Who builds our GI Issue M-16's?


PDA






AKElroy
July 15, 2009, 10:35 PM
I watched a special on Afghanistan last night, and the soldiers in the unit featured were all toating M-16's modified with what looked like Trijicon red dots w/ maginifiers, some had lights, suppresors, GL's & numerous other mods.

I am interested in building an AR with typical battle proven upgrades, and I am hoping to get a crash course on what these ugrades are, who makes the base guns for these Army issued builds, as well as the sights.

Do our fighting men upgrade these on their own dime? I do not own or know anything about our civilian equivilent AR's, but I am interested in getting my first & I am thinking that I should start by looking at what the Army has already tested and contracted, right down to the sights / scopes approved & issued.

Any help on identifying what our boys are issued?

If you enjoyed reading about "Who builds our GI Issue M-16's?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
MrFox
July 15, 2009, 11:05 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOPMOD

SHvar
July 15, 2009, 11:08 PM
M16A2 and A4 are made by FN, but I dont think they make AR-15s for civilian purposes. Originally M-16A2 were made by Colt until they had quality problems and lost their contract for M-16s.
Any good AR made by any major company that manufactures them is just as good, some have a few less features.

AKElroy
July 15, 2009, 11:12 PM
Thanks, Mr. Fox--That covers the accessories.

As for the base gun, is Colt still awarded the contract for this? Armalite? I am trying to keep the budget reasonable ($1500.00 to $1800.00) including optics & grip / comp mods.

Cabelas has a sight-ready flat top 16" Bushmaster for $950.00; any thoughts on this as a platform to start with?

Tim the student
July 15, 2009, 11:13 PM
Mine (M4, not M16) said Colt on it, for what that's worth it.

As far as upgrades, we all had either Eotechs or ACOG's, Surefire lights, and PEQ-2's. Some with 203's. Some guys had two mags rigged together for quicker reloads - I don't know where they got them, but I'm sure someone could tell you.

Happy spending.

Rosstradamus
July 15, 2009, 11:40 PM
Don't be hypnotized by the term milspec. Remember, the DoD once paid $436 for a hammer and $640 for a toilet seat. The Pentagon makes mistakes too.

I would pay attention to what the troops were using in combat though. Only their lives are on the line.

Jeff White
July 15, 2009, 11:46 PM
Originally M-16A2 were made by Colt until they had quality problems and lost their contract for M-16s.

Colt was under bid by FN for the M16A2 contract, there were no quality problems, it was all about money.

HorseSoldier
July 16, 2009, 12:03 AM
Colt does the M4s, FN mostly does the M16s.

Do our fighting men upgrade these on their own dime?

In some cases -- varies with chain of command.

blfuller
July 16, 2009, 12:20 AM
Colt's M4 contract has expired on the M4. The Army now has the rights to it.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/0...rbine_070609w/

C-grunt
July 16, 2009, 12:57 AM
The M16s are made by FN and the M4s are made by Colt, for now.

Start with a good rifle from a well known and trusted company, ie Colt, Bushmaster, Armalite, LMT, CMMG, S&W etc... That will run you about 1k give or take.

Then with the left overs, decide what you want first. Optics or other accesories like rails and lights. The optics can easily eat up the extra 500-800 bucks. I just bought a Compact ACOG TA50-4 for 600 bucks used with a rail adapter. The Eotechs can be had for around 400 I believe. You should also look into the Aimpoints. Just make sure you leave enough cash left over for ammo.

After this you will have a good all around rifle. Get to know it and you'll be good to go.

Trebor
July 16, 2009, 01:26 AM
Colt's M4 contract has expired on the M4. The Army now has the rights to it.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/0...rbine_070609w/

The Army now has the right to seek "second source" production for the M-4. However, if they do, they have to pay Colt a 5% royalty per rifle.

There's a really good thread on this going on now here. Read anything Daniel Watters has to say, as he follows this stuff closely and really know what's going on.

Trebor
July 16, 2009, 01:32 AM
Colt has had the M-16A2 contract in the past.

Currently, FN has the M-16A2 contract, as they underbid Colt. FN does not make AR's for civilian sales though. They aren't allowed to use the TDP (technical data package - blueprints and engineering info and such) to build rifles for commercial sales. That means you can't get a FN built AR.

Colt, FN, and Sabre Defense have all built M-16A4's for the military. Sabre Defense does make some civilian AR's, but I don't know all the specs as to what configurations they sell.

Colt has been the sole source provider for the M-4 and M-4A1 Carbine until July 1, 2009. The army can know solicit bids for a "second source" provider for the M-4 and M-4A1, but has not done so yet. Under the current contract Colt will be delivering M-4's and M-4A1's until 2011.

Colt Defense does make a civvie legal, semi-auto version of the M-4 with a 16" barrel. If you want a rifle made a mil-spec contractor, this is as close as you can come. The model is the Colt Defense 6920. They also make a version with a 14.5" barrel if you want to pay the tax for a SBR. That would be even closer to a military M-4. (It would still be only semi-auto though).

C-grunt
July 16, 2009, 01:58 AM
SBR is the 6921 correct???

SHvar
July 18, 2009, 12:16 AM
The loss of contract by colt was because they developed serious quality control issues after a period of years, the government was not interested in renewing with colt, I dont think the FN rifle cost any less than the colt rifle.
Im sure since then colts problems were long since fixed.

Al Thompson
July 18, 2009, 12:42 AM
SHvar, wrong yet again. Please read Trebor's post. If the Army didn't want Colt, why did they use them for the M4?

