Why are M4rgeries so popular?

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Boats

member
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
3,705
Location
Oregon
It seems that when I look at AR-15 type rifles, the predominant model one finds is some flavor of M4 knock-off with a 16" barrel and an anywhere from nice to cheesy telestock.

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

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

So why the popularity? Is it all an Army knock-off phenomenon? It seems to me that the 5.56/.223 needs all of steam it can get, or at least the USMC tends to think so, given that they do not generally go for the carbine flavored package.
 
The carbine is just a handy size and lighter. Take a look at many of the hunting rifles being sold today. Barrels have gotten shorter, on average.

No doubt that a 223 performs best with a longer barrel.
 
IMO the reduced sized handguards and the amount of barrel sticking out of the front of these things looks marvelously ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I think so too. I'm pretty sure it's an "Army Chique" thing. Otherwise, people would just get a Bushmaster Dissipater. Still has the 16 inch barrel, but has a longer handguard.
 
I don't understand where you are coming from

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

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

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

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

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

That said, I have 3 AR's with 16" barrels (actually one is a 14.5" with a perm flash hider), and 1 20". I rarely shoot the 20".
 
I don't care for M4geries myself. The Dissipator, and a similar product made by another company whose name eludes me at the moment, is much more practical, IMHO, if short overall length is desired. I always disliked the short sight radius of the standard 16" AR15 type of weapon, and as I have aged, I have lost the ability to focus on the front sight of those weapons. I can still focus just fine on the front sight of the Dissipator and the 20" AR15 types, which gives me another reason to dislike M4geries. (My employer, a police agency, does not let us use optical sights on our patrol carbines/rifles.) I am wavering right now on whether to buy a 20" upper for my M4gery (it was a gift) or trade it for a 20" AR. I already sold my 16" AR15A2. If my agency ever has another carbine/rifle cert course, and I can get into it, I want to abandon the AR platform totally and go with a Mini-14.
 
Well, my soldier son is using an actual M4 in the sand box with the forearm rail system, grip, and Surefire belonging to him. He has an Aimpoint on his service rifle, but his personal M4'gery has the ACOG, Ergo Grip, Surefire Tac Forearm, and an Insight Technologies CVL laser. He has equipped his personal rifle with what he has determined through use in the field (desert) what works and what does not. He has re-enlisted for 6 more years, and he is a non combat MOS. He also owns a Baretta 92.

His focus is using a similar weapon in civilian life as he uses in the Army. That said, my CAR15 has an Aimpoint ML2. Short range use only, but capable to be used for long range. I kinda like the way it looks, but I like the weight and function better. I too have a 20"A2, and it does get fired a lot.
 
Back in 1994 the Fed.Gov tried to tell people they couldn't have them (and in fact banned them for a decade).

That's a sure fire way to get people to want one.
 
RockyMtnTactical, et al., why in hell would I choose to use a 300 yard prairie dog round for in-home defense against a 200 lb. man at 50 feet or less?

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

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

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

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

AZC-C15RM4FT.jpg


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

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

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

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but seriously, I think people are buying them mostly because they're formerly forbidden fruit, they resemble what the army's using, they're fun toys, and they are (relatively) cheap to shoot. Nothing wrong with a fun gun.
 
one's man opinion, I guess, is as good as another.
16" barrel, telescoping stock, both perform very well at the 100 yard range I shoot at and they're easier to carry around.

There's no difference to me at all really, I figure if I guy wants a 20" bbl, he'll just get a new upper and move on. Nothing wrong with that.
 
So why the popularity? Is it all an Army knock-off phenomenon? It seems to me that the 5.56/.223 needs all of steam it can get, or at least the USMC tends to think so, given that they do not generally go for the carbine flavored package.
Click to expand...

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

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

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

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

Very much so. Though I have to agree with the guys who are saying the Clinton-era ban and news footage probably has more to do with it than most (but certainly not all) civilian consumers going with M4gery type rifles. Nothing like prohibiting things to make people want them, especially back in the 90s when you had some gun stores with all the cool toys in "law enforcement only" racks and such.
 
Most of them would think you were basically committing suicide using a .44 magnum on a brown bear as well.
Click to expand...

That may be.

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

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

Why are M4rgeries so popular?
Click to expand...

Because if you can't get into the military and get a real M4 issued to you, you can at least dress up and play the part with a semi-auto clone, cammie clothing optional. :D
 
I think it's mainly because we got a taste of what the Feds are after from 1994-2004 and are scooping them up while we can in case that happens again.
They are also a lot of fun to shoot, a nice choice for HD, and very versatile considering the range of uppers you can get in different calibers and lengths. They are the Legos of firearms.
 
You guys are comparing apples and oranges here...

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

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

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

IMO it may be going a little far in the fad lately, but it is still a great choice for many purposes. :)
 
Is it all an Army knock-off phenomenon?

Every kid on my block wanted an Army Rifle or a tommy gun.
I got a Mattel Thunder Burp tommy gun look-alike when I was ten.
Now I have an Auto Ordnance TM1 semi-auto carbine.
 
A mid-length 16" makes more sense for home defense or any other practical civilian use, but it doesn't look like the Army's gun, with the barrel turned for a nonexistent grenade launcher and a bayonet lug that's 2" too far back.

So yeah, it's got something to do with looking like the Army's gun...:)
 
Why are pickup trucks so popular? Most people never haul or tow anything, yet drive around in $45,000 turbo diesels.

They like them, that's why.
 
Because they are novel. There are better choices for HD, and pretty much everyone that has one has several accessories hanging off it. I see alot of the 6 position stock, flat top, EOtech, vert grip, light, laser, whistle, and some extra rails to get in the way.


And people want to pretend they are going to get in firefights. But hey, if you can afford it theres nothing wrong with having things because they are cool.
 
We all know what opinions are like, but some state theirs as if people who think otherwise are idiots or poseurs.

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

Dissipator handguard arugment? 44 mag argument? You have no idea what you are talking about, you should probably put more effort into not looking ignorant.
 
So why the popularity? Is it all an Army knock-off phenomenon?
Click to expand...

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

I kinda like this fashion trend. The whole JMB worship thing was kinda creepy. I still miss "wonder nines" though
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Zundfolge
  • Locked
So why NOT an AR-10?
Replies
17
Views
2K
EBRDude
E
P
  • Locked
What was wrong with Stoner's design?
2 3
Replies
51
Views
3K
Art Eatman
A
N
  • Locked
Why!? Oh why!?
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
Joe the Redneck
J
C
  • Locked
So AR15s suck.....so why........
2 3 4
Replies
84
Views
6K
AZ Jeff
A
Phaedrus/69
  • Locked
Will we see a sharp dropoff in the popularity of the AR platform now?
2 3 4
Replies
85
Views
3K
CapnMac
CapnMac
Back
Top