Comments on: Army M4 vs. Marine M16A4 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/ Firearms not Politics Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:19:07 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Fernando http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-81594 Fernando Sat, 24 Dec 2011 16:42:06 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-81594 Yes the m16a4 has way more muzzle velocity and will punch harder and longer than an m4. I understand the use of the m4, but now both Marines and Army are moving completly towards the m4. Not all combat occurs in close quarters, in Afghanistan engaging distances vary widley, but in the mountainous terrain, its well over 400 meters so the m16a4 would be way better for these types of engagments. Yes the m16a4 has way more muzzle velocity and will punch harder and longer than an m4. I understand the use of the m4, but now both Marines and Army are moving completly towards the m4. Not all combat occurs in close quarters, in Afghanistan engaging distances vary widley, but in the mountainous terrain, its well over 400 meters so the m16a4 would be way better for these types of engagments.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: chuck brodder http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-81130 chuck brodder Tue, 20 Dec 2011 23:54:52 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-81130 what is wrong with you? army put there lives in danger for our country too they were the first branch also what is wrong with you?
army put there lives in danger for our country too
they were the first branch also

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: chuck brodder http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-81129 chuck brodder Tue, 20 Dec 2011 23:51:08 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-81129 i probably have no clue what i am talking about because i am only twelve but, i would choose the m16a4. it has the longer barrel which means more effective range. i would think the m4 would be better for vehicle operations but, even though a lot of people say the m4 is better in cqb i would differ. i have an airsoft m16a4 and i can easily maneuver it in small spaces. i like m16s more too because of the long barrel because i have always liked long range. also, i like the army more even though they use more m4s. ps: is it really common to switch branches of the military like that? and for the people who have please say which you like more army or marines. i probably have no clue what i am talking about because i am only twelve but, i would choose the m16a4. it has the longer barrel which means more effective range. i would think the m4 would be better for vehicle operations but, even though a lot of people say the m4 is better in cqb i would differ. i have an airsoft m16a4 and i can easily maneuver it in small spaces. i like m16s more too because of the long barrel because i have always liked long range.

also, i like the army more even though they use more m4s.

ps: is it really common to switch branches of the military like that?
and for the people who have please say which you like more army or marines.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Tyler http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-62240 Tyler Mon, 09 May 2011 06:05:08 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-62240 The main reason the Army uses more M4's then the Marines is yes, They operate in Humvees more. But the Marines live in them just as much as the Army does. The Marines are usually the last ones to get the good stuff, And are usually the shortest on budget, So they use what is more available... Not because they want more posters then mags. But when the Marines do get a chance to get their own things its usually important. Like marpat or the new Amphibious shit coming out in a few years. But let me assure you both branches use both the M4's and M16A4s. The main reason the Army uses more M4′s then the Marines is yes, They operate in Humvees more. But the Marines live in them just as much as the Army does. The Marines are usually the last ones to get the good stuff, And are usually the shortest on budget, So they use what is more available… Not because they want more posters then mags. But when the Marines do get a chance to get their own things its usually important. Like marpat or the new Amphibious shit coming out in a few years. But let me assure you both branches use both the M4′s and M16A4s.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Logan http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-59862 Logan Sat, 09 Apr 2011 22:01:19 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-59862 Which rifle is more effective? What is the primary rifle of the Army Marines Air force Navy And how many more years will they use it primarily Which rifle is more effective?

What is the primary rifle of the
Army
Marines
Air force
Navy

And how many more years will they use it primarily

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: ME http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-58777 ME Sat, 26 Mar 2011 08:45:12 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-58777 Oh boy some of the infamous internet commandos are in full force on this post. Sheezzz!! Oh boy some of the infamous internet commandos are in full force on this post. Sheezzz!!

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Brian http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-57845 Brian Mon, 14 Mar 2011 17:45:22 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-57845 The way i see it is this, it simply comes down to physics and the role each service plays in combat operations The A4 has a longer barrel this affords it two things the shorter M4 doesn't have 1. more time in the barrel means higher muzzle velocity. 2. The additional time in the barrel also means the bullet is spinning faster when it is ejected from the muzzle both of these factors gives the A4 higher accuracy and more kinetic energy at longer ranges. The primary mission of the marine corp is amphibious assault and immediate action (typically 48 hours on less) meaning the Marines are first to fight and conditions in the early stages of a war favor M16A4. When your are storming a beach you want that ability the blow the enemy machine gunners head off at 500 yards. With only 1 sq foot of him exposed between the sand bags. By the Time the army arrives the situation has changed now the enemy is retreating hiding urban warfare is what you are most likely to encounter, conditions favor the M4 with a shorter barrel it easier to get in and out of vehicles building a what have you additionally engagements are at closer ranges the higher long range accuracy of the A4 is not required as often. So both weapons serve each branch in their particular roles best that is not to say that their isn't some overlap of missions where soldiers or marines might be better served to have the other weapon but from a overall perspective and looking at the Primary Missions of each branch the M4 best serves the Army and the M16A4 Best serves the Marine Corp. The way i see it is this, it simply comes down to physics and the role each service plays in combat operations

The A4 has a longer barrel this affords it two things the shorter M4 doesn’t have 1. more time in the barrel means higher muzzle velocity. 2. The additional time in the barrel also means the bullet is spinning faster when it is ejected from the muzzle both of these factors gives the A4 higher accuracy and more kinetic energy at longer ranges.

