Why are M4rgeries so popular?


PDA






Boats
July 23, 2007, 01:02 PM
It seems that when I look at AR-15 type rifles, the predominant model one finds is some flavor of M4 knock-off with a 16" barrel and an anywhere from nice to cheesy telestock.

And I ask myself what is up with that? IMO the reduced sized handguards and the amount of barrel sticking out of the front of these things looks marvelously ridiculous. Telestocks are great for adjusting LOP, but those can be added to any AR-15 rifle.

Apparently, the M4 is a good carbine for getting in and out of vehicles and doing entry work. Most folks don't do mounted operations with AR-15s and it is hardly like quartering a room out of a stack is in the training regimen of most folks.

So why the popularity? Is it all an Army knock-off phenomenon? It seems to me that the 5.56/.223 needs all of steam it can get, or at least the USMC tends to think so, given that they do not generally go for the carbine flavored package.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why are M4rgeries so popular?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
GunTech
July 23, 2007, 01:05 PM
The carbine is just a handy size and lighter. Take a look at many of the hunting rifles being sold today. Barrels have gotten shorter, on average.

No doubt that a 223 performs best with a longer barrel.

Prince Yamato
July 23, 2007, 01:09 PM
IMO the reduced sized handguards and the amount of barrel sticking out of the front of these things looks marvelously ridiculous.

I think so too. I'm pretty sure it's an "Army Chique" thing. Otherwise, people would just get a Bushmaster Dissipater. Still has the 16 inch barrel, but has a longer handguard.

RockyMtnTactical
July 23, 2007, 01:12 PM
M4's are a better all-purpose weapon than an M16 style weapon.

Let's face it, most of us buying these for ourselves are unlikely to see a need for these in a firefight outside of 25 yards... well within the 90 or so yards or reliable fragmentation... My most likely scenario where I would use my M4 for self defense would be inside my own home...

Not to mention that many of us can choose from a bit better selection of ammo than just M193 and M855.

A .223 from an M4 has far more ft. lbs of energy than a 6" barreled .357... and most people with a .357 would probably feel well armed...

I'll take the lightweight and handiness of an M4 over a 20" anyday!

That said, I have 3 AR's with 16" barrels (actually one is a 14.5" with a perm flash hider), and 1 20". I rarely shoot the 20".

Rexster
July 23, 2007, 01:29 PM
I don't care for M4geries myself. The Dissipator, and a similar product made by another company whose name eludes me at the moment, is much more practical, IMHO, if short overall length is desired. I always disliked the short sight radius of the standard 16" AR15 type of weapon, and as I have aged, I have lost the ability to focus on the front sight of those weapons. I can still focus just fine on the front sight of the Dissipator and the 20" AR15 types, which gives me another reason to dislike M4geries. (My employer, a police agency, does not let us use optical sights on our patrol carbines/rifles.) I am wavering right now on whether to buy a 20" upper for my M4gery (it was a gift) or trade it for a 20" AR. I already sold my 16" AR15A2. If my agency ever has another carbine/rifle cert course, and I can get into it, I want to abandon the AR platform totally and go with a Mini-14.

DougW
July 23, 2007, 01:33 PM
Well, my soldier son is using an actual M4 in the sand box with the forearm rail system, grip, and Surefire belonging to him. He has an Aimpoint on his service rifle, but his personal M4'gery has the ACOG, Ergo Grip, Surefire Tac Forearm, and an Insight Technologies CVL laser. He has equipped his personal rifle with what he has determined through use in the field (desert) what works and what does not. He has re-enlisted for 6 more years, and he is a non combat MOS. He also owns a Baretta 92.

His focus is using a similar weapon in civilian life as he uses in the Army. That said, my CAR15 has an Aimpoint ML2. Short range use only, but capable to be used for long range. I kinda like the way it looks, but I like the weight and function better. I too have a 20"A2, and it does get fired a lot.

Zundfolge
July 23, 2007, 01:33 PM
Back in 1994 the Fed.Gov tried to tell people they couldn't have them (and in fact banned them for a decade).

That's a sure fire way to get people to want one.

ArmedBear
July 23, 2007, 01:37 PM
RockyMtnTactical, et al., why in hell would I choose to use a 300 yard prairie dog round for in-home defense against a 200 lb. man at 50 feet or less?

The military has its reasons for using .223, but they aren't really good reasons in my condo.

Re comparisons with a .357 for home defense, a .223 from a 16" barrel also has more muzzle energy than a .44 Magnum revolver. I'll bet that if you asked 10 seasons Alaskan guides which one they'd rather have for bear defense, 11 out of the 10 would laugh their asses off at the notion of carrying a .223 as a "stopper."

M4geries are also popular in California, where laws restricting detachable magazines on PG-equipped semiautos make them dubious defensive firearms.

Nobody's buying these $1000 toys for home defense.

http://www.bushmaster.com/shopping/Carbon15/Images/AZC-C15RM4FT.jpg

Face it: the M4gery is popular because it was banned from new civilian production for 10 years, and the use of the M4 in Iraq made people want a lookalike gun. The market is not being driven by home defense.

I have a .223 semiauto carbine and parts that will become a couple more, but I perceive them as world-class plinkers and cheap centerfire long-range paper punchers, not HD guns.

Sure, if I had one handy and I was being attacked in my home, I would use the M4gery rather than a flyswatter, though I'd prefer a gun that would stop an intruder and maybe fly less distance if I missed a shot. I don't keep my Mini-14 loaded, any more than I keep my 10/22 loaded. What I keep loaded is a 9mm or a .357. They have the added benefits of being easily locked up in a small quick-access safe.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but seriously, I think people are buying them mostly because they're formerly forbidden fruit, they resemble what the army's using, they're fun toys, and they are (relatively) cheap to shoot. Nothing wrong with a fun gun.

kellyj00
July 23, 2007, 01:44 PM
one's man opinion, I guess, is as good as another.
16" barrel, telescoping stock, both perform very well at the 100 yard range I shoot at and they're easier to carry around.

There's no difference to me at all really, I figure if I guy wants a 20" bbl, he'll just get a new upper and move on. Nothing wrong with that.

HorseSoldier
July 23, 2007, 01:52 PM
So why the popularity? Is it all an Army knock-off phenomenon? It seems to me that the 5.56/.223 needs all of steam it can get, or at least the USMC tends to think so, given that they do not generally go for the carbine flavored package.

The USMC Powers the Be had just decided to spend a bunch of money on M16A4s before the latest go 'round of fun kicked off. For whatever it's worth, most of the Marines I've occasionally talked to or worked with in the last couple years (enlisted types rather than the Powers That Be types) have generally preferred (or wished they could get) the M4 to the M16A4 for the kind of missions and combat they've actually been involved in in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Re comparisons with a .357 for home defense, a .223 from a 16" barrel also has more muzzle energy than a .44 Magnum revolver. I'll bet that if you asked 10 seasons Alaskan guides which one they'd rather have for bear defense, 11 out of the 10 would laugh their asses off at the notion of carrying a .223 as a "stopper."


Most of them would think you were basically committing suicide using a .44 magnum on a brown bear as well.

M4's are a better all-purpose weapon than an M16 style weapon.


Very much so. Though I have to agree with the guys who are saying the Clinton-era ban and news footage probably has more to do with it than most (but certainly not all) civilian consumers going with M4gery type rifles. Nothing like prohibiting things to make people want them, especially back in the 90s when you had some gun stores with all the cool toys in "law enforcement only" racks and such.

ArmedBear
July 23, 2007, 01:56 PM
Most of them would think you were basically committing suicide using a .44 magnum on a brown bear as well.

That may be.

Okay, what about Black Bear down here?:) Which would you rather have? 1000 ft-lb. from a .44, or 1300 from a .223?

My point is that high velocity doesn't make a tiny bullet into a top choice as a manstopper just because it gives higher energy numbers, and the the best attribute of the .223 -- it's really flat-shooting for a low-recoil round -- is actually a disadvantage for home defense in a populated area. I'm not saying a .223 won't hurt someone, either. I just don't think that home defense is what's driving the M4gery's popularity.

Gewehr98
July 23, 2007, 02:00 PM
Why are M4rgeries so popular?

Because if you can't get into the military and get a real M4 issued to you, you can at least dress up and play the part with a semi-auto clone, cammie clothing optional. :D

DoubleTapDrew
July 23, 2007, 02:02 PM
I think it's mainly because we got a taste of what the Feds are after from 1994-2004 and are scooping them up while we can in case that happens again.
They are also a lot of fun to shoot, a nice choice for HD, and very versatile considering the range of uppers you can get in different calibers and lengths. They are the Legos of firearms.

Glock19Fan
July 23, 2007, 02:12 PM
You guys are comparing apples and oranges here...

.223/5.56 and the .44 magnum, while they may have similar energy levels, are for two completely different purposes. The .44 magnum is designed as a mid velocity, deep penetrating bullet, while the .223/5.56 is designed as a high velocity, low penetration round.

For hunting bears, I would take the .44 magnum, but for combat/defense, I would take the .223/5.56, and with a good round choice, would put money on it that the .223/5.56 would be the better stopper, although I dont really believe in stopping power. However, I have done ballistic gelatin testing with both calibers, and the .223, in human sized targets, is much more devastating given proper bullet choice and placement.

I own a Bushy 16 inch M4 type rifle, and home defense was one of the major deciding factors in this purchase. I also thought it looked good, knew it was capable of great accuracy, was reliable, was light, compact, cheap ammo (back then), ect.....

IMO it may be going a little far in the fad lately, but it is still a great choice for many purposes. :)

mordechaianiliewicz
July 23, 2007, 02:14 PM
One more vote for the ban.

(Though I'm an AK man myself, and don't think the M-4gery is all that great)

Carl N. Brown
July 23, 2007, 02:20 PM
Is it all an Army knock-off phenomenon?

Every kid on my block wanted an Army Rifle or a tommy gun.
I got a Mattel Thunder Burp tommy gun look-alike when I was ten.
Now I have an Auto Ordnance TM1 semi-auto carbine.

