M-4's Jamming in the 'Stan

Status
Not open for further replies.
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?

Highpower shooters regularly shoot AR-15s at 600 yards- and that's usuaully after they've aleady put a minimum of 30 rounds down range including 2 rapid fire strings in a very short period of time, and they are still cpapble f astounding acuracy- better than gas piston guns such as the M1 Garand or the M14.

Be wary of any story that starts with a friend of a friend of a 1331 5331 sniper.:D
 
I don't recall hearing complaints from the Israelis who use M16s

SIGH!

Yea, they found the M16 family so unreliable they chose to develop their own piston driven carbine. The Tavor.

Most of the wonder-rifles currently recommended (HK 416, XM8, etc) have never been tested in a combat environment. Their reputation rests mostly on marketing collateral.

Actually the HK 416 variant has been tested in combat by Army SPECOPS folks. Most of them like it and want more.

If a large enough number of troops were getting killed and/or injured because of jamming M4's, something would be done about it.

They didn't do anything about it in Vietnam. In fact their action was to order us not to complain about it. And troops kept dying.

Oh yea, and 40+ years later we are still trying to find a bullet that works reliably in that caliber.

Great weapons system.

Go figure.

Fred
 
IIRC Dri-Slide was used in Viet Nam for lubircation of M16s to increase reliablity. Perhaps this product would work for the troops in Iraq and Astan.
 
There are or may be better weapons systems. My question isn't which system is better or that this system isn't so good as why doesn't anybody seem to acknowledge this and at least begin the search for and test other presently available systems?

Even a retrofit of a few parts on the M4 such as a piston and cylinder at a small cost might be preferable to acquiring a million new rifles at a huge cost. But what is troublesome to me is that nobody in authority acknowledges the problem.
 
Even a retrofit of a few parts on the M4 such as a piston and cylinder at a small cost might be preferable to acquiring a million new rifles at a huge cost. But what is troublesome to me is that nobody in authority acknowledges the problem.
Because obviously, if you don't acknowledge the problem, it isn't there, and you aren't responsible for it.

That being said, the original article--definite HK "only use our products, but we still hate you" type crap. While I"m sure there's some problems, I'm equally sure our troops have overcome them.
 
I'm bemused by repeated internet stories about the supernatural properties of DUST in Afghanistan or Iraq.

I've done tours in both places and found the sand/dust to be pretty unremarkable. Admittedly, parts of Afghanistan and large swaths of Iraq are desert and this terrain would naturally come as a shock to anyone who hasn't spent time in a desert.

Stick a road sign to Salt Lake City in the ground in Afghanistan and you'd pretty much have a mirror image of Utah. Or South West Texas.

If you've trained or lived in the SW USA, you'd probably not find the OIF/OEF environment to be unusual.

As another poster pointed out...exactly how is the overblown HK416 gas piston supposedly more reliable in sand and dust? That's a rhetorical question, BTW...

M4A1 reliability problems haven't EVEN been a topic of discussion (much less AAR complaint) by the 2000+ 18-Series MOS Soldiers of my units (3 x SF Groups) since 9/11, 2001. Other weapons and equipment...Yes. M4A1...No.
 
As I understand it, enough sand can cause anything short of a claw hammer to fail. Even the FAL, which was nicknamed "the right arm of the free world" and adopted or copied by about 90 nations reportedly doesn't like sand (can't really say because we don't have much sand in PA).

My experience is limited compared to many on here but this is what it is:
1. An M-16 will malfunction if it has worn parts or springs in it.
2. An FAL will also malfunction with worn parts or springs (and i got almost the exact same malfunction with the same worn parts in both rifles - go figure).
3. AK's can malfunction too - I have had several and a couple of them (built by a couple of the most highly recommended manufacturers) were total POS's. I wound up with refunds for both.
Bad or out of spec parts can make anything not work right and I'd blame that over the sand.
I've also seen bone dry M-16A2's work fine for 1000's of rounds (like, say a whole company doing night fire exercises with the same rifles so that only 3 rifles would have to be cleaned). They apparently didn't have any worn out or broken parts in them and they worked perfectly.
Can't comment on the M-4 because I haven't ever fired one but I'd bet that the same thing would hold for them too.
I'd say if you are consistently getting malfunctions with a reasonably clean rifle then there is something wrong with your rifle - get it fixed or get another one.

