Army aims for positive improvements with M4A1+

[WHSmithIV]

This is from the Army Times. It's an interesting read of what the Army wants to do to modify existing M4A1's. Also, there's an e-mail link at the end of the article for sending in suggestions.

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/tech/2015/07/04/m4a1plus-army-carbine-industry/28161275/

[GOST]

Didn't find it to be a interesting read, it's behind the times. Article sounds like they want to replicate what recreational shooters have been doing for years. Most recreational shooters have been using 12" free floated handguards, removable sights and light pull triggers for a while.

[alamo5000]

Didn't find it to be a interesting read, it's behind the times. Article sounds like they want to replicate what recreational shooters have been doing for years. Most recreational shooters have been using 12" free floated handguards, removable sights and light pull triggers for a while.

That's exactly what I thought when I read it." They are FINALLY getting better triggers?" is what when through my head. I have never been in the military but from what I hear from friends who are or have been in... the rifles they provide most of the time aren't nearly as nice as the ones we build.

[Thompson]

Meh ... I'm not gonna hold my breath. I'll believe when I see it.

The Army has done similar stuff like this in the past. Ie: Indvidual Carbine test, sidearm upgrade testing ... all have resulted in nothing more than keeping current inventory.

It's not that it's necessarily "nice" ... more so the fact that some of these guns are like 20+ years old ... a decent chunk of the mags are like that too. Heck, one of my buddies who's an armorer said he found a nice little lower marked: XM16 (the X was, at some point, etched out - but you can still make it out).

It would definitely be nice to see some of these "proposed" ideas implemented by the time I'm in ... but I sincerely doubt this will get anywhere ...

You'd be surprised by the amount of nice stuff that can be found on the commercial market and not in the hands of the grunts haha


Didn't find it to be a interesting read, it's behind the times. Article sounds like they want to replicate what recreational shooters have been doing for years. Most recreational shooters have been using 12" free floated handguards, removable sights and light pull triggers for a while.
Not sure I'd want a trigger lighter than the stock mil-spec trigger. It's fine as is, but more importantly, any lighter and accidents could be more prone to happening ... for combat that is.

[JoshAston]

Not sure I'd want a trigger lighter than the stock mil-spec trigger. It's fine as is, but more importantly, any lighter and accidents could be more prone to happening ... for combat that is.

Uh, no. See they teach you to keep your finger off the trigger when you're not shooting. Milspec triggers leave a lot to be desired.

[Thompson]

Uh, no. See they teach you to keep your finger off the trigger when you're not shooting. Milspec triggers leave a lot to be desired.
Was never arguing that point. Say you start to take indirect - you dive for cover - your finger slips onto a 3.5 lb trigger ...

For what it is, the mil spec trigger isn't all that bad. Of course there's always better. But it's not bad by any means.

[JoshAston]

Was never arguing that point. Say you start to take indirect - you dive for cover - your finger slips onto a 3.5 lb trigger ...

For what it is, the mil spec trigger isn't all that bad. Of course there's always better. But it's not bad by any means.

The weight of the trigger doesn't matter in that situation. The mil spec trigger ranges from ok to absolutely horrid. While a good shooter can overcome a bad trigger, the military is never going to invest that much into training. Easier to spend a few hundred on a G SSF.

[WHSmithIV]

Didn't find it to be a interesting read, it's behind the times. Article sounds like they want to replicate what recreational shooters have been doing for years. Most recreational shooters have been using 12" free floated handguards, removable sights and light pull triggers for a while.

The reason I find it interesting is because in the civilian market there is so much available that is better than what is currently on M4A1's. It seems like the Army has realized it finally and is looking to port some of what the civilian market has created to the military rifles to make them better.

[GOST]

It's been available to the military also, just not to all branches. Look at what Special Forces run then reconsider. The military has more money to spend than we do to improve weapons for our soldiers, it's more about contracts and politics than anything else. What the recreational shooter has been doing to customize this platform to their liking isn't new news.

At work when I submit equipment that the crews need to procurement it then gets submitted to the AHJ. The AHJ then checks to see if what I want meets their guidelines and contract obligations. After that is done the crews usually end up with a dumbed down version of what was submitted, not necessarily the best tool for the job.

[Computalotapus]

It's been available to the military also, just not to all branches. Look at what Special Forces run then reconsider. The military has more money to spend than we do to improve weapons for our soldiers, it's more about contracts and politics than anything else. What the recreational shooter has been doing to customize this platform to their liking isn't new news.

At work when I submit equipment that the crews need to procurement it then gets submitted to the AHJ. The AHJ then checks to see if what I want meets their guidelines and contract obligations. After that is done the crews usually end up with a dumbed down version of what was submitted, not necessarily the best tool for the job.

You hit the nail on the head with this. It is very political about what the military can and can't use. SOF guys have more options because they are not bound by the same contracts that the everyday military unit is. I have personally seen SOF units with no consistencies in their load-outs. One guy would have a SBR'd H&K 416 suppressed and a Glock side arm while the guy next to him has a SCAR and carrying a Springfield sidearm each having their own custom touches on their weapons. For the average rifleman you are issued what you get and you can't make any changes to your weapon except for sighting it in and moving the accessories around to your liking on the weapon.

When I was in I carried a A-2 with M-203 attached my entire carrier. When I deployed I tried to get a RDS for my rifle.. I was told "What for you are a grenadier why would you need a RDS?" Did I need it? NO. The stuff that is given to the masses is under strict supply guidelines and the only way to get it improved upon is submitting a what and why to have it changed for the masses. Proving what and why for the masses is hard and if its not worth them changing contracts for it, it just doesn't happen because it is a huge pain in the ass for the people who handle the political side of it.

Look at the standard issue sidearm for example, while the M9 is an OK firearm there are so many more out on the market that are better and cheaper. But the contract says there has to be an external safety on the weapon and for a long time that has locked the M9 into that contract. I have no clue because the first thing we did at the armory for the sidearm was insert mag, release slide putting one in the chamber, disengage the safety, holster and secure the weapon. Now tell me why I need the external safety on a weapon when the I always disengage it and holster the weapon? When I was in while on a state side Army base I would watch grunts draw weapons from the armory and go out to posting without ammo, if something happened they would have to go do a ammo depot for their posting area and grab ammo, I thought it was the dumbest thing ever, those same guys would look at use Air Force Security Police with envy because not only did we draw ammo but we put one in the pipe on our side arms, draw 3 spare mags for it, 6 mags for the A-2, insert a mag into the rifle, and I drew 18 HE rounds for the 203 ( I hated carrying that can around btw so I just pulled the vest out and put it on ). The politics and some of the rules during my service just didn't make sense and why it was different from one branch to another made less sense.