrel was just fine and I prefer it over the SOCOM profile any day of the week. I shot high volume sessions, like 1100 rounds within 4hrs doing CQM training at Bragg with no issues whatsoever. The SEALs who were running their M4A1s like LMGs on AUTO were the culprits for the SOCOM profile. You should never be placing an M4A1 on AUTO, so it was a moot point.
I carried this carbine in Battlefield 2. Had no stoppages, nor maintenance issues. It always held zero.
Was the barrel prone to overheat in case of sustained fire?
@@ФедяКрюков-в6ь
I had the overheating issues while fighting near the Blacksite: Area 51
@@tylergarrett4498 well, that's less of an issue if you have health regeneration
32:24 Wow. Compared to all the videos I've seen that talk about mundane differences like velocity and projectile weight, that has to be the most interesting thing I've ever learned about this cartridge and ammunition in general.
This channel is an incredible asset for firearms education.
I was a rifleman the first half of my tour in the korengal valley Afghanistan. I’d say we shot half a combat load every other day and sometimes every day. I don’t think my infrared laser which was mounted behind the front sight post ever had issues losing zero. I don’t think I ever had heat distribution problems. I don’t think anyone had problems with our rifles. Nor did we have problems with SAW weapons either.
Either we were lucky or the rifles are actually made better than we think.
1. The SAW is Trash because my SAWs were trash lol. TBF early GWOT was a different animal. My SAW was probably 12 years old by the time i got it. You cleaned the Saws with Brillos (yes, I am very aware) because you had to because they were so old.
2. My unit was a transitionary unit for the M4 ie we saw all iterations. I came in after the fixed carry handles, the MPs were the only ones that still had them. We had M4s with half OG hand guards and this picatinny half hand guard for the gangster grip. I was a SAW gunner when the Unit got the RIS system. I really didnt think much of it because to me it was a less optimal over the arms system that you mounted the PAQ4 or PEQ2 to that was mounted through the top handguard to the barrel. Barrel harmonics wasn't even heard of in the unit outside of the snipers. We popped the heatshields out from habit from the og handguards and the half rail because they would rattle.
3. Boresighting the lsaers was part of our PCC/PCIs. The loss of zero was ALWAYS known. It was known because during the transition from car15 to what you carried, you removed your night vision and lasers during the day to prevent observation from enemy and adversarial forces. We didn't want everyone to know everyone had night vision, let alone everyone had targeting capabilities at night.
4. EVERYONE hated the buttstock change from the colt CAR style to the M4 Stock. It lost the sling retainer and was too bulky.
5. They HATED it when you tried to retrofit your rifle. I was a VC for a stryker and i got tried of my rifle not fitting in the rack so i went into the Arms room and pulled the OG hand guards, screw on Irons (not enough acogs and naw to the 68) and barrel mounted a paq4. My PSG hated it but for the situation i loved it because of how light it was. To make sure i fixed it, they issued me an izlid. "oh you want to make your rifle light wieght and fit in things , huh?"
@@bostonterrierfanatic9652 yeah I was like a ranger in like africa and my m16 was like fine
@@LikeLikeLikeLikeLkelike no way. That’s like wild
How effective were your m4s at killing?
The studies and reports of the overheating happening mostly came out of socom. the few reports that came out of big army the troops were in similar circumstances. and almost all of them were from engagements were guys expended 2/3x a soldiers normal combat load.
I'm a Filipino fan of your channel and Im just glad our Armed Forces got I think the largest acquisition (around 60,000 of M4A1 SOCOM barrel made by Remington (R4) outside of US. This is very important since our soldiers fighting in the southwest of our country could end up engaging the enemy usually lasting for hours if not a whole day and 2 basic load of ammo spent is possible.
Man I love these BACK TO THE BASICS type classes.
I'll still be rockin my MK 18 MOD 0 clone no matter what the trend is.
Based
History lesson time is always a good time from this guy.
"Well, I'll just say it -- this was a stupid design." I literally laughed out loud. Also 100% agree, it was a baffling choice that has made me paranoid about barrel thickness.
I think the proliferation of barrel profiles like the BA Hanson or the Faxon gunner have been pretty forward thinking designs. Especially in the era where lights, lasers, suppressors, etc... add quite a bit of weight to the front end.
I don't know of the US adopting any such pattern though.