I won't disagree that the direct impingement could use an overhaul. It does blow carbon back into the action and getting more dirt in there isn't really ever a good thing. But I don't think we need to pay HK a bazillion dollars a pop for them - we could come up with a conversion ourselves that could probably change over all our existing M-4's and M-16's for a few bucks each.
And we could keep our money in our own country while we do it.
But you always get a trade off with guns. You might get more ammo but have to carry a lower powered round. You get more power but more weight with it. Better reliability but less accuracy. If you want just about utter reliability in any environment you could switch back to the Enfield. It is about as impervious to harsh environments, damaged or inconsistent ammo, or being used as a club as they get. Of course, you do lose firepower by doing that.
 
Actually the HK 416 variant has been tested in combat by Army SPECOPS folks. Most of them like it and want more.

My experience with them has been less internet driven and more real world, and from what I've seen, the team guys that have them aren't very impressed, due to very poor accuracy for a service rifle. As I've described in other threads about the thing, it's maybe a 4 MOA weapon, if you're lucky, with standard M855 ammo. Or at least that's how the ones we have run.
 
Actually the HK 416 variant has been tested in combat by Army SPECOPS folks. Most of them like it and want more.

Actually I was reading a comment by Larry Vickers the other day (who some call the father of the HK416, though he gives the credit to HK engineers) and he said that the HK416 was developed for a very specific role.

For that matter, there are few piston ARs out there that are more reliable than the M4 as long as we are talking 14.5" and longer barrels. Start talking 10.5" suppressed mag dumps and you start appreciating why someone developed an AR gas piston. If you are with a group that has that requirement (notice how most HK416s you see are also 10.5" barrels?), then a gas piston can make sense.

Of course, there isn't a manufacturer in the world who doesn't prominently mention any request by elite troops for their product regardless of the purpose. They might be using the weapons as hammers; but you can bet that "Used by Special Forces Recon Ranger Seals" will be prominently mentioned without further qualification - just like H&K is using a limited role for the HK416 to try and stir up an outcry for a larger rifle contract that they currently stand little chance of winning.
 
This article's just another HK 416 marketing spiel disguised as news. And HK still hates us, and thinks we suck.

Stick a road sign to Salt Lake City in the ground in Afghanistan and you'd pretty much have a mirror image of Utah. Or South West Texas.
I know someone that almost imported 10+ conex's full of Saudi/Iraqi sand to Utah to show if a system would function in SWA as he was told UT sand wasnt close enough by the test evaluator. DS1 ended the argument as the system performed perfectly.

Kharn
 
Last edited:
Well I promised I was through with the whole AR-15 by whatever name ya-ya game.

I have stated that in my experience the M-16A1 with the lubricants available before 1980 or so was not reliable. I am not alone in that experience though others do not agree with me.

My experience with A2 series guns and modern lubricants is limited, I shoot a Colt AR15 HBAR of the A2 style on occasion and other than that have merely handled and watched shot some M4 series guns some civilian M-4geries and a few Law Enforcement guns with barrels down to 10.5 inches.

I can hardly call myself an expert (or ex-spurt as an old demo school instructor used to insist was the proper term) on A2 (or greater) series or M4 series rifles or carbines. That said I have seen them stop, and on nice clean ranges and after recent cleanings.

I have even seen them stop and when I later asked the shooters about reliability been told “my rifle” has never malfed and that “these rifles” are utterly reliable. I think perhaps pride of ownership plays some part in those claims where I see a malf and the shooter insist one has never happened.

That is not to say that every one that reports never having a malf actually had one or more and failed to notice or that folks are actively lying about the lack of malfs in their experience.

I knew guys in my younger days that engaged in unprotected sex on a fairly regular basis and neither caused a pregnancy nor had to see a Doc about a STD. And some that did this and had buddies that had the same experience. That does not mean having unprotected sex is a good idea.

I fail to see how having a self fouling action on a rifle being issued for ground combat to human beings is a good idea.

Take a look folks, Stoner himself dumped the direct gas impingment system and went to a more traditional type gas piston system (much like the AK’s) for his Stoner 63 series rifle. Armalite which employed Stoner when he lead the team that designed the AR-15 had as their next rifle design the AR-16 and later AR18 that used a gas system like in the Tokerov and G43 rifles. I believe both did this because they recognized the biggest fly in the ointment for the AR15 design.....that gas system.

I believe the AR survives out of inertia. The US became entrenched in its use early on. And so it stayed. Parts availability, ammo availability, add-ons availabilities, and forty years of trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear ( and they have done a decent job) have made the platform popular for civilians as well as governments.

All that said and some of you having stopped reading the ramblings of an aging fart to soon to notice this.....the M-16A2 and later are not “bad” weapons. As noted they generally do wortk well when kept clean and properly lubed for the environment they are in. I love the ergonomics except for that goofy charging handle. Points well. As previously noted one can attach all manner of things to it. As far as accuracy, range and penitration go, the “newer” cartridge and “newer” barrels and twist rates make the AR a much more usable weapon...though the old stopping power up close where it most maters is still an issue for many.

In my younger days I loudly proclaimed I would rather go to war with an AKM than an M-16A1. Today if it were raining Cuban and Russian paratroopers a la “Red Dawn” (that just to keep the Survivalist among us happy) and there was any model of AK next to the back door and any model of 14.5 inch or better modeled A2 or later AR by the back door, I would grab the AR.

That does not mean I do not think there are things about the AR that can not be greatly improved. Chief among those improvements, based on my own experiences shooting and observing AR-15 series rifles since 1969 and my shooting of an AR-180 since 1977, would be replacing the direct gas impingment system of the AR15 with something like the gas system of the AR-180......which is exactly what HK and Colt both have offered and neither “invented”

If one could pick and choose from our desks what to issue it would likely be someing more than a basic A2 or M4......but many folks that read THR and other places are not at home or the office typing away at what they wish for, but in a bad place at a bad time with what the US taxpayers (or Canadian or beginning last week Iraqi or whomever) has seen fit to purchase for them, some version of the AR15.

When I used to teach folks about using the M-16A1 I found it not helpful to my students to tell them the rifle their life depended on was a piece of poo-poo, but rather to discuss and demonstrate and teach and test the students to insure they had the abilities to get the most out of the rifle they had today.

Rather than this constant ya-ya ing that makes some less confidence in their equipment and others so aggressivly defensive of their view that no one will notice the few kernals of good stuff that appear have, why not spend our time and bandwith on what the GI in the field or the target shooter on the range or the plinker in the back 40 or the Survivalist in his closet get the most from his AR?

.....and Bob’s tip of the day for AR users......learn the actual trajectory of the ammo and rifle you use at your zero. For example, with a full sized A2 set for 200 meter zero with Green Tip, the bullet only passes through the sight plain at about 93 meters. Targets at 25 meters or less will be struck pretty much the height of the front sight assembly low based on actual aiming point. If all you have is a small target, say someone pulling a Kilroy was here over a stout wall or peeking around a solid corner, a center hold can lead to a low miss. Aim a little bit high for small targets inside 50 meters. Don’t forget your eye protection!

Bobs mechanical tip of the day for AR users.....keep the drain hole in the stock screw clean. If it is stoppered by dried clay or such it may slow the recoil of the bolt assembly by causing the compression of air in the plunger tube. Should water enter an AR 15 system rifle while this drain hole is plugged it is possible for the plunger tube to fracture on firing, so in wet environment it is vital this drain hole be kept clear. Failure to feed from compressing air in the system or fracturing the system by firing it with water in it are rare even when the drain hole is clogged, but why risk it? Check the hole several times a day and right away after being in water.

See how that works? Now let's all try to at least add something like that to our posts if we can not stop the ya-yaing.

