Army M4 vs. Marine M16A4

[C420sailor]

My buddy has a 20" SDM style rifle with a 6-pos collapsible stock. It has a fluted SS bull barrel so the weight bias is VERY far forward (the normal HBAR would probably be much better balanced), but other than that it is a very nice rifle.

 

[Rocketman]

As has already been briefly mentioned in the article, acquiring a proper cheek weld with armor, backpack and camelback shoulder slings, and other equipment that can get in the way can be frustrating. I'm glad the Corps has stuck with a 20" barrel as the standard issue, especially with hostilities in A-stan and any other future contingencies.

A Magpul ACS or LMT SOPMOD offer 6 positions and great cheek welds in a collapsible stock. One of those on a 20" would do the trick in A-stan.

 

[Swanee]

I don't have much experience with the M4. Some guys around here have prior experience with them. All the Guardian Angels are issued them. A4 with my RCO is accurate to about 800 meters (or so I am told). Good for long distance but you don't need that kind of range while clearing a building.

We do qual at 500 yards, the Army maxes out at 300 and we have a higher marksmanship expectation. Perhaps that is why we go with the A4... (Though the A4 is heavy, especially with the 203 hanging off the bottom)

 

[raptor10]

Question is.. why is the Marine Corps favoring a 20" heavy barrel, full size stock rifle over more advanced technology? Why is a rifle that is optimized for the Parade Grounds and Rifle Range being carried in battle today in 2009?

Because we have no money... seriously the reason that we you don't see HMMWV drivers rolling around with KRISS Super V's and Riflemen don't pack SCAR-L's is because there isn't the procurement funds. Seriously, the Marine Corps hasn't fielded a T/O battalion in forever - and even with Marines missing from the fire teams it's a struggle to get everyone the gear they need - some marines have been issued SAW pouches with Army DCU cammo - I wonder where they got that from!

WRT the M4, that is a status/billet weapon in an infantry battalion - Platoon Sergeants and up will get them, maybe your team leaders will get them if your company has enough, and then the weapons platoon bubbas will get them because they are rolling with SMAW's, 240's, and 60mm's.

As to the difference between the two weapons MER is about the same 550m for the A4, 500m for the M4, you can qual on the range with both.

And to whoever said the A4/M203 is heavy, ha! Wait till you've run the rabbit in a t-shaped hallway with the SAW! Which in my opinion is what the Corps is rightly focused on replacing with it's IAR Contract... Hopefully it will be the SCAR-L...

Now the discussion as to what would be the killer T/O for an infantry squad is something that will go on forever - but the general consensus in my company is that we'll be doing space invansions of Mars with M16A4's.

 

[A4sForever]

....stuff straight from the pages of Marine CORPS Gazette & Defense Review ....jk ....

Wow ... you've really become the little gun-guru-nut-guy ... haven't you ???

 

[raptor10]

Wow ... you've really become the little gun-guru-nut-guy ... haven't you ???

I get paid to work out and shoot guns... and I take my job seriously

 

[pourts]

For DCM (distinguished) matches the A2/A4 rifle is what is required, no M4 style rifles. Those matches have an obvious emphasis on accuracy, which I think corresponds well with the same mindset that the Marines place on individual accuracy.

yeah, but bladed range shooting with a shooting jacket is not the same as combat shooting with flak and all your gear.

 

[sodajones]

That's why you slap this on your A4 and you're ready to go.

Don't know what most of you gentlemen are worried about, seeing as how the officers and SNCOs always end up with M4s anyways.

 

[insanebikerboy]

yeah, but bladed range shooting with a shooting jacket is not the same as combat shooting with flak and all your gear.

Yes, I totally agree, but the fundamentals of accuracy are all the same regardless of where you're shooting. I'm not a Marine but what I take from their marksmanship training is that they place a very heavy emphasis on those fundamentals for every rifleman.

Plus, the Marines don't have the dough for new toys so they get stuck with the old stuff.

 

[Rocketman]

Yes, I totally agree, but the fundamentals of accuracy are all the same regardless of where you're shooting. I'm not a Marine but what I take from their marksmanship training is that they place a very heavy emphasis on those fundamentals for every rifleman.

Plus, the Marines don't have the dough for new toys so they get stuck with the old stuff.

The active duty Marines on AW know this better than I do but for the rest the current USMC course of rifle qualification involves 2 stages or "tables" now. The max combined score for both tables 1 and tables 2 is 350 points.