GoldenWebb does barrel meltdown tests on his channel. The tests are completely unrealistic and yet there is still information to be gleaned from them.
Government profile barrels are always the first to fail. Usually they fail by barrel deformation and then rupturing as it can no longer contain a projectile.
In one of the tests the barrel failed so spectacularly the catastrophic ventilation blew out through the handguard. The handguard was completely mangled.
@@TheBradyrulez There was nothing wrong with the 727/original M4 profile.
@@LRRPFco52until you put a can it, I’ve watched a lot of “lighter weight” barrels once the weight of a suppressor is added the accuracy opens up 1-2 moa
@publicpersuaders I've been shooting suppressed since 1998, covering a pretty wide variety of cans from the KAC NT4 to Ase Utra, BR Tuote, European Brugger & Thommett, AEM5s, AAC, YHM, SiCo, TBAC, Form 1 cans, etc.
Typically we see accuracy and precision tighten-up as long as the bore is concentric and the can is made right. They act as a harmonic dampener usually. In rare cases, the addition of the can will increase erratic harmonic resonance and open up the group.
Would love a video on just barrels.
Material, contour, lining, rifling methods and treatments companies do can sometimes be a bit overwhelming because they all do serve a specific purpose.
One of your best videos, Chris. The US Military should just play this vid for whoever is in charge of procuring small arms.
The smart thing to do would be to keep the M4 and transition to 77 gr ammo
I think that’s a good idea. The m4 is still very accurate up to 500 yards. I can imagine the hole would tighten up significantly with 77 grain.
Finally a comfy video
Chris will never lie to us.
Do you need a safe place to
My Colt M4 served me very well in Iraq in 2005. Never had an issue. When I first got in the Army in 1997 at my first unit only squad leaders and up got an M4 and lower had an M16A2. Got to the 82nd and everyone had the M4. Noticed a difference in rifle qual for sure.
So, my LE6920 will still be relevant for the next 20 years. Cool.
Yup, doubt the army will change much
the most beautiful and efficient rifle ever ! it will always be my favorite
Great show Chris, superb detailed discussion as usual, sincere thanks.
The gov made some odd design choices and on the m4. It is still a capable and effective military rifle.
Almost identical to the one I carried except with a comp m2, no ambi.. (05-08 gwot timeframe) But 3 years with the same rifle and I can’t recall ever having an issue with it.. many many rounds.. but they were religiously cleaned being I was a grunt and that’s our favorite past time. We never used burst. 🤷🏻♂️
There is so much in common between the M4 and the M1 Carbine. Great video!
As a little trivia. The Coast Guard didnt standardize on the M4A1 untill 2019 and many of the recivers are M16A4 marked
“The Vietnam flash hiders were the best”
Weird how Stoner knew what he was doing…
@@Landoftheignorant The Stoner muzzle devices of the late 1950s were quite different than what Colt produced from 1959-forward. Flash Hider design was driven by DoD after 1962 with no involvement that I'm aware of from Stoner.
The M4A1: The most reliable and effective combat carbine ever fielded. It is the APEX of modularity and it is superior to all other systems and platforms. God bless Mr. Eugene Stoner for providing the free world with such an outstanding series of rifles and carbines which continue to save countless lives.
The URG-I program was the pinnacle, andnits awful that it took so long to get there
Thank You Thank You Chris and Heather I’ve Been Waiting on a Detail Video on an AR Rifle/Carbine 😀❤️😊😇👍🏼
Great seeing reviews from someone who speaks with real knowledge! I'm tired of seeing reviewers without any gun knowledge talking about firearms. Hope your channel grows and becomes really successful!
Not only are these rifles dated, but what is more sobering is that the majority of these rifles have remained unchanged in terms of new or replacement parts aside from the m4 to m4a1 product improvements, even after years of heavy use.
I read in Chris McNab's Book The M4 Carbine, that the M4 was first type classified in 1987 from the Colt Model 777, but that the US congress denied founding and therefore the M4 was put on hold, until in 1993 the need for a carbine has reemerged and the Colt Model 920 was bought as the M4 in large numbers. In that true?
The M4 was type classified in 1996. The XM4 of course predates.