HorseSoldier
July 18, 2009, 01:14 AM
+1. FNH underbid Colt on the M16A2 contract in the early 90s, wasn't a quality issue. Colt got handed the M4 contract as a kind of consolation prize, which it was until the army decided the M4 was the new standard issue weapon replacing the muskets.

Jeff White
July 18, 2009, 01:22 AM
The loss of contract by colt was because they developed serious quality control issues after a period of years, the government was not interested in renewing with colt, I dont think the FN rifle cost any less than the colt rifle.

SHvar,
I don't know where you got your information, but it's wrong. Colt's last M16A2 contract with the Army was for procurement of 100,176 rifles through 1986.

In May of 1988 the Army solicited bids for 336,205 M16A2 rifles to be produced through fiscal year 1982. Look up DAA09-87-R-1225.

Colt bid $577.75 per rifle and FN bid $420.00 per rifle. Look up contract DAAA09-88-C-1-56.

The truth about the contracts is well documented and not hard to find.

MTMilitiaman
July 18, 2009, 01:32 AM
I was in the Marines. All the M16A2s and A4s, and all the M4A4s that I saw were made by Colt or FN. Of the ones I saw, there was no functional difference in terms fit and finish or overall quality.

The M16A4 I was issued in the fleet had a KAS RIS with a Versa Pod, some odd 3-point sling, a 4x Trijicon RCO, a 3-battery Surefire (sorry, no model number, that's what we called them), and a PEQ-2. No rear sight was supplied with the rifle. If you wanted a high-speed single-point sling, a different vertical foregrip, light, or something else, you had to furnish it yourself. I had no complaints with any of it, save for a intense dissatisfaction with the shooting characteristics (not as a much reliability, which was fine for the most part, and certainly not with its accuracy) of the rifle itself.

meytind
July 18, 2009, 09:34 AM
We get M4s with an Aimpoint M68 optic. The BUIS is the same one on the Colt 6940 I believe. We get a PEQ-2 and a 2-pt sling. Some guys upgraded their weapons with vertical foregrips, Surefire lights, and 3-pt slings.

Everything should be pretty simple to acquire and put together, except the PEQ-2. These are quite hard for civilians to get. Then again, I don't think you'll need one unless you're planning to go around with NODS on.

SHvar
July 20, 2009, 12:14 AM
Towards the end of the contract problems developed in far too many M-16A2 when they were originally delivered, they had to be returned to colt to fix them.
Price is but one issue.
Another case of selective research.
The M-16A2 originally made by colt was a great rifle, towards the end of the run many many of them delivered new with the same problems, this did not help colt in getting a new contract any.
Not wrong, just like those who said that no other manufacturer ever supplied M4s to the US Army, in fact during war times the governement can side step contracts if they so choose to buy the same product supplied in limited numbers, but made to milspecs under the new manufacturers personal features.
Bushmaster made the M4 issued to the one brigade from the 82nd Airborne in Desert Shield/Desert Storm (the guys who had a fire fight over a card game in a hotel in Dharan). These BM M4s were also issued to the Delta Force which provided personal security for "Stormin Norman". I have pictures of those rifles being carried by his security detail (of course they were taken from too far away to see the snake on the reciever).
But none the less I saw those rifles up close, and the Bushmaster name caught my attention.

Tim the student
July 20, 2009, 12:45 AM
the one brigade from the 82nd Airborne in Desert Shield/Desert Storm

What do you mean, one brigade was in Desert Shield/Storm, or one brigade was issued M-4's?

shotgunjoel
July 20, 2009, 12:57 AM
Colt bid $577.75 per rifle and FN bid $420.00 per rifle. Look up contract DAAA09-88-C-1-56.

How do you produce a quality M-16 at that price!? We civilians are getting screwed!

Maverick223
July 20, 2009, 01:00 AM
Colt bid $577.75 per rifle and FN bid $420.00 per rifle.Just think what retail would be if WW decided to stock up and carry ARs. :D You would be able to procure a new AR [from the cheapest bidder] for about $500.00USD. :neener:

We civilians are getting screwed!You were posting whilst I was thinkin'...but my thoughts exactly. :)

gga357
July 20, 2009, 01:55 AM
Buy in quantity, get 100,000 of your closests friends together and have 3-4 companies bid on your collective order. You'll come out like champs.

Jeff White
July 20, 2009, 02:03 AM
Towards the end of the contract problems developed in far too many M-16A2 when they were originally delivered, they had to be returned to colt to fix them.

Where are the Quality Deficiency Reports? Where is the documentation of this. Selective research??? Tell you what, post some proof and maybe you'll be taken seriously around here. Being retired Army I have AKO access and have been able to find no official documentation of systematic quality control problems in the M16A2 program. I can recall no Safety of Use Messages, QDRs or anything from TACOM at that time. I was on active duty in a position where I would have seen anything like that at the time. So my friend, it's up to you now, time to put up or shut up, fair enough? Links, .pdf files any official documentation of your allegations are acceptable as long as they are from official sources. You've got 48 hours.

Bushmaster made the M4 issued to the one brigade from the 82nd Airborne in Desert Shield/Desert Storm (the guys who had a fire fight over a card game in a hotel in Dharan).

The M4 was not fielded in any quantity until 1998 when it was fielded to the 82d, the 101st, SOCOM and other units. Bushmaster produced exactly 65 M4 type rifles on a one time buy for DOD. This came out in the court filings they made when they challenged Colt's claim to commercial use of the term M4: http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=06-1696.01A If Bushmaster had actually produced more then 65 M4 type rifles for the Army they certainly would have claimed that in their court filings.

