There is only one place in the world that the US Army is having problems with the M16/M4.....The internet. Fortunately soldiers don't need firearms on the internet. In the real world there are no systematic problems with them.
Jeff
M-4's Jamming in the 'Stan
- Thread starter rc135
- Start date
- Status
There is only one place in the world that the US Army is having problems with the M16/M4.....The internet. Fortunately soldiers don't need firearms on the internet. In the real world there are no systematic problems with them.
Jeff
inherentical
Member
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2007
- Messages
- 753
It's equally effective on rocks and sand?
The majority of problems with M16A2's that I saw as a Marine armorer stemmed from the malfunctions pulling the triggers.
JHansenAK47
Member
I didn't say the rifle jammed a lot. I just think most of the problems associated with military weapons is they need to get springs replaced regularly. Not so much the M16 as the M9. If you don't change the recoil spring the slide is just battering the frame. Then a perfectly good pistol is going to breakdown and jam more regularly. My point being old M16 rifles are going to suffer similar problems because soldiers beat them up and after 15 yrs are in need of some TLC. I really don't see new rifles being a liability as long as you clean them. However if you don't clean really good around the locking lugs they will jam. Especially since the dust in Iraq has the same consistency as the dust you can blow out of a air filter.
What is this StrategyPage.com website? This is the second article I've seen posted by them just today that is sensationalist and inaccurate. The other one was about "spray and pray AK47s" and stating "even Russia is abandoning the AK47 in favor of a rifle like the M16". 
Noobs.
Noobs.no_problem
Member
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2006
- Messages
- 342
Well, I had an M16A1, and it used to jam all the time. I did clean it, we were pretty anal about that. The armorer saw to the arms cleaning pretty well.
The M16, no matter how clean, would invariable jam. I cannot say it is reliable. I wish my service M16A1 was as reliable as my service M1911 and i wish my service M1911 had the accuracy of my service M16A1.
The M16, no matter how clean, would invariable jam. I cannot say it is reliable. I wish my service M16A1 was as reliable as my service M1911 and i wish my service M1911 had the accuracy of my service M16A1.
MD_Willington
Member
The Diemaco C7 series is working well for a lot of countries in Afghanistan...
C7A2 is the latest variant being used ATM..
C7A2 is the latest variant being used ATM..
HorseSoldier
Member
I like the "the troops say . . ." information from whoever this anonymous "insider" is (my guess: HK sales rep ). Being one of the troops, I'm always puzzled as to why I never get these "emails flying around" or hear this deafening storm of complaints about the M4. Most everyone I know in an army uniform, and literally everyone I know in CMF 18 or other combat arms MOS's, seems more than happy with the M4 (and that includes some guys who prefer the M4 to their issue HK 416s . . .). The last time I talked to some marines their only complaint about the M4 was that they did not have them. I'm always eager to hear where these supposedly unhappy troops are, especially the ones clamoring for the melt-o-matic XM8 or the 4+ MOA HK 416, but I only ever seen to encounter them in Strategy Page articles or over on the Soldiers for the Truth website.
). Being one of the troops, I'm always puzzled as to why I never get these "emails flying around" or hear this deafening storm of complaints about the M4. Most everyone I know in an army uniform, and literally everyone I know in CMF 18 or other combat arms MOS's, seems more than happy with the M4 (and that includes some guys who prefer the M4 to their issue HK 416s . . .). The last time I talked to some marines their only complaint about the M4 was that they did not have them. I'm always eager to hear where these supposedly unhappy troops are, especially the ones clamoring for the melt-o-matic XM8 or the 4+ MOA HK 416, but I only ever seen to encounter them in Strategy Page articles or over on the Soldiers for the Truth website.
wcwhitey
Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,814
Not a statement but more of a question. The Afgan/Iraq environment has got to test any weapons system to it's limits. I wonder if we were having this discussion amongst insurgents if a few complaints about the AK47/74 would not arise. I have heard the stories about the venerable M1 Garand's that were frozen shut during the battle of the bulge. The bolt handle on a every bolt action in WWII and Korea would have to be beaten open occasionally for the same reason. The 1911 has a legendary reputation for reliability but they can and will fail. So what weapons system exists that can live up to everyones expectations, never jam, never need cleaning or maintenance and perform in any and all environments while using a round that is guaranteed to stop anyone at any time?
I heard the reason the army didn't go with the xm-8 was because the thing melted when being fired rapidly in desert heat? thats a damn good reason not to want the thing. not really relevent to the m-4 discussion, but i would much rather have a sturdy m4 than somethin that might melt if i have to put some serious fire downrange.
aloharover
Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2006
- Messages
- 305
How so? FTF or FTE? Blanks or live? What was the condition of the mags?
I spent 21 years as an 11B, active and guard. Had the A1 from 84-97, and then the A2 from then on.
Never had an issue when using good mags and live rounds. I was platoon armorer for a while and worked helping out as well as working as the BN UMC. Never had any issues with the A1 that were related to the weapon.
I have also spent a while working as a DoD contractor. Also spent a year in Iraq in uniform. Can't say as I ever heard/saw any issues with the M4.
IIRC, Diemaco is now a Colt operation - the contractor for the M4.
Any weapon is a compromise. People laud the AK for it's reliability, but trvile it for it's accuracy (or lack thereof). The M16 is the reverse.
Interestingly, one can find soldiers complaints about the M1 replacing the more reliable M1903 and similar complaints about earlier rifles.
Any weapon is a compromise. People laud the AK for it's reliability, but trvile it for it's accuracy (or lack thereof). The M16 is the reverse.
Interestingly, one can find soldiers complaints about the M1 replacing the more reliable M1903 and similar complaints about earlier rifles.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
Yet another article from H&K's marketing machine... note that it mentions the dust tests and mentions both the failed XM8 and the HK416 as contenders without ever once mentioning another short-stroke contestant in the dust-test (the FN SCAR). Wonder why that is?
Also note that it continues the erroneous assumption that sand in the chamber is somehow an issue with a direct gas system instead of an issue regardless of gas system. If the HK416 uses an AR chamber and AR bolt, then how does the gas system change what happens when sand is in there?
Also note that it continues the erroneous assumption that sand in the chamber is somehow an issue with a direct gas system instead of an issue regardless of gas system. If the HK416 uses an AR chamber and AR bolt, then how does the gas system change what happens when sand is in there?
I've seen these reports online, but of everyone I know who's been over there, I have not heard a single diss about the M4 or M16, to the exception of one friend/neighbor who was in a guard unit with some old, beat-up A1s (IIRC, they replaced the bolt carrier groups and stopped having -as many- problems). Many more accounts of what a piece of sh*t the 240 is, and slight irritation at having to shoot them more than once to put them down, more often than not (which is no different than what was experienced in any other war).
Wolfgang2000
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 376
I was a small arms repairman for the 172nd from 73 to 76. From 78 till the 90's I carried a car as a LEO. If something bad can happed to a weapon I've seen it. MOST people here don't have to worry about their AR's. If you can keep the bolt travel path lubed it will run. If you use a lube that is to wet in a dusty environment, (ie the big sand box) It will fail. (Remember Jessica Lynch? Her platoon jammed everything jammed they had, including a M2HB. However the AK's shooting back didn't jam!)
If you shoot enough rounds fast enough to cook the lube out, it will jam. It just a fact of the design. The new synthetic oils, grease, and dry lubes have made a difference. But as long as you are using a design that shoots hot gas and carbon directly into the action, you will have to be on guard.
In the 70's the 1911a1 would rattle if you shook them. However groups were minute of bad guy at 25 yards. You start tightening it up and you started running into reliability problems. It took them till the 80's to arrive at a happy medium, between reliability and accuracy for off the shelf 1911's.
The AR / M16 has been with us for 40 years. It's going to be with us for the immediate future. If you are going to bet your life and the life of others on it, you better take a honest look at it. Both the good and the bad.
People knock the accuracy of the AK. My cheap SAR 1 will shoots groups good enough to kill bad guys at 200 + meters. ALL THE TIME!!!!. I don't have to worry if the ammo is to dirty, or old or anything else.
You like your AR's, great, I'm happy for you. I'm sure some of you don't have a choice as to what you carry. I understand. Just take off the rose colored glasses.
If you shoot enough rounds fast enough to cook the lube out, it will jam. It just a fact of the design. The new synthetic oils, grease, and dry lubes have made a difference. But as long as you are using a design that shoots hot gas and carbon directly into the action, you will have to be on guard.