The date discrepancy is due to the service which did the type classification: USMC versus the US Army. The USMC approved the XM4 (Model 720) for service use in January 1987. This can be confirmed in Ed Ezell's "Small Arms Today, Vol 2" and in congressional testimony regarding the USMC's FY1988 budget. Congress used the Army's exit from the XM4 program against the USMC. The US Navy killed the USMC's follow-on budget requests.
@@danielwatters1203 Thanks, that clears up a lot. I have this book and found it on page 409.
I have taken a m4a1 to its overheating temp. It took 300 rounds fired fully automatic in 5 round bursts to do so and it cooked the bluing off.
My standard m4 was entirely reliable except with blanks and then you had to fire a combat load before the carrier speed was reduced enough to impart malfunctions
This is all fascinating stuff to me. I got out in late '93 so my primary issue rifle was the M16A1 and A2. I never got a chance to experience the M4 series.
M855A1 needs several radial grooves crushed into the cooper to reduce the barrel wear and might increase velocity a bit.
Another outstanding video! Cpl Sev
Thanks for the very informative video. The original was good for its time. Very glad the platform evolved a lot.
Thank you for the excellent overview of this weapon platform.
I don't see the XM7 fully replacing the M4; too heavy, fewer rounds on-hand, logistics concerns. That being said, LC is ramping up .277 production, which is a big deal.
I got a good deal on a BCM M4 SOCOM barrel and was going to build out a nice M4 clone with some improvements. I wanted the RAS rail, but when Chris explained the issues with it, I decided to go with the BCM QRF. Not only did I get a free float quad rail that weighs the same, but at 1/4 of the price. The KAC RAS rails are going for ridiculous money simply because people want to clone what the military issues.
I paid 300$ for a used KAC quad rail that was used gov sn when I built my clone but my colt 6920 was a piece of junk terrible quality it was after,colt was sold
@@operatorsolidsnake2542I'm glad I got a Windham weaponry m16 when I could,😂 it's tits.
There is really no reason to use a RAS/RIS today unless you enjoy clone builds. Though that being said I still have one on my first AR that I picked up for the princely sum of roughly $30-$40 (I suspect it fell off a truck) and it has been rock solid so I have never felt the need to replace it.
@@operatorsolidsnake2542 Why do you think it was junk?? What was out of spec??
Early in my AR experimenting I had a rifle length KAC. Yeh, it was well made and solid but Cripes! it was heavy. Accessories seem to double in weight when mounted on an AR. Depending on the barrel, scope/mount, handguard mounted hardware, it wasn't hard to end up with a 12 pound rifle.
Thank you for another great video on our favorite black rifle😎🔥🔥🔥
Hearing safe with 5.56 is pretty impressive. I run my 12.5" with a silencerco omega. Its rated for up to 300wm, i went with it for 300blk of course but, i use it on my 5.56 too. Its for sure louder on the 5.56 than 308 win...which i did not expect. I just assume its because of the end cap being sized for .30 cal.
Your channel, content, is probably one of, if not my favorite channel regarding guns; particularly stoner platform.
Love your history videos. Great delivery and lots of valuable information
It makes me wonder why the government couldn't go to an expert like you the first time.
$$$
Doing that would make sense . . . and we know that 'military' and 'intelligence' are two factors which do not collide in milthink.
@@ElTejon47901gotta send more to sig & slop programs
Come on man they wouldn't take advice from the original designer either. I'm good with that. My poverty build is probably better anyways 🤣
The Army has a long history of picking the wrong rifle & cartridge back to the 1860s. Never understood what possessed them to pick such flawed weapons.
The SOPMOD stock is in the same category as the vertical grip.
Translation it’s not a Battle rifle, really good breakdown once again 👍
Incredibly knowledgeable as always
You never have anything positive to say about A.R.M.S. handguards. I understand but I'm old and not interested in keeping up with new products so I'm holding on to them anyway. Most all of my add-ons on all of my rifles are from a Dick Swan design and "out of date" but I'm still happy with them. Ah the price you pay for doing this in the early 2000's. All my BUIS, scope rings, handguards, mounts and even FSP is a 41-B and I love them. Again, you put out the most informative ACCURATE videos on rifles I have ever heard. Thank you Chris!
Sir, I am VERY fond of ARMS, Inc. Dick Swan was a personal friend for over 10 years right when he passed. He was ground breaking. The SIR system was the first production free float rail. It was rather bulky but he solved that with the Spartan. Just when he was making evolutionized models, he became sick. When he passed ARMS ceased to make anything new. His BUIS are still some of the best made. I am a big fan.