-Bob Hollingsworth
 
Well from my personally experience, I just got back a month ago from Iraq, downtown Baghdad, I didn't have a single malfunction with my M4. I've had malfunctions with M16A2s in the past, but all accountable to firing blanks.

I know this makes me look bad for being unprepared, I was out on a week long mission, staying the nights at various FOBs, COBs, and JSS sites, I didn't have any of my cleaning gear with me so I didn't clean my M4 the entire time, it got dirty, not terribly bad though, using militec. Upon returning to my FOB we had to do a weapons qual (awsome schedualing from the back office guys) anyways, I didn't have a single problem.

11B 6 years, 31B almost a year and a half now.
 
rather than adopt an easier to maintain weapon, like the XM-8 or H&K 416, because of the billion or so dollars it would cost to switch rifles.

Or just spend a couple million and buy our troops AK-47s... oh that's right, the defense department is stuck in the 1980s and would never use "commie guns". Your tax dollars at work folks...
 
On these pro/con AR-15 threads I've found that you can almost always categorize people into 3 groups:

1. People who have been in the military in the 60s and 70s that were saddled craptastic A1 rifles that had serious reliability problems. These shooters are usullay over 50 years old and more often than not hate the AR-15 platform because of real life bad experiences with them.

2. People who don't own/never shot/ or may have put a few rounds through a AR-15 once, that read the horror stories about the government issued AR-15s and have a very negative impression of the rifle but no experience with them. Often times this group would state that they think the gas piston ARs or AK-47 variants are far superior to the DI AR-15s, but once again with no experience with any of the rifles.

3. Current soldiers and civillians who shoot, own (often multiple copies) of AR-15s who have had a lot of experience with the modern 'perfected' AR-15s who have had little to no problems with the rifle, but also understand the limitations and extra bit of maintenance the rifle requires.
 
Or just spend a couple million and buy our troops AK-47s... oh that's right, the defense department is stuck in the 1980s and would never use "commie guns". Your tax dollars at work folks...
Or we could spend a fraction of that amount to train our troops so they don't get shot by commie weapons.

I've come across a few soldiers in my day, and haven't really heard a complaint from any of them, so long as they keep their rifle clean. Since our troops aren't third-world conscript farmers, I think we can handle the "weapon's maintenance" part of training with an AR, and get the most out of the platform.

And Roberts had an interesting point about the 416s all being 10.5". Never occurred to me.
 
What people seem to miss is this.

The AR-15 platform has functioned quite well as an infantry weapon.

It, like any mechanical device, has its pros and cons.

So does ANY OTHER DESIGN.

Replacing the AR platform with another design will most likely reveal a new set of problems, unseen until the platform is tested in real combat in harsh environments.

Simple observation will show that the AR is not a complete POS, and it does function well for tens of thousands of troops in combat as we speak. Therefore, replacing it is hardly a guaranteed improvement, even if the M16A4, M4A1, or whatever, isn't perfect. No other design is perfect, either.

Pointing out a weakness does not mean you have solved it, or can solve it without some other compromise. That's life in the big city.
 
{CHUCKLE}

Yup, written by people who aren't actually over here (Iraq) using said weapons.

To make it short and sweet.... I get to shot over here quite a bit...minimum once a week and I have a spare M4A1 that I've been using as "test" rifle. It's got over 5,000 rounds through it without cleaning.....yes..."NO" cleaning. Haven't even broke it open because you know what....it's not that dirty. Oh yeah another little secret.....it's bone dry and has "ZERO" lube inside. Ok, not zero but when I first took it out I used a drop or two in the bolt cam pin area..thats it.

Has it jammed??? Yes it has....I pulled the mag out and found it had cracked feed lips...tossed it inserted a fresh mag and no problems....

The weapon is dusty inside and out, has been on a convoy (several) a helo ride or three and even a (gasp) Osprey.. and still reliable.

Is there carbon inside it? Yes....duh its had 5k rounds through it... but since its dry the carbon has nothing to stick to and turn into sludge and the same for the dust..nothing to stick to there either..