To score expert with the rifle you must have a table 1 and table 2 combined score of between 305 to 350.

Table 1 is worth 250 points and with very slight changes is exactly the same KD (known distance) course Marines qualified on in the mid to late 70's. It's shot with iron sights at 200, 300 and 500 yards in the standing, sitting and prone positions. Both slow and rapid fire. Without question this course of fire teaches even an average Marine rifleman good basic shooting skills which can be used in the future while firing any weapon with any sighting system. In my opinion basic Marine shooters understand sight alignment, trigger control, breathing control and natural point of aim better than new recruits from any other service because of Table 1.

Table 2 is relatively new and is worth 100 total points. Each shot is worth 2 points, with a hit in the designated target area (inside a 10" circle I think") worth 2 points and a hit on the target but outside the designated target area worth 1 point. Distances involved are I believe 25, 50 and 100 yards. The shooting involves head shots, controlled pairs, failure to stop, rapid reloads. I believe moving targets left and right are engaged as well. Some of this may involve night shooting and shooting with gas masks on but I'm not sure.

IMHO the combination of Table 1 and Table 2 quals makes today's Marines a much better "field rifleman" than I was by far. Deploying grunt units get additional training as well with Table 3 etc.

I'm not sure they get all the training they need to make full use of the MCO optic though. That said, a young Marine that only qualified Marksman can damn sure put that chevron on a bad guy at 300 meters and kill him all day, every day.

 

[Swanee]

The active duty Marines on AW know this better than I do but for the rest the current USMC course of rifle qualification involves 2 stages or "tables" now. The max combined score for both tables 1 and tables 2 is 350 points.

To score expert with the rifle you must have a table 1 and table 2 combined score of between 305 to 350.

Table 1 is worth 250 points and with very slight changes is exactly the same KD (known distance) course Marines qualified on in the mid to late 70's. It's shot with iron sights at 200, 300 and 500 yards in the standing, sitting and prone positions. Both slow and rapid fire. Without question this course of fire teaches even an average Marine rifleman good basic shooting skills which can be used in the future while firing any weapon with any sighting system. In my opinion basic Marine shooters understand sight alignment, trigger control, breathing control and natural point of aim better than new recruits from any other service because of Table 1.

Table 2 is relatively new and is worth 100 total points. Each shot is worth 2 points, with a hit in the designated target area (inside a 10" circle I think") worth 2 points and a hit on the target but outside the designated target area worth 1 point. Distances involved are I believe 25, 50 and 100 yards. The shooting involves head shots, controlled pairs, failure to stop, rapid reloads. I believe moving targets left and right are engaged as well. Some of this may involve night shooting and shooting with gas masks on but I'm not sure.

IMHO the combination of Table 1 and Table 2 quals makes today's Marines a much better "field rifleman" than I was by far. Deploying grunt units get additional training as well with Table 3 etc.

I'm not sure they get all the training they need to make full use of the MCO optic though. That said, a young Marine that only qualified Marksman can damn sure put that chevron on a bad guy at 300 meters and kill him all day, every day.

Table 2 has moving targets, and you shoot with an RCO, you also do double taps as well...

Table 3 is the night time fire with the pec-15s.

 

[raptor10]

Table 2 has moving targets, and you shoot with an RCO, you also do double taps as well...

Table 3 is the night time fire with the pec-15s.

And table 4 is day and night, known distance and unknown distance, moving targets, popups, from 15yds to 310yds.

Also you can do table 1 with the RCO now.

 

[Swanee]

And table 4 is day and night, known distance and unknown distance, moving targets, popups, from 15yds to 310yds.

Also you can do table 1 with the RCO now.

Table 4?! We did some shooting at Crazy Ivan targets during the day. perhaps that was part of it.

Though at TBS the syllabus is still to qual with iron sights your first time.

 

[sodajones]

Also you can do table 1 with the RCO now.

I already thought the addition of table 2 was bullshit but using the acog for table 1 is complete and utter bullshit that pisses on the marksmanship heritage of our past. I've read too many things today that have raised my blood pressure.

 

[mmx1]

I already thought the addition of table 2 was bullshit but using the acog for table 1 is complete and utter bullshit that pisses on the marksmanship heritage of our past. I've read too many things today that have raised my blood pressure.

What happened to train like you fight? I agree that initial training should be on irons and it seems like it still is, but the optics in use today are a superior aiming device. Does using a semi-auto magazine-fed rifle shit on our marksmanship heritage?