If I ever do anything great in history I want a historian like you to tell that story. I mean my god this is such an underrated Channel, no more concise and accurate information on small arms anywhere else on TH-cam or the internet. Thank you sir for the amazing knowledge.
@@SmallArmsSolutionschris, you literally have an amazing Channel and I am baffled that you don't have over a million subscribers. It's unfortunate that TH-cam Shadow bands 2A content 😢 but watching your videos literally turned me into an AR guy 😂I USED TO be an AK guy but brother I swear 😂 YOU CHANGED my mind 😂😂😂😂 watching your video comparing the AK to the AR 💯💯💯 an awesome video! Everything you said was absolutely true. And the AR-15 is an absolute genius platform and dozens of rifles have came from that pattern. I love hearing all the knowledge you have, I love how much attention you pay to detail. And I absolutely love the fact that your wife sits there and films you and listens to it all. That she supports you that much. Much love coming from maryland!
The M4 carbine owes its existence to the 9th Infantry Division and the U.S. Army Development and Employment Agency (ADEA). The ADEA was created in 1983 to explore new concepts, high tech equipment, and innovative tactics under field conditions. Around the same time, the 9ID was selected as the test bed for the High Technology Motorized Division (HTMD) concept in support of their role in the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force. In April 1983, the 9ID initiated a Quick Reaction Program for a 5.56mm carbine. It was originally framed in terms of a modified XM177E2 with improved furniture and a 1-7" twist barrel. The Army's Armament Research and Development Center (ARDC) reviewed the QRP in June 1983 and noted that the XM177E2 would need additional modifications beyond those cited by the 9ID. ARDC recommended additional commonality with the M16A2, as well as lengthening the barrel to 14.5". The FY 1984 ADEA test and evaluation programs announced in November 1983 required a variety of materiel from AMCCOM items upon receipt of funding authorizations, including 16 5.56mm carbines. In January 1984, the 9ID revised its QRP and redesignated the proposed 5.56mm carbine as the XM4 Carbine. The Army formally approved the revised QRP in February 1984. Picatinny Arsenal awarded a contract for 40 XM4 Carbine prototypes in June 1985 (DAAA21-85-C-0192.) The XM4 Carbine became a joint Army/Marine Corps program sometime in 1985, but the Army pulled its funding in 1986. In their budget request for Fiscal Year 1986, the Army had requested a first-year procurement of $2.8 million for 4,685 XM4 carbines. The XM4 5.56mm carbine was intended to replace the M3 submachinegun, selected handguns, and selected M16 rifles in the front line combat units. The hope was that It would give the soldier an improved range and firepower capability for personal defense. In order to maximize cost efficiencies, the XM4 would maintain maximum commonality with the M16A2. The USMC approved the carbine for service use in January 1987; however, Congress used the lack of Army interest as one of many excuses to refuse funding for the Corps' carbine acquisition plans. In the FY 1987 request, the USMC was satisfied with a mere 892 carbines. For FY 1988, the USMC requested $2.8 million to acquire 8,814 carbines. After multiple years of failing to gain congressional approval, the USMC gave up on the carbine for nearly a decade. The Army stepped back in around 1989, adopting the USMC's Required Operational Capability document for the carbine. By March 1991, there was sufficient funding to support the carbine's type classification. While the basis of issue plan (BOIP) was not finalized, a one-for-one swap of M4 carbines for M16A2 rifles in the 82d Airborne Division was planned. For other units, the M4 carbine was intended to replace all M3 submachineguns. as well as selected pistols and rifles. The US Army's initial production contract for the M4 (DAAA09-93-C-0375) was awarded in May 1993, followed by another contract (DAAA09-94-C-0508) in July 1994. The initial M4A1 production contract for USSOCOM (DAAA09-94-C-0154) was awarded in February 1994.
@@zeck8541 Watch the video again. It was only until after M855 ball and M16A2 standardization in the 80s that the push for a shorter M16A2 variant that was compatible with M855 ball and M16A2 parts began - this was the XM4 which developed into the M4. In fact, as mentioned in the vid, the XM4 was previously termed the M16A2 carbine. The Army's XM177 program stayed stagnant through the 70s and beyond, never being officially standardized, having stopped production in 1970-1971 (Colt Models 609, 610, 629 and 649), and having never seen nor been a part of the aforementioned developments that led directly to the creation of the XM4/M4 program. In other words, if the M16A2 and M855 adoption never happened, the XM4/M4 would never exist and the XM177 program would have just withered away, possibly replaced by either Colt COTS AR-15 models unrelated to the XM177 or supplanted by a type from another service.
I was always under the impression that the 14.5 inch barrel was a simple matter of fitting the M16 bayonet. Just seems kind of convenient that the ideal barrel length to mitigate muzzle blast is the exact length to fit that bayonet.
But that convenience is achieved by where you locate the gas port and thus the triangle front sight. I'm 99 percent sure that if you get a 16 inch rifle with a midlength gas system you'll get a proper fit with the bayonet. Simply because the front sight is moved forwards towards the muzzle.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD yup! My mid length carbine is able to use a bayonet as opposed to the 16” barrel carbines with carbine length handguards and gas blocks.
@@ChucksSEADnDEADThe only commando-length carbines that had triangular handguard caps were the first Commando variants, the Colt 607s. They had 2 different front handguard caps for those that used cut rifle-length handguards. The XM177 and XM177E2 went to a round handguard cap with circular ribbed handguards. That handguard cap design was used until the Colt RO727, which had a clipped circular cap with cuts for the M203 receiver to clear it.
There WAS an M3 carbine in addition to the M3, M3A1 submachine guns. The M3 carbine was an M2 carbine (select fire M1 carbine) with night vision sighting system. The "M4" designation was "next" for carbines.
I love the 16-inch barrel and carbine-length gas system. You can set them up to cycle relatively smooth, and you can cycle any type of ammunition, including steel.
@@totalnewb123 I will say, I did get an LWRC DI recently. Mid-length guns in the same barrel length have a really nice recoil impulse. Very reliable system even with steel Tula so far. Can’t go wrong with either in my experience. My first Del-Ton upper had a 16-inch carbine barrel and worked good, too. Glad to see another American with a good rifle.
Interesting. I've never tried steel in a carbine length gas system. I've had steel get stuck in my mid - full length and piston guns. I'll have to maybe give it a shot
I prefer my 14.5 to any 16 I’ve had for really one reason. The TA31RCO-M4 and the TA01NSN ACOGs that I run on both mine were made with the BDC stadia lines for a 14.5, and out at 300 yards+, the ranging is much easier and tends to hold truer than the 16” uppers. But if it weren’t for that, there’s no reason other than cloning a service rifle to choose a 14.5” over a 16”
I was Air Force, late 90s. I loved it ~but~ we got one day at the range total. Ever. We got handed A2s so old they disassembled themselves if anyone sneezed. We had one exercise up at Little Rock that armed us air frame mechanics with laser-tag/blank versions of the same old loosey-goosey A2s and all we learned is that we were dead if we were tasked with our own force protection, lol. My thanx to all the grunts and jarheads we trusted in Saudi, Yugo, N. Turkey and anywhere else we reliably C-130'd you into theater. We brought the heat, on time and on target - but WE KNEW we relied on protection from folks with the real knowledge. Thank you and your M4s.