ArmedBear
July 23, 2007, 02:23 PM
A mid-length 16" makes more sense for home defense or any other practical civilian use, but it doesn't look like the Army's gun, with the barrel turned for a nonexistent grenade launcher and a bayonet lug that's 2" too far back.

So yeah, it's got something to do with looking like the Army's gun...:)

Stinger
July 23, 2007, 02:34 PM
Why are pickup trucks so popular? Most people never haul or tow anything, yet drive around in $45,000 turbo diesels.

They like them, that's why.

ArmedBear
July 23, 2007, 02:41 PM
Most drivers don't have $45,000 turbo diesels.

Gewehr98
July 23, 2007, 02:45 PM
:D

An M4gery, not so much...

ArmedBear
July 23, 2007, 02:50 PM
I think that M4geries make most people look fat.

The Deer Hunter
July 23, 2007, 02:54 PM
Because they are novel. There are better choices for HD, and pretty much everyone that has one has several accessories hanging off it. I see alot of the 6 position stock, flat top, EOtech, vert grip, light, laser, whistle, and some extra rails to get in the way.


And people want to pretend they are going to get in firefights. But hey, if you can afford it theres nothing wrong with having things because they are cool.

000Buck
July 23, 2007, 02:55 PM
We all know what opinions are like, but some state theirs as if people who think otherwise are idiots or poseurs.

This type of question brings out all the know it alls that really dont know anything.

Dissipator handguard arugment? 44 mag argument? You have no idea what you are talking about, you should probably put more effort into not looking ignorant.

nwilliams
July 23, 2007, 03:07 PM
I have one, why? Because I can:D

Oh and here's another reason......
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb264/nwilliams27/pic_obama_bio.jpghttp://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb264/nwilliams27/xin_9601d34640ce42cc9c73b2a2c77ec47.jpg

R.W.Dale
July 23, 2007, 03:13 PM
So why the popularity? Is it all an Army knock-off phenomenon?

Nope, The whole "all things 1911" fad pretty well has run it's course. Leaving a void in peoples lives that had to be filled thus presenting a need for the next firearm fashion. In this case black rifle fever.

I kinda like this fashion trend. The whole JMB worship thing was kinda creepy. I still miss "wonder nines" though

trueblue1776
July 23, 2007, 03:14 PM
I like to make little race courses in the woods, my "M4" with a mini Y is a good race gun for my little hobby.

Whether it is a bad copy of a military gun or an awesome little carbine is all just a bit of opinion.

ArmedBear
July 23, 2007, 03:27 PM
Nobody's saying that anyone shouldn't have one, or that there's a thing in the world wrong with a fun gun of any sort.

The question was, "Why are they so popular?"

If everyone suddenly wanted to make sure they had a gun for HD, there would be a run on 4" 686+ revolvers for convenience and 18.5" 870s for stopping power (or whatever you want to call it if you don't believe in it: 00 Buck at close range will stop an attack faster than a little bullet, or a big bullet, fast or slow, with less reliance on shot placement).

So the answer must be something else.

Again, there's nothing wrong with that.

My only point about .44 or .357 or whatever, for 000Buck or anyone else who doesn't "get it" is that nobody's choosing .223 because it's the best round for HD. That doesn't mean I want to be hit with one; it does mean that someone who is honestly looking specifically for home defense is unlikely to choose a small-caliber rifle.:rolleyes: High velocity, long range, and critical shot placement are not ideal characteristics if that's really what you're looking for.

So the answer must be something other than simply "people are buying them for home defense."

taliv
July 23, 2007, 03:33 PM
it does mean that someone who is honestly looking specifically for home defense is unlikely to choose a small-caliber rifle.

So the answer must be something other than simply "people are buying them for home defense."

on the contrary, the AR15 in m4gery config is ideal for home defense. I know plenty of people who use them for HD. Perhaps a pistol might make sense in California, but in most of the country, small-caliber rifles are perfect.

raubritter
July 23, 2007, 03:35 PM
I'd rather have this one:
http://www.olyarms.com/?rootView=browse&view=dtl&ids=PP-20

ArmedBear
July 23, 2007, 03:38 PM
I know plenty of people who use them for HD.

Do you know anyone who has actually used it for HD?

What does California have to do with whether a small-caliber long gun is a good choice for HD? We can get other guns with detachable mags and similar specs. They're not good choices, either. It's as easy for a BG to grab a 3 foot long gun indoors, in every state, and it's just as hard to keep one in a drawer or holster.:p

Maybe in other places, people consider a 100-yard shot to be home defense? Recent court cases cited here suggest otherwise...

And while some people who might have to defend their homes do practice for a protracted firefight with multiple intruders, most people don't. They still buy M4geries.

JonB
July 23, 2007, 03:39 PM
.223 for HD? No way. I would rather have my Benelli 12ga for HD - less chance of over penetration, don't really have to aim it (just point), and nothing better than the sounds of a 12ga being racked to make a bad guy think twice.
Anyway, I am not sure of the reason behind the M4 fad either. I suspect it is to have what the reasl soldiers have - or rather something close to it. I personally went with a 16" midlength. Still short and handy, but I think the short hand guards look silly.

000Buck
July 23, 2007, 03:41 PM
You are right, I dont get it. I didnt know 357 and 44 mag were so much better at close range than 223 against a human, not a bear, but a human. You are telling us that a .357 or .429 hole is better than a .22 hole? Well did you know that 223 fragments at close range?

I'll agree with the buck shot argument, but some women have a problem firing a 12 guage or a magnum handgun, so sometimes a 223 is a good comprimise...even though it isnt a comprimise really.

And the original poster wasnt really asking a question, he was just telling us his opinion but disguised it as a question. This happens everyday on forums all over the place. Another popular opinion hidden as a question is why are 14.5" barrels so popular??? With 16" being available, 14.5 is for idiots is the common "question"

I could start two opinion question things myself. Why would anyone want a dissipator, you could buy a midlength and have the gas system lengthened that gives longer life and supposedly better reliability.

Why would anyone want an 11.5" barrel with a 5.5" flash suppressor? You lose all that velocity.

But I dont want to start threads just to make myself feel smarter than everyone else.

000Buck
July 23, 2007, 03:43 PM
regarding 12ga...don't really have to aim it (just point)

You should go shoot a target at 15 feet and you will probably change your mind on that one.

taliv
July 23, 2007, 04:46 PM
Do you know anyone who has actually used it for HD?

not sure why that's relevant, if by used you mean "shot someone". I mentioned cali because none of the guns i see labeled "california legal" bear any resemblance to AR15s.

i can't recall anyone personally who has shot someone in their home with their pistol either, although I can think of 3 people i talk to regularly who have shot themselves with their pistol (one as recently as 2 weeks ago), but i don't know anyone who has shot themselves with a rifle.


here's an excerpt from an article by Clint Smith on Home Defense:
Firearms for Home Defense Handguns

Handguns are simply not the best choice of weapons to fight with. They are in fact convenient for concealed carry purposes in the public domain. They can win a fight if used effectively, but should not be considered the optimum choice, period. In the home they add a degree of portability, but with this added mobility also comes a degree of lacking. The process is a no-brainer: The less effective the tool is, the more likely it will have to be shot multiple times to resolve the issue at hand. The more you shoot, the more likely something will go wrong--sort of like fighting bees--one bee, maybe one sting, tour bees ... You get the point.

<snip the part about shotguns>

Rifles

All things considered rifles are the way to fight if you must. They are powerful and will shoot though people and walls, so your weapons selection may need to take into consideration where and how you live. Split-level homes or residences where other family members are often at the other end of the living area will require a thoughtful shooter before launching .308 ball rounds down the length of the home should there be a fight. All of the high-speed magazine-fed rifles are OK with me although, all things considered and in perspective, I personally would rather not get shot by .30-30 from a 94 Winchester ... personally. A local young mother here recently shot an intruder with a Model 70 in .30-06. It worked.

here's another interesting quote:
"Over 80 percent of people shot with pistol rounds survive the incident. Less than 20 percent of those shot with rifle rounds survive."

James McKee
Author
The Book of Two Guns


i'm not really interested in whether you or anyone else chooses to use a pistol or a rifle. I'm certainly not much interested in arguing about it. The point was simply that there are plenty of knowledgeable and reasonable people who prefer one or the other for a variety of reasons.

Acting as if the AR15 is not appropriate for HD is ignorant and does a disservice to new readers.

RockyMtnTactical
July 23, 2007, 05:06 PM
RockyMtnTactical, et al., why in hell would I choose to use a 300 yard prairie dog round for in-home defense against a 200 lb. man at 50 feet or less?

The military has its reasons for using .223, but they aren't really good reasons in my condo.

Sure there are. This is why many LE agencies are dropping their pistol caliber carbines, because the .223 is better every way you look at it.

FWIW, .223 is an excellent man stopper, esspecially when compared to most pistol calibers, even .357's, etc...

Re comparisons with a .357 for home defense, a .223 from a 16" barrel also has more muzzle energy than a .44 Magnum revolver. I'll bet that if you asked 10 seasons Alaskan guides which one they'd rather have for bear defense, 11 out of the 10 would laugh their asses off at the notion of carrying a .223 as a "stopper."

Apples and oranges. I don't anticipate my home being broke into by Grizzly or polar bears... Even if my home were broken into by a black bear (which are somewhat common in my area), I would have no problem with my M4gery's... or against any other predator in my area for that matter (not that I think a break in by wildlife predators are likely).

M4geries are also popular in California, where laws restricting detachable magazines on PG-equipped semiautos make them dubious defensive firearms.

Nobody's buying these $1000 toys for home defense.

Nobody? You're wrong. I did. Almost everyone I know has bought one for a potential need to use it to defend their homes... however unlikely, that is why they bought it, or at least one of many reasons...

I happen to use my M4's for hunting, plinking, training, shooting, but the number one reason I own one is for defense of my life and liberty... however unlikely you think that is...

