What was/is most lacking about your service weapon?

AR/M4 AR General Discussion
1

It’s easy to get overwhelmed by all the internet conjecture about what should be done to improve the capabilities of the infantry carbine, but all that really matters is what people on the ground thought. It’s also easy for people behind keyboards to just slam a bunch of stuff onto the receiver to try and solve a shortcoming, but more often than not that just adds unnecessary weight to an already heavy hump. What were some genuine gripes you had about your issued weapon, and what would you have done or added or fix it?

  1. Weight is often talked about regarding full-size rifles and belt-feds. Is weight a primary concern for the infantryman, or should lethality and volume of fire still be prioritized? Do you prefer certain rifle setups such as optic or suppressor preferences purely due to added weight to the weapon? How much weight is acceptable and what should the maximum weapon weight be?

  2. Excessive barrel lengths can reduce maneuverability in tight quarters. How much of a combat deployment consists of CQB vs spread out firefights (obviously that depends on the unit and terrain, but a ballpark estimate of current conflicts), and should maneuverability be prioritized over muzzle velocity and terminal effective range?

  3. Optic magnification is also hotly debated online. Did you feel under zoomed with your issued optic, and which capabilities do you wish you had that you didn’t? Should light weight and fast target acquisition be prioritized, or should extended magnification, target identification and precision marksmanship aid be prioritized?

  4. Terminal ballistics. Which 5.56/7.62 round did you do the most of your shooting with, and did you think that it was at all lacking in terms of accuracy or terminal effectiveness? Is shot placement more important than fragmentation for most engagements, or does bullet behavior make a massive impact on combat effectiveness? Would you have preferred to be able to use commercial expanding ammunition? Would you have liked a heavier, longer-range round?

  5. Did you experience any reliability issues with your weapon that weren’t related to poor maintenance or cleaning? How many of your failures were magazine related, ammo related, or weapon related? Do you wish you’d been issued something else?

  6. Did the standard grip, stock, hand guard or other attachments cause discomfort or impede your ability to effectively carry out your work? Did the A2 grip angle seem adequate for close quarters?

These are just a few brainstorm ideas to get the ball rolling, but I’d love to hear your thoughts. Any and all feedback is more than welcome. It will be interesting to see how the newly acquired “Geissele and friends” upper will fare in the years to come. Some say it’s overpassed but others say it’s not. Surely it will be an improvement, although at some point I personally think all carbines should be traded in for Knights. Not this year, but maybe in 10 or 15.

2

My biggest gripe was that no matter how many Iraqis I shot at it with I’d still come home and have old guys who served in the USAF during peacetime (or not at all) call me a “freaking millennial” on message boards.

USMC M16A4 w/ PVQ-31A & PEQ-15

It was also long as ****.

3

These millennials whining about how long their A4 is. :smiley:

Back in my day…

4

A4? Back in my days in Iraq all we had was M16A2’s. Nothing else. In M915A4’s. Would’ve “liberated” an M4 from the 82nd guys I was with in a heartbeat if I thought I could’ve gotten away with it.

In regards to the OP’s questions: Even as small of a build as I have and with gloves the A2’s grip is a bit small. For the conditions/situations we operated in a 20" barrel was annoying at the least, possibly unneeded at the most. Our security elements had ACOGs issued and installed on their rifles, only difference with them and us was the drove in HMMWV’s.

5

This is an interesting thread but my experience (for example) spans over 20 years and 3 completely different career fields. I was never a tip of the spear guy.

I carried an M16A1 in Desert Storm, an M9 in Bosnia, and an Aimpoint equipped M16A2 in OIF. In between, I carried a M249 and an A2/M203.

In my opinion/limited expirience, the A2s were pretty long and clumsy for the primarily mounted or urban operations in Iraq (circa 2005) and the fixed stock sucks with body armor.

I would have been better served by a simple M4/CCO during my career. Compact, adjustable and relatively easy to shoot well enough.

Andy

6

I carried a plain old A2. I cannot complain because I wasn’t a ground pounder. During deployment, the most action it seen was being cleared before entering the chow hall.

7

M16A1.