Learned and trained on the A2 late 80s, early 90s. Old school irons but certainly not a piece of crap. Too bad you got handed some old, poorly maintained ones. You may have liked them. Cheers.
I have a Remington made M-4 upper with a 14.5 inch chrome lined 1in7" twist with a 1.5" long flash hider ,pinned and welded to make 16" overall legal length.Which I like since the bayonet fits properly as opposed to the regular 16" barrel plus the flash hider. Great program Chris!🏆
Its so disappointing that such a wealth of information like this channel as of January 2020 only has 41k subs. Meanwhile Demolition Ranch a shootem up blowem up channel has 7 million+ subs. Us true gun guys really are few and far between.
My uncle, macvsog 1970, told me once that the moderator on their carbine masked the sound of the carbine to make it sound more like an AK. Or something other than an American weapon.
This is a good "old wives tale" that got passed around. There is no documentation from the mil or from Colt to back this story up. From all indications the moderator serves 3 purposes. 1) to increase backpressure to help with the short dwell time of the 10 1/8" barrel. 2) decrease noise decibels to that of the full size M16. and 3) deal with muzzle flash.
7:30 From what I have learned about the 14.5 is, it was chosen because of the bayonet mounting on a carbine gas system. But it could be what you said or both... There maybe multiple reason they picked a 14.5
Thank you for this excellent channel! A request: Please increase the sound output in your videos, I'm struggling to hear you on full volume. Thanks again!
Just a point. In the video, it was stated that the M4 was used by rear echelon dudes before the GWOT and that we only pushed it to front lines after the war was underway. I was in an Infantry Company in 2001 prior to 9/11, the M4 was the primary weapon. It had been in that Company for a while before I got there. I don’t even remember M16s at all in that Company.
I watched all of this unfold since I was a gun guy since the 1970s, and used to collect everything I could on the different types of AR-15 development and history. I would draw the variants from side view in extreme detail, which made me notice all the little changes between XM177 and XM177E2, or M16A1 and A2, all the weird variations I saw with Sporter IIs, the M16A2 Carbines, and then parts catalogs from Shotgun News and Bushmaster. I was very familiar with the carbine variations that existed in the 1980s, so when new things started popping up, I took notice. I joined the Army in Oct, 1993 as an 11X, got 11B at Benning, did OSUT, and went to my first unit. There was already talk about the Army getting M4 Carbines for certain units, complete with posters to advertise it. There was a Colt poster with guys from 18th Airborne Corps LRSC with M4s in our motor pool mx bay no later than summer of 1995. I did a year in the line, then went to Recon. We got a new E-5 from 2nd Ranger Batt who showed me pics of them with brand new M4A1s before he left Batt. We still had M16A1s with A2 furniture, which we turned in fall of '95, and drew brand new M16A2s out. I went to Korea on the DMZ Feb '96, DROS'd back CONUS to Fort Lewis, got a job in I Corps LRSC F Co 52nd, then we got deactivated and the M4s we were supposed to get went to 1st Brigade of 25th ID to the Recon Platoons, which is where I ended up. When I got there, we still had A2s for maybe a few weeks, then cleaned them, turned them in, and drew out brand new M4s. This was fall of 1997. Deployed with them to Panama Nov 1997 to play OPFOR for 2/75. All of 2/75 had M4A1s with KAC rails, VFGs, PAQ-4Cs, Surefires, Aimpoint Comp Ms or NSN ACOGs in 1997 and they were well-worn. Their Sniper Squad Leader had an Ops Inc 3-piece collar suppressor on his M4A1 with an ACOG. I got attached to 1st SFG in 1998, and they all had M4A1s as well, but were just getting SOPMOD accessories in. Ranger Regiment had better optics and accessories than most ODAs in 1st Group at the time. When I got to Bragg, I don't think I saw an M16A2 again unless it was in some soft skills unit. All the Parachute Infantry Battalions had well-worn M4s with KAC rails and Aimpoint Comp Ms by 2000. These were the original M4s with govt profile barrels like the 727. The heavy SOCOM profile barrel came later.
We had GUA-5's up through 2014 at my Unit, the 10" barrel's were awesome. A few guys brought them along with the M4A1's on deployments for CQB. Our GUA-5 were full auto and we're fun to shoot but got hot very quickly and we're not comfortable to hold with sustained fire. I was told AF took than back to issue out to Aircrews. Heard they might add removable barrels but don't know for sure if that happened, Cool firearms though.
The greatest technical channel period . He’s not hear for entertainment. I come hear to learn from a master . All the best to you and I’m glad you are felling better . I have a colt match target and the lower is marked 223 but barrel 5,56 nato 1/7 . Would love to know why ? Thanks ,
The burst was chosen over actual full auto for a simple, yet dumb, reason. It was a "new" tech that sounded interesting to the Col. in charge when making the decision on what would be used. So it wasn't really extensively tested, so much as seemingly futuristic, and therefore "better", and its timing was lucky.
Burst mechanisms were tested extensively on the early 1960s variants, including several 4-way fire control groups. The Colt RO605B had a 4-way FCG, and I believe there was a 607B as well.
It seems that the burst trigger recycling has been corrected by Colt now. All the M16 and M4 in Greek service were retrofitted with new trigger groups few months ago. BTW they are 0-1-3-Full.
GreekPreparedness no, the Colt burst system does not reset if cycle is interrupted. It fires the remaining number and then resets to the full 3 round burst
GreekPreparedness the M4A1 has a full auto capability, not Burst. The M4 PIP program removes the burst and returns the rifle to auto. The Army is getting rid of the burst and going back to auto. As far as what the Greeks are doing I do not know. Colt stopped that four-way a long time. Perhaps they got it from some other company. I have never see a burs mechanism that resets after each pull of the trigger regardless of how many rounds had been fired.
What is the point of having both the three round burst as well as full auto capabilities? i mean... it isn't like your average soldier will have that much need for burst mode in Greece - unless i'm missing something?
I just realized I haven't got any video notifications from you then saw your was "unavailable" did they delete your channel or what happened? I am now subscribed to this one thanks for the content!!
I love your videos but your voice volume is so low that I have to be in a quiet room to hear everything you have to say or turn on a blue tooth speaker. Keep up the good work!
The carbine length of the carbine gas system settled upon way back in the early XM177 days. A 14.5" barrel just happens to be the exact length needed on a carbine length gas system in order to use an M7/M9 bayonet.... I'm sure that's just a coincidence in how the 14.5" barrel length was settled on.
Important factor a lot of guys miss is, the length of barrel AFTER the gas block. Many discussions of carbine vs mid-length, etc. on the internet seem to assume the civilian carbine is the same setup as the military carbine. It isn't. The civilian carbine has much more barrel after the gas block, and so much greater dwell time. That's why the civilian carbines are said to be harsh to shoot, or harder on parts than a rifle. Good rule of thumb, speaking of your bayonets.... IF the weapon can take a standard bayonet, the barrel length after the gas block is the same, so the dwell time is the same. Peace.
@@douglasj2254 My point was that 14.5" barrels for carbines were not selected by the military because it was some ideal length for the cartridge or the gas system. That length was chosen solely because it allowed them to use the same bayonets.....
ok, here is an M2 carbine story. I do not know if it is a true story,I can't even remember who told me about this either. Told to me over 20 years ago. I take it to be true. here it is,,,,,,,,,,,,,, M2s were made during WW2 at Vandalia(Dayton)Ohio. this plant was a GM plant(Inland). This plant eventually became a delphi plant after the delphi spin off. As with all former GM plants, business from GM was being outsourced. Eventually near the end of operations, delphi was making physical changes to the plant. this included tearing down/out various walls. When employees tore down a certain wall, they found it to be a false wall. inside the cavity were 2 crates. When opened they found M2 carbines! a sort of time capsule. None of the carbines had serial numbers either. And they all made it out without "permission". As I said, i believe this to be a true story. A similar story occurred just a few miles from Inland at about the same time. In Dayton was also an old Chrysler air temp factory. Being very old, it also had areas that were dark and unused. One day 2 millwrights were mulling around and exploring while on break. they went into an unused part of the plant. They found 3 crates stacked with 2 inches of dust. Being Americans with a sense of adventure, they grabbed a forklift and lowered the top crate. they opened it with a crowbar and what did they find? A 1960s era 340 ci Hemi! These 3 Hemi's were intended as back up power for part of the plant, but had long been forgotten about. All 3 Hemi's made it out again,,,,,,,,,,"without permission". As before this was told to me 20 years ago,,,is it a true story? I am almost certain this happened.
Chris implied that the M4 was called the M4 because it was the next model after the M3 grease gun SMG, which is incorrect, it's called the M4 because it's the next model of carbine after the M3 night vision carbine. The last M-designation SMG in the US military was the M10, which was the Ingram gun, which would have made the M4 the "M11" if it was following the SMG model designations.
i'm kind of interested as to why, back in 2002, SOCOM moved from the M4 to the AK-47 (for some situations, not all obviously) as Jeff Kirkham talks about in his video called "5 things you need to know about the AK" - when i served i qualified with the M16A2 in basic training and then qualified again with the M16A2 shooting expert each time. however, i trained on the M249 first and then was moved into a LMG team as an M240B gunner about a quarter into my first deployment. i stayed on the 240 for my other deployments as well so i don't have a vast amount of experience with the M4.... actually, i didn't carry an M4 ever in my time in the Army from '04-'09.
I suppose if you're working with certain allied forces as advisors, it would make sense to use the weapons they use so you blend in or can train them on the use of said weapons. Said forces aligned with the US may be using AKs, so naturally the SOCOM operators working as advisors would use AKs so they don't stand out in a gunfight.
Why do we have Weaver rails? From what I've seen, all they do is cause problems because they're wider than the 1913 rail and their spacing is also different.
Did they made Colt M16 A1 in the Philippines and Elisco Tool Company bought a License from Colt to produce M16 Rifles for the Military here? I saw a couple of Elisco M16 the local cops carried but the engraving says License by Colt. So, are they Original Colt firearms?
Colt licensed the Philippine govt to manufacture M16A1 rifles for their Army. They could not export or sell outside the Philippines. There were very few countries which Colt licensed production.
I hated the 3rnd burst especially the idiot system we got you could pull the trigger and if you let off before 3rnds say you got off 2rnds the next pull of the trigger gets you one round unlike the MP5 3rnd burst no matter when you let off the trigger and pull the trigger again you will always get 3rnds. You are correct it was a big mistake the USMC did with the A2 program I also hate the A2 fixed stock most Marines did too. I also really didnt care for the rear sight the A1 was easy to use not a big problem but USMC weapons training Battalions CO wanted it for the round hand guards I do prefer them but the round are nice no left only right only issues and the 3rnd burst. I can say I had to agree with the Navy getting A3 rifles instead of A2 guns.
The reason Colt used the 14 1/2 inch barrel was it could use the standard bayonet using the carbine gas tube...The 14 1/2 inch barrel has the same length from the gas port to the muzzle as the standard M-16 20 Inch barrel...
@@GameFaceFailya mean like a troop rifle like the garand or similar? Not the beast gatling automatic unit in the fighter jets or A10 in large caliber. Aren't those ~20/30mm? Just hadn't heard of a personal rifle with that name. I Was like bullshit, no single troop is carrying around a GAU. A minigun maybe but doubt those were even used much in combat. Unless Swartzeniger was active duty
@@mrt2this607 Yeah the similarity of designation just hit me lol. While a funny mental image, no not the gun the A-10 Warthog was built around. GAU-5 not GAU-18
@@GameFaceFail gotcha. That's what had me going. It would look beautiful on the for purchase wall at the sporting goods retailers. Yep I'll take that one, load it up & then mount it to the top of my truck. Or in the front yard scanning back & forth vaporizing squirrels & rabbit. People would be like Damn!, that guy just took home security to a new level....one can dream. Take care
For what it's worth , the M4 was never , ever known as the M16a2 carbine.Daniel Watters excellent comment below , clarifies the lineage and history of the XM4 and later M4. The M16a2 carbine was the Colt M723 and Colt M733 series. Both the M723 and M733 were used by Delta force , and both never had the A2 rear sight or double heat shield handguard.They had the A1 style rear-sight , burton bump on the upper receiver and the A2 style pistol grip,with the M16a2,rifling profile in the barrel.Before 1987 , the thin M653 barrel was used on M723/733 series. The M723 carbines manufactured from 1987 to 1993 had the step cut barrel which came out of the XM4 program , this is the only similarity between an M16a2 carbine and later M4.
Hi guys can somebody tell me why the Army prefers the 3 round burst and not the full auto ( M4A1) . I just want a simple but technical answer , thanks for whoever responds.
Because the ATF decided anything below 16" had no use use something civilians based on absolutely nothing. If the current SBR law didnt exist neither would 16" barrels
I have the Colt A3 H- Bar 16 inch ( 6721). I wish it had a 20 inch barrel to increase velocity , accuracy is great but velocity is not as I'd like with 55 gr bullets hitting 2900 fps is a chore and only achieved by reloading, with a 20 inch 3100+ is no chore at all.
The movie guns in Blackhawk down are incorrect they where using M16A1 Carbines in reality and Special Forces and Delta didn't call them that they called them CAR-15s
>they were NOT the originators still liking and subscribing, but ease up, aspergers. it's a colloquial term, like 8mm mauser. regardless, great vid. liking your channel hardcore.
I'm ashamed that my Mforgeries are from RRA. Now that we know what they SA did. You filled in some gaps again. The website autoweapons.com has those M16A1 carbines from Colt. For a lot of money. Transferable pre 1986 weapons.
@@humansvd3269 what sorts of disadvantage do you think it'll bring to combat? It's primary selling point is a full-length barrel in an overall shorter length that makes it easier to handle in tight spaces. Magazine swaps might be awkward but I feel that's a matter of training and habit.
@@aaronseet2738 We simply don't want it. Too awkward, they tend to be pricey, it's not we are used to, the m16 or m16 style magazine layout is already been copied and used on other 5,56 platforms (SCAR, Turkish mpt, etc) it wouldn't be feasable for the government procurement system too get rid of a whole slew of spare parts that can be widely used and the cost per unit would be higher. We simply don't want it. It's like the vegan lifestyle," it's so good! Why aren't you embracing it?!"
