Us Rifle Reliability Trials: M4 Stoppages

[rc135]

US RIFLE RELIABILITY TRIALS HIGHLIGHT M4 STOPPAGES
[Link: www4.janes.com/subscribe/idr/doc_view.jsp?K2DocKey=/content1/janesdata/mags/idr/history/idr2008/idr11088.htm@current&Prod_Name=IDR&QueryText= ]

The US Army has completed its rifle reliability shoot-off and announced that the gas piston-operated weapons tested proved less vulnerable in desert conditions than the direct gas system of the M4 carbine during extreme dust trials. During the six-month trial in 2007, the M4 experienced 882 stoppages. The highest number of stoppages for gas piston-operated weapons was 233 for the HK416. The FN Herstal SCAR fared better with 226 stoppages, while the Heckler and Koch XM8 had the least with 127. However, the Army stated that officials maintain full confidence in the M4, adding that the tests reinforced the importance of proper cleaning and lubrication. A further analysis of the tests is continuing.
© 2008 Jane's Information Group

 

[merk]

From stuff I hear just about everything over there is second rate.

 

[Rshooter]

USMC Rifle Creed
This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
My rifle is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life.
My rifle, without me, is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless. I must fire my rifle true. I must shoot straighter than my enemy who is trying to kill me. I must shoot him before he shoots me. I WILL...

My rifle and myself know that what counts in this war is not the rounds we fire, the noise of our burst, nor the smoke we make. We know that it is the hits that count. WE WILL HIT...

My rifle is human, even as I, because it is my life. Thus, I will learn it as a brother. I will learn its weaknesses, its strength, its parts, its accessories, its sights and its barrel. I will ever guard it against the ravages of weather and damage as I will ever guard my legs, my arms, my eyes and my heart against damage. I will keep my rifle clean and ready. We will become part of each other. WE WILL...

Before God, I swear this creed. My rifle and myself are the defenders of my country. We are the masters of our enemy. WE ARE THE SAVIORS OF MY LIFE.

So be it, until victory is America's and there is no enemy, but peace!

by Major General William H. Rupertus (USMC, Ret.)

Color me stupid but I have not heard of the grunts complaining about the M16. Take care of your equipment and it takes care of you.

 

[Kind of Blued]

However, the Army stated that officials maintain full confidence in the M4, adding that the tests reinforced the importance of proper cleaning and lubrication.

How can you make it to the upper ranks of the Armed Forces of the richest nation in the world, having seen combat, and say that you are 100% behind putting sub-par tools into the hands of your young American soldiers?

 

[Jenrick]

If I recall correctly weren't 95%+ of the stoppages correctable merely by adding lube? I agree that the weapon does have some issues in sand and dust when light lubed, but it has problems in general when lightly lubed.

-Jenrick

 

[Outlaws]

If I recall correctly weren't 95%+ of the stoppages correctable merely by adding lube? I agree that the weapon does have some issues in sand and dust when light lubed, but it has problems in general when lightly lubed.

If I recall we had a multipage thread with nothing but people spouting off about what they know when in reality, no one has seen the actual report detailing the stoppages....like if the bulk occurred near the end of the testing or if they were perfectly spaced every x number of rounds like clockwork.

 

[earplug]

Army Times had a article about the rifle trials and the methods of recording the failures.
IMHO the Army is forced to deal with a lack of money/funds to buy a new weapon system and they are trying to put a spin on the test results.
The A4's barrel is to short to work well with the current gas system in my opinion. The short barrel does nothing to help in terminal performance or system performance.
I'd be happy with the old M-16A1 with the A2 sights. M193 ball please.

 

[HorseSoldier]

If I recall we had a multipage thread with nothing but people spouting off about what they know when in reality, no one has seen the actual report detailing the stoppages....like if the bulk occurred near the end of the testing or if they were perfectly spaced every x number of rounds like clockwork.

I don't know if the power point presentation on Defense Review has been authenticated as genuine, but it seems to add some important additional details to the information out there.

The briefing seems to verify most of the rumors that have been floating around -- stoppages generally occurred into the second half of the firing cycle, though the M4 had issues sooner than other designs. The XM8's accuracy was poor compared to all three other weapons (the tested HK 416s shot better than the ones my unit has . . . makes me wonder if we got a bad run of weapons or if HK cherry picked the test weapons). Etc.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Great link Horse Soldier. I'm going to add that link to the big thread on this same topic. If accurate, that is certainly the most detailed break down I've seen so far. It also seems to suggest that the big problem area for the M4 was failure to extract. Every other weapon had less than 10 failures of that type where the M4 had over 200. Apparently cycle 15 was real hard on the M4s in that test (i.e. 3600 rounds and over an hour into the sandstorm). Most of the stoppages appear to have happened after this point.

Also surprised at the XM8 accuracy results. It looks like the XM8 is about as accurate initially as an HK416, SCAR or M4 at the end of its operational service life.

 

[Slamfire]

Extremely interesting document. You have to read the thing carefully.

I believe this test shows the obvious, the impingement gas system is more susceptible to dirt and fouling accumulation than piston systems. Well duh!. I have known that ever since I had an AR. The thing blows powder residue directly into the action, and you would expect it requires more maintenance than “cleaner” action types.

Having followed Defense procurements and activities I have observed that all procurements follow two simple behaviors:

1) Maximize the cash flow to the Contractor
2) Minimize scandal

I do find the summary an example of how these rules work: Read Carefully:

• 743, or 81%, of Soldiers assigned the M4 did not experience a stoppage while engaging the enemy.
• 74, or 19%, of Soldiers assigned the M4 did experience a stoppage while engaging the enemy.
• 143, or 16%, of Soldiers who experienced a stoppage reported a small impact to their ability to engage the enemy after performing immediate or remedial action to clear the stoppage.
• 31, or 3%, of Soldiers who experienced a stoppage reported an inability to engage the enemy during a significant portion or the entire firefight after performing immediate or remedial action to clear the stoppage.

I consider any weapon platform that fails to operate 19% of the time in combat unacceptable. The fact that 31 SURVIVORS were unable to clear the jam is ill relevant if you don’t provide the statistic of the number of soldiers who died or were injured due to a jammed weapon.

And this statistic:

• 12, or 1%, of Soldiers indicated the M4 should be replaced.

This is so self serving. Only 1% of Soldiers want to replace a weapon system. I expect the question was framed to lead Soldiers to this answer, and any question like this does not take into account that the guys on the line are very conservative. Instead of putting their lives in jeopardy with new gadgets that may not work, they will stick to familiar platforms, even if they are not perfect. Maybe Soldiers would have given a different answer if they had a chance to handle, use, and practice with the better weapon systems out there.

I will bet, if the question had been framed, “Would you replace the M4 with a more portable, 100’% reliable rifle that is guaranteed to fry all human existence to a distance of two miles from the forward line?” I would bet most would have given two thumbs up.

Heck, I want that weapon.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I believe this test shows the obvious, the impingement gas system is more susceptible to dirt and fouling accumulation than piston systems.

Does it? The most glaring difference in failures was the number of failures to extract for the M4. How does dirt/fouling contribute to that in the M4? The only thing I can think of is that a heavy layer of fouling in the chamber might shrink dimensions so that obturation takes longer and possibly a lot of dust might do the same if you could get it in there; but since over half the stoppages did not happen until cycle 15, it appears to me to be more of a parts wear issue than a fouling issue.

The M4 for example had only ~42 stoppages in 6,000 rounds (first 600rds x 10 rifles) with no lubrication or cleaning in a five-hour sandstorm (99.3%). That failure rate is quite comparable with most of the other rifles in the test. The problem seems to be that the M4 doesn't hold up as well as the other rifles as wear increases. Stoppages start to spike dramatically. I'd also add that firing almost three times the basic load with no cleaning or lube while in continuous sandstorm conditions is a fairly unrealistic test of any rifle.

More than anything this test appears to show that if you take care of your weapon, it will take care of you and that this is more important with the M4 than the other tested weapons.

Realistically, these rifles were subjected to a tremendously difficult test. They basically spent their entire operational service life in a sandstorm environment and the worst performer ran at 98.6%.

 

[Slamfire]

Does it? The most glaring difference in failures was the number of failures to extract for the M4. How does dirt/fouling contribute to that in the M4? The only thing I can think of is that a heavy layer of fouling in the chamber might shrink dimensions so that obturation takes longer and possibly a lot of dust might do the same if you could get it in there; but since over half the stoppages did not happen until cycle 15, it appears to me to be more of a parts wear issue than a fouling issue.

This is a summary level presentation. We are lacking the failure analysis corrective action report, (assuming they did one!) describing the failure, the failure cause, and the corrective action. So you would be right in saying that my statement that it “shows the obvious, the impingement gas system is more susceptible to dirt and fouling accumulation than piston systems.” is more opinion than fact. But I believe it.

The weapons they chose, all the rest are gas piston, and they are later models. Is there another gas impingement service rifle in inventory? I cannot recall another; there are a lot of different service rifles out there. All that I can recall are gas piston or roller bolt. If small arms design bureaus have abandoned the impingement system, that should be a clue that it is not the best of its class.

Though my roller bolt PTR-91 leaves a lot of residue in the breech.

I have read your analysis of the M4 system, and I agree with your statements about gas port location.

I am biased, I don’t like the M16 weapons platform. I don’t like the cartridge, I don’t like the gas system, and most of all, I don’t like how contractors are able to get marginal equipment into inventory, through politics, influence, and cash. The M16 is a good historical example of a “procurement end run”. Heck, the presentation mentions that they are up to Engineering Change 396 on the M4!! How many more changes will the Army fund to fix this proprietary, sole source, contractor owned design?

And the presentation. Subordinates the negative things, provides a “cup half full” perspective, and ends with glowing testimonials about the M4. The basic conclusion is that the M4 is fine, Soldiers love it, so lets buy some more.

 

[Outlaws]

How does dirt/fouling contribute to that in the M4? The only thing I can think of is that a heavy layer of fouling in the chamber might shrink dimensions so that obturation takes longer and possibly a lot of dust might do the same if you could get it in there; but since over half the stoppages did not happen until cycle 15, it appears to me to be more of a parts wear issue than a fouling issue.

Hre something about dirt/debris causing FTE's in the AR platform.

http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/2008/01/13/good-ar-bolt-take-down-page/

A few small brass shavings, combined with carbon and lube in the ejector slot, WILL cause malfunctions. In fact, when this editor is called to diagnose problem ARs, the first things I look at (after swapping magazines) are the ejector recess and the slot for the extractor. Clogged ejectors are responsible for fail-to-ejects and other jams. It is essential that you keep the ejector hole clean. Old, gooey lube residues mixed with carbon and tiny brass shavings in the ejector recess will create all sorts of problems.

 

[mpmarty]

My personal rant:

The procurement process in the US armed forces for anti-personnel individual weapons is a crime for which there is no punishment severe enough.

The AR15/M16/A4 fiasco should see some responsible folks beheaded for their complicity.

This mickey mouse piece of junk has killed more than a few of those who carried it.

I carried a US Rifle Cal 30 gas operated, clip fed semi automatic shoulder weapon (Garand), and an M14 when they issued the 5.56 weapon I had no choice but to surrender my 30 cal rifle and was issued an M16 but soon "lost" it and "found" an M3 and a poncho to pack stick mags. The M3 had no range to speak of but when you could only see fifty yards it didn't matter. In open country we need to return to something modern but more powerful and MUCH MORE reliable than this direct impingement POS.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Hre something about dirt/debris causing FTE's in the AR platform.

They are talking about debris (usually small brass shavings that happen when higher pressures cause the case to expand back into the ejector pin hole and then as the weapon cycles it bites off a piece).

In any case, not the same comparison since the briefing distinguishes between Failure to Eject (33 for the M4 which tied with the XM8 for lowest FEj) and Failure to Extract (271 for M4, <10 for every other rifle).

