The M16A2 has yet to be bested by a competing design.
That's very much debatable.
The M16A2 has yet to be bested by a competing design.
Considering there are some commercial elements/links in that article, I'd take some of it with a grain.
Here's a supreme authority on the matter, and he's done some very in depth, documented tests to show what the platform is capable of: CTT-Solutions.com - Articles
If they were to convert the issue rifles to piston, it would solve a lot of issues with needing to clean so much as well as the lifespan of certain functional components. It's difficult for armorers (at least in a straight leg infantry unit) to order all the parts necessary to constantly keep all the rifles up to date. Often times the rifles break and are put aside and one of the reserve rifles are issued until the broken one can be turned in and a new one ordered. Often times they can't even order individual rifles, but instead have to wait until they have to replace enough rifles to order an entire set (8 or more or so).
Considering there are some commercial elements/links in that article, I'd take some of it with a grain.
Here's a supreme authority on the matter, and he's done some very in depth, documented tests to show what the platform is capable of: CTT-Solutions.com - Articles
I agree-CLP isn't the greatest lube. It's a great cleaner, but there's better lubes out there for sure.False, and in fact the cheapest and easiest solution is to completely get rid of CLP the breakfree style and upgrade to a modern CLP. The current lube/cleaner we are told to use is crap and is exactly what makes you need to clean it so often.
My brother bought one of those weird SIG 556's as well. He LOVES it though.I've read several of the articles from SIGs link.
Magazines indeed are the main failure point of ARs from what I've read.
OK, so give the troops better mags. Well that's a huge FUBAR situation in the current military command.
From the links, the improvements that the Green Mountain Defense people mention in the OP are also called for in one of the articles. So it's not the DI that's the problem, it's the weak springs.
"Fouling in the M4 is not the problem. The problem is weak springs (buffer and extractor), as well as light buffer weights (H vs. H2 or H3). With the above mentioned drop-in parts, the M4 is as reliable as any weapon I have ever fired, and I have fired probably every military-issue assault rifle fielded worldwide in the last 60 years as a Special Forces Weapons Sergeant (18B)."
So, if we aren't going to replace the rifle entirely as some in the original article argue for, then the military should definitely upgrade their existing as per the Green Mountain Defense Industries recommendations which are reflected in SIGs linked studies as well.
On the civilian side, folks that are into ARs should consider the same improvements. I know some do these improvements, but it's nowhere near universal. One could also argue the civilian manufacturers should be sending the rifles out in this more reliable configuration as well.
Good stuff, I know SIG is a very studious in these matters and I liked the links as they didn't just rehash the DI vs piston debate, whereas one must be determined superior to the other.
So, let's upgrade those ARs folks! (if you haven't already)
This almost makes me want to go buy an M&P Sport to accompany my weird non-AR Sig 556.
My background isn't military but I've fired countless rounds from AR-15's in the eight years of competitive shooting. I NEVER had a malfunction in any of my rifles that wasn't directly caused by imported steel cased ammo.
The AR-15/M16 rifle has been messed with by military people who had no qualifications to do so. From the first extruded/ball powder change that caused our troops to go into a firefight with cleaning rods taped to their rifles, corroded chambers and dirt/crap/fouled mechanism.
That corroded chamber had several cures including the A2 Forward assist. Corroded/fouled chamber, bolt won't close, rifle is locked up so let's put a button on the upper to force the bolt home. OK, I like the A2 upper but the forward assist is a monument to the meddling that has been done with this rifle!
Then the carbine craze hit, barrel configurations, buttstock options, sight options, changes in buffers and mainsprings. Let's not overlook bullet weight changes that required different twist rates in the rifling.
The rifle "poops where it eats" and that's not great. Why direct smoke and powder residue back into the operating mechanism? Properly maintained, it's a great rifle and damned accurate!
Nearly every gripe we have with that rifle originated with Brass meddling with the design. That's how I see it.
Flash
How about bolt fragility due to all those tiny lugs?
During and after Vietnam, there was a lot of griping about the M16. There were several problems with the design, and eventually most of them were worked out. Of course, the Pentagon moves at a pace that would allow glaciers to lap them, so it did take a long time.
I've talked to any number of vets from the Sandbox and I have yet to hear anyone complain about the M4. In fact, the only weapon I heard complaints about was the M249 SAW. (And it's being replaced by the HK M27, which is allegedly a nice improvement.) Ever hear of a US serviceman saying, "I wish we could trade these out for AK-47s"? Nope.
No weapon is perfect and no weapon does well in all environs.
I've heard of broken carriers, but not so much of broken bolts.
Honestly, our fighting force is the best on earth and can destroy anything that gets in their way. That tends to apply to the equipment they use also......
Whatever happened to the XM8 testing? Was talk of it doing great when I was in and replacing the M4 but then it just kinda disappeared. Looked similar to the bushmaster ACR as I recall.
The bolts will crack lugs over time. I've seen a few in random range guns and I believe a rental AR (my memory is fuzzy on that one).
Also, some of the lower quality brands that do not have Milspec rated or similar/better components (MPI/HPT, Carpenter #158 steel, gas key bolts staked to spec, etc.) have been known to have factory defect components make their way into production guns and on to the shelves. Since they aren't MPI/HPT they could have things like microfissures which can cause premature failures. In the past, I've seen a number of cases where people have reported guns from various manufacturers like Bushmaster, DPMS, etc. that have had bolts fail and lugs crack within 1,000rds or less, likely due to the occasional defect. Obviously the exception to the rule, but it still happens occasionally. What's that saying about buy right, cry once?
Considering how heavily invested our military is in the M16/M4 platform, that's not going to change in probably a long damn time. It just wouldn't make any sense fiscally. Also, some alternative options like piston conversions offer a whole LOT of potential downsides versus the potential benefit, and there is still a legitimate debate as to how much of a benefit it really is. From my layman's perspective, what would seem to make the most sense would be to progressively phase out purchase of a few existing wear items, such as the buffer (action) spring, extractor spring, etc. and phase in purchase of legitmately improved components. A more optimal buffer spring, extractor spring (with the O or D ring), and possibly even a different lubricant (anyone's guess on that one). That would be the most cost effective option by far, without completely changing the platform or vital operational components (gas system, bolt carrier, etc.) and opening up several new cans of worms.
There is a reason it has not been replaced. That is because no other rifle offers a SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT IN RELIABILITY AND
LETHALITY over the current m4/m16