@@humansvd3269 oh yes for sure, I was not suggesting a scenario of wholesale sudden adoption; that's simply not feasible. None of the militaries like British Army, IDF, Austrian Bundesheer, Singapore Army etc just went about the transition overnight. Perhaps just a couple of select scenarios and units (or even police).
@@aaronseet2738 The Aug is nifty. But overall, I just don't like bullpups. We've managed to enhance the conventional carbine to the point that bullpups aren't needed.
I just didn’t think the M-4 in 5.56 out of a 14.5 barrel was a great idea for Afghanistan. For Iraq, yes, but US troops in Afghanistan should’ve had SCAR H’s.
Chuck Pressburg, former SF and worked along with weapons development in the Army, had a few good points why soldiers shouldn't be switching to .308 rifles... Primary & Secondary Modcast: 5.56 vs. .308 th-cam.com/video/3Sh1gNW4yeI/w-d-xo.html
the 7.62x51 (m80) sucked in afghanistan, i carried the EBR and the ammo weight limited carry amount, +4000ft elevation turns ounces to pounds very quickly. they were great for crew served, but sucked for carry. most of our engagement distances were still well withing 200 meters and anything further out was pinned with mgs and maneuvered on or we called artillery or CAS. you must also remember that engagement with the enemy needed PID per our ROEs when i was down range in 2010-2011 and again in 2015-2016.
People also forget that 5.56 can reliably hit targets out to 700 meters if the shooter knows what he's doing. Granted an M4 might not fit the bill for that range, but a Recce Rifle or SPR would with Mk 262 ammo. Of course the flip side to the argument is "you have a radio man and (hopefully) an MG and or mortar team for a reason; use them". People also forget that "fire and maneuver" is the name of the game, not "trade long range machine gun salvos until both sides run out of ammo". It's as if Custer getting butt-fucked at Little Bighorn when the opposing Henry and Winchester rifles let the Indians make the US Army and the Springfield Trapdoor Rifles their bitches is lost on people. Yes, I know Custer didn't bring Gatling Guns with him for that engagement, but since those were weight equivalent to a small field cannon so the logistics were a bit and those beasts still need to be aimed... but since the Indians were far more familiar with the terrain and basically ate/lived/breathed rapid maneuver warfare, I think all the Gatlings would have done is force a stalemate at best.
@@crackbot Thank you for your service. My little brother (friends call him scarface) has purple hearts from Afghanistan and Iraq along with lots of "good job stickers" He would have received one for Nicaragua as well but he was never really there. He loved the door kicking up close and personal fighting in Iraq did not care much for the long distance stuff.
Airforce is really bad at updates on weapons I can remember at Kadena AF Base they had 601 M16s with A2 hand guards a lot of GAU5s lots of bastard A1 lowers with A2 uppers and you never knew what flash hider you would get what ever the AF Armorer had in the bin box. The Airforce doesnt throw anything away they just need to get rid of it and get the newer version but the Airforce isnt like the USMC when we change weapons systems we change over 100% no hodge podge of guns. Now you got to remember the Airforce 1st priority is Technology and Aircraft thats the reason why the Airforce keeps their weapons as long as possible its not a priority like their technology side so if they can keep their small arms going to save money they are ok with it and to be honest I cant blame them they really only need these for guard duty except for a small few specialized units in the Airforce who get better equipment.
![เจ็บที่ยังฮัก - ม่อน วรวิทย์ [ Official Mv ] จอนนี่มิวสิค](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KALIGSRSjFs/mqdefault.jpg)
If I ever do anything great in history I want a historian like you to tell that story. I mean my god this is such an underrated Channel, no more concise and accurate information on small arms anywhere else on TH-cam or the internet. Thank you sir for the amazing knowledge.
Thank you for the kind words
@@SmallArmsSolutionschris, you literally have an amazing Channel and I am baffled that you don't have over a million subscribers. It's unfortunate that TH-cam Shadow bands 2A content 😢 but watching your videos literally turned me into an AR guy 😂I USED TO be an AK guy but brother I swear 😂 YOU CHANGED my mind 😂😂😂😂 watching your video comparing the AK to the AR 💯💯💯 an awesome video! Everything you said was absolutely true. And the AR-15 is an absolute genius platform and dozens of rifles have came from that pattern. I love hearing all the knowledge you have, I love how much attention you pay to detail. And I absolutely love the fact that your wife sits there and films you and listens to it all. That she supports you that much. Much love coming from maryland!
Still watching this historical piece even when the Army is moving away from M4A1 rifles.
M4A1 carbine is forever!
The M4 carbine owes its existence to the 9th Infantry Division and the U.S. Army Development and Employment Agency (ADEA). The ADEA was created in 1983 to explore new concepts, high tech equipment, and innovative tactics under field conditions. Around the same time, the 9ID was selected as the test bed for the High Technology Motorized Division (HTMD) concept in support of their role in the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force.
In April 1983, the 9ID initiated a Quick Reaction Program for a 5.56mm carbine. It was originally framed in terms of a modified XM177E2 with improved furniture and a 1-7" twist barrel. The Army's Armament Research and Development Center (ARDC) reviewed the QRP in June 1983 and noted that the XM177E2 would need additional modifications beyond those cited by the 9ID. ARDC recommended additional commonality with the M16A2, as well as lengthening the barrel to 14.5". The FY 1984 ADEA test and evaluation programs announced in November 1983 required a variety of materiel from AMCCOM items upon receipt of funding authorizations, including 16 5.56mm carbines.
In January 1984, the 9ID revised its QRP and redesignated the proposed 5.56mm carbine as the XM4 Carbine. The Army formally approved the revised QRP in February 1984. Picatinny Arsenal awarded a contract for 40 XM4 Carbine prototypes in June 1985 (DAAA21-85-C-0192.)
The XM4 Carbine became a joint Army/Marine Corps program sometime in 1985, but the Army pulled its funding in 1986. In their budget request for Fiscal Year 1986, the Army had requested a first-year procurement of $2.8 million for 4,685 XM4 carbines. The XM4 5.56mm carbine was intended to replace the M3 submachinegun, selected handguns, and selected M16 rifles in the front line combat units. The hope was that It would give the soldier an improved range and firepower capability for personal defense. In order to maximize cost efficiencies, the XM4 would maintain maximum commonality with the M16A2.
The USMC approved the carbine for service use in January 1987; however, Congress used the lack of Army interest as one of many excuses to refuse funding for the Corps' carbine acquisition plans. In the FY 1987 request, the USMC was satisfied with a mere 892 carbines. For FY 1988, the USMC requested $2.8 million to acquire 8,814 carbines. After multiple years of failing to gain congressional approval, the USMC gave up on the carbine for nearly a decade.
The Army stepped back in around 1989, adopting the USMC's Required Operational Capability document for the carbine. By March 1991, there was sufficient funding to support the carbine's type classification. While the basis of issue plan (BOIP) was not finalized, a one-for-one swap of M4 carbines for M16A2 rifles in the 82d Airborne Division was planned. For other units, the M4 carbine was intended to replace all M3 submachineguns. as well as selected pistols and rifles.