Car816 is a good gun so far it covers over the beach and bote obstruction problems, thx smallarms solutions for the heads up!
Bore *
34:06 my personal opinion is that the m250 lmg will probably stay perhaps it will retrofitted sith 7.62x51 barrels, m7 will perhaps be used as a dmr
Pets my FN Military Grade Collector’s Edition M4A1 and M16A4…Good Boys. Good Boys!
If you can please review the Colt commando, not sure if you have any good info or if you guys made them while you worked there, any info would be awesome
A few years ago I was surprised to learn from some Navy guys the M4A1 designation was born from just that one change!
I still own 2- A.R.M.S 40-L w/NSN number’s Cage Codes great sight ..
Really enjoyed, fantastic info, thanks so much
The semiauto ones I've owned have been the most accurate and reliable long guns. Also the most accurate. Hated the one I was issued but over the years, the design grew on me.
Awesome information Sir !!! Keep up the great work !!! ☺️
Nice. I was looking for something to watch tonight. Thanks
I Greatly enjoy your videos Chris. A wealth of information and not a paid for and by the latest and greatest must have trinket we are flood with from the Super Cool Club of TH-cam pranksters [IMO]. The debate over internal vs external is getting old and worn out for me. I have a number of both and I lean to external because of running Cans and cleaning. Most any AR on the market now days can shoot better than I am able to shoot it. Thank You for the great work you give us as always well done. Your work is greatly appreciated and enjoyed.
Lots of good info here, thanks for sharing.
Excellent video Chris
It never got upgraded or changed becuase it was not really needed. I'm been using the M4A1 rifles for years and they work great.
Fantastic video Chris! Also, I own some of those sharps rifle company relia-bolts. Love their quality and look.
This DI system is still the best overall. Has drawbacks but the Stoner AR system has a lot of benefits over all these other rifles that don't offer much improvements. Really just need a mid length gas system and a free float handguard on this. I am pretty sure that doubled the service life of the barrel and cut down on a lot of malfunctions. I am just quite surprised that those upgrades have not happened on a large scale yet. And agreed, the M7 is not the right choice for every soldier. I still predict it will end up being rechambered to 7.62 nato and used as a DMR role.
reminds me of the DD StW barrel. love mine.
How would you design an M16A5 upgrade program to improve the M16A4 and M4 carbines used by the Marine Corps that is not prohibitively expensive?
I think I’d start with a mid length gas system on a 16 inch mid weight barrel and a low profile gas block, add in a free floated hand guard, full auto fire control group, ambidextrous safety and issue them with those rubberized ladder type rail protectors instead of the very rattly and wiggly KAC rail covers. Save as many parts from the existing M16A4 or M4 it’s made from and if it’s an M16A4 then it’ll need an M4 carbine stock and buffer system as well. The end result should be a lightweight rifle that is a cheap upgrade that gives everyone the same barrel length and shooting characteristics as an M27 IAR, but far less durable in the sustained fire role. This would help in optics zeroing all being the same since they now have the same barrel length and now every rifle performs the same in the short term. The grunts will still have the much more durable rifle for sustained fire, but now everyone else can do the same thing for a short while and better than they could before with legacy M4s and M16A4s. Your thoughts?
Can you please do a video on the 11.5” Colt commando
My takeaway from @30:00 is that anyone paying MSRP for a 6920 is getting ripped off.
Thanks for the video!😊
SOCOM (Special Operations Command) still uses it...
Greatest general purpose rifle ever developed
Great vid as always, throughout the videos it seemed like the greates challenge this rifle overcame was the decisions of the US military. Don't count the internal piston out, Knights Armament won the contract for the new UK Ranger regiment rifle.
Im not for sure. I use believe the future will be in external weapons. For the stated reasons
It's interesting concerning bolt and carrier issues. It made me think of the Ruger SFAR .308 rifle and the use of a small face bolt, and some "miracle" steel that can take the stresses of a much larger cartridge, instead of the large AR10 bolt. Maybe the small bolt is out sourced from LMT or Geissele?
Have you thought about doing a video on the Colt Commandos and other SBRs?
NGSW/XM7 is currently intended to only replace the M4A1s for combat troops while the rest of the Army keeps M4A1s, just like how you said it was initially meant to be issued. I guess the reason for the new M4 orders is to replace worn out weapons. The Army is ordering XM7s, but the weapon and more importantly the ammo manufacturing lines are still being built up to support the desired number of weapons. There's no point in replacing all the M4s for grunts when the ammo isn't available.
XM7 will fail and miserably. Half the duty positions in an Infantry Line Company would only be hindered if they had to carry it. Everyone that actually shoots their weapons will have a significantly-reduces basic load due to magazine size, capacity, and weight. It’s not even a good DM Carbine because it only shoots 2-4 MOA. What an abortion.
Hi Chris, Thanks for a thorough and informative video. In addition to my 5.56 rifles, I’m hanging on to my LWRC SIX8-A5 (6.8 SPC). Seems to me to hit that “sweet-spot” between 5.56 and 7.62. Why do you think that the 6.8 SPC lost traction? Lastly, do you find it at all fishy that Sig has become almost a “sole-source” supplier of some very questionable, poorly-tested weapons?
It's funny that we have a "dated" rifle from 1995 but Russia still has AKs.
Meanwhile every old world European nation that still had them is ditching their AK's for modern rifles as fast as they can.
Russia tried to replace the AK, the AN-94. They couldn't afford to do it. They still can't.
@@raifsevrenceWhat are those modern rifles I wonder?
We are capitalist Russian isn’t. US Military contacts have to expire to give way for the new thing.
When Russia invaded Ukraine there was wild variety of small arms and machine guns. AK based variants mostly in 5.45 with eclectic collections of attachments which sprouted as the war went on. The hodge podge of donated hardware like the M14 (Estonia), G-3's, SCARs, Mosin 91/30's for the meat targets, some STG44's. Also a surprising number of privately purchased AR rifles of HBAR and A2 all scoped. One rifle I never saw was the FN FAL which you'd think would show up being so widespread around the world.
The frontline weapons narrowed down to AK styles in 5.45 and the US M4 style. The guys in the trenches are primarily AK equipped and the high speed low drag units. The lower tiers like Territorial Guards, Border Guards and local defenders still have the eclectic varieties like US M1919 LMG and water cooled model and WW1 Maxim MG for static positions. One Maxim was said to be made before WW1.
One of the most memorable moments was during a rant by the head of the Wagner Group. He was in a coal or salt mine in Russia occupied eastern Ukraine. As he was ranting and being a drama queen the camera did quick sweeps of the mind boggling amount of military crates of RPGs, ammo and rifles. He then opened the lid of the crate nearest him and it was a full crate of brand new US made Thompson SMG WW2 models. Still in storage from Lend-Lease.
Adopting URGI uppers, piggybacked ACOGs, and magpul MOE stocks with QD sockets would be the smartest thing the army could do right now instead of entertaining the XM-7 nonsense.
I get the mechanics of "Over the Beach" but can someone explain how an external piston system mitigates Bore Obstruction better than an internal piston system?
That was my exact question, how would the operating system make any difference with bore obstructions?
That was my question that never got a answered..The other weapons have an extractor support nub in the barrel extension that allows the weapon to pass the over the beach test..This same modification should work with the internal piston as well..
Great program, Chris. And Mrs. SAS🪖
Heather
I have heard quite a bit about the advantages of the mid-length gas system; why was this not considered for the M4?
It was considered by SOCOM. They did a report on the benefits of the mid length gas system and how it did everything better. But getting it in production is a bureaucratic and logistical nightmare. Also it was argued they could not use the M9 bayonet. This is a change that should have been made in my opinion,
@@SmallArmsSolutions Thanks. I figured it was pretty much an admin problem, like keeping the A2 barrel thin to fit the M203--it seems like simply changing the clamp on the launcher would have been simpler.
Love your channel and this video. Would you make a video on the history of the SOPMOD program for the M4A1?
I will look into it. Check out Americas Rifle. I have a chapter on it.
Environmentally friendly bullets in war.
You have so much knowledge on this subject. Any chance you will cover the URGI or the Kac KS-1?
I was hoping you would've gone into the Block II and URGI, but still loved the video.