 

[Firepower!]

M4

Well as some you know I live in probably one of the dustiest conditions. M4 does not jam for those of you who are concerned with keeping it for you self defense weapon at home, especially true when it is a semi version.

I have had M4 jam on me but that was in select fire and the gun was old and not kept clean.

But for military use where you may not have chance to clean your weapon over and over again, M4 may be a problem in muddy/dusty conditions. I think US army should also take a look at SIG 552 SWAT as a carbine.

There is someone selling one here in PK for 11000 US$ but he has only one mag with it, and that is not enough for me specially when I am paying that much and going to use as my personal weapon.

I need SIG 551-2 mag!!

 

[Tony Williams]

Heck, the presentation mentions that they are up to Engineering Change 396 on the M4!! How many more changes will the Army fund to fix this proprietary, sole source, contractor owned design?

They are planning more...according to yesterday's Jane's Defence Weekly, the US Army is now committed to the carbine in general, and the M4 in particular. Its poor performance in the dust tests just means that they'll learn from that, and tweak it a bit...

 

[PercyShelley]

What was the recorded difference between the 416's failures to extract, the M4's, and are the extractors any different between the two guns?

 

[Firepower!]

The article and test is about a very dusty condition. How many of you worry about that? PLUS to my surprise every US service man I have spoken to speaks highly of M4. They dont seem encounter that many jams.

 

[Iron Mike]

M4 reliability

I am considering picking up a bushmaster piston operated carbine in either 6.8 or 5.56, anyone have any experiance with this weapon?
thanks in advance
Mike

 

[Slamfire]

Heck, the presentation mentions that they are up to Engineering Change 396 on the M4!! How many more changes will the Army fund to fix this proprietary, sole source, contractor owned design?

They are planning more...according to yesterday's Jane's Defence Weekly, the US Army is now committed to the carbine in general, and the M4 in particular. Its poor performance in the dust tests just means that they'll learn from that, and tweak it a bit...

This is so frustrating as a taxpayer. And a repeat of the Vietnam experience. Colt was the owner of the technical data package for the M16 through most of the Vietnam war. They had sold this weapon as a totally developed and perfected small arm, unlike that “awful” M14. Today these procurements are called “off the shelf”. Well when the M14 program was terminated and the Mattie Mattel Mouse gun became the sole alternative, it malfunctioned and Americans died. To fix the M16 problems the American tax payer had to fund the tests, and pay Colt to implement the fixes into “their” design. A design which the US Government later bought at the cost of $200 Million dollars (or so) in 1968 money.

Colt is now doing the same thing with the M4. From what I have read on the weapon, the M4 is considered their inhouse design, they are in a sole source procurement, guaranteed until 2010 (or so) and again the American taxpayer is funding the fixes on their “perfected” design.

And I have no doubt, if the Army wants to buy the M4 TDP for competitive procurements, it will cost a Billion dollars to buy it from Colt.

But all this is consistent with rule 1: Maximize the cash flow to the Contractor.

 

[HorseSoldier]

This is so frustrating as a taxpayer. And a repeat of the Vietnam experience.

Not really. Guys aren't dying with their weapons torn down in their foxholes. The troops, myself included, are comfortable and confident in the weapon. Guys downrange aren't having trouble keeping them running. There aren't many people actually putting their lives on the line with M4s and M16s that think what we've got is broken.

None of that gels with the Vietnam era situation, at least as it's been reported in various histories and such (before my time).

Colt is now doing the same thing with the M4. From what I have read on the weapon, the M4 is considered their inhouse design, they are in a sole source procurement, guaranteed until 2010 (or so) and again the American taxpayer is funding the fixes on their “perfected” design.

The role of the M4 has evolved. Not making changes to it to reflect not only practical experience on the battlefield but also its transition from a personal defense weapon to the primary combat arm would be the actual disservice to US soldiers.

 

[TexasRifleman]

The highest number of stoppages for gas piston-operated weapons was 233 for the HK416.

Hmmm, maybe Correia needs to change his slogan to:

"HK, because WE suck and we still hate you"