Thoughts on the US mil M4 replacement? Heard they're going

>>34940772
They aren't replacing the M4 and they aren't replacing it with 7.62x51.

>>34940772
>Thoughts on the US mil M4 replacement?

M4A1

>Heard they're going for 7.62x51mm.

They are buying a 7.62 rifle for certain types of units, expect an HK417 derivative.

>>34940830
The muhreens' new M27 is 5.56 m8

>>34940840
Which is an HK416, and because the USMC is snowflakes and want 'their' rifle.

>>34940862
No, that's just to slowly replace the M249. Also where did you see reports or actual contracts for more units being outfitted with 417 outside of JSOC. It's a M110 and will be very specific.

I doubt it

>>34940772

>>34940893
The M27 will slowly replace both the M4 and M249 in USMC service, and are you unaware of the US Army putting out an RFI for a 7.62 service rifle?

>>34940919
>The M27 will slowly replace both the M4 and M249
It won't, there are now more M249s in service than there were before the contract was given. It's not going to replace the M4. It's going to be used for a specific role.

>are you unaware of the US Army putting out an RFI for a 7.62 service rifle?
So? That doesn't mean they're actually going to award anyone with a meaningful contract. This is just a way to play with some shiny new toys and spend some money. The M4 isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Get over it.

>>34940937
The USMC is replacing it's M4's with M27's, the Army is replacing it's M4's with M4A1's. Get over it.

>>34940772
I think they only want it for the SDM though.

>>34940983
>The USMC is replacing it's M4's with M27's
It's not. The M27 was purchased to replace the M249 you dildo.

>>34941021
If the USMC was just replacing the M249 it wouldn't be buying over 50k rifles (which is more than the total amount of M4's they have).

File: M4A1-Carbine-Product-Improvement-Program[1].jpg (97KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 960x720px

>>34940983
>the Army is replacing it's M4's with M4A1's
They're upgrading existing M4s, not buying new.

>>34941209
Yeah the Army has had a lot of success lately with the ship of Theseus approach.

File: m4.jpg (328KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 1920x1080px

The M27 will never be as a e s t h e t i c as the M4/M4A1

File: 20170528_234727.jpg (43KB, 276x280px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 276x280px

>>34940772
Why does the Army exist? It seems all they do is waste money on mentally retarded shit.

>>34941374
What are the marines good for?

>>34941374

You answered your own question

>>34941286
Are you implying receivers get worn as much as barrels?

What the hell are you trying to imply, anyways?

>>34941416
>No Congress we are not buying a new rifle, just upgrading an existing one (wink wink), no need for all that bureaucratic red tape.

>>34941679
You obviously don't understand government bids and contracts at all.

>>34941709
You obviously are choosing to ignore Congressional interference in Army procurement programs.

>>34941679
It's the same rifle with a different select-fire sear and some tweaks that could have come at any routine repair cycle. It's not like they're turning M4s into a Sig556.

>>34941811
Also known as a ship of Theseus approach instead of buying a new rifle.

>>34941864
Why the fuck would they need new rifles when a couple parts can be swapped out in half an hour?

You're making a very stupid argument here.

>>34941948
Do you not know what a ship of Theseus is?

>frantic googling intensifies

>>34942321
Yes, I do. At no point is the receiver, stock, rails, or other major components being replaced. You're a fucking idiot.

>Before you start in on it again: If every part gets replaced over the years, is it still the same ship?
In this case, the serialized component is staying the same either way.

>>34941323
Ah, the good old labelmaker sticker keeps falling off so just use masking tape marking method

>>34941393
Being a bunch of ptsd pussies?

>>34940830
False. Our govt doesnt believe a soldiers life is worth the cost of a piston system.

File: (You).png (178KB, 1190x906px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1190x906px

>>34943065
Soldiers aren't cheap you fucking retard. Worse yet, even more expensive when they die or get injured without anymore work being done.

>>34943065
>Implying the extra costs for no real performance gains and excess receiver wear are worth the money

>>34940772

It'll be either Colt or HK because they have the best lobbyists and lawyers.

>>34940937
Nope the IAR is replacing all the m4s, though right now its role fills the Automatic Rifleman role. We have SAWs still but there all shot to shit. Wonder how that LSAT programs is chugging along