Face it: the M4gery is popular because it was banned from new civilian production for 10 years, and the use of the M4 in Iraq made people want a lookalike gun. The market is not being driven by home defense.

I am sure that some people have them for those reasons... but you could say the same thing for people who own M16 lookalikes, or AK-47's, or any other military style weapon...

But I think you underestimate the intelligence and preparedness of many people who own these guns...

I have a .223 semiauto carbine and parts that will become a couple more, but I perceive them as world-class plinkers and cheap centerfire long-range paper punchers, not HD guns.

Good for you. That is your right, but you should assume that everyone else just wants to have one to "look cool" just because that's why you bought one.

Sure, if I had one handy and I was being attacked in my home, I would use the M4gery rather than a flyswatter, though I'd prefer a gun that would stop an intruder and maybe fly less distance if I missed a shot. I don't keep my Mini-14 loaded, any more than I keep my 10/22 loaded. What I keep loaded is a 9mm or a .357. They have the added benefits of being easily locked up in a small quick-access safe.

Interesting that you trust the weak power and inaccuracy of a 9mm and a .357 over the better power and accuracy of an M4.

Let's be realistic here. Missing your target and hitting an innocent bystander is an issue to consider. With this in mind, you're far better off using something that you will likely be more accurate with... like, say an M4 instead of a GP-100.

If you hit your target, your chances of injuring or killing another human being are far less. Not to mention that when .223 rounds pass through dry wall they lose that critical velocity that would have let it fragment and cause more damage...

So, if you miss with a .223, you do less potential damage, and if you hit with a .223 (which is more likely with a more accurate weapon like the M4) you will do more damage...

Not to mention you have a tactical advantage of more rounds and faster, more accurate shooting, assuming you are using 20-30 round mags... useful for defending against multiple attackers.

When you are fighting for you life, you should take any and every advantage you can when you can...

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but seriously, I think people are buying them mostly because they're formerly forbidden fruit, they resemble what the army's using, they're fun toys, and they are (relatively) cheap to shoot. Nothing wrong with a fun gun.

No, there's not... and I am sure some of that comes into play, I don't doubt it... but those are secondary concerns to me...

Frog48
July 23, 2007, 05:26 PM
Because they're fun.

ArmedBear
July 23, 2007, 05:31 PM
RMT-

You bought a 10-round fixed magazine M4gery for self defense? Really? That's what I wrote about, and that's what's in that picture. A $1000 fixed magazine Bushmaster made for the CA market.

I think you underestimate the intelligence and preparedness of many people who own these guns...

I think you haven't done a lot of repairs at ranges or ever been to a gun show. Never did I say that there aren't smart, well-prepared people who shoot the things. However, there are plenty of people who can't hit the broad side of a barn who buy them. I have known one or two myself... They should be practicing with a .22 first, but that's not as cool as missing the paper with an M4.:) I never said you're one of them. Nor did I say I wouldn't load up a few guns of various sorts, if defense of liberty becomes an issue.

weak power and inaccuracy of a 9mm and a .357

LOL

Now maybe you can't hit anything at 15 feet or less with a handgun, but I can. And the belief that a .357 is an ineffective defensive round is laughable to say the least, contradicted by real-world data. And in the scenario I'm likely to face inside my home, a handgun will be FAR more useful to me, because I will be able to grab and shoot it more effectively.

So, if you miss with a .223, you do less potential damage, and if you hit with a .223 (which is more likely with a more accurate weapon like the M4) you will do more damage...


LOL

Which is it? Slows WAY down when it hits something like drywall, but outperforms a big slug if it actually hits a person?

And you ignore issues of sight plane, which are pretty significant at in-home ranges. The gun isn't so accurate if you miss by a few inches even when you're dead-on. How is that better than a handgun, again?

those are secondary concerns to me...

I'm sure they are. To you.

And I bought my Jeep to go in the dirt.

Last I read about it, 15% of Jeeps are ever driven off-road. And Jeep had the highest ranking of any manufacturer of 4x4's.

We WERE talking about what makes the things so popular -- not just among serious shooters, not among carbine competitors, and not the AR-15 platform, not 16" AR's in general, but m4geries which are specifically designed to resemble Army-issue guns.

Because they're fun.

Exactly. And there's NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT.

000Buck
July 23, 2007, 05:41 PM
OK, so we have two opinions here:

One group says they are popular because lots of people want to pretend they are playing war.

The other group says they are good at killing people, very handy around the house and easy to shoot, so they are a good HD gun.

Anyone have a third idea? Almost forty posts and there are two things being said.

Maybe Michael Moore could do a movie on the M4.

http://uglydemocrats.com/democrats/United-States/Michael-Moore/michael-moore-pizza.jpg

KC&97TA
July 23, 2007, 05:50 PM
Why So Popular?

1. They're considered a "sexy gun",
2. Practical & Tactical, light, short, 30 round + mag capacity, light recoil, many options to tailor the rifle to the person, many accesories on the market from dirt cheap to Mil Spec and expensive.
3. Can be used to hunt medium game, Can be used to plink, Can be used for HD. Accuracy from 0-600 yards on Iron sights, can be pushed to 800+ yards on optics and ammo.
4. Many training locations and techniques, ie; US Military, Gun Sight, On Sight, Front Sight, FBI, Police, Swat
5. Highly Dependable, build in forward assist, all the bugs are gone!
6. Can be made ambidextrous :neener: try that with an AK!
7. Ammo isn't too expenive, $5 for 20 rounds of WWB

I could probly go on and on...

FWIW: The US Marine Corps has a message out saying that the M4 will replace the M9 as T/O Weapon to all Staff NCO and Officers, as available. The Unit I'm with, currently has only M4's, the only long guns are M40A3's, M21's, XM3's and SR25's.

RockyMtnTactical
July 23, 2007, 06:06 PM
You bought a 10-round fixed magazine M4gery for self defense? Really? That's what I wrote about, and that's what's in that picture. A $1000 fixed magazine Bushmaster made for the CA market.

When did I say that I bought a 10-round fixed mag M4gery? I don't recall writing that...

I wouldn't live in CA with their gun laws, but if I did, sure I would own a 10 round fixed mag AR. I wouldn't be able to own a handgun with more capacity than that, would I?
I think you haven't done a lot of repairs at ranges or ever been to a gun show. Never did I say that there aren't smart, well-prepared people who shoot the things. However, there are plenty of people who can't hit the broad side of a barn who buy them. I have known one or two myself... They should be practicing with a .22 first, but that's not as cool as missing the paper with an M4. I never said you're one of them. Nor did I say I wouldn't load up a few guns of various sorts, if defense of liberty becomes an issue.

I am a dealer. I sell AR parts to lots of people. I'd say that most people buy them for a self defense rifle, first and foremost.

Now maybe you can't hit anything at 15 feet or less with a handgun, but I can. And the belief that a .357 is an ineffective defensive round is laughable to say the least, contradicted by real-world data. And in the scenario I'm likely to face inside my home, a handgun will be FAR more useful to me, because I will be able to grab and shoot it more effectively.

I would say that I am above average with a pistol, compared to most. With a rifle, I am probably about average or slightly below average (among people in my skill level who train with and shoot AR15's on a regular basis). That said, rifles are easier to be accurate with when compared to pistols. And as good as I am with a pistol, I will be more accurate with a rifle, just because it's easier to be accurate with rifles...

As for the .357 being ineffective, I never said that (you did). Relatively speaking though, it is a step down from a .223, even in a longer 6" barrel...

Which is it? Fragments when it hits something like drywall, but outperforms a big slug if it actually hits a person?

And you ignore issues of sight plane, which are pretty significant at in-home ranges. The gun isn't so accurate if you miss by a few inches even when you're dead-on. How is that better than a handgun, again?

It won't fragment when it hits drywall, only if it hits soft tissue. If it hits drywall, it will likely slow down under the frag threshold, which will make it less harmful to innocent bystanders though.

You can site in your rifle for 15 yards, you know that right?

I'm sure they are. To you.

And I bought my Jeep to go in the dirt.

Last I read about it, 15% of Jeeps are ever driven off-road. And Jeep had the highest ranking of any manufacturer of 4x4's.

We WERE talking about what makes the things so popular -- not just among serious shooters, not among carbine competitors, and not the AR-15 platform, not 16" AR's in general, but m4geries which are specifically designed to resemble Army-issue guns.

What is your point? I know what the subject is. Why are M4's so popular? Because they make a great all-purpose long guns for almost anyone... whether you are in LE, military, or just for home defense. They are also fun, good looking, you can hunt with them... etc...

Haven't we already gone over this?

waterhouse
July 23, 2007, 06:17 PM
I can see a use in a collapsible stock. I'm thinking about putting one on even my 20" AR. I can see the use of a short barrel, I've got a 14.5" with perm. flash hider.

I've never really understood what is gained by the, as ArmedBear so nicely put it:
barrel turned for a nonexistent grenade launcher

Can someone explain to me why the M4 barrel profile makes sense (from a non military point of view)?

Until I can figure that barrel profile out, the M4gery doesn't gain anything in my mind for range use, HD, or any other reason.

Mikee Loxxer
July 23, 2007, 06:18 PM
While we are on the subject of M4geries another question comes to mind. Why are the Springfield SOCOM M1A’s so popular? As far as I know no military organization has ever adopted an M-14 rifle with a 16” barrel. Personally I wouldn’t want one but many do.

Boats
July 23, 2007, 06:21 PM
000Buck wrote:

And the original poster wasnt really asking a question, he was just telling us his opinion but disguised it as a question. This happens everyday on forums all over the place. Another popular opinion hidden as a question is why are 14.5" barrels so popular??? With 16" being available, 14.5 is for idiots is the common "question"

Sure my opinion, "M4rgeries look ridiculous" is embedded in my post, but the question is genuine.

To put it another way, "How did such a goofy looking example of AR become so popular?"

I guess the why behind the why is "Why the midget handguards?" Small handguards look classic on an AK and look like a cost cutting move on an AR, as in "where'd the rest of the plastic go?"

So I have been shopping for an EBR. I have come down on an AK of some type, but every once in awhile I get drawn back to getting an AR, and then I encounter these goofball looking carbines. Now we have people saying the M4, and by extension, the 4rgery, are better rifles than the A2.

Maybe, for soldiers. But what is inferior about a 16" Bushie Dissipator? One could always telestock it.

000Buck
July 23, 2007, 06:22 PM
Can someone explain to me why the M4 barrel profile makes sense (from a non military point of view)?

Until I can figure that barrel profile out, the M4gery doesn't gain anything in my mind for range use, HD, or any other reason.

M4 profile does nothing for HD. Who said it did? The "question" asked was about the M4 in total, not just the turned down barrel. If you want a gun from LMT, that is your only option though. Would the M4 profile stop you from buying a gun?

I doubt most people buy M4 style guns because of the turned down barrel. Most people buy them because they are carbines. They are short and handy.

000Buck
July 23, 2007, 06:30 PM
But what is inferior about a 16" Bushie Dissipator? One could always telestock it.

You said the M4 handguards look ridiculous. You want to see ridiculous, take the handguards off the Dissipator. So you have the carbine gas block under the handguards, then you have the fake gas block up front with sight on it. Dissipators looks ridiculous to me, so to each his own or whatever.

If you want a short AR but dont like M4 handguards, look at a midlength. They have medium length handguards and a midlength gas system which is easier on the gun in the long run supposedly.

Small handguards look classic on an AK and look like a cost cutting move on an AR

A real life cost cutting measure is manufacturers putting out most of their guns in HBAR config. It was marketed as a great thing, but it is really just so the manufacturers dont have to turn the barrel down and use up costly bits and time on the machines.

TOU
July 23, 2007, 06:46 PM
Boat wrote: But what is inferior about a 16" Bushie Dissipator? One could always telestock it.

Exactly! This my idea as well. You do know the Dissy's can come with this stock, no? The only thing holding me back thus far (besides $$$ ;)) is wishing I could get it with the mid-length gas. (which I understood Bushmaster does not make.)

Chris Rhines
July 23, 2007, 07:11 PM
Nothing says you can't build an AR-15 carbine exactly the way you like it. I personally like a 16" lightweight barrel, mid-length gas system, and short fixed stock for a non-NFA home defense carbine. Modularity is a nice feature for a weapon system to have.

I also much prefer such a carbine to a shotgun, when it comes to choosing a weapon for home defense.

I don't know that the M4A1 lookalikes are more popular than any other variant of the AR-15 theme.

- Chris

TOU
July 23, 2007, 07:16 PM
Nothing says you can't build an AR-15 carbine exactly the way you like it. I personally like a 16" lightweight barrel, mid-length gas system, and short fixed stock for a non-NFA home defense carbine. Modularity is a nice feature for a weapon system to have.
So who/what did you go with? Build it yourself?

Chris Rhines
July 23, 2007, 07:56 PM
Built it myself. If I were going to buy a pre-assembled AR upper in the same configuration, I'd get one from CMMG.

- Chris

DMK
July 23, 2007, 08:05 PM
The carbine is just a handy size and lighter.The funny thing is, most folks can't tell the difference between an M4 barrel and an HBAR, ending up with a rifle heavier than my 20" Govt. profile. Heck, my Govt. profile midlengths are even lighter than an M4.

Personally, I can't wait to get my 20" 1/7 twist pencil barrel from CMMG. That will make a light and handy rifle with the capability to shoot the better modern ammo.

waterhouse
July 23, 2007, 08:54 PM
M4 profile does nothing for HD. Who said it did? The "question" asked was about the M4 in total, not just the turned down barrel.

No one said the barrel profile did anything for HD. But people have said that the M4gery:
are a better all-purpose weapon than an M16 style weapon.

most likely scenario where I would use my M4 for self defense would be inside my own home

The original question was why people buy or build M4geries (sp?) My point is that there is nothing wrong with owning a collapsible stocked carbine, but that the M4 barrel profile, which is part of a true M4gery, is useless.

I guess we need to decide if the question is "why are carbines in general so popular?" (in which case I would say they are light and
handy) or "why are true, M4 look-a-likes popular?"

Most people seem to be answering about why they think carbines are popular, with a few exceptions, such as the gentleman who pointed out that his son wanted a similar rifle to one he used in combat.

Would the M4 profile stop you from buying a gun?

Unless it was a smoking deal, yes, but I'm pretty picky about my AR barrels.

22LongRifle
July 23, 2007, 08:55 PM
I would have to say cause its on TV and its cool.

There might be a few who buy one cause they used one in the service or at work. That why I got a Mini 14, we use them at work and I like them. I did not buy an AR even though I used them in the service and as a reservist LEO. Just what I think is a better weapon for HD. And that is a reason why most older gentleman buys a M1 Carbine or M1 Garand.

If you sell them, yeah, you are going to think they are the best thing since sliced bread.

22lr

RNB65
July 23, 2007, 09:01 PM
I just put a Bushy M4 profile upper on my AR and it's awesome. My little rifle now weighs 1.5lbs less than it did with the HBAR upper and I can't tell any difference in accuracy at 100yds. No tele-stock for me -- I prefer the standard fixed stock. I don't really need the little barrel groove for attaching the M203 grenade launcher, but it's nice to know it's there just in case. :) I LOVE my "new", lightweight, easy handling AR. :cool:

SpeedAKL
July 23, 2007, 09:05 PM
I read in G&A that it's on track to pass the 1911 in sales. Anyone hear whether that's true?

Why I bought mine:
1. reasonably-priced entry into centerfire rifle realm
2. highly accurate given its size and light weight
3. light / ergonomic / easy to use
4. boatload of parts and accessories available on the Web and elsewhere
5. large community / lots of info available on them
6. cheap ammo for a centerfire
7. versatile - makes good plinker, fun gun, SHTF gun, small-game hunter, etc

And yes, I would trust mine with HD....only concern would be overpenetration, but at close ranges I have no doubt that stopping power on human-size targets is more than adequate. However, I'd be just as inclined to use the 12-gauge.

000Buck
July 23, 2007, 09:39 PM
but that the M4 barrel profile, which is part of a true M4gery, is useless

And my point is who cares, it doesnt affect anything one way or the other. Many guns come with them because some of the higher end guns we can get are from suppliers to the military and police. Look at the Colt 6920 and all of LMTs guns. Maybe Bushmaster and RRA continue to do it because they want to give the illusion of being a big military and LE contractor. Most people buying M4s for their looks probably dont even know what the groove is for so they dont care.

If it bothers you because it is useless, do you also only buy guns without bayonet lugs because they are equally useless?

Nameless_Hobo
July 23, 2007, 09:55 PM
Because it's fun and they like carbines. I personally like the A1 style rifles, but in the end I don't loose sleep over other's money spent.

Stevie-Ray
July 23, 2007, 10:04 PM
Because they are novel. There are better choices for HD, and pretty much everyone that has one has several accessories hanging off it. I see alot of the 6 position stock, flat top, EOtech, vert grip, light, laser, whistle, and some extra rails to get in the way.Hey, I got all that plus the BUIS, but minus the whistle on my practical tactical. Awright, where do we get the tactical whistles?:D

Actually mine was bought for fun first, and HD a distant second but not out of the question. Who was it that said your pistol is for fighting your way back to your rifle? Mine is not set for long distance targets. If I want to reach out and touch someone, I have the SAR-48 for that.

I live a scant few miles from where the worst race riots took place in the sixties. I don't believe it would happen again, but I would be a fool to assume it couldn't. Just one of the possibilities. Gangs are also on everybody's minds nowadays. We just ran one bunch of idiots out of the neighborhood.

bpsig
July 23, 2007, 10:04 PM
There a few reasons why popular. The end of the idiotic pc feel good from the clueless In DC.
The aftermath of Katrina people see they will be on there own. An the reason that service personel have bought weapons like they used in service. Familiar and sometimes trust them to be reliable somewhat . Depends on their experiences and mos.
But also they are fun to shoot and sort of lightweight.

000Buck
July 23, 2007, 10:05 PM
Question: Why did the chicken cross the road?










































Answer: To buy an M4.

koja48
July 23, 2007, 10:13 PM
A) I wanted one.
B) Compliments my other AR

IMHO, it supplements my ability to defend myself, if needed. Given a choice, if I were faced with fending-off bad guys, I'd take the M4gery hands-down (even moreso, now that I put an EOtech on it). I love my 1911s, but the carbine provides an edge they can't. Easy to carry, stow & carry in the Jeep, was a fun project, and is a blast to shoot. My ex asked me one time: "Have you bought more guns? Why did buy more guns?" Answer: "Because I can."

Eightball
July 23, 2007, 10:16 PM
I own one (well, a middy, actually) because the light recoil and controllability are nice factors, and it makes a helluva coyote gun--but I still intend to get a 24" Stainless upper later on to make it a real coyote gun.

But, PO'ing anti-gunners is plenty enough of a good reason to own one. That's why I bought my WASR a while back, I just like being able to hit what I am at at any given distance (which is why the WASR is gone and the RRA is here).

As for the CAR length with goofy long barrel and nonexistant grenade launcher--no idea. I prefer to get the "most" out of my 16" barrel, and the middy gas system seems to offer it for my purposes; collapsible stock for storage purposes, none of this "in and out of vehicle" nonsense for me--it takes up less room in my home when not in use. And all that will be "hanging" off of mine will be some flavor of scope, and maybe a bayonet--just in case I need to stab a coyote, or pose for a photo op, or PO another anti. To each their own :D

Neo-Luddite
July 23, 2007, 10:26 PM
Because of many of the afformentioned reasons, and because the price has come so far down because of all the players in the m-4 style market; Just a sub-piece of the massive AR market that has become commodified in many ways. The quality has (arguably) never been better, and the price never lower.