The US Army's initial production contract for the M4 (DAAA09-93-C-0375) was awarded in May 1993, followed by another contract (DAAA09-94-C-0508) in July 1994. The initial M4A1 production contract for USSOCOM (DAAA09-94-C-0154) was awarded in February 1994.
Don't forget the colt 723s used by special forces regiments in the late 80s.. Basically an m16a2 marked m4 with a non flat top carry handle upper
Don’t forget that Special Forces, at least 5th Group had M4A1s in late 1993 as their standard rifle.
Not necessarily. The XM-177 was around in the ‘60s.
@@zeck8541 Watch the video again. It was only until after M855 ball and M16A2 standardization in the 80s that the push for a shorter M16A2 variant that was compatible with M855 ball and M16A2 parts began - this was the XM4 which developed into the M4. In fact, as mentioned in the vid, the XM4 was previously termed the M16A2 carbine. The Army's XM177 program stayed stagnant through the 70s and beyond, never being officially standardized, having stopped production in 1970-1971 (Colt Models 609, 610, 629 and 649), and having never seen nor been a part of the aforementioned developments that led directly to the creation of the XM4/M4 program.
In other words, if the M16A2 and M855 adoption never happened, the XM4/M4 would never exist and the XM177 program would have just withered away, possibly replaced by either Colt COTS AR-15 models unrelated to the XM177 or supplanted by a type from another service.
I loved my M4 and eventually M4A1 carbines I was issued during my time in US Army. Great weapon and it never gave me any shit.
I was always under the impression that the 14.5 inch barrel was a simple matter of fitting the M16 bayonet. Just seems kind of convenient that the ideal barrel length to mitigate muzzle blast is the exact length to fit that bayonet.
But that convenience is achieved by where you locate the gas port and thus the triangle front sight. I'm 99 percent sure that if you get a 16 inch rifle with a midlength gas system you'll get a proper fit with the bayonet. Simply because the front sight is moved forwards towards the muzzle.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD yup! My mid length carbine is able to use a bayonet as opposed to the 16” barrel carbines with carbine length handguards and gas blocks.
It was..
@@ChucksSEADnDEADThe only commando-length carbines that had triangular handguard caps were the first Commando variants, the Colt 607s. They had 2 different front handguard caps for those that used cut rifle-length handguards.
The XM177 and XM177E2 went to a round handguard cap with circular ribbed handguards.
That handguard cap design was used until the Colt RO727, which had a clipped circular cap with cuts for the M203 receiver to clear it.
Same here.
When I was in marine bootcamp years ago with an m16a4 I noticed how the trigger pulls were inconsistent, now I know why.
There WAS an M3 carbine in addition to the M3, M3A1 submachine guns. The M3 carbine was an M2 carbine (select fire M1 carbine) with night vision sighting system. The "M4" designation was "next" for carbines.
gary K dayuuum so the m3 got locked as well? :/
I love the 16-inch barrel and carbine-length gas system. You can set them up to cycle relatively smooth, and you can cycle any type of ammunition, including steel.
And that’s why I have that for my rifle. In a shtf scenario I want to have something that is going to run without any issues.
@@totalnewb123 I will say, I did get an LWRC DI recently. Mid-length guns in the same barrel length have a really nice recoil impulse. Very reliable system even with steel Tula so far. Can’t go wrong with either in my experience. My first Del-Ton upper had a 16-inch carbine barrel and worked good, too. Glad to see another American with a good rifle.
Middy 16 is even better
Interesting. I've never tried steel in a carbine length gas system. I've had steel get stuck in my mid - full length and piston guns. I'll have to maybe give it a shot
I prefer my 14.5 to any 16 I’ve had for really one reason. The TA31RCO-M4 and the TA01NSN ACOGs that I run on both mine were made with the BDC stadia lines for a 14.5, and out at 300 yards+, the ranging is much easier and tends to hold truer than the 16” uppers. But if it weren’t for that, there’s no reason other than cloning a service rifle to choose a 14.5” over a 16”
I was Air Force, late 90s. I loved it ~but~ we got one day at the range total. Ever. We got handed A2s so old they disassembled themselves if anyone sneezed. We had one exercise up at Little Rock that armed us air frame mechanics with laser-tag/blank versions of the same old loosey-goosey A2s and all we learned is that we were dead if we were tasked with our own force protection, lol. My thanx to all the grunts and jarheads we trusted in Saudi, Yugo, N. Turkey and anywhere else we reliably C-130'd you into theater. We brought the heat, on time and on target - but WE KNEW we relied on protection from folks with the real knowledge. Thank you and your M4s.
Learned and trained on the A2 late 80s, early 90s. Old school irons but certainly not a piece of crap. Too bad you got handed some old, poorly maintained ones. You may have liked them. Cheers.
@@bigpetetube Agreed!!!
Were the Titan II missile fields still there in the 90's? 😃🇺🇸🗽
Hey just noticed this channel is back. Glad it is! One of the best gun channels there is.
I have a Remington made M-4 upper with a 14.5 inch chrome lined 1in7" twist with a 1.5" long flash hider ,pinned and welded to make 16" overall legal length.Which I like since the bayonet fits properly as opposed to the regular 16" barrel plus the flash hider.
Great program Chris!🏆
Thanks Chris for taking the time to share this important history on the US’s weapons platforms.
Its so disappointing that such a wealth of information like this channel as of January 2020 only has 41k subs. Meanwhile Demolition Ranch a shootem up blowem up channel has 7 million+ subs. Us true gun guys really are few and far between.
You can enjoy them both.
Agreed!!!
M4/M4A1 one of the most influential service rifles that our military had a hard time finding its replacement.
I've always thought the sole source contract was a really stupid deal for the DoD to agree to, but now I know why they did. Thanks.
Reed Knight and Eugene Stoner invented the modern version of the M4 and M16, rails and all.
Without a doubt, you have the best AR videos ever made. You cover every aspect and the info is fantastic. Did you ever make a part 2 for the M4?
Yes sir!
@@SmallArmsSolutions Found it! I missed it the first time looking. Thank you!
My uncle, macvsog 1970, told me once that the moderator on their carbine masked the sound of the carbine to make it sound more like an AK. Or something other than an American weapon.
This is a good "old wives tale" that got passed around. There is no documentation from the mil or from Colt to back this story up. From all indications the moderator serves 3 purposes. 1) to increase backpressure to help with the short dwell time of the 10 1/8" barrel. 2) decrease noise decibels to that of the full size M16. and 3) deal with muzzle flash.
That was a friggin ton of info. I'm so glad I found it. Thanks sincerely!
7:30 From what I have learned about the 14.5 is, it was chosen because of the bayonet mounting on a carbine gas system. But it could be what you said or both... There maybe multiple reason they picked a 14.5
Thank you for this excellent channel!
A request: Please increase the sound output in your videos, I'm struggling to hear you on full volume. Thanks again!
This is an old video of ours from 2016. All sound input has been increased for all our newer content.
Just a point. In the video, it was stated that the M4 was used by rear echelon dudes before the GWOT and that we only pushed it to front lines after the war was underway.