Those 65 are the only M4 type rifles Bushmaster produced for our military. Which brigade allegedly had these Bushmaster M4s? I was on active duty at the time and I've got a lot of friends who were in the 82d then spread throughout all three brigades and the division base and none of them was issued an M4 made by Bushmaster or any other manufacturer during the first gulf war.

These BM M4s were also issued to the Delta Force which provided personal security for "Stormin Norman".

Delta Force??? What the heck is Delta Force, that's not the official designation of unit you are referring to. The unit you are referring to did not provide a security detail for General Schwartzkopf. His security detail was provided by CID agents from the Army Protective Services Battalion: http://www.cid.army.mil/psb.html This is well documented. In fact Soldiers Magazine even did a feature on this unit right after the war. It's possible that the 65 M4 type rifles Bushmaster were purchased by the PSU (as it was known during the gulf war),in fact I have heard that's where they went, but I have no proof of that.

Ok SHvar, balls in your court, let's see some proof.

Smith357
July 20, 2009, 07:47 AM
Back when I carried an M16a1 I saw them made by General Motors, H&R, and Colt. I heard stories of one made by Mattel but never saw one in person.

DMK
July 20, 2009, 09:41 AM
I am interested in building an AR with typical battle proven upgrades, and I am hoping to get a crash course on what these ugrades are, who makes the base guns for these Army issued builds, as well as the sights.

It's my understanding that the Colt 6920 is about as close to a real M4 as you can get. You just need to add the proper Aimpoint M68 CCO sight, the mount, the proper rail setup and all those other expensive accessories or however you want to configure it.

DMK
July 20, 2009, 09:43 AM
Back when I carried an M16a1 I saw them made by General Motors, H&R, and Colt. Those were all contractors for Vietnam era M16s.

I heard stories of one made by Mattel but never saw one in person. This part is pure folklore. Mattel never made a real M16.

SHvar
July 20, 2009, 12:05 PM
I was also on active duty then. How do you think I saw the rifles his secuity detail carried?
How do you think I knew about the firefight over a card game in a hotel? That wasnt published info.
There was only one brigade of 82nd that was in the first gulf war, they tried the BM M4 and liked the fact that it was easier to jump with.
How sad, so what if I didnt use an official designation for a unit, you get the idea.
By the way Norman chose his own security detail, that was common knowledge among many units over there.
Yes, there were deficiancies with the last M16A2s when they were delivered, almost all of them the same, all were returned and remedied. All of the M-16A2s before that were excellent rifles, I really liked them.
Personally I could care less about personal posturing on here and who takes who seriously, I read alot of comments posted by people claiming to be "in the know" and I realize that too many of them get their info from gunshop employees and 2 internet forums, instead of actual experience or reputeable sources.
I ask for proof all of the time here, I get nothing but brand snob comments, and "its well documented". Somehow people think that I have something against colt, I really dont, but I also know that they are no better than most major manufacturers.
Theres alot that happens in the army thats not documented correctly, or is never told to the public.
There were alot more than 65 of those rifles, not thousands, but alot more than 65. I couldnt tell you what happened to those rifles after the war, but they were in use. Back then the closest rifle to those Bushmaster M4 in use was the CAR-15 used mostly by the Air Force by air crews.
The last discussion about those rifles the colt fans tried to say that those BM M4s rifles never existed, now they existed and there were only 65 of them, next time there will only be 165 purchased, at least it will be closer to the truth.

RP88
July 20, 2009, 12:10 PM
if I remember correctly:

Colt lost out to FN on m16s primarily because of the underbidding. Fair and simple. There will always be minor quality control issues that FN can and possibly has been victim to, but all in all it came down to them underbidding Colt by 25% of Colt's quoted cost.

Colt still holds some M16 contracts, but they are with law enforcement or otherwise domestic for the most part. They had one contract for the military, and it was only for like a hundred rifles before they got cut off.

The reason why Colt got the M4 contract was not as a consolation prize, but because it was their rifle; the Army could not contract it to anyone but Colt (well, they could have contracted it elsewhere, but after the lawsuit and royalty settlement to Colt, it would have been way more expensive). Colt owned the TDP, specs, patent, etc. for the M4 up until two weeks ago. They still hold the main contract, but the army can now go and contract other companies if they choose to do so. FN could probably be the next producer of M4's, but the Army says that they don't need any more than what Colt is obligated via ongoing contract to finish making, so who knows. If it does happen, it probably won't be for two years or so.

Sabre Defense holds some contracts with the military and some federal government agencies. They also (I believe) had something with the Coast Guard and other at-home forces as well.

Rock River also holds some contracts with the fed (mainly the treasury if I recall correctly) and various law enforcement, but I don't think any of those are dealing with M16 or M4 rifles - just ARs.

Tim the student
July 20, 2009, 12:19 PM
The only brigade of 82nd that was in the first gulf war tried the BM M4 and liked the fact that it was easier to jump with.

The Army disagrees with you: "But seven months later the paratroopers were again called to war. Six days after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait on August 2, 1990, the 82nd became the vanguard of the largest deployment of American troops since Vietnam.
The first unit to deploy to Saudi Arabia was a task force comprising the Division's 2nd Brigade. Soon after, the rest of the Division followed" http://www.bragg.army.mil/82DV/History.htm

What makes the M4 easier to jump with? The stock is fully extened in the M1950. I have jumped both M16's and M4's, and there really is no discernable difference. Maybe a really, really short person might notice, but they jump the same to me, and I'm only 5'7". It's not like the difference between a 240 and an M4.

When were the test jumps done?

Jeff White
July 20, 2009, 12:47 PM
I was also on active duty then. How do you think I saw the rifles his secuity detail carried?

News photographs the same way most of the public saw them.