In the 70's the 1911a1 would rattle if you shook them. However groups were minute of bad guy at 25 yards. You start tightening it up and you started running into reliability problems. It took them till the 80's to arrive at a happy medium, between reliability and accuracy for off the shelf 1911's.
The AR / M16 has been with us for 40 years. It's going to be with us for the immediate future. If you are going to bet your life and the life of others on it, you better take a honest look at it. Both the good and the bad.
People knock the accuracy of the AK. My cheap SAR 1 will shoots groups good enough to kill bad guys at 200 + meters. ALL THE TIME!!!!. I don't have to worry if the ammo is to dirty, or old or anything else.
You like your AR's, great, I'm happy for you. I'm sure some of you don't have a choice as to what you carry. I understand. Just take off the rose colored glasses.
C-grunt
Member
^^^Who's dissin the 240. They are going to have words with me. I did two tours in the Sandbox and never had a problem with the M16/M4 platform. Yeah you had to keep them clean, but not inspection clean. Clean off the bolt and the chamber and you were pretty good to go. In 03 we had the huge red dust storm and had a small skirmish the next day.....No malfunctions. Everyone wiped down the bolt and the chamber and...GASP...the rifles worked fine.
Id say a bigger problem is CLP. That stuff was a gunk magnet. I switched to REM oil and my weapons never got half as dirty. By the end of my 05 tour, most of my platoon was using REM oil that our families sent us.
The M249s though...........Every SAW is different and you had to know your particular ones tendencies and what she liked. The one I carried in 03 would work fine as long as I kept the bursts over 5-6 rounds. Anything under that and it would jam.
Id say a bigger problem is CLP. That stuff was a gunk magnet. I switched to REM oil and my weapons never got half as dirty. By the end of my 05 tour, most of my platoon was using REM oil that our families sent us.
The M249s though...........Every SAW is different and you had to know your particular ones tendencies and what she liked. The one I carried in 03 would work fine as long as I kept the bursts over 5-6 rounds. Anything under that and it would jam.
Like I said, it jammed our trap machines.
Since it's a solvent, not just a lube, it dissolves gunk and can turn it into a clay-like mass.
I use it, but I'm not in Afghanistan. For a hunting gun, I use Rem Oil, though, when I want something thin, Bullfrog if I want something more viscous. CLP is a good cleaner and a passable oil, but I think it's overrated for serious use as a working lubricant.
jpwilly
Member
The Rem Oil works well because it most of the light oil evaporates and the teflon lube is left behind...almost like dry lube. I seems to remove carbon well too. I still use both CLP and Rem Oil but CLP + Dirt = Goo.
boredelmo
member
I don't understand the posters saying "all you gotta do is keep the rifle clean..".
I thought the point the original post was making is that when it gets dirty it is unreliable. And the fact is, they're in the desert... I can imagine cleaning up a rifle and have one gust of wind track dirt all over the recently lubed guns.
I thought the point the original post was making is that when it gets dirty it is unreliable. And the fact is, they're in the desert... I can imagine cleaning up a rifle and have one gust of wind track dirt all over the recently lubed guns.
cracked butt
Member
I never understood the fascination over CLP amongst us civillian users. Its almost passable as a cleaner, but there are far better materials on the market. It kind of works as a corrosion inhibitor, but not nearly as well as other stuff available and not nearly well enough that I'd trust it on my guns. It works as a lube, but once again, not as good as pretty much everything else that can be found on the shelf at the local sporting goods store.
Still 2 Many Choices!?
Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2006
- Messages
- 455
Mmmm, kool-aid! Some people wouldn't believe the M-16 is as reliable as the guy behind the trigger unless a Navy Seal popped up out of the water pointing one at them ...
Still 2 Many Choices!?
...Still 2 Many Choices!?
How come no one ever talks about the diminishing accuracy you get with the added heat in the AR system? Besides the reliability, systems that do not throw a ton of heat back into the receiver can stay more accurate for a longer period of time...at least that's what I hear...