I was in an Infantry Company in 2001 prior to 9/11, the M4 was the primary weapon. It had been in that Company for a while before I got there. I don’t even remember M16s at all in that Company.
Yes, he got that completely backwards.
I watched all of this unfold since I was a gun guy since the 1970s, and used to collect everything I could on the different types of AR-15 development and history. I would draw the variants from side view in extreme detail, which made me notice all the little changes between XM177 and XM177E2, or M16A1 and A2, all the weird variations I saw with Sporter IIs, the M16A2 Carbines, and then parts catalogs from Shotgun News and Bushmaster.
I was very familiar with the carbine variations that existed in the 1980s, so when new things started popping up, I took notice. I joined the Army in Oct, 1993 as an 11X, got 11B at Benning, did OSUT, and went to my first unit.
There was already talk about the Army getting M4 Carbines for certain units, complete with posters to advertise it. There was a Colt poster with guys from 18th Airborne Corps LRSC with M4s in our motor pool mx bay no later than summer of 1995.
I did a year in the line, then went to Recon. We got a new E-5 from 2nd Ranger Batt who showed me pics of them with brand new M4A1s before he left Batt.
We still had M16A1s with A2 furniture, which we turned in fall of '95, and drew brand new M16A2s out.
I went to Korea on the DMZ Feb '96, DROS'd back CONUS to Fort Lewis, got a job in I Corps LRSC F Co 52nd, then we got deactivated and the M4s we were supposed to get went to 1st Brigade of 25th ID to the Recon Platoons, which is where I ended up.
When I got there, we still had A2s for maybe a few weeks, then cleaned them, turned them in, and drew out brand new M4s. This was fall of 1997. Deployed with them to Panama Nov 1997 to play OPFOR for 2/75.
All of 2/75 had M4A1s with KAC rails, VFGs, PAQ-4Cs, Surefires, Aimpoint Comp Ms or NSN ACOGs in 1997 and they were well-worn.
Their Sniper Squad Leader had an Ops Inc 3-piece collar suppressor on his M4A1 with an ACOG.
I got attached to 1st SFG in 1998, and they all had M4A1s as well, but were just getting SOPMOD accessories in. Ranger Regiment had better optics and accessories than most ODAs in 1st Group at the time.
When I got to Bragg, I don't think I saw an M16A2 again unless it was in some soft skills unit.
All the Parachute Infantry Battalions had well-worn M4s with KAC rails and Aimpoint Comp Ms by 2000.
These were the original M4s with govt profile barrels like the 727. The heavy SOCOM profile barrel came later.
I remember see the XM177 rifles being used by the SP's at my airbase in Germany in '78
We had GUA-5's up through 2014 at my Unit, the 10" barrel's were awesome. A few guys brought them along with the M4A1's on deployments for CQB. Our GUA-5 were full auto and we're fun to shoot but got hot very quickly and we're not comfortable to hold with sustained fire. I was told AF took than back to issue out to Aircrews. Heard they might add removable barrels but don't know for sure if that happened, Cool firearms though.
Glad to see you guys back up and going again
This is too good. I’m getting the best of both worlds, History & Guns. Phenomenal work sir. 🤣👍💯🇺🇸
Thank you for the hard work.
The greatest technical channel period . He’s not hear for entertainment. I come hear to learn from a master . All the best to you and I’m glad you are felling better . I have a colt match target and the lower is marked 223 but barrel 5,56 nato 1/7 . Would love to know why ? Thanks ,
I enjoy gun Jesus's brother.
Mrv V hahahaha
He’s a Texan, let’s call him Gun Jesus’ American cousin.
@@Landoftheignorant New York*.
Gun Moses
@@Landoftheignorant I think he means Ian from Forgotten Weapon, aka Gun Jesus
I enjoy your videos! I'm becoming a fan of the Ar's and enjoyed this video. Please hurry up with Part 2 "M-4 History" :-)
th-cam.com/video/zHo9z_C0Du0/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=SmallArmsSolutions
"Piccatini Rail" sounds like the name of a shore bird.
The burst was chosen over actual full auto for a simple, yet dumb, reason. It was a "new" tech that sounded interesting to the Col. in charge when making the decision on what would be used. So it wasn't really extensively tested, so much as seemingly futuristic, and therefore "better", and its timing was lucky.
Lol, that sounds like something brass would pull
Burst mechanisms were tested extensively on the early 1960s variants, including several 4-way fire control groups.
The Colt RO605B had a 4-way FCG, and I believe there was a 607B as well.
Anxiously awaiting part 2!
Cheesehead Tony it’s up
Earned my sub.
Amen.
It seems that the burst trigger recycling has been corrected by Colt now. All the M16 and M4 in Greek service were retrofitted with new trigger groups few months ago. BTW they are 0-1-3-Full.
GreekPreparedness no, the Colt burst system does not reset if cycle is interrupted. It fires the remaining number and then resets to the full 3 round burst
Chris I just called a friend in the SF and reconfirmed it. The retrofit was to remedy the burst non-reset. How Colt did it i do not know.
GreekPreparedness the M4A1 has a full auto capability, not Burst. The M4 PIP program removes the burst and returns the rifle to auto. The Army is getting rid of the burst and going back to auto. As far as what the Greeks are doing I do not know. Colt stopped that four-way a long time. Perhaps they got it from some other company. I have never see a burs mechanism that resets after each pull of the trigger regardless of how many rounds had been fired.
But I am talking about the models in Greek service, like the RO778, RO708 and RO908
What is the point of having both the three round burst as well as full auto capabilities? i mean... it isn't like your average soldier will have that much need for burst mode in Greece - unless i'm missing something?
Love this channel! Keep up the good work!
Another great video. Please keep them coming. Thanks
Very interesting. On to Part 2.
I just realized I haven't got any video notifications from you then saw your was "unavailable" did they delete your channel or what happened? I am now subscribed to this one thanks for the content!!
Very informative video, well done !
I love your videos but your voice volume is so low that I have to be in a quiet room to hear everything you have to say or turn on a blue tooth speaker. Keep up the good work!
He said all his new videos have better sound.
Wasn't the M3 carbine an M1 with the IR illuminator package?
correct
The carbine length of the carbine gas system settled upon way back in the early XM177 days. A 14.5" barrel just happens to be the exact length needed on a carbine length gas system in order to use an M7/M9 bayonet.... I'm sure that's just a coincidence in how the 14.5" barrel length was settled on.
Important factor a lot of guys miss is, the length of barrel AFTER the gas block. Many discussions of carbine vs mid-length, etc. on the internet seem to assume the civilian carbine is the same setup as the military carbine. It isn't.
The civilian carbine has much more barrel after the gas block, and so much greater dwell time. That's why the civilian carbines are said to be harsh to shoot, or harder on parts than a rifle.
Good rule of thumb, speaking of your bayonets.... IF the weapon can take a standard bayonet, the barrel length after the gas block is the same, so the dwell time is the same.
Peace.
@@douglasj2254 My point was that 14.5" barrels for carbines were not selected by the military because it was some ideal length for the cartridge or the gas system. That length was chosen solely because it allowed them to use the same bayonets.....
thanks for the info
What about the CAR-15? Weren’t they sort of the issue version on the xm177e2 in Vietnam.
ok, here is an M2 carbine story. I do not know if it is a true story,I can't even remember who told me about this either. Told to me over 20 years ago. I take it to be true. here it is,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
M2s were made during WW2 at Vandalia(Dayton)Ohio. this plant was a GM plant(Inland). This plant eventually became a delphi plant after the delphi spin off.
As with all former GM plants, business from GM was being outsourced. Eventually near the end of operations, delphi was making physical changes to the plant.
this included tearing down/out various walls. When employees tore down a certain wall, they found it to be a false wall. inside the cavity were 2 crates.
When opened they found M2 carbines! a sort of time capsule. None of the carbines had serial numbers either. And they all made it out without "permission".
As I said, i believe this to be a true story.
A similar story occurred just a few miles from Inland at about the same time.
In Dayton was also an old Chrysler air temp factory.
Being very old, it also had areas that were dark and unused.
One day 2 millwrights were mulling around and exploring while on break. they went into an unused part of the plant. They found 3 crates stacked with 2 inches of dust.
Being Americans with a sense of adventure, they grabbed a forklift and lowered the top crate. they opened it with a crowbar and what did they find?
A 1960s era 340 ci Hemi!
These 3 Hemi's were intended as back up power for part of the plant, but had long been forgotten about.
All 3 Hemi's made it out again,,,,,,,,,,"without permission".
As before this was told to me 20 years ago,,,is it a true story?
I am almost certain this happened.
The M4 is next in line from the M3 carbine, not the M3 grease gun SMG
Chris implied that the M4 was called the M4 because it was the next model after the M3 grease gun SMG, which is incorrect, it's called the M4 because it's the next model of carbine after the M3 night vision carbine. The last M-designation SMG in the US military was the M10, which was the Ingram gun, which would have made the M4 the "M11" if it was following the SMG model designations.
@@muwuny he's saying it was designed to replace the M3 not that it was next in line
Thunderbolt22A10 I believe the M3 grease gun was still issued in desert storm so that makes sense.
I would agree the AR-15 is the archetype of the M-16 and M-4, but I would not call either of those rifles an AR-15
Ann M16 and M4’s are AR15’s
i'm kind of interested as to why, back in 2002, SOCOM moved from the M4 to the AK-47 (for some situations, not all obviously) as Jeff Kirkham talks about in his video called "5 things you need to know about the AK" - when i served i qualified with the M16A2 in basic training and then qualified again with the M16A2 shooting expert each time. however, i trained on the M249 first and then was moved into a LMG team as an M240B gunner about a quarter into my first deployment. i stayed on the 240 for my other deployments as well so i don't have a vast amount of experience with the M4.... actually, i didn't carry an M4 ever in my time in the Army from '04-'09.
I suppose if you're working with certain allied forces as advisors, it would make sense to use the weapons they use so you blend in or can train them on the use of said weapons. Said forces aligned with the US may be using AKs, so naturally the SOCOM operators working as advisors would use AKs so they don't stand out in a gunfight.
This guy must really like the loch ness monster
what happened to part 2. i know you made a part 2 when your channel was up months ago. i wanted to see it again and cant find it.
It has just been added.
great Mr. Bartocci. Like your channel very much. thank you
I always thought burst fire was jacked up........
It was it was meant to teach troops to conserve ammo and accuracy but it just proves to be kinda pointless
I’ve always wanted to know how and why the 14.5 was chosen and why ATF turns in into aNFAitem ??
Very informative.
Why do we have Weaver rails? From what I've seen, all they do is cause problems because they're wider than the 1913 rail and their spacing is also different.
I had a E16A1 at my first unit
16E1
Can you do a video on the Mk18 series of M16 rifle?
Ricochet already done
@@SmallArmsSolutions
Ok, thanks.
I must have missed it.
Why was the slip ring changed from strait to the canted Delta ring?
Are they interchangeable?
Easier hand guard removal
they are interchangeable, and the Xm177E2 was the first military carbine/rifle to feature the delta ring.
@@brucecamparmament3728 thanks!
what happened why the brace ?
"Nessie" lol I like that.
Did they made Colt M16 A1 in the Philippines and Elisco Tool Company bought a License from Colt to produce M16 Rifles for the Military here? I saw a couple of Elisco M16 the local cops carried but the engraving says License by Colt. So, are they Original Colt firearms?
Colt licensed the Philippine govt to manufacture M16A1 rifles for their Army. They could not export or sell outside the Philippines. There were very few countries which Colt licensed production.
Why do they leave the front iron sight on
I hated the 3rnd burst especially the idiot system we got you could pull the trigger and if you let off before 3rnds say you got off 2rnds the next pull of the trigger gets you one round unlike the MP5 3rnd burst no matter when you let off the trigger and pull the trigger again you will always get 3rnds. You are correct it was a big mistake the USMC did with the A2 program I also hate the A2 fixed stock most Marines did too. I also really didnt care for the rear sight the A1 was easy to use not a big problem but USMC weapons training Battalions CO wanted it for the round hand guards I do prefer them but the round are nice no left only right only issues and the 3rnd burst. I can say I had to agree with the Navy getting A3 rifles instead of A2 guns.
The reason Colt used the 14 1/2 inch barrel was it could use the standard bayonet using the carbine gas tube...The 14 1/2 inch barrel has the same length from the gas port to the muzzle as the standard M-16 20 Inch barrel...
Is he saying nesies when talking about the burst sears or is it just sounding like that and my subtitles show it as Nessie
Burst disconnect looks like lock ness monster
Is he saying guaze/gah/gua when speaking of the rifle model variations? What does it mean?
GAU, one of the Air Force's models
@@GameFaceFailya mean like a troop rifle like the garand or similar? Not the beast gatling automatic unit in the fighter jets or A10 in large caliber. Aren't those ~20/30mm? Just hadn't heard of a personal rifle with that name. I Was like bullshit, no single troop is carrying around a GAU. A minigun maybe but doubt those were even used much in combat. Unless Swartzeniger was active duty
@@mrt2this607 Yeah the similarity of designation just hit me lol. While a funny mental image, no not the gun the A-10 Warthog was built around. GAU-5 not GAU-18
@@GameFaceFail gotcha. That's what had me going. It would look beautiful on the for purchase wall at the sporting goods retailers. Yep I'll take that one, load it up & then mount it to the top of my truck. Or in the front yard scanning back & forth vaporizing squirrels & rabbit. People would be like Damn!, that guy just took home security to a new level....one can dream. Take care
what was the brace for?
monocogenit1 broke my back back then
How did the number 1913 become nomenclature
It simply refers to the Mil standard specification document. Google search MIL-STD-1913
For what it's worth , the M4 was never , ever known as the M16a2 carbine.Daniel Watters excellent comment below , clarifies the lineage and history of the XM4 and later M4. The M16a2 carbine was the Colt M723 and Colt M733 series. Both the M723 and M733 were used by Delta force , and both never had the A2 rear sight or double heat shield handguard.They had the A1 style rear-sight , burton bump on the upper receiver and the A2 style pistol grip,with the M16a2,rifling profile in the barrel.Before 1987 , the thin M653 barrel was used on M723/733 series. The M723 carbines manufactured from 1987 to 1993 had the step cut barrel which came out of the XM4 program , this is the only similarity between an M16a2 carbine and later M4.