And China is there, like it or not depending on your politics, flooding the market with (at least) cheap plastic goodies and whatnot that the rifles are made from. That is the only part the I resent, otherwsie it's a great deal for shooters who want that platform.

RubenZ
July 23, 2007, 10:34 PM
I like it because I can have it the back seat of my truck, reach my arm back there and grab it and run after the Wild Pig that just ran in front of my truck. The best part is I can do it all without banging a longer Rifle all over the place inside my truck and cracking windshields.

Then its great for Home Defense as well.

Seriously. Whats not to Like about them?

AZgunstudent
July 23, 2007, 10:58 PM
I bought one to train with before I deployed. Now that I am here, it languishes in the safe back home. I'm selling it because I now have no use for it (I'm getting out after this deployment). I bought and sold a Beretta 92 for the same reason.

They're "okay" guns, but I find them clunky to carry around, don't really enjoy shooting them, have other guns that are perfectly adequate for HD, and think most of the SHTF/TEOWAWKI/Molon Labe scenarios are pretty outlandish.

Fads come and go in the gun world - someone else mentioned 1911s and wondernines - and this too shall pass.

Blackbeard
July 23, 2007, 11:12 PM
But, PO'ing anti-gunners is plenty enough of a good reason to own one.

Why I got mine. They want to ban scary-looking guns, so I get the scariest-looking one I can find. That it shoots well and is fun, well that's just gravy. :-)

RubenZ
July 23, 2007, 11:56 PM
Fads come and go in the gun world - someone else mentioned 1911s and wondernines - and this too shall pass.


Pleeeeease! 1911 Love has been around probably before you were born. The 1911's are not a FAD. They are a Historic Item. Big difference.

taliv
July 24, 2007, 12:06 AM
*cough* i just had my 36th b-day and AR15s were here a long time before i was.

now that i think about it... that's a little unsettling. i usually think of AR15s as "new" because i think of them compared to springfields and garands in High Power. I might have to update my thinking

KC&97TA
July 24, 2007, 12:20 AM
Pleeeeease! 1911 Love has been around probably before you were born. The 1911's are not a FAD. They are a Historic Item. Big difference.

Thank You RubenZ, JMB will secure your place in the heavens ;)

First and Fore Most, the 1911 is not a FAD, that is like saying the M2 BMG .50 cal is a FAD... The 1911 has survived almost 100 years, I'd call that a heck of a pile of parts. Why there has been such a popularity surge on them the last few years... guess you just have to be a "1911 person to understand".

Second; the M4 profile barrel just looks broken up and fancy, so what if you never own a M203... but if you wanted one they are out there, just fill out the paper work and pay your tax to the ATF!

Which makes me think, the AR has been around since the early 50's... which makes the AR/M16 the longest used military issued rifle/carbine in the modern US military. The AK's are cheap, and if you've personally had contact with the ones that have seen battle you'll know that all that "fill it full of sand, mud, so much better than the M16" is just a bunch of bull.

Another point to consider is the AR/M16 Magazines are easier and quicker to load, if you use speed loaders.

What is the alternative to the AR? AK's, Keltec, not too many are into plastic (not bashing Glocks and XD's), There's the Mini 14 & 30, the SKS, G3.

What other common semi auto, high capacity rifles are around?

cameron.personal
July 24, 2007, 12:32 AM
Why are M4rgeries so popular?

They are... (deep breath) accurate, reliable, easy to use, rugged, excellent ergonomics, with the telestock they fit a huge range of shooters, easy to maintain (relatively), soft shooting, great capacity, great supply of accessories and parts, cheap ammo (relatively try feeding my .308 habit for a couple of months), effective (yes the round works to stop people)... Oh I nearly forgot they look tacticool.

Cameron

mordechaianiliewicz
July 24, 2007, 05:23 AM
While I said before I think the military having them is why so many people have got them. That point doesn't negate their utility in home defense.

Would I use one for HD? No, I use a shotgun for that.

But, I'll tell you, if I lived in a rural area, I'd use some kind of semi-auto carbine for HD. And, in a SHTF situation, it would be a fantastic weapon. I don't just mean the Martians are here!!! scenario. Just a temporary natural disaster, and I'd want something to use which would have it's advantages.

For those things, well... the military did choose it's full auto cousin. The real M4.

arthurcw
July 24, 2007, 09:52 AM
In a few years when we can't get them I suggest we use some good old thread necromancy to re-animate this topic to remind us of the good old days when some had the luxury of making fun of those with M4-geries.

I'm sure there are plenty of antis who want to help us keep the peace on this board and will do their dead level best to take this bone of contention away from us.

Why to do some like hi-points? Why do some like race guns? Why do some like Skeet? Why do some like hunting? Why do some like normal cap mags? Why do some like Trucks? Why do some like gas guzzlers? Why do some like guns? Why do some like fast food? Why do some like cigarettes? Why do some like to talk politics? Why do some like to criticize elected officials?

One man's meat is another's poison until it's all gone. Then it's just everyone's memory.

IDriveB5
July 24, 2007, 09:56 AM
I was never a big fan until I shot my buddy's Rock River. I love the two stage trigger and its accurate as all.

waterhouse
July 24, 2007, 10:00 AM
And my point is who cares, it doesnt affect anything one way or the other.

I don't "care" either. All that I am saying is that if people want to argue why an "M4gery" is popular, they need to look at each aspect of an M4gery. To me an M4gery is more than just a carbine. It has specific attributes. Again, most people are saying why they think short, handy AR-15 is popular. Read all of the posts. A few people talk about wanting to have a military looking gun. That is a great answer as to why they have an M4gery. Perfect answer. Home defense, a nice short gun to have in the truck, target shooting, etc . . . none of these answer the question of why an M4gery is popular.

Many guns come with them because some of the higher end guns we can get are from suppliers to the military and police. Look at the Colt 6920 and all of LMTs guns. Maybe Bushmaster and RRA continue to do it because they want to give the illusion of being a big military and LE contractor. Most people buying M4s for their looks probably dont even know what the groove is for so they dont care.

Now we are getting somewhere. Some reasons why M4geries are popular are that they are what companies are making already for gov't contracts( making the barrels cheaper for the civilian market), or some companies want to seem like they are making them for gov't contracts, or people don't know why the barrel looks like it does and don't care, and they are buying it for the looks (probably because they have seen that the military uses it.)

I think about it like this. If I walked into the gun store tomorrow and there was a bolt action rifle with a bunch of metal removed about 6 inches short of the end of the barrel, I'd probably want to know why. People don't seem to ask this about the M4geries.

If it bothers you because it is useless, do you also only buy guns without bayonet lugs because they are equally useless?

While that would be useless to me (and therefore I would not buy it) I have seen many people who actually do have bayonets on their rifles. If it is useful to anyone that's fine by me.

AZgunstudent
July 24, 2007, 10:25 AM
Pleeeeease! 1911 Love has been around probably before you were born. The 1911's are not a FAD. They are a Historic Item. Big difference.

First and Fore Most, the 1911 is not a FAD, that is like saying the M2 BMG .50 cal is a FAD

I'm well aware of the 1911's illustrious history, thanks. I carried one for years before I switched to Glock.

I should have been clearer, however. I was referring to the fact that 1911s are on the cover of every current gun rag that doesn't feature an AR or M4gery. Well, that and the fact that lots of people - many of whom are complete duffers - are paying very steep prices for custom and semi-custom versions of the old horsepistol. It'll pass when the gun rags start pushing the next high-dollar item and the duffers move along like sheep to that.

BigG
July 24, 2007, 10:44 AM
Cool looks.

If you remember, when the 1994 ban was in place they put "muzzle brakes" (cough, cough) on the end of AR15 barrels? Why? They look cooler than the naked end of a barrel. Why did they all start putting flashhiders on after the ban? They look cooler than a muzzle brake. Simple.

JohnBT
July 24, 2007, 10:49 AM
"Why are M4rgeries so popular?"

I don't know, but I'm 56, just bought my first AR and it's an M4rgery, so the fad must be over. I'm not kidding, it's happened time and time again with a variety of guns.

Why an M4rgery? Because I stumbled across a for sale ad on a car forum and the guy lived 4 miles from me. RRA Tactical Entry, 60 rounds fired, great trigger, 2 30-rd mags, lightweight chrome-lined 1:9 barrel and only $800. It's a well made 7-pound gun that's easy to shoot with the factory sights.

John

cracked butt
July 24, 2007, 11:57 AM
Jeez people make a big deal over a little groove in the barrel.:rolleyes:

Yugo SKS' are very popular and they do have a grenade launcher and grenade sight. They aren't popular for those attributes, as most people would probably prefer to do without, but they are popular because at least for a time they were readily available for a decent price just about everywhere.

M4geries? If a person wants a carbine and there are a dozen of them on the rack at the local gunshop with M4 profile barrels on them, I would guess that most people would buy one because they are readily available.

I don't have a M4 type carbine yet, though I would like one because:
1> I can
2> I couldn't 3 years ago
3> They are fun and relatively cheap to shoot
4>Liberals crap themselves over the idea that an average Joe like myself can go into a gunshop and take home something that is so evil to them.:evil:

bogie
July 24, 2007, 12:04 PM
Why are M4geries so popular? Because there's a lotta mall ninjas out there who get off on bolting stuff on, so they can be ubertacticool. My "plain" Bushy Dissipator has pretty much the same capabilities. And I'd be real nervous about the guy with the 12 gauge pump or the .30-30, if they know how to use 'em.

Take that $100 "accessory" budget, and buy some ammo with it...

Kimber1911_06238
July 24, 2007, 12:18 PM
I use an m4gery mostly for target shooting/preadator hunting within 150 yards. At this range, the shorter barrel isn't that much of a handicap. The short barrel makes for quick handling in the woods where most of my varmint hunting is done.
Bottom line, i bought it because i wanted it.

cracked butt
July 24, 2007, 12:35 PM
Because there's a lotta mall ninjas out there who get off on bolting stuff on, so they can be ubertacticool.