It jammed. A dirty weapon was worse. That meant that in combat you were working against a clock, because every shot was being marked up against you.

8

M16A1 for four years as an Army grunt. No optics, because none were available at the time and none were authorized (I can just see if someone had bought an old Colt carry handle scope…the 1st SGT would’ve been like “Who the hell told you to put that on your weapon?”). Panama, so a jungle environment. Basically the same environmentally as Vietnam without the NVA or VC trying to kill you! It’s been a long time but I don’t recall it being a huge deal moving through bush with it.

To this day I have an A1 clone for old times sake and marvel at it’s lightweight and handling, especially for a 20" rifle. We’ve gotten so used to M4geries with rail and RDS/ACOG (at a minimum) that they nearly weigh the same as the old A1, of course without the cool actual performance-enhancing stuff we see nowadays.

9

I thank you all…:cool:

10

Like Eurostiver I was last issued an M16A4, this was 2004 when all Marine infantry, aside from Recon units, were still rocking the 20” full size M16 variant.

I was issued a AN/PEQ-2, and an ACOG for the rifle. I also took my privately owned Aimpoint Comp M2 in an ARMS mount, which I came to prefer and my command allowed.

I really liked the M16A4 overall. The 20” wrung out close to max performance from the 5.56mm NATO, and sure seemed to dick up the few Iraqis I, or my platoon mates, had to engage. We didn’t see a ton of combat in early 2004, so my “combat” use knowledge is limited compared to many on this site.

I would have liked the rifle to have a shorter stock or a collapsible stock to make it easier to deal with wearing the Interceptor body armor with SAPI plates, and deal with in vehicles. I had also started shooting competitive rifle on my own time prior to deployment, and the trigger in the M16 was and remains painful awful garbage for anyone used to a decent trigger. I guess it would have been nice if about 1lb could have been shaved off the rifle weight, but I got used to humping it around and didn’t notice it much.

Otherwise my complaints are going to revolve around 20/20 hindsight that generate unfair criticism of issued gear that at the time was a big improvement over my previously issued M16A2. Looking at the purpose driven improvements over the past 15 years to the M4/M16 platform obviously will draw an unfavorable comparison for my 2004 era issued M16A4. Obviously had the KAC SR-16 been available and had I a choice in the matter I’d have chosen an SR-16, or the M27, or the USASOC M4 upgrade.

11

Excellent input, thank you. A 20” barrel just seems so alien for combat by today’s standards, but it seems to have worked just fine.

12

See weight is really tricky. The 240B(x2) was humped all around the providence because my squad found it to be the single best weapon for the long distances and barriers found in our AO. Also the 240 was absolutely reliable where the 249 could be finicky. We humped a lot less in the 249(x1) or 203(x2) department because it just wasn’t as useful. I think the M4 block 1 can get way too heavy for a 5.56 carbine.

When dismounted my main blaster was a M4 (H1 buffer) with a peq 15 and aimpoint M4. We always had Gi mags with improved followers or pmags and using M855 the system was incredibly reliable. Only shooting blanks or sims did I ever have to do any stoppage clearing. I do attribute a little bit of the reliability to my propper maitnence cycles. Basically: keep it lubed and the springs stiff, and it will run.

13

A 20” barrel is awesome where performance is concerned in 5.56mm NATO. More velocity is always better.

Shorter barrels are just a compromise to make the long gun more manageable in and around vehicles and inside other tight quarters. It’s a performance compromise worth making a lot of the time but still a compromise.

If it were guaranteed that I’d not be fighting from a vehicle, or doing a lot of structure clearing with a long gun and I had to go back to being a grunt I’d still pick a 20” barrel 5.56mm NATO if that was the issued cartridge. That setup shoots really soft, is very very reliable, is durable, and adds meaningful performance over a 14.5” or shorter barrel. The M855A1 makes some of it back up by running higher chamber pressures… I’ll bet it would be a real nasty little bastard out of a 20” barrel though.

Of course such guarantees can’t be made, so we compromise performance a bit for flexibility. So with that in mind give me a well made 14.5” or 16” barrel with an appropriate length gas system, and a collapsible/adjustable stock.