::cue story time flashback music::
I didn't know this happened until hearing a range story from a vet who used to be a sniper back in the day (I know this is how all range stories start, but this one is actually 2nd hand as opposed to hearing from a friend of a friend of a brother who read it online). He said that his main beef with the AR platform is how it dumps where it eats. No news there. I was surprised how he went on to talk about how this hurts the weapon's performance, in addition to durability. He said he when he was out shooting at 300 yards, he made a nice 2" group to start off the day. Feeling good, he continued to shoot, but was getting discouraged at how his groups had widened to about 6" as he kept shooting, with nothing he was doing working to close it up. Seeing he was at wits end, someone else at the range told him to let the gun cool off for 30 minutes or so, then try again. He did this, and sure enough, got the 2" group back. At first he thought it was just from taking a break from that rifle, so he loaded up a mag and let the guy next to him let it rip, before getting the now hot rifle passed back to him. He sighted up, took his 5 shots same as before, and sure enough, was back at 6". The stranger then explained what was going on, and I don't remember the nitty gritty details from part because I don't own an AR and am not familiar with the parts, but I'm reasonably sure it was something about how the heat screws with the springs in such a way that is detrimental to the performance of the weapon...or something. After that day, he became a believer in a piston system, because even though they may be inherently slightly less accurate, they stay cooler much longer, which means you won't see your groups widen as quickly.
Now then, this is purely anecdotal, and I was wondering if anyone could back it up or debunk it? I'm as curious as the next person, and don't like believing that which is not true, so if this is impossible, yell it out now before it gets out of hand. If, however, this is true or could be true...I suppose no one cares because how many people are going to take that many precision 300 yard shots with an AR15 these days?
::cue story time flashback music::
I didn't know this happened until hearing a range story from a vet who used to be a sniper back in the day (I know this is how all range stories start, but this one is actually 2nd hand as opposed to hearing from a friend of a friend of a brother who read it online). He said that his main beef with the AR platform is how it dumps where it eats. No news there. I was surprised how he went on to talk about how this hurts the weapon's performance, in addition to durability. He said he when he was out shooting at 300 yards, he made a nice 2" group to start off the day. Feeling good, he continued to shoot, but was getting discouraged at how his groups had widened to about 6" as he kept shooting, with nothing he was doing working to close it up. Seeing he was at wits end, someone else at the range told him to let the gun cool off for 30 minutes or so, then try again. He did this, and sure enough, got the 2" group back. At first he thought it was just from taking a break from that rifle, so he loaded up a mag and let the guy next to him let it rip, before getting the now hot rifle passed back to him. He sighted up, took his 5 shots same as before, and sure enough, was back at 6". The stranger then explained what was going on, and I don't remember the nitty gritty details from part because I don't own an AR and am not familiar with the parts, but I'm reasonably sure it was something about how the heat screws with the springs in such a way that is detrimental to the performance of the weapon...or something. After that day, he became a believer in a piston system, because even though they may be inherently slightly less accurate, they stay cooler much longer, which means you won't see your groups widen as quickly.
Now then, this is purely anecdotal, and I was wondering if anyone could back it up or debunk it? I'm as curious as the next person, and don't like believing that which is not true, so if this is impossible, yell it out now before it gets out of hand. If, however, this is true or could be true...I suppose no one cares because how many people are going to take that many precision 300 yard shots with an AR15 these days?
It's certainly possible, but I don't think it was related to the AR operating system. More likely it was a barrel that wasn't properly stress relieved and that could happen with any operating system. I had an FAL like that once. As the barrel heated up the groups went to hell.
NoScreenName
Member
Hmmmm... If I had a dollar for every BS story I heard from a vet who "used to be a sniper"... I'd be a rich man...and on that note... If i could just once hear even a story from a friend of a friend of a friend of a REMF Vietnam vet, that might carry a bit more weight...
Do you reallly need anything more to call BS on this 3rd hand story from a "former sniper"?
That article is pure HK BS... some people like the author are far too gullible... I'm completely sure he did get his "inside info" from an HK rep.
If it's that big a deal why not consider some piston retro-fits for the M4? Does anyone really believe that the armed forces are that stupid? Or could it be that the supposed issues are merely overblown and somewhat of a non-issue? If a large enough number of troops were getting killed and/or injured because of jamming M4's, something would be done about it. It really is that simple.
All weapons have jams. It is a fact of life.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked