Please vote based on YOUR personal choice, not which company you predict will win. All the rifles listed above are way too fun to look at. Best of luck to all the competitors!
I voted for Colt. My reasons are they are very familiar with whole procurement process and I believe that model will make for the easiest transition for the various units. As far as real knowledge of the various systems I’m probably as ignorant as anyone else, maybe more so.
Not a dumb question at all. If none of the non-Colt firearms prove to be a significant improvement, then the “Enhanced M4” will be fielded instead. This is identical to the Colt APC. Either way, the military’s going to receive a piston gun.
My gut says the Colt (if any) will be chosen. However i personally would prefer to see the Remington ACR. I was very impressed with the ACR at Shot Show this year and i think the refinements Remington has done with the platform offers alot.
Also Remington has stated if they are chosen then they will release the updates to the commercial market.
Are you saying that all responders to the M4PIP RFP have submitted proposed improvements and that the Colt APC has already won?
If the Colt APC hasn’t been awarded the contract for the M4PIP, then how would we know what final form of the new M4 will be pitted against the winner of the IC competition?
It hasn’t already won, because the other carbines haven’t had a chance to prove themselves superior in design. If the ACR, for example, scores higher than the APC during trials, then Remington will win.
the Colt Enhanced M4 is a 6940P with a fluted barrel, suppressed setting, and tan.
the M4 PiP is a completely different thing, and it will be DI. Honestly there is nothing wrong with the M4 that cant be fixed with the PiP. Give it a bolt made of better materials, a CHF barrel, and you have a M4A1 with double the parts life of the current M4, and its cheaper. Given the budget cuts and the requirement that the IC rifle would need to be far greater than the PiP M4A1…well I’ll let you guess.
BTW how are you still here trolling vapor? Every post you make just blows my mind. I can guarantee you the IC will not give us a new rifle and the PiP will be the way we go forward.
I think there’s a big difference between “trolling” and being misinformed. I’m not an expert, the APC=IC part was just what I read on DefenseReview. Sorry if I messed up, but I’m not a troll. I’m genuinely interested in people’s opinions and the future of the U.S. arsenal.
As stated above, I was talking to the point that the M4PIP rifle will not necessarily be a piston gun. It will likely be a modified DI rifle, which will then be pitted against the winner of the IC competition which will be a piston gun.
Only IF the M4PIP DI rifle is significantly beat out by one of the IC winners, and IF there are funds available, and IF a bunch of weird stars align, will the military as a whole get a piston gun. I’m doubting anything will happen in the end…but I honestly think most the choices would serve us well. For the most part, they all seem like great rifles.
BTW, I voted for the 416. I’ve had a couple, and they are amazingly nice rifles which have already been well vetted here and abroad. The only thing I wasn’t a fan of was the cost of replacement parts…but that’s a really only a problem for civilian owners.
The PiP is pretty much a go, though it will take a long time to get all the rifles completed. First stage of the PiP was adding a heavy barrel and ambi selector(basically purchasing M4A1’s instead of M4’s)
Current PiP’s right now are:
BARREL AND FRONT SIGHT ASSEMBLY (HEAVY VARIANT) AND THE BOLT ASSEMBLY(this one is actually 2 different RFP’s put into one)
Forward Rail Assembly
That is honestly the easiest way to go about getting a modern M4.
The competition is designed to find out if they work or not. We’re not just going to give troops an untested rifle. Why trade? Because in theory the new one will perform better. Have an open mind.
In theory yes, but what about 10-15 years from now when the rifles have been rebuilt 2-3 times? The current rifle works, even after being rebuilt numerous times and when the receivers have 30,000+ rounds on them. IMO the best way to move forward is with the PiP. Now if we are talking new caliber, bring us a new gun. As long as we are still using 5.56 give the M4A1 the few upgrades it needs and work on better bullet designs.
Excellent post, and the 1911 analogy was perfect. Luckily the IC entrants all seem like good contenders, well the BEAR im not sure about but their HPWhite test was promising.
While a new rifle is needed the argument Coburn makes is a poor one, the argument you make is the perfect one.
Here is a statement by one LF user in another thread:
I don’t think it’s a matter of the M16 FOW simply being “good enough.” I think it’s the realization that there isn’t anything out there right now that’s substantially better than the M16 FOW. I realize that the word “substantial” is subjective and hard to quantify, but current and near future (next 1-3 years) rifles don’t offer the Warfighter any major advantages over the M16 FOW.
and your answer is:
[i][b]Wouldnt parts life alone be worth the change?
look at the M27, guaranteed 10,000 rounds bolt life but they are apparently getting 20,000 out of their bolts.
using an M4 you would need to replace the bolt nearly 4 times to equal that life.
the M16FOW is a great family of weapons but newer piston designs offer double or more in parts life alone which would be worth it, correct?[/b][/i]
I can post several more comments from you from other boards, where you are not as adamant about the M4 and needed changes, as you are on here.
Perhaps you would also like to expound on the info about you supposedly read the IC, on a board you did not name, that you stated would blow peoples mind come November? Your link was removed over on LF because of hot-linking.