Paven Govender XM4 was sold as the M16A2 carbine prior to M4 classification with mil-std-1913 rail.
Great video..but I think COLT is over rated..just my opinion..now you pay 400$ more for the NAME not quality
True. They've been outdone years ago but they still make decent rifles.
Now they won't be making rifles for any of us except Big Brother. Fucking cocksuckers, I hope they go bankrupt.
Colt overrated or outdone? whatever, when the shit hits the fan I dont want some gun bubba built in his garage and saved $400
Of course you would use a 50 bmg as a pointer haha
The burst mechanism seems overly complicated. I'm not an expert by any means though.
Burst is useless feature
lock ness monster 🤣
Hi guys can somebody tell me why the Army prefers the 3 round burst and not the full auto ( M4A1) . I just want a simple but technical answer , thanks for whoever responds.
John Lennon pretty sure it has to do with them not wanting soldiers just spraying bullets
Ammunition conservation with a high hit ratio
Holdover from m16a2. Seems they were afraid conscripts would mag dump.
How did the government decide on an overall legal length of a 16" barrel vs 14.5?
Because the ATF decided anything below 16" had no use use something civilians based on absolutely nothing. If the current SBR law didnt exist neither would 16" barrels
14.5” barrel with a carbine gas system allows for a bayonet and m203 to be used
I have the Colt A3 H- Bar 16 inch ( 6721). I wish it had a 20 inch barrel to increase velocity , accuracy is great but velocity is not as I'd like with 55 gr bullets hitting 2900 fps is a chore and only achieved by reloading, with a 20 inch 3100+ is no chore at all.
Change the barrel out. Not a hard thing to do. Or buy a new upper.
Amazing how knowledgeable you are. 👍
GAU is pronounced G-ow
👍👍👍
👍💯
The movie guns in Blackhawk down are incorrect they where using M16A1 Carbines in reality and Special Forces and Delta didn't call them that they called them CAR-15s
Wait so who actually invented and designed the m4
I mean its just a variant of the M16 so...
>they were NOT the originators
still liking and subscribing, but ease up, aspergers. it's a colloquial term, like 8mm mauser. regardless, great vid. liking your channel hardcore.
I'm ashamed that my Mforgeries are from RRA. Now that we know what they SA did. You filled in some gaps again. The website autoweapons.com has those M16A1 carbines from Colt. For a lot of money. Transferable pre 1986 weapons.
#12
Nessie???
Yeah, I had trouble understanding that too. CC doesn't help, either. Maybe he's saying "that sear"? I dunno.
It’s shaped like lock ness monster...I find it odd he will call that part nessie but refuses to call 1913 rail a picatinny
Will USA ever consider a bullpup design?
No. To hell with bull pup.
@@humansvd3269 what sorts of disadvantage do you think it'll bring to combat? It's primary selling point is a full-length barrel in an overall shorter length that makes it easier to handle in tight spaces.
Magazine swaps might be awkward but I feel that's a matter of training and habit.
@@aaronseet2738 We simply don't want it. Too awkward, they tend to be pricey, it's not we are used to, the m16 or m16 style magazine layout is already been copied and used on other 5,56 platforms (SCAR, Turkish mpt, etc) it wouldn't be feasable for the government procurement system too get rid of a whole slew of spare parts that can be widely used and the cost per unit would be higher.
We simply don't want it. It's like the vegan lifestyle," it's so good! Why aren't you embracing it?!"
@@humansvd3269 oh yes for sure, I was not suggesting a scenario of wholesale sudden adoption; that's simply not feasible. None of the militaries like British Army, IDF, Austrian Bundesheer, Singapore Army etc just went about the transition overnight. Perhaps just a couple of select scenarios and units (or even police).
@@aaronseet2738 The Aug is nifty. But overall, I just don't like bullpups. We've managed to enhance the conventional carbine to the point that bullpups aren't needed.
I just didn’t think the M-4 in 5.56 out of a 14.5 barrel was a great idea for Afghanistan. For Iraq, yes, but US troops in Afghanistan should’ve had SCAR H’s.
Chuck Pressburg, former SF and worked along with weapons development in the Army, had a few good points why soldiers shouldn't be switching to .308 rifles...
Primary & Secondary Modcast: 5.56 vs. .308 th-cam.com/video/3Sh1gNW4yeI/w-d-xo.html
I agree, a 7.62x51mm would have been better in Afghanistan
the 7.62x51 (m80) sucked in afghanistan, i carried the EBR and the ammo weight limited carry amount, +4000ft elevation turns ounces to pounds very quickly. they were great for crew served, but sucked for carry. most of our engagement distances were still well withing 200 meters and anything further out was pinned with mgs and maneuvered on or we called artillery or CAS. you must also remember that engagement with the enemy needed PID per our ROEs when i was down range in 2010-2011 and again in 2015-2016.
People also forget that 5.56 can reliably hit targets out to 700 meters if the shooter knows what he's doing. Granted an M4 might not fit the bill for that range, but a Recce Rifle or SPR would with Mk 262 ammo. Of course the flip side to the argument is "you have a radio man and (hopefully) an MG and or mortar team for a reason; use them". People also forget that "fire and maneuver" is the name of the game, not "trade long range machine gun salvos until both sides run out of ammo". It's as if Custer getting butt-fucked at Little Bighorn when the opposing Henry and Winchester rifles let the Indians make the US Army and the Springfield Trapdoor Rifles their bitches is lost on people.
Yes, I know Custer didn't bring Gatling Guns with him for that engagement, but since those were weight equivalent to a small field cannon so the logistics were a bit and those beasts still need to be aimed... but since the Indians were far more familiar with the terrain and basically ate/lived/breathed rapid maneuver warfare, I think all the Gatlings would have done is force a stalemate at best.
@@crackbot Thank you for your service. My little brother (friends call him scarface) has purple hearts from Afghanistan and Iraq along with lots of "good job stickers" He would have received one for Nicaragua as well but he was never really there. He loved the door kicking up close and personal fighting in Iraq did not care much for the long distance stuff.
Sound bad
Airforce is really bad at updates on weapons I can remember at Kadena AF Base they had 601 M16s with A2 hand guards a lot of GAU5s lots of bastard A1 lowers with A2 uppers and you never knew what flash hider you would get what ever the AF Armorer had in the bin box. The Airforce doesnt throw anything away they just need to get rid of it and get the newer version but the Airforce isnt like the USMC when we change weapons systems we change over 100% no hodge podge of guns. Now you got to remember the Airforce 1st priority is Technology and Aircraft thats the reason why the Airforce keeps their weapons as long as possible its not a priority like their technology side so if they can keep their small arms going to save money they are ok with it and to be honest I cant blame them they really only need these for guard duty except for a small few specialized units in the Airforce who get better equipment.
I remember USAF SP 82-86.
Stay firsty my friends...
Audio is very low watching this on a phone.
3 round burst is stupid
First!
M4: “machinegun 4”
No, Model 4
@@SmallArmsSolutions I know 🤣
Something a democrat senator from CA would say
what was the brace for?
Broke my back