14

I carried an M16-A2 throughout my four years in except once when they issued me an M249 SAW. I thought the SAW was really cool initially because they were brand new…until I lugged one aroumd in the field. I surely wanted my A2 back. Luckily when i deployed to Kosovo with another unit, they gave me an A2. About the same time (l98-99) we were getting some M4’s, but they went to the officers.

15

My first three years it was a reliability issue. The A2’s we had were worn out. God knows how many Marines had been issued them, cleaned them, abused them and screwed them up. Mine would jam with just a slight amount of dust, to the point you had to hold the barrel and step on the charging handle to pull the bolt to the rear. I had a buddy that went 20 something clicks left to shoot strait. They were just shit, and we took those things with us to the invasion in 03.

The A4 I took on my second deployment was brand new, I mean strait from the box new. It was great. No problems, reliable, acutarte. In my experience most of our problems were from old gun, bad magazines and bad advice.

The 20” size never bothered me, but I wasn’t a grunt and besides training I wasn’t kicking down doors on a regular basis.

16

USMC ‘99-‘03 I was issued an M16a2. The accuracy was great, trigger was decent for back then. We envied those who were issued M4’s and who had railed hand guards and optics. Weapon lights were duct tape and mag-lights for the a2 crowd. After the Iraq invasion big leaps were made, but not in time for me to see them.

Police Career- I started with a shotgun and glock .40 pistols. Shotguns had the same issues as M16’s when it came to maneuvering in tight spaces and working in and out of vehicles. Glock pistols were great, but the trigger always left much to be desired.

I moved on to another department where we were issued Colt AR-15 with collapsible stocks and 16” uppers with fixed carry handles. Lowlight was still a bitch, but ergonomics was much improved over the shotgun along with ease of operation. Glock .40 pistols equipped with surefire x200’s caused constant issues for some.

My last department used RRA Entry Tacticals (16” stainless black coated barrel, collapsible stock, dominator sights) in every car. These rifles had surefire m500 handguards and solved the lowlight issues. Very happy with them and the triggers were fantastic. The only gripe was really the thick RRA barrels were way too heavy, and 16” was unnecessarily long for urban LE. In hot situations it was still rough getting the rifle around the steering wheel. We used whatever pistol we wanted so that was on us.

On SWAT we used what was essentially a frankenrifle mk18. US m16a1 stripped lower (a1 safe/semi/auto fire control). Collapsible stock, and RRA 10.5” flat top upper. Aimpoints/eotechs and surefire m900 verticals mounted in surefire rails. They were heavy for their size, but almost perfect for urban LE. The heavy profile RRA 10.5” barrels, surefire Rail, and m900 added up the ounces quickly. SBR’s should have been in every patrol squad instead of just for SWAT.

Snipers used Remington M700’s heavily modified by GAPrecision with Leupold LRT 6.5-20’s. The only issue with our setups was the magnification was too high for most call-outs (less than 75 yards out). We found that M4’s with variable optics were sufficient for 90% of call-outs. This was due to magnification, maneuverability, and firepower. They are now moving to LMT .308’s to close the gap.

The reliability of all my rifles over the years was great. Colt and especially RRA accuracy was fantastic. I know that RRA gets a lot of flak here, but there were very few issues for us that weren’t immediately resolved by RRA.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

17

I was only a ROTC cadet (got medicaled before I commissioned). We trained with Guard M16A1s. I rather liked them. The few times I used an A2, I hated the burst trigger and more importantly the A2 stock. That extra, what, 5/8" on the Length of Pull didn’t work so well for me.

18

Biggest issue I had wasn’t the weapons themselves. It was the INSANE cleaning that gets preached/demanded. There is such a thing as to much.

I was only issued M4s, except when I was a PFC I was a 240 gunner. No major issues with either system.

19

Damn, I never have thought of that. There was a lot of slop and the anodizing was worn, probably because the damn armory wanted it spotless.

Also, it didnt get the best treatment. It might have been used as a racket or bat a few times, and from riding in the bed of trucks and gators.

20

The bolt shouldn’t be a shiny silver, I don’t care what the unit armorer or supply NCO says!

Ya I may have known a couple of junior Soldiers that did some questionable things with their assigned weapons.