There are a lot of those, but there are a lot of people who bolt on expensive gizmos like Eotechs and ACOGS because it gives them a competitive advantage in certain types of competition.

I wouldn't call a guy who has a tricked out M4 for shooting 3-gun a mall ninja any more than I'd call a guy the same who has a 1911 racegun he uses for IPSC.

texas bulldog
July 24, 2007, 12:50 PM
So why the popularity? Is it all an Army knock-off phenomenon?

disclaimer: i don't own one yet, but plan to when the funds are in order.

for me, the 16" barrel is plenty sufficient for the distances i would reasonably engage an attacker, and the shorter barrel is handier and lighter. maybe i would get a 20" one day as well, but i don't imagine i would use it as much.

as for the tele-stock...this allows both me and my wife [and eventually our kids] to use the same weapon comfortably. to be honest, i kinda prefer the look of the plain ol' buttstock, but the telescoping stock serves the function of making the weapon more adaptable to multiple shooters.

and i can say for sure that my reasons have nothing to do with them being "formerly forbidden fruit." i wasn't really shooting then, so that doesn't factor into my reasoning.

ultimately, i'd prefer to get an 16.25" FAL instead, but the price of .308 these days has forced me to revise my want list.

RubenZ
July 24, 2007, 12:59 PM
I actually think the plain stock looks hideous.

Frog48
July 24, 2007, 01:05 PM
I actually think the plain stock looks hideous.

At first, I did too. I gradually warmed up to it, and now I actually like the look of a 16" carbine with A2 stock. Call me crazy!

I'm still not wild about 20" barrels, though. To me they feel too long and ungainly.

kcmarine
July 24, 2007, 01:12 PM
Because they can.

Andrewsky
July 24, 2007, 10:06 PM
Watch the movie "Platoon."

Nothing like clutching your AR while watching Tom Berenger firing three shots at the guy running from the village with his CAR-15, or Willem Dafoe running through the jungle with his CAR-15 shooting VC on semi-auto.

There it is.

000Buck
July 24, 2007, 10:47 PM
Why are M4geries so popular? Because there's a lotta mall ninjas out there who get off on bolting stuff on, so they can be ubertacticool. My "plain" Bushy Dissipator has pretty much the same capabilities.

Why are Dissipators so popular? Because people like to buy them and feel like they know something others dont know....like ridiculously long handguards on a carbine barrel looks cool. News flash, it doesnt and double gas blocks are nerdy.

koja48
July 27, 2007, 11:52 PM
And so shall glaciers . . . call Guiness . . . a 90+-year fad . . . I'm pretty sure that beats streaking & the hoola-hoop.:D

Stevie-Ray
July 28, 2007, 01:21 AM
But what is inferior about a 16" Bushie Dissipator?
You do know the Dissy's can come with this stock, no? Oh, no. NO! NO! Please don't tell me we are buying "Bushie Dissies", now!:rolleyes:

Rexster
July 28, 2007, 02:53 AM
Long hands guards do look silly, but IMHO the long snout in front of the front sight looks even more silly. The only AR15 that even approaches a dignified appearance is the standard 20", IMHO. Now, a Garand, that is dignified beauty. :)

bstump2
November 9, 2007, 07:53 PM
I have an M4 style as well as an M16A2 Style. I have a great many years experience with military weapons and given the tremendous weight of the M16A2 as compared to the M4, I'll take the M4 all day.

benEzra
November 9, 2007, 09:46 PM
And I ask myself what is up with that? IMO the reduced sized handguards and the amount of barrel sticking out of the front of these things looks marvelously ridiculous.
That's why I like the midlength uppers. Carbine-length handguards may be ideal for a 14.5" barrel or shorter, but I like the middies for 16" barrels. To me, a full-length handguard on a 16" barrel looks odd, though.

I think 16" barrels are popular because they are lighter and handier than 20" barrels, not because they look like M4's rather than M16's.

Telestocks are great for adjusting LOP, but those can be added to any AR-15 rifle.
True. They can also be added to AK's, mini-14's, and even hunting shotguns, which (increasingly) they are.

Apparently, the M4 is a good carbine for getting in and out of vehicles and doing entry work. Most folks don't do mounted operations with AR-15s and it is hardly like quartering a room out of a stack is in the training regimen of most folks.
No, but if you do like the concept of a carbine for defensive purposes, a 16" barrel makes the most sense.

So why the popularity? Is it all an Army knock-off phenomenon? It seems to me that the 5.56/.223 needs all of steam it can get, or at least the USMC tends to think so, given that they do not generally go for the carbine flavored package.
The Marines also train for 600-yard engagements, and the full-length sight radius gives them the ability to do so. That's not necessarily applicable to the civilian looking for a combination defense/plinking rifle.

Re comparisons with a .357 for home defense, a .223 from a 16" barrel also has more muzzle energy than a .44 Magnum revolver. I'll bet that if you asked 10 seasons Alaskan guides which one they'd rather have for bear defense, 11 out of the 10 would laugh their asses off at the notion of carrying a .223 as a "stopper."
For bear, yes. Compare the depth of a bear's chest to that of a human. Compare the typical charging posture of a bear to that of a human. Compare the weight, muscle mass, and bone structure of a large bear to a human. 10"-12" of penetration with fragmentation and fantastic energy transfer won't do much to a charging bear unless you get really lucky, but the same load is very, very effective on humans, who (1) do not run on all fours and (2) are a HECK of a lot smaller than bears.

A hardcast .44 magnum that doesn't expand, doesn't do much in the way of energy transfer per linear foot, but offers 48" of penetration is just the thing to crack the skull or reach the vitals of a bear, but the same load would go through a human without slowing down much, and would typically cause less tissue damage. No, .223 is a better defense round against human attackers than .44 magnum or .454 Casull bear loads; so is the .357, IMHO.

Nobody's buying these $1000 toys for home defense.
My mini-14 was my primary HD gun while I owned it; 20 rounds of .223 JHP beat 9 rounds of 9mm JHP, IMHO. I recently sold it and set the money aside for a Rock River 16" Elite CAR A4; HD utility is a primary consideration.

RockyMtnTactical, et al., why in hell would I choose to use a 300 yard prairie dog round for in-home defense against a 200 lb. man at 50 feet or less?

The military has its reasons for using .223, but they aren't really good reasons in my condo.
Regarding the close-range defensive utility of AR-pattern civilian carbines using JHP and SP ammunition, I'll refer you to the following article, which contains some very good gelatin comparisons of SP and JHP .223 loads compared to handgun and shotgun rounds.
Roberts G.K., "Law Enforcement General Purpose Shoulder Fired Weapons: the Wounding Effects of 5.56mm/.223 Carbines Compared with 12 ga. Shotguns and Pistol Caliber Weapons Using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant, Police Marksman, Jul/Aug 1998, pp. 38-45.

INTRODUCTION

Until recently, the 12 gauge shotgun has remained the universally accepted shoulder fired weapon for United States law enforcement use, despite the shotgun's limitations as a general purpose weapon--short effective range, imprecise accuracy, downrange hazard to bystanders, small ammunition capacity, slow reloading, and harsh recoil. While 12 gauge shotguns still have a valid law enforcement role, especially to deliver specialized munitions and possibly in close quarters combat (CQB), recent recognition of the shotgun's significant limitations as a general purpose weapon have prompted many American law enforcement agencies to begin adopting the more versatile semi-automatic carbine for general purpose use.(12) Semi-automatic carbines offer more accuracy, less recoil, greater effective range, faster reloading, and a larger ammunition capacity than the traditional shotgun.

...

Less well known is that 5.56mm/.223 rifle ammunition is also ideally suited for law enforcement general purpose use in semi-automatic carbines.(5,6). It offers superb accuracy coupled with low recoil, and is far more effective at incapacitating violent aggressors than the pistol cartridges utilized in submachineguns and some semi-automatic carbines.

...

CONCLUSION

A 5.56mm/.223 semi-automatic carbine with a minimum of a 14.5" to 16.5" barrel may be the most effective and versatile weapon for use in law enforcement. When used with effective ammunition, the 5.56mm/.223 carbine simultaneously offers both greater effective range and less potential downrange hazard to bystanders than a 12 ga. shotgun, handgun, pistol caliber carbine, or SMG , as well as far greater potential to incapacitate a violent criminal than any handgun, pistol caliber carbine, or SMG.

...

The routine issuing of 5.56mm/.223 semi-automatic carbines for general purpose use to all law enforcement officers woudl significantly enhance officer safety, increase police effectiveness, and decrease dangers to innocent bystanders in all situations requiring the use of firearms.

Oohrah
November 10, 2007, 12:53 AM
Don't know why, but just bought a new Bushy A4 last week! Like
some said back a few, because I can ! Lousy system and maybe
should have spent a few more bucks for a piston system instead of
one that pukes the gases back into the chamber. Waiting for a
laser bore sight as too much distance between the bore and sight
plane.
Marine NCOs and weapons teams that carry M9s recently had to turn
in their side arms for the A4s. Go figure !!! They are good to adapt for
close in, distance, and addition of glass sights. Short barrel and adjust-
able stock can lend many different options. Old school, I prefer 30 caliber
over the .223 any day, even though I own a couple of different .223s.

Slugless
November 10, 2007, 01:07 AM
I bought an M4gery for the little lady, it fits a small sized person well.

Most 20" ARs are ungainly because they are HBAR. 20" GI is not ungainly.

The M4 does lend itself to the Army method of getting the same sight picture - the tip of your nose meets the back of the charging handle. Try that with an A2 stock.

But I'm certain that most men don't think about consistent sight picture because most of the guys I see with M4geries don't shoot that well. Good thing they have $450 optics that allow them to shoot large groups :rolleyes:

jay43
November 10, 2007, 01:44 AM
For hunting bears, I would take the .44 magnum, but for combat/defense personaly i'll take the 223 for bear hunting, with an accurate range of over 3/400 yards it's my choice. i dont want to be close enough to any bears to hit them with a 44

gyp_c2
November 10, 2007, 09:39 AM
...doesn't make a damn bit of difference what you shoot unless you can hit with it...http://emoticons4u.com/smoking/rauch06.gif

TexasRifleman
November 10, 2007, 09:45 AM
At first, I did too. I gradually warmed up to it, and now I actually like the look of a 16" carbine with A2 stock. Call me crazy!

Me too. After years of seeing so much junk hanging off of railed ARs the nice clean look is pretty appealing. The last lower I assembled was just like that, plain and simple.

This is on my Christmas list......

http://www.fulton-armory.com/Legacy-600_50.jpg

Grayrider
November 10, 2007, 11:02 AM
I would have to agree with benEzra on this one as he nicely recapped my considerations for liking 16" 5.56 caliber rifles as a civilian defensive carbine. I would say the same reasoning LE agencies apply to selecting defensive long guns easily correlates with civilian home defense scenarios. Long before such agencies started to transition to carbines from shotguns, I had made the same decision for the same reasons. I recall arguing the point with LE friends (even when I was an LE) and having them steadfastly stand behind the shotgun as the better choice. I was a bit ahead of the curve on that one, but no great leap of logic lead me there. I suppose I was ahead of the curve as well in thinking a carbine would be superior to a handgun for home defense even indoors, although lately I have been revisiting that judgment for a few practical reasons that are not on topic for this thread.

Of course the question was specifically why the "M4"? I suppose by that we mean the step cut barrel and fat handguards, for beyond that it is just an AR15. I think the appearance holds some appeal to customers who decide they want an AR and then look to see what exactly that is currently in a defensive role. The model is the military as that is who is primarily using the guns, and when one looks to see what configuration they have it is the M4. I suppose then market forces enter the picture, and as one poster said when you see the guns in shops or at gun shows most are in "M4" configuration. I say why not? I cannot make the point that any other 16" 5.56 caliber carbine is any better suited for personal defense off the battlefield, and certainly in the confines of a residence. The modularity of the current AR lends itself nicely to a person setting a defensive carbine to suit their tastes. Indoors having such items as lights or quality lasers may enhance the home defense role. So I see "tacticool" accessories as having a benefit that may be beyond simply being stylish at the range. The carbine length AR may be a bit more easily configured thusly if for no other reason than the fact that rail systems for it are less expensive and weighty than those for 20" guns. I personally favor 5.56 caliber AKs, but that is just because I am a fan of the platform and know it well. For a shooter who will only buy one defensive carbine, I think the current trend in favoring 16" ARs in any configuration makes a lot of sense. They work well in the roles many people are buying them for. Certainly more so than say a Garand would have circa 1950 (not to disparage such a fine battle implement). Our present military rifle simply has some dual use capability that may not have been typical of our armed forces past choices.

John

slzy
November 10, 2007, 11:17 AM
every reason to pick an ar platform over ak is negated by the m4.

HorseSoldier
November 10, 2007, 11:37 AM
The Marines also train for 600-yard engagements, and the full-length sight radius gives them the ability to do so. That's not necessarily applicable to the civilian looking for a combination defense/plinking rifle.


Most Marines I've talked to in the last couple years have expressed a preference for the M4 if they could get it over the M16A4. Just like the Army, they're not shooting anyone at 600 meters over in the sandbox with any frequency at all (if I recall correctly, the USMC is the organization that determined the average engagement range in Iraq is all of 31 meters). And if they had a need to do so, an M4 with an ACOG will do 600 meter engagements better than an M16 with iron sights or a red dot sight. But right before the GWOT kicked off, the Corps spent a bunch of money on M16A4s and so, the Corps being the frugal organization that it is, most guys are stuck with it . . .

Though personally, I suspect that the real issue is that nagging rumor that Marine generals were not sure the M4 would work for drill and ceremonies, so they canned it in favor of a longer, easier to "right shoulder arms" weapon . . . :)

CatholicKnight
August 29, 2008, 12:01 AM
$45,000.00 pickup truck ???
WHere in the Heck did you find that?
I just got suckered out of about $52,000.00 for my 08 Silverado. Yep, it's a 6.6 Liter TURBO diesel.
Oh, Im a farmer though. SO I actually DO haul "stuff" with it. LOL
Catholic Knight

Stevie-Ray
August 29, 2008, 12:21 AM
$45,000.00 pickup truck ???
WHere in the Heck did you find that?Simple. Turn the calendar back a year.

Ragnar Danneskjold
August 29, 2008, 12:30 AM
Well I have short arms and I'm in the Army, so that's why I opted for the M4gery. Can't speak for anyone else though.

HisDivineShadow
August 29, 2008, 07:29 AM
I much prefer the M4 style over the rifle, a carbine is much more versatile. But you really ought to get a carbine with a mid-length gas system, same 16" barrel but with a system designed for a 16" barrel, the M4 system is designed for a 14.5", the mid-length action works much better and is easier on the gun.

ctdonath
August 29, 2008, 05:02 PM
Nobody's buying these $1000 toys for home defense.
After much thought & training, that's exactly what I did.

Handguns are ONLY for convenience/concealment. If the situation allows for the inconvenience of a long gun (esp. at home), then by all means bypass the handgun and go for a shotgun or rifle.

Shotguns are a fine choice for home defense, being good at making big messy holes with great force. Personally I lean away from them due to the relatively low ammo capacity (and I have a Mossy 590, 8+1), very slow reload, bulky size, and slower cycle time (and yes I can pump it fast). Autoloading shotguns may be faster, but add bulk and still have limited capacity.

Major caliber rifles (.30 and up) tend to have the same problems, great force but at a cost of size & weight & capacity.

Carbine rifles provide the best balance of power vs. size. The .223/5.56 serves our military quite well (maybe not optimally, but still admirably), providing significantly more energy than any viable handgun, and while certainly less than 12ga or .308, the much-maligned .223 in a hot (Mk262 or TAP) load will do a marvelous job of wrecking an intruder's day. The smaller size and lighter weight ammo allows for a compact platform suitable for indoor manuvering, the M4 design gives plenty of options as the owner sees fit, and 30+ round capacity minimizes the need to reload (and once you need to reload, you've got major problems).

I wanted the most punch available in a compact package with capacity I wouldn't have to worry about. Ergo, I chose the M4 design for home defense, specifically the Colt M4LE 6933 - all the technical improvements of the M4 over the M16/AR15 design, in civvie-legal semi-auto, as close to a "real M4" as I can get at this point. Yes, people are buying these >$1000 "toys" for home defense.

zoom6zoom
August 29, 2008, 05:23 PM
"Why are M4rgeries so popular?"
Because it's a good caliber for zombie threads coming back from the dead?

TexasRifleman
August 29, 2008, 06:01 PM
Because it's a good caliber for zombie threads coming back from the dead?

Clearly not, this one marched right through the field of fire :)

Dravur
August 29, 2008, 06:17 PM
I guess for all those "poseurs" who wanted the Garand or a 1903 must just be army wannabes as well.

I guess all those people with Mauser 98s are closet Nazis.

How about this. Get whatever rifle you want. If you want an M4gery, get one. Great rifles. Fun to plink with.

Would I take it to Alaska to bear country... no.

Would I use it for home protection. Sure, why not? I've seen very few bad guys with the cross sectional density of a bear. And if I do, my guess is he isn't robbing my house, but down at Dunkin Donuts for Day-old Donut sales.

So, time to jump off the high horse and give this a rest. People who like the AR platform can like it for any reason they want and may or may not be army poseurs. Justs like someone who buys a Garand can be a WWII poseur... or not.

I LIKE IT!
August 29, 2008, 06:24 PM
M4 is the black beauty of rifles.

If you don't find the M4 appealing then you're either an old-timer or gay.:neener:

It's a very versatile platform, I'll admit semi(AR) does get boring but damn it's one sexy rifle.

Just my opinion.;)

Shung
August 29, 2008, 06:55 PM
I like it!. you got it.. M4, because it's sexy, and Ninja ;)

ctdonath
August 29, 2008, 10:23 PM
this one marched right through the field of fire
Oh my word. Thread start date: July 23rd, 2007

dispatch55126
August 29, 2008, 10:44 PM
Watch the movie "Platoon."

Nothing like clutching your AR while watching Tom Berenger firing three shots at the guy running from the village with his CAR-15, or Willem Dafoe running through the jungle with his CAR-15 shooting VC on semi-auto.

There it is.

Wrong movie. "...and there it is" comes from Hamburger Hill, not Platoon.:p

Daemon688
August 29, 2008, 10:50 PM
Because the owners are a bunch of girly men who are scared of real calibers. You know, the ones who complain about recoil this and recoil that :neener:

rob_s
August 30, 2008, 06:48 AM
I find it somewhat disconcerting that so many posts in this thread refer to the aesthetics of the gun. Isn't the point to actually shoot?

As to the original question....

First and foremost (as evidenced by all of the "'cause it looks cool" responses above) the M4 pattern exploded in 2004 because the ban expired. The M4 had ALL the banned features rolled into one package; telescoping stock, bayonet lug, threaded barrel and flash suppressor, etc. So the fact that the OP and others think it looks stupid clearly puts them in the minority.

Secondly, the 16" barrel is the best compromise between the law, achieving effective muzzle velocity, weight, and size. For the type of shooting that the vast majority do, there is absolutely no reason to own an AR with a 20" barrel. I have made hits on an 8" steel plate at 200 yards using a 4 MOA Aimpoint and an AR with an 11.5" barrel. Clearly having a 16" barrel is not a liability at all.

I frankly find myself asking the opposite question most often; why the hell did that guy just buy an AR with a 20" barrel and an A1/A2 upper?

AnaxImperator
August 30, 2008, 08:33 AM
M4 is the black beauty of rifles.

If you don't find the M4 appealing then you're either an old-timer or gay.

It's a very versatile platform, I'll admit semi(AR) does get boring but damn it's one sexy rifle.

The M16/M4 may be the original "black rifle", but tell me an AK doesn't have it's own aesthetic appeal in basic form, or can't be a sexy "black rifle".... or have the ability to mount as many tacticool doodads as an AR platform. :p

(Okay, admittedly not a black rifle, but I like it.)

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y7/orderodonata/DuraCoatAK47.jpg

(This is about as loaded as my own AK will get. But having the option to have add-ons is nice.)

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y7/orderodonata/AK5rail.jpg

(.... to the gills.)

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y7/orderodonata/BadassAK.jpg


Why So Popular?
1. They're considered a "sexy gun",
2. Practical & Tactical, light, short, 30 round + mag capacity, light recoil, many options to tailor the rifle to the person, many accesories on the market from dirt cheap to Mil Spec and expensive.
3. Can be used to hunt medium game, Can be used to plink, Can be used for HD. Accuracy from 0-600 yards on Iron sights, can be pushed to 800+ yards on optics and ammo.
4. Many training locations and techniques, ie; US Military, Gun Sight, On Sight, Front Sight, FBI, Police, Swat
5. Highly Dependable, build in forward assist, all the bugs are gone!
6. Can be made ambidextrous, try that with an AK!
7. Ammo isn't too expenive, $5 for 20 rounds of WWB

The same can be said (almost, I'll get to that) for the AK. I & many others consider them "sexy". They can be light, short, have a 5/30/40/75rd mag or drum option, have very little recoil with an adequate compensator, and have an increasing number of aftermarket options. 7.62 can be used to take any animal a .223 can... and plink, and defend a home. AKs can be very accurate as well, just maybe not have as long a reach as a .223. AKs are gaining popularity in with students at tactical carbine schools. Nowhere near the AR, but they're not inexistant. Dependable & AK is synonymous.
Admittedly you can't just swap uppers/lowers with AKs and get truly ambidextrious controls; although the mag-release is already ambidex, and a left-side safety can be added with a little work. With practice the bolt can be worked off-hand very quickly; ARs still edge them out there, but AKs aren't horribly one-sided. And right now I've found 7.62x39 for as little as $3.99x20rd/box.

I've thought about the popularity of the AR/M4, and as close as I can figure it's because people simply want what works for our military.... and they're fun. That's how the 1911 got hot, and then gunsmiths found that they could be worked into high-performance handguns.
I'm sure if Europe didn't have such strict firearms controls, Europeans would prefer carbines based on their own successful, indigenous battlerifles (FAMAS, FN-FAL, Steyr AUG, G3, etc).

Ragnar Danneskjold
August 30, 2008, 11:23 AM
I find it somewhat disconcerting that so many posts in this thread refer to the aesthetics of the gun. Isn't the point to actually shoot?

The point is actually to spend your money on something you enjoy for whatever reason.

Emfuser
August 30, 2008, 11:30 AM
I wanted a carbine-sized AR-15 to plink with. I bought a mix of parts that gave me a 14.5" barrel (w/perm flash hider to 16"). I enjoy it.

It's also my home defense weapon. I don't doubt that it will stop anyone I need to stop and that they wont charge at me, laughing off the impinging 5.56 fire while maniacally laughing "SHOULD'VE USED A ROUND WITH MORE STOPPING POWER!"

mattw
August 30, 2008, 06:02 PM
The Marine Corps doesn't have as many M4s in service as the army because they don't get as much money to spend as the army.

The M4geries are light and pack a decent punch, also very accurate. I've got an M1A for something that requires better long range effect.

mljdeckard
August 30, 2008, 09:33 PM
(I skipped the first 5 pages of replies.)
The M-4 is the ideal configuration for this rifle. It is an intermediate powered cartridge. Even if the full-length A-2 is good out to 500 meters, most army soldiers aren't good enough to use it out to this distance. Shortening the barrel (thus reducing velocity) and dropping the effective range back to 300 meters is WELL within the capability of the average soldier. (I WISH that the army's rifle training was as long and as good as the Marines', but it ISN'T.) One of the reasons the military dropped the Garand/M-14 platform, was that when more range is required, it is more cost effective to use machine guns or snipers, rather than expect average riflemen with standard issue rifles to hit the target.

The average soldier has no need for anything longer range or more powerful than an M-4. They won't even need THAT most of the time.

If I am using a rifle for any situation inside a building, I MUST have a shorter rifle and an adjustable stock. If you don't believe this, try clearing a house with averaged size halls, doors, and stairways with a full-length longarm. Try holding a full-length A2 in isoceles walking forward, without collapsible stock or vertical grip. It makes it impossible to get your weight as far forward as it should be, and you have to hold the rifle by the mag well. FAR from ideal.

RP88
August 30, 2008, 11:31 PM
just the sound of a gunshot has stopping power, because if you hear it, you'll -stop- and retreat nearly all of the time. I'd imagine the sharp pain of even a 'wimpy' bullet would have the same effect.

moga
August 31, 2008, 12:14 AM
1-easy for non-experienced rifle operators to shoot/low recoil
2-lightweight platform
3-easy to clean
4-high capacity mags/lightweight ammo
5-just cool as hell

With that said, I stay away from carbine gas system and m4 profile barrels. I prefer HBAR carbines in middie or rifles. Just my personal preference.

kurts_armory
August 31, 2008, 01:03 AM
they look awsome, mine is pretty accurate (2moa with cheap ammo), and after the elections, some of us may sell these for 5x what we payed for em.

HorseSoldier
August 31, 2008, 01:07 AM
The Marine Corps doesn't have as many M4s in service as the army because they don't get as much money to spend as the army.


The higher ups in the USMC "knew" that they needed a 20" barrelled long gun for how wars were going to be fought, so they spent a bunch of money on upgrading their M16 inventory, right before we got into a war where everybody wants and needs 14.5" barrels.

In hindsight, perhaps not the wisest decision ever, though I'm sure someone will be along presently to defend it.

12131
August 31, 2008, 01:07 AM
Why are M4geries so popular?
Because folks like them. If you don't, we won't hold it against you.:D

tokarev762
September 18, 2008, 07:11 PM
Mine just turned out that way. Heh!

I had a stripped lower from Doublestar. While at Knob Creek in '05, I was able to pick up everything needed to build my AR. Choose a telescoping stock for use in summer and winter clothing. Looking over a table full of DPMS uppers (complete with bolts & carriers for $350!) I wanted a flattop for the ability of mounting different kinds of sights. The 16 inch barrel so that different muzzle brake/flash suppressors could be used and still be short and handy. A fixed front sight for durability.

Being my 1st AR, I didn't know until I was finished putting it together that that particular configuration was refered to as an M4gery.

Barbara
October 4, 2008, 07:02 AM
Dear Mr. Zumbo...

I have it because I like it and still live in a free country that allows me to spend my money on things I enjoy.

Why do people shoot sporting clays? Are they trying to satisfy their inner bird hunter?

mr.trooper
October 4, 2008, 12:44 PM
I THINK what Boat is saying is that the barrel length of civilian models is not conducive to the design.

16" M4s have long barrels and a tiny reduced sight radius. Various companies have offered "dissipater" style rifles to no avail; they solve all the problems with civi length M4s yes nobody wants them.

possum
October 4, 2008, 01:02 PM
i can't speak for everyone, but i have an ar in an "m4" type set up for a few reasons
1) i can
2) it is handy and easier to shoot and move inside of structures and out.
3) that is what i use at work and in the sandbox, so therefore that is what i own and train with on my own dime, and time.

H2O MAN
October 4, 2008, 01:23 PM
mr.trooper I THINK what Boat is saying is that the barrel length of civilian models is not conducive to the design.

16" M4s have long barrels and a tiny reduced sight radius.

The abbreviated sight radius is not a problem as most run some type
of optic rendering the iron sights suitable to emergency back-up usage.

benEzra
October 4, 2008, 04:10 PM
16" M4s have long barrels and a tiny reduced sight radius. Various companies have offered "dissipater" style rifles to no avail; they solve all the problems with civi length M4s yes nobody wants them.
Dissipator-style rifles aren't all that popular, but midlengths do seem to be taking off.

To me, the Dissipator looks funny, and the length of the gas system still doesn't match the barrel length. The midlengths with 16" barrels look better and probably function a bit better, IMO.

spuscg
October 4, 2008, 06:35 PM
if the government was using .30-30s people would stock up on those. its only popular because "th military uses it so it must be good." although a lot of states make .223 illegal for deer............

NonConformist
October 4, 2008, 06:54 PM
Maybe because this is America and because we can? Or because we want to? etc

I bought mine as I have wanted one since i was a kid, though I prefer a longer rifle 18" and I carried one for 'serious' use

ugaarguy
October 5, 2008, 12:53 AM
if the government was using .30-30s people would stock up on those. The .30 WCF (AKA 30-30 Winchester) is still a very popular cartridge. Ammo is relatively inexpensive, as are the rifles, and the round performs well on most medium size North American game.
its only popular because "th military uses it so it must be good." The US Military does not use Glock pistols, yet they're extremely popular. They do not use pocket automatic pistols like the Keltecs and Ruger LCP, yet those are in constant demand. The Remington 870 shotgun was extremely popular before the US Military used it to replace the Ithaca 37, and it remains popular even after the military has transitioned to the Mossberg 590. The Remington 700 is a very popular rifle, despite the fact it's only been issued in very limited numbers as a sniper weapon within any military in the world.

All of those weapons are very popular because they perform exceedingly well in their intended role. The AR-15 style rifles perform extremely well in their intended role of a light weight, low recoil, semi-automatic, self defense or target rifle.
although a lot of states make .223 illegal for deer............
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution makes no mention of hunting. In fact it reads:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Further, "The militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves, ... all men capable of bearing arms;..."
— "Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic", 1788 (either Richard Henry Lee or Melancton Smith). and "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788 from http://www.constitution.org/mil/cs_milit.htm.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why are M4rgeries so popular?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!