I have a video on the MK18 where i do this. This video was only on the US Govt M4A1. I do hope at some point to have 14.5 URGI
@@SmallArmsSolutions I remember that video. Just watched again in fact. I was hoping to get your thoughts on the Daniel Defense Ris II handguard. Really, the only thing you said was that it was heavy. I hope you get your hands on a URGI as well. Would love to hear your thoughts on that variant of the M4.
What is your opinion on the vltor A5 system?
Make a video about the colt 6520 sir it’s my favorite rifle but I’m no expert.
When the barrel has been submerged in water, just open the bolt to break the suction, and the water will drain out. Easy peasy.
I know this. The external piston guns, you come up shooting. No need for that step.
@@SmallArmsSolutions Wouldn't the water just get pushed into the piston and force a premature extraction? H&K offers OTB features on the 416 but they're not a default configuration.
@@SmallArmsSolutions The external piston AR rifles use an extractor support nub in the barrel extension that prevents this..Couldn't the M4 do the same?
In your opinion, does a longer barreled rifle like the M16 have any utility as a primary service rifle anymore? As you said, in the past decade or so, all branches converted their infantry to carbines or 16" rifles like the M27
I think that since combat ranges are mostly under 300 yards, there is no benefit of the 20” over the 14.5”. Sure with the longer bbl you will get higher velocity and slightly more range. But how much would a soldier benefit? My guess is a negligible amount. Again, my opinion
25:30 The M60 was also a very poorly maintained weapon and probably never should have been replaced fun story if you have some time on the internet to watch gun videos about history
I liked the M60 personally
Mr. Bartocci. Can you review the F.R.T. triggers AK/AR? If you can get a hold of them.
What are the provisions that other modern rifles have that prevent barrel rupture, when filled with water or obstruction? How are they related to the operating system - internal piston vs external that the operating system is the culprit? I didn't quite get the connection beteween one and the other. Thanks.
The vertical grip is gayazphuk, but perfection, otherwise.
Does the AK have the same issues as the M4 with the Government profile barrel? You said the M4 A1 with the SOCOM barrel can run 180 rounds till cook-off, what can the AK do?
Get A.R.M.S to make the pinnable folding front sight gas block. Can’t get em anywhere
I wish! Since his passing, the company has been fatally neglected. These parts are no longer in production. I doubt they ever will be
I do think It's ready to be replaced. Or at least have a reliable, easy way for suppressor mounting. But that's just my opinion.
Today's Winchester '73.
“Is this outdated?”
Ask your local police dept. your average patrol rifle is a DI M4 basically.
99% of cops are incompetent with firearms
I am referring to its relevance in the modern military markets. It is still an ideal police rifle. The US Govt model lacks all the advancements of today. But this is what the US Govt asks for. Other rifles in internal piston have these features and are continuing to be sold worldwide. But the trends are moving in the external piston direction.
@ forsure. I understood what you meant. It’s still a viable option but there are more options now
10:10
Honestly, I'm not surprised they still haven't figured that out. I mean, it took +30 years for the Marine Corps to figure out that Marines were cheating their crunches on the PFT. It went from doing 100 crunches to 105, 110, then 120. Yet somehow, Marines were still "doing all the crunches." There is no way that all Marines are so fit they can do all the crunches. In 2020, my last year in they switched from crunches to planks (timed event to avoid cheating. 4 minutes is a perfect score).
The point of my comment is that it takes the military decades to figure stuff out unless it is of dire need. Like the first ever issued m16 that were supposedly self-cleaning.
I agree m4 will be replaced by a short stoke piston rifle sig spear lite 5.56 etc
Sig spear lite 5.56 or mcx lite will probably be replacing those m4a1s due to their political connections of winning weapons contracts:
Sig p320 and the m5 program
Hopefully they will ask for a 16 ich barrel I doubt they will keep the m855a1 "green" round for their rifles due to excessive barrel wear, bolts breaking and sound suppressors shredding.
Which means they are going back to old stockpiles or ammunition: m855, m193 ball etc.
The 16 inch barrel will ensure letality on target unlike 14.5 inch barrels (those older ball ammunition need the extra barrel length to ensure legality on target)
Thank you for the video, Chris. Why does the external piston system handle bore obstruction better than the internal piston system?
What about the URGI? Sure its not mass issue but it exists and would be an obvious upgrade for everyone else.
I have one on order with Geisselle
Is the Matech rear sight still a standard issue item?