There are various publications on the market that detail the history of the M16, some better than others and none (evidently) are entirely satisfactory.
The Defense Technical Information Service (DTIC) has various publications on it’s website that might be of interest to those wanting a comprehensive history of the M16’s early (to about 1968) development and production. These are fairly exhaustive studies and are free to the public. One example is the following:
Not really, but DTIC does have a DODIG report which outlines the history behind the infamous “M4 Addendum.”
I’ve seen what appears to be a DTIC ascension number for a Colt-authored report from September 1987 titled “XM4 Carbine Development Program.” However, this must only be available for DOD, as it does not show up in searches on the Public STINET site. The Colt report number can be found in the references of the September 1994 Rock Island report “External Barrel and Handguard Temperature of the 5.56mm M4 Carbine.” FWIW: The latter report makes note that XM4 development was in progress as early as 1984.
From what I’ve been able to ascertain from some limited research, the M4 had it’s genesis in a Colt carbine variant called the RO727. Some sources list this as a model produced for Abu Dhabi.
I believe that you are correct. I know the Navy MA’s in Bahrain had 14.5 in. Colt’s with a fixed carry handle and they referred to them as the 727. Unfortunately, I do not have my Colt reference materials with me.
I’ve read Ezell’s “The Great Rifle Controversy”. Truly an excellent book, and somewhat of a damning indictment of US small arms development.
IIRC, Ezell stated that since the Army has been traditionally responsible for rifle development, something was out of whack with the system when the M16A2 (a USMC initiative) was adopted as standard. He also detailed the M14 as pretty much a “horse designed by a committee”, which didn’t meet anyone’s expectations.
The M-16 A2 exists only because of “Coldblue”(ret. Lt. Col. Dave Lutz ).
Ironically Mr Stoner could not stand some of the “improvements” made to the rifle.Specifically the forward assit. I wonder what he would think of some of the things industry is now doing to the M-16 design.