As for AKs being themost ultimate reliable rifle ever.... "Ha!" They are mechanical and they break just like any other rifle...

Also in my job I get to shoot AKs often (weekly) and have at least one that is junk every trip... Last week I had 3 out of 20 that were not reliable. While next to me were about 40 Marines with zero stoppages.... do the math...

I'll be at the range tomorrow with my trusty M4A1 and 500+ rounds of green tip...most of them will be fired full auto..I expect no issues....if I do have any I'll post back here..

I also have another 20 Aks or so to shoot....I "expect" to have at least one go down... I'll even use good Chinese API in them just so you can't blame the junk Iraqi ammo for the failures...

I have no issues with the reliability of ANY US issued weapon here in theater...PERIOD. M240s and M249s ROCK...if they don't run right then there is something wrong with them....fix it and they will run right..period..

Feel free to ask questions... I'll be around for a few days...
 
Well if I was a Brit I wouldn't complain about being issued a M16/M4 either , otherwise your liable to get a SA80 back

This was certainly true with the first L85 and the a1, but the a2 is a fine rifle. I am surprised HK didn't screw it up actually, but they turned the weapons system into a really reliable rifle, to go with outstanding accuracy. Now if they can only redesign the rifle so you can actually use it left handed.

The 416 is a little overrated, though it is not like I have much experience with it. The standard Ar15 based rifles work generally fine.
 
Lot of defense of the M4s in here. I've never fired one in my life. But my A2 was pretty reliable. Jammed on me in the sand once. And I *did* let it get pretty damned dirty. And it was my fault, because I didn't use some cleaning time I had to actually clean. It was the first and last time I made that mistake. As long as I kept my A2 clean, it went bang. And it'd go bang many, MANY times in succession without jamming up.

Given the choice, if I were back there now? I'd want a piston driven something. But I'd sure want the army to thoroughly test it first by issuing it to half a million troops before handing it down to us lowly jarheads ;)
 
Cracked Butt, you missed at least two more types of people:

Those who have shot modern M4s in a combat situation and suffered a jam.

Those who think the M4 is the best gun in the entire world and will never listen to a single bad word against it.

Every gun on earth malfunctions sometime or later. And everyone on earth has a bias one way or another. I'm positive the M4 is jamming. All guns do. Is it jamming so frequently to make it a big issue? I don't know, and realistically no one here knows either, unless there is someone here in the military who's job it is is to review weapons failures.

There's no arguing that the M4 and other variants are inherently going to be prone to jamming after long use without proper maintenance because it craps where it eats.

But clearly this is one of those threads that will never end.

But I think everyone should easily agree that our boys deserve the absolute best rifle we can give them no matter what it is. If its an AR, an AK, an HK, who gives a flying hoot as long as its what shoots best? Although I would be partial to something manufactured in America - why trust another nation with making our armies guns?
 
Or just spend a couple million and buy our troops AK-47s... oh that's right, the defense department is stuck in the 1980s and would never use "commie guns". Your tax dollars at work folks...

Thank God. We've finally started teaching people how to really fight their weapons for real world combat and the last thing we need is a weapon so utterly unergonomic that it would take our average shooters back to square one in terms of speed and handling.
 
And Roberts had an interesting point about the 416s all being 10.5". Never occurred to me.

They (supposedly) make other barrel lengths up to 20", but I've never seen anything but a 10.5" version in .mil usage.
 
I've got AK types in 7 different calibers,that said if it were
SHTF right now (i'm in my house) the AR's will get warm long
before the AK's.
Some are for different purposes,I'd pick up my Saiga 12 before going
for the old "faithfull" 870. Different weapon,different job.
As if I needed food on the table,a .22 lr would do just fine(quietly ;) )
The troops should have the "best of the best" with them at all times.
As far as jamming it's hard to say,as I don't put sand in my AR's,if I did
my choices might change.

MRI
 
Seems to me like the AR would do pretty good in a dusty area because it has no uncovered openings into the receiver.

The M14 is a much more open design and I'm sure more dust gets near the working parts.

What say you? Is this an important consideration (amount of openings into the receiver)?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top