MAF abandon Steyr after 15-year service

ferryman2393 SG

the MAF infantry doctrine calls for ‘close in’ combat. in a way, the M4 ‘encourages’ them to ‘close in’ and see the eye balls of the enemy before pulling the trigger. if the need arises for longer range, they can just turn to the RPG gunners (2 per squad) or the MGL gunner to lob a few grenades and settle the issue.

chino65 SG

You can't hit anything with your carbine because it is not zeroed to you, simple.

Besides, the m16 carbine and the M4 have differences. For one, the M4 barrel is heavier.

DaveC who owns an M4 said he can hit stuff out to incredible distances. Read his posts.

It is little early to laugh at anyone based on your own narrow experience.

...

In most SE Asian scenarios of jungle, plantation or urban, EFFECTIVE rifle fire beyond 200m is wishful thinking.

Last I heard - in war your enemy WON'T be as co-operative as the No. 11 target at the range.

So if you want to take aimed shots at someone trying very hard not to get shot at, you better close the distance instead of trying to shoot someone from the safety of 300m, 400m or 2.5km etc...

Let's not even talk about low light or smoky conditions.

And besides, eveyone here is telling you that the M4 will not be the only weapon they use in the section. they do have sharpshooters, snipers, SAW, LAW GPMG, M203 etc - just like us.

gary1910 SG

M-16 has some advantage like fast reloading , ergonomic etc but with modern AR coming online , it is not the best.

Piston vs gas blowback

M-16 gas blowback where carbon build up in bolt carrier area need constant cleanup after every contact, the longer you delay, carbon will harden and start to cause jamming. 2ndly, cleaning take longer as compare to piston driven AR

Piston driven AR only has carbon build up in the piston area, there is less jamming and much easier to clean as there no carbon build up in the bolt area.

Therefore I will chose piston driven any time, ease of maintenance, less jamming as long as the other attributes is similar.

Bullpup vs conventional

Bullpup advantage is always shorter weapon but with the same efffectiveness as compare to the longer conventional weapon.

The loading and reloading is different as compare to say M-16, but it is matter of getting used to it,I must admit that M-16 unloading and reloading seem easier than SAR-21, but difference is not significant with one who use to the SAR-21.

A lot of new AR are of the Bullpup design becos of it's shorter design, becos shorter weapon is better suited for close terrain like urban or forested terrain.

That is also why some US SF unit prefer the M4( M-16A2 carbine), especially when they airdropped ,the reason is their role, for example LRRP team operations is for recon, their main objective is to collect intel w/o being detected, they always move in stealthy and if the terrain permit, in deep forested area and always avoid contact.

Similarly, to the strike operation, stealth infiltration, quick attack and quick extraction.That is why they prefer the M4.

Anyway, I found that MAF selection and implementation is full of co

Then the Austrian company wanted to shift their entire small arms production to MY eventhough there is some objection in Austria.

Suddenly , there was breakdown in the negotiation with MY, Austrian scrapped the idea of transfering small arms production to MY and MY stop licensed production of Steyr AUG ( license withdraw?) and suddenly wanted to buy M4 to replace the Steyr AUG without a proper selection and evaluation process for the next generation rifle!?!

This kind of thing can only be found in MY!!! Laughing

specialOps SG

What makes you think our carbines are not zeroed?

Are you saying that 100+ trained and experienced soldiers who zeroed their rifles before the shoot, and can hardly hit anything at 300m is a coincidence or because they didn't zero?

You don't know what you're talking about dude.

Yes, you can probably still aim and hit something with a carbine at 300m, but I'm saying the accuracy and chances of hit is slimmer compared to a M-16 and SAR-21.

That is quite simple to understand, isn't it? You mean carbine as good as M-16? What are you trying to argue?

chino65 SG

Quoting your previous post:

"(eg. an experienced SOF 2WO whom I served with), could barely hit 1-2 outta 4 shots from a carbine, while most of us miss all 4 shots".

You trying to tell me you zeroed the rifle and than just got to fire 4 shots each? Mr. Green

C'mon...

Anyway, if you calm down you will realise that i am not comparing carbine to rifle.

I am saying that the carbine is GOOD ENOUGH for MAF's needs. If you don't understand that, there's no point arguing with you.

And I don't know how many thousand times I have to say this, the M4 is only one of the weapon in the section. There are other weapons in the section that can kill you effectively at 300m, 400m etc.

Rockhound SG

bullpup vs carbine debate been going on for quite some time..

it is really a love hate relationship..i really think that the m4 is a good move by malaysia...hope they really use this weapon to the utmost.....

a rifle is onli as good as the user....i honestly think that action happens less than 200m....most of the time 100m....

gary1910 SG

I dunno abt DaveC, but tankee in SAF were using M-16 carbine as their personal weapon,and they has always complained abt the disadvantages of using a carbine during CTSS(or whatever they called today) at 300m.

And those weapon are zeroed.

Regardless, shorter barrel mean lower muzzle velocity which means less penetration and accuracy at long range, that is a fact.

It is possible to have higher muzzle velocity when using a better rds( i.e. more expensive rds?) but the effectiveness will always be better when it is used in longer barrel weapon.

It is alway better to have more accurate weapon at longer range, becos it useful when you need it.

For example let say that your enemy setup an ambush at 250m for your arrival becos they have detected your unit via UAV., or when they are in high ground detected you via binocular etc.

So just becos in closed terrain, the LOS is limited, there is always a possibility that you need a effective longer range weapon, so why does one want to limit themselves using a shorter range weapon whereby a longer range weapon is available?

chino65 SG

Funny... As I remember it, everyone including the SAW gunners, GPMG and M203 all revert to M16 for CTSS.

Originally posted by gary1910:

It is alway better to have more accurate weapon at longer range, becos it useful when you need it.[/b]

I said the M4 meets the MAF's needs. Didn't say it is better than this or that...

And please, your potential enemy is not that stupid they don't realise the M4's range is shorter. And besides, they have a huge stock of M16 in use/storage. if they decide to go back to the conventional M16 system, should they get yet more M16?

Of course not! The M4 is the logical choice.

...

They used bullpups way earlier than us. If they are not going back to bullpups, hey, maybe there's a lesson there? And they are not the only ones who are not going for bullpups inspite of the barrel length advantage.

...

Just because the M4 isn't good for 300m doesn't make the MAF a "laughing stock" for choosing it as "SpecOps" mentioned. That's just being simplistic.

The whole Russian army is still armed with AK weapons with a short barrel and combat effective range of around 200m. Are they all "laughing stock' also?

chino65 SG

Well, what are the options they should consider then, in your opinion?

Please tell us.

...

Their Specops actually preferred the CAR-15 over any other rifle they can choose, so it is no brainer that they would adopt the M4.

The M4 will not be a new system for them. Logistically they still have the M16 system in place as i have explained earlier.

...

Whatever other options you think they should consider, it may offer marginal advantages here and there, but not enough to overrule the M4. And probably at a huge investment.

If they get a third AR system, then they'd really be in trouble - logistically.

gary1910 SG

No, you are remember wrong, SAW gunner used SAW and has their own standard for CTSS.

M203 , LAW use standard M-16 standard for CTSS and all of them use their own personal weapon.

GPMG , 84 etc all use M-16 for their CTSS as well.

And as for tankee, their personal weapon is the carbine.

M4 is not chosen after a proper selection and evaluation process , it was chosen after the deal broke down with Steyr-Mannlicher AG & Co KG to transfer their entire small arms production to MY whereby many of small arms will be produced solely in MY.

In fact , the deal would include producing the latest Steyr AUG A3 which could very possible be the new AR for MAF.

Before that, MY was very happy abt having to produce all their small arms locally and even export all the arms under Steyr-Mannlicher , and there was no talk abt any AR to replace the Steyr AUG in MAF.

Then suddenly the deal is off and Najib annoucned to the world that they will be getting M4 to replace the Steyr AUG !!!!

WTF happen was not announced, but it look like there was some animosity between them and M4 was the result of that kneel jerk effect after the deal was off.

So tell me, how could it be the best choice for MAF when M4 is chosen w/o a proper selection and evaluation process???

And it seem to be more an emotional and political decision rather than objective and rational decision taken by MY.

2ndly, lot of armies already started to replace the M-16 and it's variant, Thailand is the latest, they ordered a large qty of Tavor-21.

Afterall, there are a lot of better AR than M-16 available now, chosing M4 is in fact going backward.

johngage SG

Please forgive my ignorance as I am jumping into an already intense discussion. But my understanding was that the M4 is just for special forces but the regular infantry are still using Steyr, or am I wrong?

SpecOps87 SG

Shorties are never meant for full-scale implementation. Carbines and all, look cool, but practical? No…unless using in a largely CQB and limited outdoor function. Perhaps they can consider a Carbine lower, with a full-scale upper? (Just wondering, mebbe Dave can educate me on this, cuz i always see standard lowers with carbine uppers).That way you get a shorter weapon but regular barrel and higher accuracy etc.

ferryman2393 SG

i don't think the M4 is meant for MY special forces alone. the first order was for 14,000 units and apparently has received uncle sam congress approval recently. dear najib also announced that these rifles will come with a wide range of attachments. most probably scopes of various calibre.

as for which unit will get it first, i think it should be special forces, paratroopers and mechanised units will be among the first. that's what? equivalent of 8 battalions? i think we can do our maths here....

tankfanatic SG

M16

tankfanatic SG

they have tested and evaluate the m4...i saw the pic in tempur magz way back.....and their Spec ops have given their own evaluation too....

about ammo and the quality of malay handycraft...it is so dead wrong to say they were making crapy stuff... i mean if you really want to believe that their bullet wont kill you thats fine with me...please take one in the stomach.

this is some of the comment foreign army says about malaysian .308

Deer HunterDecember 16th, 2006, 12:13 PM
I was at a local Army Navy store the other day looking for reloading supplies for my dad's Christmas present. I saw at the counter they had packs of 7.62x54R, 8mm, and .308 surplus. The 7.62x54R was Russian (I asked the old man at the counter, he said he didn't know and that the dealers didn't tell him. The young lady sitting at a computer to his right said "It's Russian." Wink ), didn't ask what the 8mm was, but I saw that the .308 was marked Malaysian.

I havn't heard much about this ammo, so I didn't pick a pack of it up. Is this stuff worth it? It was being sold in packs of 50 for $15 each. A little high, especially if it was bad stuff.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

jagdpanzer347December 16th, 2006, 12:28 PM
Deer Hunter, grab it! It has a very good reputation and is boxer-primed. Should be great thru your STG. If you don't want it, I sure would like a crack at it.

-jagd

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Deer HunterDecember 16th, 2006, 12:57 PM
Sweet! I'll grab it up as a Christmas present to myself, then.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

rangerruckDecember 16th, 2006, 06:22 PM
the malays are much like singapore. old british empire stuff, they don't make crap.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

richardschennbergDecember 21st, 2006, 03:08 PM
I have not tried their .308, but Malaysian .223 worked great for me, even when my AR was almost new and somewhat finicky on ammo.
Richard
Schennberg.com (http://www.schennberg.com)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4fingermickDecember 21st, 2006, 08:00 PM
I had a thousand malay 7.62s given to me by a mate who was Afghanastan bound. They are to Nato F4 standard, shoot great and seem a bit warm, but it is MG ammo after all. I thought that they were berdan primed from memory. mick.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

R.H. LeeDecember 21st, 2006, 08:10 PM
Where's the decent 7.62x51? The Lake City, the Radway Green, the NATO stuff???? Howcome that's not available?? I won't buy any third world crap.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10-RingDecember 22nd, 2006, 12:49 AM
The stuff I've bought & used has been top notch! I'd get more Very Happy

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SvenDecember 22nd, 2006, 02:28 AM
308 surplus has dried up big time. Lake City sells for 35-40 cents ea. - where you can find it. Time to start reloading.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TexasRiflemanDecember 22nd, 2006, 08:37 PM
I won't buy any third world crap.

Then you won't be shooting any .308 surplus. Enjoy your dollar a round Federal ammo!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1911userDecember 22nd, 2006, 09:13 PM
Malaysian 308 is berdan primed and decent 308 FMJ. I recently sold the last 400 rounds I had of it for $100 shipped. I also sold my only case of 308 hirtenburger for nearly $400 shipped; we were both very happy with the deal.

If you need 308 FMJ, it's time to get the reloading press busy. Midway has new winchester 308 FMJ for 50 cents a round. It can be reloaded for cheaper than that.

I have a hunch the surplus ammo situation is going to stop much of the bump-fire nonsense and slow down the price inflation on machine guns that shoot rifle ammo. It's going to be a hard reality check.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pardini FanDecember 22nd, 2006, 10:10 PM
Midway is having a special $99 for 200 rounds of Winchester nato.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SvenDecember 22nd, 2006, 10:16 PM
I'm keeping my "stash" of 60s Lake City Match 118LR for... if the balloon goes up. For plinking, I just bought a case of the Paki 308:

link to Wideners (http://www.wideners.com/itemdetail.cfm?item_id=6990&dir=18|190|191)

It arrived quickly in a big spam can. Looks good, reports are that this is better than the Indian. Will be testing in my M1A and will report - wish I had a chrono to use.

Daniel-Lim SG

Not to ruffle any feathers but many trained men in my infantry company couldn't hit the 300m target with regular M16. So maybe it is the shooter and not the rifle?

As mentioned, DaveC had no problem with the M4's accuracy. I believe Dave.

Daniel-Lim SG

Have to disagree.

MAF already uses the M16A1, Choosing the M4 to supplement their existing stock of M16 is the most rational decision ever made by MY.

If they pick the Tavor, or G36 etc, they would add another logistic mess to their arsenal. And none of these weapons are so overpoweringly good as to justify doing this.

Atobe SG

Third guy from the front - is he not carrying a Steyr ?

Meia Gisborn SG

It could be the shooter, it could be the rifle.... and then it could also be the ammunition.

Mass-produced ammo for military use might not always be subjected to the same level of quality control as ammo intended for the civilian market. There may be enough variations in powder charge, projectile shape and weight, neck tension and cartridge overall length to adversely affect long-range accuracy.

I have come across milsurp ammo with minor but visible variations in cartridge length at our club's AR shoots. Such ammo is great for general blasting, and might even be reasonably accurate out to 100 yards, but beyond that, their accuracy falls off considerably.

Atobe SG

Originally posted by Daniel-Lim:

Not to ruffle any feathers but many trained men in my infantry company couldn't hit the 300m target with regular M16. So maybe it is the shooter and not the rifle?

As mentioned, DaveC had no problem with the M4's accuracy. I believe Dave.

What is the current doctrine in zeroing the rifle to the shooter ?

Back in the early 70s, the shooter was taught to cover the black target with the foresight, lower the gun barrel till a small space show up between the top of the foresight to the bottom of the black target, then pull the trigger.

This must be stupid, as the arm of the shooter will have to be rock steady so as not to create different space between the top of the foresight to the bottom of the black target.

During the 80s, the shooter was taught to aim at the black target, with the top of the foresight at the middle spot of the target.

This one seems to make more sense, but one has to remember the same approximate middle spot at 100m.

Used the same approach during a side trip to the Cu Chi tunnels in south Vietnam, I tried firing the AK-47 at different targets located between 100m to 300m.

Without the gun sight zeroed to my eye, I missed the first three shots - each shot cost US$1.00 a piece for some very old ammo with plenty of duds replaced at no extra cost.

Making compensation to my aim by shooting low, I managed to hit the 100m target by ricochetting the round off the ground to the target; and seeing the dust burst, I compensated again to get better direct hits at the 100m targets.

Only one target at 300m was hit and probably by a ricochet round.

The gun cannot think, the shooter can and need to adjust to the environment.

« Previous Page Next Page »