The primary mission of the marine corp is amphibious assault and immediate action (typically 48 hours on less) meaning the Marines are first to fight and conditions in the early stages of a war favor M16A4. When your are storming a beach you want that ability the blow the enemy machine gunners head off at 500 yards. With only 1 sq foot of him exposed between the sand bags.

By the Time the army arrives the situation has changed now the enemy is retreating hiding urban warfare is what you are most likely to encounter, conditions favor the M4 with a shorter barrel it easier to get in and out of vehicles building a what have you additionally engagements are at closer ranges the higher long range accuracy of the A4 is not required as often.

So both weapons serve each branch in their particular roles best that is not to say that their isn’t some overlap of missions where soldiers or marines might be better served to have the other weapon but from a overall perspective and looking at the Primary Missions of each branch the M4 best serves the Army and the M16A4 Best serves the Marine Corp.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Mike http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-48162 Mike Tue, 30 Nov 2010 08:14:08 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-48162 Facts is facts fellas........ The M16a4 has better stopping power and better range than the M4. Could someone who is a great shot qual on the 500yd range with an M4? Sure, but a few things make that a moot point. 1) The same dude, shooting an A4 would do better 10 times out of 10. 2) The M16a4 sends it's rounds downrange at a higher velocity than the M4; I'm not an expert in physics, but from what I do know, that equals more "oomph" when hit hits. 3) This is just my personal experience; the M16A4 is simply more reliable than any shorter barreled version. If I had to guess, I'd assume that this has something to do with a more powerful buffer spring, and a gas recoil system that has a full barrels worth of gas to tap into. There is no doubt that the M4 is lighter, but the difference in weight isn't huge. Also, while the shorter barrel does make the weapon handier, it doesn't change the fact that an MP5 is shorter that both.....and I don't hear a huge clamoring to make THAT the primary weapon. My thoughts, the M4 is sexy. The M16A4 will kill better. Facts is facts fellas……..
The M16a4 has better stopping power and better range than the M4. Could someone who is a great shot qual on the 500yd range with an M4? Sure, but a few things make that a moot point.
1) The same dude, shooting an A4 would do better 10 times out of 10.
2) The M16a4 sends it’s rounds downrange at a higher velocity than the M4; I’m not an expert in physics, but from what I do know, that equals more “oomph” when hit hits.
3) This is just my personal experience; the M16A4 is simply more reliable than any shorter barreled version. If I had to guess, I’d assume that this has something to do with a more powerful buffer spring, and a gas recoil system that has a full barrels worth of gas to tap into.
There is no doubt that the M4 is lighter, but the difference in weight isn’t huge. Also, while the shorter barrel does make the weapon handier, it doesn’t change the fact that an MP5 is shorter that both…..and I don’t hear a huge clamoring to make THAT the primary weapon.
My thoughts, the M4 is sexy. The M16A4 will kill better.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Steve http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-40884 Steve Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:20:21 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-40884 Sgt, why did they want to ditch the A4? Weight? Sgt, why did they want to ditch the A4? Weight?

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Sgt Peterson http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-40883 Sgt Peterson Thu, 19 Aug 2010 08:47:31 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-40883 Marines are using the M4 in Iraq and Afghanistan ...my last deployment we had them, and people who didnt have them were admin Marines.....why did it take the Marines so long to get these weapons??? Ever try and convince a Marine he is wrong? Especially an old Marine? Good luck. The other reason is funding, we get the smallest piece of the DOD budget pie. Were used to using less to do more than everyone else. As for the M16A4's go, just about everyone I knew wanted to toss them in a ditch and get their A2's from boot camp back haha. Marines are using the M4 in Iraq and Afghanistan …my last deployment we had them, and people who didnt have them were admin Marines…..why did it take the Marines so long to get these weapons??? Ever try and convince a Marine he is wrong? Especially an old Marine? Good luck. The other reason is funding, we get the smallest piece of the DOD budget pie. Were used to using less to do more than everyone else. As for the M16A4′s go, just about everyone I knew wanted to toss them in a ditch and get their A2′s from boot camp back haha.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Dave Wood http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-37882 Dave Wood Thu, 08 Jul 2010 00:41:51 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-37882 About Matt Groom's comment, I know the requirements for a US marine and they need to be acurate with the M16A4 at 500 yards and greater. They also spend more time in training at the range than any other branch of the United States military. About Matt Groom’s comment, I know the requirements for a US marine and they need to be acurate with the M16A4 at 500 yards and greater. They also spend more time in training at the range than any other branch of the United States military.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
]]> By: StrykerGunner http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-36634 StrykerGunner Mon, 21 Jun 2010 00:40:17 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-36634 Last time I checked and I've been in the Army infantry for the last 6 years. Aside from SF standard issue A4s and M4s are not full auto. just sayin Last time I checked and I’ve been in the Army infantry for the last 6 years. Aside from SF standard issue A4s and M4s are not full auto. just sayin

