how good are actual M4s?

Jayne

Jayne

Just here for the memes
Charter Member
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Joined
Dec 16, 2016
Messages
8,028
Location
Unincorporated Wake County
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
All of the threads around poverty ponies vs. gucchi guns talk about how you wouldn't want a poverty pony for "real work".

That got me to thinking, just how good are real (military) M4s or whatever? I've never seen one in real life, but the .gov uses them to kill a lot of people... so what's the quality like? Is it closer to the top name brands, or just a collection of mil spec parts with no fancy features?
 
Jayne said:
All of the threads around poverty ponies vs. gucchi guns talk about how you wouldn't want a poverty pony for "real work".

That got me to thinking, just how good are real (military) M4s or whatever? I've never seen one in real life, but the .gov uses them to kill a lot of people... so what's the quality like? Is it closer to the top name brands, or just a collection of mil spec parts with no fancy features?
Click to expand...

I was issued my first M4 in 1997 and then the M68 two months after. I have used the M4 with and without the M203 for four deployments. I am still alive, so I say its the best!
 
Last edited:
B00ger said:
My PSA upper on an Anderson lower is just as good. 200 rounds in 2 years and not a problem.
Click to expand...
If you’d have used an Anderson upper and this PSA lower, it would’ve been the same as the military issued variant. :D

6BAD27E4-5739-41B9-A565-FB51758AF67E.jpeg
 
JBoyette said:
Yeah but, mine was a Colt not a bastard FN. So yeah it was great, oh and during the same time as the AWB. I had to show my ID to buy 30rnd mag's at General Jackson's
Click to expand...

I actually had an H&R marked lower on one deployment.
 
JBoyette said:
I had a Bushmaster M16A2 in Sandhill and a Colt M16A2 at Bragg for 3 months. Then the M4's came out
Click to expand...
Yup, did my first Afghan deployment with a M16A2. Although y’all prob had M4s sooner than we did. USMC is usually behind the times.
 
Last edited:
I've been going bang with them since 1972 with them and the only time they failed was very early and my fault. We went from running them too dry to using a gallon of LSA every 500 rounds.
 
Derek8404 said:
Yup, did my first Afghan deployment with a M16A2. Although y’all prob had M4s sooner than we did. USMC is usually behind the times.
Click to expand...
As i hear it, that's because the other branches give a person a weapon whereas the Marines make a person into a weapon, then give them a useful accessory.
 
DrScaryGuy said:
As i hear it, that's because the other branches give a person a weapon whereas the Marines make a person into a weapon, then give them a useful accessory.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that and the Corp’s serious lack of a budget and being stuck in their ways. Although lately they seem to be coming around and making some good changes.
 
Just thinking about the commercial side...

We have come so very far since the early days, in the AR world. And early M16's too, for that matter. There used to be a lot of out of spec junk that wasn't reliable. But, the market is so competitive now, trying to producing the most bang for the buck, that you almost have to go out of your way to put together a rifle that didn't work fairly well, these days. This is especially true when there are only a handful of source manufacturers that actually make most of the stuff anyway.
 
Last edited:
georgel said:
Just thinking about the commercial side...

We have come so very far since the early days, in the AR world. And early M16's too, for that matter. There used to be a lot of out of spec junk that wasn't reliable. But, the market is so competitive now, trying to producing the most bang for the buck, that you almost have to go out of your way to put together a rifle that didn't work fairly well, these days. This is especially true when there are only a handful of source manufacturers that actually make most of the stuff anyway.
Click to expand...

Thats because the functionality parts are down to 1-2 suppliers now. Back in 2005 you could buy a barrel extension from 6 factories now? Two.

Same with forged receivers. 3 and to top it off the work instructions are free.

This is what killed the old brands colt, dpms and so on. When best practices become unearned information, profits are a race to the bottom.
 
Derek8404 said:
Yeah, that and the Corp’s serious lack of a budget and being stuck in their ways. Although lately they seem to be coming around and making some good changes.
Click to expand...

Historically they have been the bottom feeders and got the army's hand me downs. This is definitely changing for the better, they're putting a lot of money and thoughtful consideration into infantry weapons systems.

I echo @JBoyette and @Combat Diver . It's a great weapon that has done what it was intended to do.

I don't get wrapped around the axel about the whole "mil spec" thing. All that means is there are specifications around which something was built or designed. Everything in the military is mil spec.
 
JBoyette said:
Thats because the functionality parts are down to 1-2 suppliers now. Back in 2005 you could buy a barrel extension from 6 factories now? Two.

Same with forged receivers. 3 and to top it off the work instructions are free.

This is what killed the old brands colt, dpms and so on. When best practices become unearned information, profits are a race to the bottom.
Click to expand...
Ironically, as I read this, I remember this is also what happened in the IBM PC business. Products became a commodity.

As far as mil-spec, as CD said, it means commonality to me. And some indication of durability. That it meets some standard of robustness under rigorous use. This is probably what I look for most in "mil-spec", I break stuff.
 
Last edited:
georgel said:
Ironically, as I read this, I remember this is also what happened in the IBM PC business. Products became a commodity.

As far as mil-spec, as CD said, it means commonality to me. And some indication of durability. That it meets some standard of robustness under rigorous use. This is probably what I look for most.
Click to expand...

The concept of "best practices" and "learned industry behaviors" is how competitive advantage is shot in the face. A brands uniqueness gets gone and allows every entry to a market have the same advantage. Volume sales only.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom