MAF abandon Steyr after 15-year service

last SG · 2007-11-07T19:31:58+00:00

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

tankfanatic SG

look at the dude that looked pissed

tankfanatic SG

look at the dide no 2 from the right... Colt M4A1 carbine

tankfanatic SG

let stop posting MAF m4 shall we..

greek airborne troop.

p/s: Hellenic Armed Forces equipment were as rojak as MAF..they didnt complain...nor the MAF complain

tankfanatic SG

greek!

tankfanatic SG

more greek M4

try to call these people stupid and rojak.....(im being sarcastic)

johngage SG

Heard a rumour that one reason the AUG's were replaced by the M4 was that no further developments/improvements were planned for the AUG. But don't know how true that is.

gary1910 SG

I'm a very obstinate person ???
Laughing

Firstly I've already stated 2 point which you guys acknowledge:

1) Gas blowback has higher frequency of jamming and need daily maintenence.
( also higher wear and tear as reported in the article below)

2) M4 has less effective range due to shorter barrel.

But you guys ignore the above points as if they dun exist!!!!

The article I have posted clearly stated :

The contenders participating in the upcoming test use a piston-style operating system, which relies on a gas-driven piston rod to cycle the weapon during firing.

By contrast, the M4 uses a gas tube system, which relies on the gas created when a bullet is fired to cycle the weapon. Weapons experts said blowing gas directly into the receiver of the weapon spews carbon residue that can lead to fouling and heat that dries up lubrication and causes excessive wear on parts.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/09/army_rifletest_070920/

Then you stated that it is it logistical reason, which dun even stand in term of MAF.

Then you Chino bought inferior 5.56mm ammo, which atm still no new standardised ammo, so a moot point.

Then you guys stated that due to most SF units are using M4 therefore it must be good, but the fact is, most US SF units are now switching to H&K416 and discarding the M4.

Those switching over becos they dun think the M4 is good enough , therefore switching over to H&K416.

Now again , you ignoring the changes of weapon in US SF units , instead stated that the UK , OZ SAS still using the M4, therefore it must be good.

But let me ask you guys, what if those SAS units will also switch over to H&K 416 too, will it happen?

I will not be surprised, since the 416 is still relatively new, the SAS units may be slow at adopting it , but they will certainly look closely on the US SF units that are using the 416, afterall the Delta force purposely collaborated with H&K to come out with 416, so based on f/b from them and their own evaluation, I will not surprised they too will switch to 416!!!

Then will you guys ignore the above and come up with more excuses?!? Laughing

So who is being obstinate???

Lastly as I asked you guys is there any army using M4 as a standard infantry AR???

Remember the operative word is standard infantry, not SF.

gary1910 SG

You are the first one here that called them stupid, so are u admitting they are??? Laughing

Rojak orbat is fact, even Johngage ,a Malaysian acknowledge it becos of those in charge are either more concern of their self interest or of political reason.

LazerLordz SG

the AR upper receivers have enjoyed renewed popularity over the past few years.

Shotgun SG

I give up. I doubt Gary nor anyone else is saying that the M4 is an inferior weapon.

Its just not a "3G" weapon that the MAF boasts it to be.

Just a few notes I've gathered from some experience from Iraq and Afghan. Whether the M4 can shoot through a brick wall, is questionable. That extra barrel length only goes to help the rounds to go through.

"Why would any one want to shoot at / through walls??!"

I think every one on this forum should be able to answer that.

Cro-Magnon SG

Wall Hacking? Laughing

Rockhound SG

u all quarrel with so much passion over this..

whether it be a good rifle or not...

1 bullet enuff to kill u if not cause ALOT OF DISCOMFORT

chino65 SG

- You keep blabbering about HK better than Colt as if anyone is debating that.

- I am not saying M4 is the best weapon. I am saying the M4 is best for MAF, after all things considered.

- SAS of 3 countries' usage is still not proof enough that it is a above average weapon. As if you know better?

- furthermore, a license to make the HK416 isn't appearing from H&K.

- and that the HK416 is probably too expensive for MAF.

Maybe you are not obstinate - just very blur sotong. Rolling Eyes

chino65 SG

If a MAF soldier is about to shoot Gary in the nuts with an M4, he'll probably just stand there and "laugh out loud" and telling him to go buy a HK416 instead.

Soon-to-be-eunuch Gary is not concerned because according to his internet sources, the M4 is not accurate, has short range, will probably jam, and bullet won't be effective due to short barrel. And also becos the firer is a "rojak" Malaysian soldier.

chino65 SG

Originally posted by Shotgun:
I doubt Gary nor anyone else is saying that the M4 is an inferior weapon.

Gary is saying the M4 is crap and need to be replaced by the HK416. Read his posts again.

Originally posted by Shotgun:
Its just not a "3G" weapon that the MAF boasts it to be.

What makes a rifle 3G?

Originally posted by Shotgun:
Just a few notes I've gathered from some experience from Iraq and Afghan. Whether the M4 can shoot through a brick wall, is questionable. That extra barrel length only goes to help the rounds to go through.

Wrong, no single bullet fired from any 5.56mm M16 rifle can penetrate a brick wall at whatever distance. The recommended method is to fire a burst - preferably in a "U" shape.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1999/99-16/appendc.htm

Originally posted by Shotgun:
I give up...

Mr. Green I think it's been an interesting thread so far. Whatever anyone choose to believe, a lot of useful info had been posted,

For me, the most important one was finding out that the famous "jamming" cases in Iraq and Afghanistan happened to guns not previously fired before. So the jamming had nothing to do with the gas system.

They jammed due either to bad magazines, poor maintenance, the fine sand and wrong lubricant. The SAS, IDF (for decades) used the M16/M4 in the desert with no problems.

gary1910 SG

That is becos I want to show you that gas blowback design is flaw in the first place!!!

H&K416 is basically similar to M4 except that one is gas piston and the latter is gas blowback.

And yet US Delta Force is willing to collaborate to produce "gas piston M4" which is the H&K 416.

Why the hell they want do that if the gas blowback M4 is so good ??? Rolling Eyes

You said M4 is best for MAF, why is it the best?

Logistical, that I have already rebuttal it, if it truly logistical, then Steryr AUG A1 to A3 will be more logical.

Only thing going for M4 is cheap, but does it represent the next generation AR ?

SAS are using the M4 , but US SF are discarding M4 and replace it with 416 , does this tell you anything? Confused

As I already said, SF like to use M4 due to it's compactness and lightweight especailly good for airborne operation, that is why they like it.

If M4 is such good weapon as Standard infantry AR, how come no country in the world use the M4 as such??? Care to explain that?

Article after article said that the M16 gas blowback cause reliability issue, that is fact.

Are you saying all those US vets are all lying thru their teeth and those test results were falsified!?!

I have fired live rds from AR-15 to M16S1, SA80 to SAR-21( SAR-21 is tested but not trained),I have also fired full auto live rds with M16S1.

All of you know how much carbon deposit in the bolt area in M16 design but do you there is little carbon deposit in the bolt area in gas piston AR?

Likewise , I have also fired more than 50 rds live rds in a very quick succession( the Encik want to clear the rds becos of excess rds during special training non CTSS , I went thru quick turnaound at 300m, fired , clear arm and collected ammo and fired again x3 , no rest in between, dun even bother abt result.)

At the end of day, the bolt carrier is stone dry, I could only conclude that due to quick succession of firing ,the heat generated is so much that it dried up the whole bolt carrier!!!

Imagine that in real contact where one contact is more than 100rds, when all lubricant all went dry ,it will be metal against metal. then parts will wear off faster , let alone that it might cause jamming.

You are loser instead of debating with me in points, resorting to name calling, a sure sign of a loser!!!! Laughing

xXhuskyXx SG

Originally posted by chino65:

-SAS of 3 countries' usage is still not proof enough that it is a above average weapon. As if you know better?

But the Main issue here we are talking about is replacing their main force AR, not their SF as they are like aforementioned using CAR-15

Shotgun SG

It is true that the HK416 addresses the key weakness of the M4, which is the direct gas blow back. And the HK416 is being recognized as the replacement for the M4 by SF communities.

3 Types of Jams occur with M-16 systems. Half, Double and No -feeding. I'll be honest with you, I've only encountered half feeds once, and that was due to a faulty magazine. But the ones that i encounter the most, that pisses me off the most are still the no-feeding, where no round is chambered, and the bolt carrier is left the forward position.

Im no pro when it comes to guns, but i figured that wasn't due to a magazine fault since I loaded those rounds myself and felt the spring tension on those magazines.

In any case, I spent the next half n hour cleaning n scraping off carbon off my bolt carrier assembly before I went for my night shoot. The rifle worked like a charm there after.

I figured the weapon was blowing more carbon and spraying it against my bolt carrier than it was blowing sufficient gas to cycle the weapon. I don't know, I think our 2 gun-pros here can answer better.

Is the M4 a good weapon? I've never handled it, but seeing its wide adoption, I think it has to be good. But it has problems that plague the whole AR-15 series of weapons, problems that have been fixed by new generation of assault rifles and carbines.

johngage SG

Is it possible that we have missed some points here? Weapons procurements tend to be decided by a variety of factors. Maybe the economic considerations influenced the decision, namely the weak USD. Perhaps the Colt people showed the MAF some new equipment for the M4 which they liked and suited their future doctrine. It is possible that they wanted another weapon but this was beyond their budget. What I am trying to say is that since we don’t have access to all the info in the procurements process, it is possible that other reasons may have been involved. After all, if weapons selection is based purely on military reasons with no consideration given to budget or political considerations I suspect we would see all generals submitting requests for equipment which the country may not be able to afford. I’m just guessing.

tankfanatic SG

it might be true… because they have tested the HK416 and XM8 too…yet they still choose M4A1…and posibly futher develop the A16A2

« Previous Page Next Page »