There was only one brigade of 82nd that was in the first gulf war, they tried the BM M4 and liked the fact that it was easier to jump with.

The entire division deployed in 1990. There were no mass tactical parachute drops in the first gulf war. Which Brigade had these weapons? Surely you must know......

How sad, so what if I didnt use an official designation for a unit, you get the idea.

Do you even know the official designation of the unit? What is it?

By the way Norman chose his own security detail, that was common knowledge among many units over there.

So the editors of the official Army publication Soldiers Magazine made up the story?

Personally I could care less about personal posturing on here and who takes who seriously, I read alot of comments posted by people claiming to be "in the know" and I realize that too many of them get their info from gunshop employees and 2 internet forums, instead of actual experience or reputeable sources.

Anytime you want to compare DD214s let me know. I think that you are the one getting your information from gun shop employees and internet forums because so much of it is completely wrong and simply a rehash of things that have been floating around the gun shows and the internet for years.

There were alot more than 65 of those rifles, not thousands, but alot more than 65. I couldnt tell you what happened to those rifles after the war, but they were in use.

Bushmaster made a grand total of 65 rifles for the military. That is a documented fact. Are you disputing Bushmaster's own court filing? And if there weren't thousands, where did the 4000 you claim a brigade of the 82d carried in the first gulf war come from? Are you now admitting they didn't have them? I think you have your wars mixed up. Only one brigade of the 82d ever served in Vietnam, but the entire division deployed to Southwest Asia.

I couldnt tell you what happened to those rifles after the war, but they were in use.

A couple sentences back you said there weren't thousands, now there are again and you don't know what happened to them? Make up your mind.

Back then the closest rifle to those Bushmaster M4 in use was the CAR-15 used mostly by the Air Force by air crews.

Are you referring to the GAU-5? Made by Colt, been around since the 1960s....

The last discussion about those rifles the colt fans tried to say that those BM M4s rifles never existed, now they existed and there were only 65 of them, next time there will only be 165 purchased, at least it will be closer to the truth.

Once again, the only documentation of Bushmaster selling rifles to the US military is the 65 they stated in their court filing. If Bushmaster doesn't admit to selling more then 65, why do you insist they did?

Bushmaster used that 65 rifle one time buy in their advertising for years. It's the same thing many companies do when they sell something to the military or other government agency.

If you like Bushmaster, that's fine. Argue that it's better on it's merits, making up things to justify your opinion doesn't convince anyone.

Mr. T
July 20, 2009, 01:39 PM
If you can find a Bushmaster flat top for $950 you should take it and right now. The prices I've been seeing are around $1100-$1200 for that model. I bought a "Patrolman's Carbine" about 2 years ago for $750 and I have to say that the prices are now through the roof and going higher. I would recommend the Bushmaster as well. The gun I have is super accurate and has taken ever kind of ammo that I've fed it up to this point.

Faitmaker
July 21, 2009, 10:24 AM
Quote:
Back when I carried an M16a1 I saw them made by General Motors, H&R, and Colt.
Those were all contractors for Vietnam era M16s.

Quote:
I heard stories of one made by Mattel but never saw one in person.
This part is pure folklore. Mattel never made a real M16.

Interestingling enough, the NRA Rifleman just talked about this myth in the August issue.

SHvar
July 21, 2009, 12:18 PM
"News photographs the same way most of the public saw them."

I have the 35mm photos that I took while serving proudly.

"The entire division deployed in 1990"

No it didnt, check your history, one brigade went over, they also went north with a French unit.
By the way, they did jump so they could earn the right to say they jumped into combat.

Yes I do know the name of the unit. Do you?

"I think that you are the one getting your information from gun shop employees and internet forums"

Sorry, I dont frequent gunshops, and the only place I see this BS crap posted on the internet unless its being rehashed is here by a few people and on one other site which I dont participate.

"Bushmaster made a grand total of 65 rifles for the military"

If you want to believe that then by all means go right ahead. What I saw in person was far more than 65.

"A couple sentences back you said there weren't thousands, now there are again and you don't know what happened to them? Make up your mind."

You need to learn some reading comprehension, seriously. Alot more than 65, but not thousands, hmmm... Also, I said that I dont know what happened to the rifles after the war.

Are you referring to the GAU-5? Made by Colt, been around since the 1960s.

Possibly, I didnt look closely at them, or spend much time around air crews except when I was being transported in their aircraft.



By the way, I like lots of brands of AR type rifles. Why is it that a few people keep insisting that I dont like colt, or have some major problem with them. My major problem is with those who lie about them being some gold standard, and being made far better than all of their competitiors, and that their competition falls apart for no reason or fails every time you shoot them, proven fact that with exception of Vulcan, the others shoot and shoot with no problems and work just as good for thousands of rds.

Tim the student
July 21, 2009, 12:34 PM
No it didnt, check your history, one brigade went over

http://www.bragg.army.mil/82DV/History.htm I guess they are lying? Maybe the 82nd doesn't know its own history? Ok, suuuuure. Why is there no mention of a jump? Oh, again, they don't know their own history.

I've never met anyone from Division that ever mentioned a jump, or wore a mustard stain from Desert Storm. in my time in the 1/508, 3/505, and 3/505 (again). Why?

Sir, I suggest you check your history.

Jeff White
July 21, 2009, 03:41 PM
No it didnt, check your history, one brigade went over, they also went north with a French unit.
By the way, they did jump so they could earn the right to say they jumped into combat.

I did check the history:
http://www.history.army.mil/reference/DS-Poster.htm
DESERT SHIELD

Operation DESERT SHIELD, the defense of Saudi Arabia, began on 7 August. The XVIII Airborne Corps, with its elite 82d Airborne Division, began to move to Saudi Arabia the next day, beginning a buildup of combat power in the region that would peak at over 600,000 U.S. personnel.

In rapid succession, the 24th Infantry Division (Mechanized), the 197th Infantry Brigade, and the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) moved to the Gulf. The U.S. Army Reserve began its largest mobilization since the Korean War. By early November, with the addition of the 1st Cavalry Division (Armored), the 2d Armored Divisionís 1st (or Tiger) Brigade, and the 3d ACR (armored cavalry regiment), a lethal force of over 100,000 soldiers was assembled for the defense of Saudi Arabia.

http://www.bragg.army.mil/82sb/82nd%20SB%20History.htm
A year later, these logistical Paratroopers deployed to Saudi Arabia during Operation Desert Shield. When hostilities commenced in that volatile region, the operation transitioned to Desert Storm and the unit helped protect the XVIII Airborne Corpsí left flank.

All of divarty was there:
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu_G6EWZKbWcB7L5XNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE0YzYza3ZmBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMzIEY29sbwNhYzIEdnRpZANGODYwXzExMg--/SIG=12pbvkkr9/EXP=1248289594/**http%3a//sill-www.army.mil/FAMAG/1991/APR_1991/APR_1991_PAGES_23_27.pdf
The Lightning
and Thunder of Desert Storm
The
following is a list of those Army and Marine Corps
Field Artillery unit battalion and higher, serving in
the Persian Gulf as of 27 February 1991. The units
are listed by their usual command affiliations, not
task organized as they were in Desert Storm. We
rate their speed and accuracy in putting steel
on target as the lightning and thunder of the
Storm.

Divisions
1st Armored Division Artillery HQ
2d Battalion, 1st Field Artillery
3d Battalion, 1st Field Artillery
1st Cavalry Division Artillery HQ
1st Battalion, 82d Field Artillery
3d Battalion, 82d Field Artillery
1st Infantry Division (Mech) Artillery HQ
1st Battalion, 5th Field Artillery
4th Battalion, 5th Field Artillery
3d Armored Division Artillery HQ
2d Battalion, 3d Field Artillery
2d Battalion, 82d Field Artillery
4th Battalion, 82d Field Artillery
24th Infantry Division (Mech) Artillery HQ
1st Battalion, 41st Field Artillery
3d Battalion, 41st Field Artillery
82d Airborne Division Artillery HQ
1st Battalion, 319th Field Artillery
2d Battalion, 319th Field Artillery
3d Battalion, 319th Field Artillery
101st Airborne Division (AAslt) Artillery HQ
1st Battalion, 320th Field Artillery
2d Battalion, 320th Field Artillery
3d Battalion, 320th Field Artillery

There is one parachute drop listed for Desert Storm, a 12 man HALO insertion of a special forces team. No mass tactical drop of any kind from 20 December 1989 until 26 March 2003 when the 173d jumped into Northern Iraq.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/airborne-jumps.htm

Yes I do know the name of the unit. Do you?

Of course I do, but don't deflect the question. I asked you first, what is it?

"Bushmaster made a grand total of 65 rifles for the military"

If you want to believe that then by all means go right ahead. What I saw in person was far more than 65.

Really? Where did you see these vapor rifles? The never existed, period, now matter how many times you say they did won't make it true. Bushmaster sold 65 rifles to a unit in the US Army around 1990. That's it, the sum total of their military production.

You need to learn some reading comprehension, seriously. Alot more than 65, but not thousands, hmmm... Also, I said that I dont know what happened to the rifles after the war.

So you expect us to believe that Bushmaster produced more then 65 rifles for the Army, more then 65 but not the 4000 you said equipped a brigade of the 82d, and these rifles mysteriously disappeared after the war. There is no documentation of them ever being purchased or issued, no documentation of a brigade of the 82d using them and as soon as the war was over the M4 fairy changed them all back into M16A2s..........:rolleyes: Ok if you say so :rolleyes:.

Why is it that a few people keep insisting that I dont like colt, or have some major problem with them.

I never questioned what rifle you liked, that's immaterial to me. I have been questioning the history that you are fabricating to make your point.

My major problem is with those who lie about them being some gold standard, and being made far better than all of their competitiors, and that their competition falls apart for no reason or fails every time you shoot them, proven fact that with exception of Vulcan, the others shoot and shoot with no problems and work just as good for thousands of rds.

And what personal experience do you have with a rifle that disproves this? How many rounds a year do you personally fire from your rifle? How much time do you spend in a training environment where ARs from all the different manufacturers are used hard? My friend said doesn't count here, I'm asking for first hand knowledge. But that's really a topic for another thread. This thread is about who makes the M16....

HorseSoldier
July 21, 2009, 05:55 PM
By the way, they did jump so they could earn the right to say they jumped into combat.

It's been said already, but no mustard stain from Desert Shield/Storm for guys in the 82nd.

rscalzo
July 21, 2009, 06:58 PM
Bushmaster made the M4 issued to the one brigade from the 82nd Airborne in Desert Shield/Desert Storm

Bushmaster assembles. They don't produce anything.

rscalzo
July 21, 2009, 07:06 PM
The loss of contract by colt was because they developed serious quality control issues after a period of years, the government was not interested in renewing with colt, I dont think the FN rifle cost any less than the colt rifle.


Doesn't seem to be the case. Sounds like a case of union sour grapes.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/10/03/nyregion/army-drops-colt-as-m16-rifle-maker.html

22LRFan
July 21, 2009, 07:19 PM
Ok regardless of who makes the current (or for that matter older) G.I. M16/M4s. We all know that military contracts are won by the cheapest bidder. This could be an indicator that searching for similar models in the civilian market may be a bad idea.

w_houle
July 21, 2009, 07:22 PM
I saw them made by General Motors
Would this be the ones marked as GM Pipe works?

hags
July 21, 2009, 07:33 PM
Doesn't seem to be the case. Sounds like a case of union sour grapes.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/10/03/ny...fle-maker.html

Another case of unions shooting themshelves in the foot. No pun intended but welcome anyway.

Maverick223
July 21, 2009, 10:58 PM
This could be an indicator that searching for similar models in the civilian market may be a bad idea.I agree to an extent, as there is often something better than GI issue, and you will generally pay a premium for something that is GI spec or looks/is fielded by the US armed forces, but they don't tend to have junk. All of the equipment (that sticks around for a while) has met stringent quality standards and has proved itself to be satisfactory in service. This goes for everything from lowly P-38 can openers to F-22 fighter jets. :)

Jeff White
July 22, 2009, 01:21 AM
We all know that military contracts are won by the cheapest bidder. This could be an indicator that searching for similar models in the civilian market may be a bad idea.

In this case you probably want to find a rifle as close to the military specifications as you can get. The M16 technical data package specifies things that you won't find on rifles made by most aftermarket manufacturers. It's up to you to decide if you need a rifle built to those specifications. Things like parkerizing under the front sight base. Necessary on a military weapon that may be exposed to the elements for weeks at a time, submerged in salt water or otherwise abused, but maybe not necessary for your purposes. You may or may not need 4150 barrel steel and a chrome lined bore. If you are going to use the rifle for precision shooting like prairie dog hunting, then you may not want a 5.56mm chamber but you may want a match chamber on an aftermarket rifle. You should decide how you are going to use the rifle and what your budget is and make an informed decision.

Pack
July 22, 2009, 02:15 AM
My uncle was in the 82nd after graduating from West Point. He had to put off his wedding to deploy for Desert Shield/Storm.

I remember asking him why we'd send paratroopers when all we heard on the news was how much AAA Saddam had.

He explained that it had nothing to do with them specifically being paratroopers, and they are as heck weren't going to do anything remotely related to a big jump (like they did when he rather unfortunately was injured upon landing when they did Panama a seemingly short time before), but simply because the division was part of our "rapid deployment" collection of units, or something to that effect.

Either way, even though at the time I was just a kid who was interested in what was going on with our military, I'd stake my last dollar on the fact that the whole division went.

He was an Lt running one of the weapons outfits (I don't know at what level - whether platoon or something smaller) - he told me of what he apparently thought was the rather inglorious helicopter ride (is this technically called "air assault"? as opposed to a jump?) and long walk across the sand with his pack AND the baseplate for an 81mm mortar.

Tim the student
July 22, 2009, 02:22 AM
I wish my LT would have carried my baseplate when I was sucking as an 11C. Sounds like a good guy.

TheFallGuy
July 22, 2009, 04:11 AM
To SHvar:

Quote:
By the way Norman chose his own security detail, that was common knowledge among many units over there.

Common knowledge among military units is mainly BS, rumors, and hearsay. You should know this if you served. I am not calling you a liar, I am just saying you shouldn't take your battle buddy's word for it. Granted, I wasn't there so I don't know what you saw but I have done my homework on the 82nd. Yes the government can sidestep contracts during war time but that hasn't happened for M4's during the two current conflicts. Currently only Colt supplies the M4's to the Army.

On a side note, I had an FN M16A2 in basic in 2004. It went belly up and was replaced with what appeared to be a new issue Colt. It is possible the Colt was refinished but it sure felt new and was definately a Colt.

ParaElite
July 22, 2009, 01:34 PM
Tim the Student, Jeff White, and TheFallGuy

The BS was really going on before the ground war started.

I was in the HHC, 2/504th PIR (part of the 1st Brigade of the 82nd) and I was in the advanced party for the 1st Brigade.
My Battalion was on block leave (my birthday was August 2nd). I remember flying back to Ft. Bragg from Abilene, Texas.

The guys in my battalion were all returning by any means possible. As part of the advanced party, I remember stepping off the C141 onto Saudi Arabia and it was 125 degrees in the shade. The flies were horrendous. I though I had died and gone to hell!

I know for sure that the 2nd Brigade of the 82nd, the 505th PIR (Parachute Infantry Regiment) went first because they were on DRF 1.

This meant that my Brigade elements could go on block leave because we had the 2nd Brigade ready to be deployed anywhere in the world within 18 hours.

There absolutely was no mass parachute jumps in the 82nd during Desert Storm. My Brigade commander Col. Nix kept volunteering our Brigade for every possible contingent plan and "Stormin" Norman nixed (pun intended) every hair-brained idea by the Brigade commanders!

I don't know of any infantry unit that was living in a hotel in Dharan (- from what I saw it was a large hangar for supplies etc.) and that started a firefight over a card game. I cannot speak for the rest of the division or the support elements. I know that discipline in the 82nd among the infantry units was absolute you did not screw-up and not pay dearly for it.

We were somewhere in the north of SA on a missile base (we had the small mercy of living in an air-conditioned motor pool area - that smelled of fart, bad breath, and nasty crotch and armpits - every Saturday morning we washed out that entire hangar area). The engineers rigged a make-shift shower system and in Nov., Dec., and Jan. you froze your balls off from those unprotected showers). We even had to do shower duty where we had to keep an eye on naked guys taking showers and seeing to it that they policed the area after their shower! It was traumatic duty indeed!

Yes we did go north and ended up paralleling the French Foreign Legion guys! I remember tossing our MREs to them and they tossed us some of their meals. Their bread was awesome but after about 10 minutes they started throwing our MREs (Meals Rejected by Ethiopians) back at us - Mon Dieu! that is terrible!

So yes SHIVAR, I know, absolutely, that more than one Infantry Brigade deployed from the 82nd, the 505th and the 504th. You are definitely wrong! I have DD214s and DD215s to prove what I did, where I did it, and what awards and qualifications and promotions I got.

hags
July 22, 2009, 01:52 PM
Tim the Student and TheFallGuy,

The BS was really going on before the ground war started.

I was in the HHC, 2/504th PIR (part of the 1st Brigade of the 82nd) and I was in the advanced party for the 1st Brigade.
My Battalion was on block leave (my birthday was August 2nd). I remember flying back to Ft. Bragg from Abilene, Texas.

The guys in my battalion were all returning by any means possible. As part of the advanced party, I remember stepping off the C141 onto Saudi Arabia and it was 125 degrees in the shade. The flies were horrendous. I though I had died and gone to hell!

I know for sure that the 2nd Brigade of the 82nd, the 505th PIR (Parachute Infantry Regiment) went first because they were on DRF 1.

This meant that my Brigade elements could go on block leave because we had the 2nd Brigade ready to be deployed anywhere in the world within 18 hours.

There absolutely was no mass parachute jumps in the 82nd during Desert Storm. My Brigade commander Col. Nix kept volunteering our Brigade for every possible contingent plan and "Stormin" Norman nixed (pun intended) every hair-brained idea by the Brigade commanders!

I don't know of any infantry unit that was living in a hotel in and that started a firefight over a card game. I cannot speak for the rest of the division or the support elements. I know that discipline in the 82nd among the infantry units was absolute you did not screw-up and not pay dearly for it.

Yes we did go north and ended up paralleling the French Foreign Legion guys! I remember tossing our MREs to them and they tossed us some of their meals. Their bread was awesome but after about 10 minutes they started throwing our MREs Meals Rejected by Ethiopians) back at us - Mon Dieu! that is terrible!

So yes SHIVAR, I know, absolutely, that more than one Infantry Brigade deployed from the 82nd, the 505th and the 504th. You are definitely wrong! I have DD214s and DD215s to prove what I did, where I did it, and what awards and qualifications and promotions I got.

Sure, but you were all using Bushmaster carbines, correct? :D

ParaElite
July 22, 2009, 03:12 PM
Tim the Student just corrected me. It was the 325th that was the 2nd Brigade and the 505th that was the 3rd Brigade. I also think that the 325th was on DRB 1 status. I always got those mixed up because they ended in 5!

And no we did not get issued Bushmaster carbines (I am speaking of the 504th, my Brigade). I was issued an M16A2.

Apart from my mistake of substituting the 325th with the 505th, everything I have said can be verified with strong google-fu. I also remember Khobar towers. We were picked up in the Iraqi desert by C130s and flown back to Saudi where were cleaned our equipment and stayed at the Khobar towers where we heard children screaming living in another part of the complex. It was April 1st when we got flown out of Saudi Arabia. It was a commercial flight and we landed in the then unified Germany for fueling and took off and landed at Pope AFB. I have tried to forget my 7.5 months there.

Tim the student
July 22, 2009, 03:21 PM
I also confuse 1st and 2nd BDE's sometimes. I was always in 3rd, so the others are just that - the others.

ParaElite
July 22, 2009, 03:30 PM
Tim the Student,

But we are in the Airborne fraternity and paratroopers forever!:D

Nobody can take that from you.

w_houle
July 22, 2009, 07:10 PM
Tim the Student,

But we are in the Airborne fraternity and paratroopers forever!

Nobody can take that from you.
Spoken like a true Leg... Just kidding:scrutiny::neener:

John Parker
July 22, 2009, 07:13 PM
I was issued an FN M4 once. It was the tightest-shooting M4 that I've ever shot.

w_houle
July 22, 2009, 07:24 PM
Don't remember what tha mfg of what I shot in Basic, but got to play around with an H&R and the GM Pipe Wroks A1 with 3 prong flashes on 'em. KSARNG had A1s with A2 handguards and birdcage flashes Those were made by Colt. Most had S/Ns in the 600000 range. It was a one of these that I had ever seen a catastrophic failure:
Bolt was stuck partially back. Beat it forward with the assist. Popped the back pin, opened her up and went to pull out the bolt and the gas tube came along with it.

Kernel
July 22, 2009, 07:25 PM
Who builds our GI Issue M-16's?
Trick question. The answer is: NOBODY.

There are no GI Issue M-16 type rifles currently being built (or rebuilt). Colt and FN have both met all their contract obligations and there are no additional rifles on order or in production. Uncle Sam's coffers are full up and topped off.

I was issued a Harrison & Richardson M16A1 when I went thru basic in '82 at Fort Knox (about a year after they filmed STRIPES there - watching that movie gives me flash-backs).

The finish was so worn on that rifle the whole thing looked like polished stainless steel. Shot expert, though. After that, in the Air Cav, it was always a M203 or M60.

rscalzo
July 22, 2009, 07:47 PM
MREs (Meals Rejected by Ethiopians)

Cleaver:D

Tim the student
July 23, 2009, 11:23 AM
Spoken like a true Leg... Just kidding

That was kind of funny

berettashotgun
July 23, 2009, 07:55 PM
Am I on T.H.R.?
I swear I heard someone say," My Dad can beat up your Dad":rolleyes:
Back to the poster - most every AR-15/M4 I have shot seemed about the same, the difference is what they were tasked to do.
My personal preference is the good old A2 setup.(I like my mini for close stuff)
The M4 needs a bigger bullet for me - coming out of that short pipe. The stock design on the M4 is very nice for some, but I have never needed to adjust a excellent fit.
The Colt/Hakko 4X scope on the handle is a nice addition to the A2, but the EO Tech seems (to me) better suited to a pistol.
To each their own.......

gga357
July 23, 2009, 09:56 PM
The War of 1812,............I think back then the m16 ---1000 was made by Ben franklin.

gga357
July 23, 2009, 09:59 PM
deleted

Maverick223
July 24, 2009, 12:41 AM
Am I on T.H.R.?No you are in central Oklahoma. :D AR topics don't tend to fare too well...lets ban the AR...topics that is. :neener: or this reason I usually keep my nose out of them...but was curious about some of the answers, as I really don't know who makes all of the M16 pattern GI rifles. :)

ParaElite
July 24, 2009, 03:04 PM
Here is the source for ShVar information - keep reading and you will come to the section where it says that the Bushmaster rifles deployed with the 82nd. I did not go hunting for it, I found it while searching for a set of handguards for my new BCM 20" upper assembly - a very well manufactured piece of weaponry.

Death to all filthy stinking rotten legs - just kidding!:barf::neener:

http://www.cybershooters.org/dgca/bushmaster_m4.htm

Jeff White
July 24, 2009, 03:16 PM
It's funny that the cybershooters article provides pictures of a commercial Bushmaster Carbine....I think that Bushmaster's own admission in court that they produced 65 weapons for the US military and the collective personal experience of those of us who were on active duty at that time has pretty well debunked the myth of Bushmaster providing M4s to the 82d Airborne.

ParaElite
July 24, 2009, 04:34 PM
Here is the reply from Steve Kendrick the editor of Cyber bull****.

Mmm, this might have been misinformation and they were used by special forces.

But I did have it from someone who should know they were used by the 82nd Airborne. Given that it was a brand new weapon at the time and the 82nd Airborne is a front-line unit it sounded plausible. 4,000 sounds like enough to equip a regiment.

Certainly the DoD did place an emergency contract and they were supplied for use in Desert Storm, so what unit of that size would have used them if not the 82nd? I did hear from an armourer years ago that they had a fairly low opinion of them so perhaps they only saw limited deployment. One of these things they buy in an emergency and then they end up sitting in a warehouse somewhere.

Steve.

Jeff White
July 24, 2009, 07:23 PM
In February 1986 Colt delivered 40 prototype XM4s to Picatinney Arsenal for test and evaluation. After that the program lay dormant until it was revived in 1992. Additional M4s were not received in the inventory until 1994. The weapon wasn't fielded until 1998.

In the years between 1973 and 1998 special operations units filled their requirements for a short carbine version of the M16 with XM177E2s left over from the Vietnam days and small purchases of Colt R0653 Carbines. I know that the Ranger Regiment used these commercial models, in fact if you can still find the photos of the weapons belonging to the casualties of the Oct 93 Mogadishu battle you can see some of these carbines. They used to be posted online but the link I have to those photos is dead now.

No conventional unit in the Army fielded an M4 type carbine until 1998. Bushmaster did not sell any more then 65 rifles to the Army.

mljdeckard
July 24, 2009, 10:01 PM
I for one don't want to limit myself to specifications of a contract that goes to the cheapest bidder. Civilians have MANY more options for both quality AND variety in ARs. USE them.

I had a G.I. issued bolt key come unstaked. (FN.)

HorseSoldier
July 24, 2009, 10:19 PM
Though most of those options, quality-wise, are below the TDP. You've got to be willing to spend some serious money to do better than a Colt or FN.

Trebor
July 24, 2009, 11:41 PM
small purchases of Colt R0653 Carbines.

What's the configuration of the Colt R0653?

Is it essentially the same as a M-4, or is it closer to the XM-177EI, or something completely different?

Just curious as I'm not familiar with that model and wonder how it fits into the history of the M-4.

Jeff White
July 25, 2009, 12:32 AM
What's the configuration of the Colt R0653?

RO653 is a 14.5 inch 1/12 barrel, A1 upper and collapsible butt stock. I don't know if any model RO720 or RO721 Carbines were purchased after the fielding of the M16A2 but I personally saw the RO653s when I was in ANCOC at Benning in 86 when a class mate in the 3d Ranger Bn showed me some of their non standard small arms.

vanfunk
July 25, 2009, 07:41 AM
Shvar is certainly entitled to his opinion, though in this case, the facts of the matter powerfully promote a different conclusion.

As my mother told me long ago, wise sage that she is, "when you're in a hole, stop digging."

I was issued an FN M4 once.

Colt has been and is the sole-source provider of the M4 carbine (though that may change). This would seem to be a case of an FN M16A2 lower updated with a Colt M4 upper.

vanfunk

starhotel
September 2, 2009, 11:14 PM
Those were all contractors for Vietnam era M16s.

This part is pure folklore. Mattel never made a real M16.
... despite all the "expert" opinions my first M16 rifle issued to me in 1969 Republic of South Vietnam US Army forces III Corps AO had that Mattel symbol same as my little brothers Mattel wind up toys displayed, as I was very up close and personal with this weapon I do remember that fact still..

ever been to "Alice's" Resturant Long Binh?

Tim the student
September 2, 2009, 11:54 PM
Oh lord, here we go. Again.

Maverick223
September 3, 2009, 12:49 AM
Yeah and it came standard issue with a free Barbie too right? :rolleyes:

If you enjoyed reading about "Who builds our GI Issue M-16's?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!