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
]]> By: Rob http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-34496 Rob Sun, 23 May 2010 14:16:38 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-34496 My brother just came back from marine ocs and they were the first class to train with the m-16a4 he says that it comes equiped with a fully automatic mode along with a three round burst, just like the m4 but has a better effective range and reliability than the m4. My brother just came back from marine ocs and they were the first class to train with the m-16a4 he says that it comes equiped with a fully automatic mode along with a three round burst, just like the m4 but has a better effective range and reliability than the m4.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
]]> By: Ken http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-29674 Ken Mon, 29 Mar 2010 22:55:20 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-29674 Damn, I'm not that old, but I was issued the M16A1 back in 1984. There were still some of those POS rolling around in the armories. I would have given a testicle for an M16A2, let alone A4 or an M4 carbine. Times change. Damn, I’m not that old, but I was issued the M16A1 back in 1984. There were still some of those POS rolling around in the armories. I would have given a testicle for an M16A2, let alone A4 or an M4 carbine. Times change.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Brad http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-16260 Brad Thu, 15 Oct 2009 07:25:01 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-16260 I don't remember where I saw the article, but it was more than a year ago (maybe two?), where the USMC was evaluating what to replace the M-16a2 with. At the time the Army still clung to the XM-8 as an 'eventual' replacement weapon, but the Marines wanted to replace the M-16a2 immediately. The candidate weapons under consideration were the M-4 and the M-16a4. Supposedly tests demonstrated the longer weapon as more reliable and that was the primary reason it was selected in preference to the M-4. I don’t remember where I saw the article, but it was more than a year ago (maybe two?), where the USMC was evaluating what to replace the M-16a2 with. At the time the Army still clung to the XM-8 as an ‘eventual’ replacement weapon, but the Marines wanted to replace the M-16a2 immediately.

The candidate weapons under consideration were the M-4 and the M-16a4. Supposedly tests demonstrated the longer weapon as more reliable and that was the primary reason it was selected in preference to the M-4.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Michael http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-14936 Michael Tue, 22 Sep 2009 21:18:21 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-14936 What year did the M16A4 come out? 1994, or earlier?? What year did the M16A4 come out? 1994, or earlier??

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: solomon http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-13701 solomon Fri, 28 Aug 2009 08:27:07 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-13701 Marines still use the M16A4 because its part of the Martial Arts/Close Combat Program. I forgot what the exact quote was but many of the basic movements are performed with the butt of the weapon. The M4 is good to go and serves its function well. I think the point about the Army being highly mechanized (like someone said before) dictates this more than anything. Aren't they suppose to be getting even more Stryker Brigades? As a side note a bunch of Marine Gunners are suppose to be lobbying the Commandant to get the collapsible butt stock for the M16A4...supposedly the Commandant is resisting because of the hand to hand issue. Marines still use the M16A4 because its part of the Martial Arts/Close Combat Program. I forgot what the exact quote was but many of the basic movements are performed with the butt of the weapon. The M4 is good to go and serves its function well. I think the point about the Army being highly mechanized (like someone said before) dictates this more than anything. Aren’t they suppose to be getting even more Stryker Brigades? As a side note a bunch of Marine Gunners are suppose to be lobbying the Commandant to get the collapsible butt stock for the M16A4…supposedly the Commandant is resisting because of the hand to hand issue.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: jdun1911 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-13686 jdun1911 Fri, 28 Aug 2009 00:44:18 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-13686 Military traditions is one of the hardest thing to break so it better not to fight it. These military traditions goes back to the founding of Army and Marine Corp. The Army have their way of doing things. The Marines has theirs. Military traditions is one of the hardest thing to break so it better not to fight it.

These military traditions goes back to the founding of Army and Marine Corp. The Army have their way of doing things. The Marines has theirs.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Ride Fast http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-13673 Ride Fast Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:16:59 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-13673 Interesting commentary. I would be surprised to hear that Marines tend to break M4's but not A4's. Marines can be hard on anything. Interesting commentary. I would be surprised to hear that Marines tend to break M4′s but not A4′s. Marines can be hard on anything.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Pat http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/08/27/army-m4-vs-marine-m16a4/comment-page-1/#comment-13659 Pat Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:21:54 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=7515#comment-13659 hey Dave...I have a 31 year old brother who just got top gun and honor grad in sniper school at Fort Benning... and from my understanding, that was the first time in 10 years... oh...and he is Army...don't lump all the rocks into one bucket while having a diamond in the rough at the bottom hey Dave…I have a 31 year old brother who just got top gun and honor grad in sniper school at Fort Benning… and from my understanding, that was the first time in 10 years… oh…and he is Army…don’t lump all the rocks into one bucket while having a diamond in the rough at the bottom

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]>