Post by: qdemn7 on September 18, 2008, 01:47:06 AM
Quote
In a move that could reverse years of Army small arms policy, the service is asking industry to send in ideas for a new combat rifle that could replace the M4 carbine.
In late August, the Army issued a solicitation to the arms industry asking companies to submit proposals that would demonstrate "improvements in individual weapon performance in the areas of accuracy and dispersion ... reliability and durability in all environments, modularity and terminal performance."
And in a dramatic gesture that could throw the door wide open to a totally new carbine, the service did not constrain ideas to the current 5.56mm round used in the M4.
In late August, the Army issued a solicitation to the arms industry asking companies to submit proposals that would demonstrate "improvements in individual weapon performance in the areas of accuracy and dispersion ... reliability and durability in all environments, modularity and terminal performance."
And in a dramatic gesture that could throw the door wide open to a totally new carbine, the service did not constrain ideas to the current 5.56mm round used in the M4.
At last, someone in the Army bureaucracy finally had gained some sense (or maybe had it knocked into their head). What would be the height of irony is if they choose the 6.8mm SPC as the new standard cartridge after rejecting it 60 years ago, so to speak as the .280 British. At the time the .280 British was considered "too weak". "Too weak" being code words for Army's NIH attitude.
Of course they could always choose the 6.5mm Grendel.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 18, 2008, 02:17:38 AM
Post by: MechAg94 on September 18, 2008, 04:19:57 AM
Wouldn't those tend to be mutually exclusive?
Post by: Firethorn on September 18, 2008, 04:22:34 AM
I was going to ask if we hadn't heard all this before, but the article does point out a few things that I haven't heard before.
It's at least the fifth time I've heard about the military considering something new. The rest have fizzled out, I'm not holding my breath for this one.
Post by: Manedwolf on September 18, 2008, 04:40:00 AM
This is one time where the rest of the world is right.
At least change the UPPER to gas piston and keep the lower if you wanna keep all the logistics and mags and stuff...
And as for caliber, in urban fighting with cinderblock walls, yeah, it's advantage AK. Just look at video of a 7.62x39 vs a 5.56x45 against a cinder block. One lets you have cover, the other doesn't.
Post by: Ryan in Maine on September 18, 2008, 04:44:39 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on September 18, 2008, 04:46:57 AM
What ever happened to Magpul's Masada rifle? I thought that sounded like a winner right there.
Bushmaster bought it, ditched the name and called it the ACR instead.
Either they get it right, or they re-engineer it to be cheaper and end up with another M17.
Post by: AJ Dual on September 18, 2008, 04:50:44 AM
What ever happened to Magpul's Masada rifle? I thought that sounded like a winner right there.
It's getting produced by Bushmaster as thier ACR, advanced combat rifle, for civilian and LE sales. Probably with a hope it could someday be the M4's replacment.
However, I'm in the "I'll believe it when I see it" crowd too. The DoD has been running these tests and trials forever, with the caseless HK G11, Flechette rifles from AAI, Steyr, and Colt, wacky duplex rounds, all sorts of stuff.
The M4/M-16 is not perfect. OTOH it's adequate, and when the bean-counters look up an honest accounting of the real shortcomings of the caliber and platform, and then balance that out against the logistical pain to the entire military of replacing them all, the M-16 family just keeps on trucking.
Post by: Manedwolf on September 18, 2008, 04:52:47 AM
Keep the lowers. Keep the mags. Keep everything else.
Just stop making direct impingement uppers and replace them with gas piston as they wear out, with training on the new operating system and fieldstripping. They're not that complicated.
Post by: MechAg94 on September 18, 2008, 04:59:10 AM
Post by: AJ Dual on September 18, 2008, 05:39:27 AM
Is the direct impingement the only part of the rifle that is causing problems? I seem to have read stuff that said that is not the case. I thought I heard someone comment on sand sticking in around the locking lugs of the bolt. A gas piston only won't suddenly make the chamber shiny and clean.
That is another weakness of the system.
The AR-style bolt has (what, eight?) lugs on it. This has some advantages, it creates a very quick and short unlocking rotation which has ramifications all the way up and down the gas and fire control system. Remember that the original intent of the AR design was absolute lightest marching weight while still being well balanced with capacity-firepower and lethality. It also allows for even distribution of bolt thrust during firing, which means you can get away with much lighter parts, and facilitated the then revolutionary barrel extension chamber, which in turn allows for the aluminum non-stressed receiver that only need act as a guide-way for the moving parts.
OTOH, the multi-lugged bolt increased surface area and the complex topology increases exponentially the area for fouling and debris to gum up the action, and the leverage that fouling has to negatively impact cycling of the rifle.
One thing that occurs to me with the 'Just swap the uppers' philosophy of a more incremental design change to the AR, perhaps including a 6.8 or 6.5mm caliber change too, is that then the buffer tube is absolutely wasted space. A gas-piston upper can incorporate the recoil spring into the upper, which then allows for a true folding stock. The collapsing/telescoping stock the AR buffer tube originally forced as a compromise, is now well-liked because it allows for ergonomic adjustment to fit different statured soldiers, and account for the extra thickness of gear or body armor.
However, I see no problem making an adjustable AND folding stock.
Post by: MechAg94 on September 18, 2008, 05:50:50 AM
I guess there is a lot of focus on the direct impingement system which is way back behind the bolt. I just can't see how that is the source of all the problems. You chamber will get dirty every time it is fired regardless of the system.
Post by: Manedwolf on September 18, 2008, 05:56:16 AM
Okay, thanks for that explanation. I thought I had heard the bolt was a major issue with the sand over there.
I guess there is a lot of focus on the direct impingement system which is way back behind the bolt. I just can't see how that is the source of all the problems. You chamber will get dirty every time it is fired regardless of the system.
I guess there is a lot of focus on the direct impingement system which is way back behind the bolt. I just can't see how that is the source of all the problems. You chamber will get dirty every time it is fired regardless of the system.
No, not really. Direct impingement blows all the carbon and crap back and onto the bolt. Piston systems are MUCH cleaner to run and easier to clean!
That's always been the criticism of the direct impingement system. It was meant to save the weight of a piston, but it "sh_ts where it eats".
Post by: MechAg94 on September 18, 2008, 06:13:26 AM
But, it is probably like a AR vs AK discussion. Opinions vary.
Post by: Firethorn on September 18, 2008, 06:24:53 AM
Okay, thanks for that explanation. I thought I had heard the bolt was a major issue with the sand over there.
Small finicky parts show detrimental operation far sooner than bigger looser tolerance parts such as the AK series. And by 'loose tolerance' I mean by design - the weapon is designed to operate properly in a fairly wide range, for a rifle. It does make sacrifices for that, though.
As for dirt and such, there's differences between powders(the military switched to a cleaner burning version a while back), and being dropped in the mud or exposed to sand.
Post by: Boomhauer on September 18, 2008, 06:27:19 AM
Okay, thanks for that explanation. I thought I had heard the bolt was a major issue with the sand over there.
Small finicky parts show detrimental operation far sooner than bigger looser tolerance parts such as the AK series. And by 'loose tolerance' I mean by design - the weapon is designed to operate properly in a fairly wide range, for a rifle. It does make sacrifices for that, though.
As for dirt and such, there's differences between powders(the military switched to a cleaner burning version a while back), and being dropped in the mud or exposed to sand.
Looser clearance, not looser tolerance...Clearances between operating parts.
The AK sacrifices accuracy for greater reliability. However, a properly built AK will still have practical accuracy for infantry use.
Post by: roo_ster on September 18, 2008, 07:11:23 AM
"accuracy and dispersion"
Wouldn't those tend to be mutually exclusive?
Wouldn't those tend to be mutually exclusive?
Actually, they are kinda the same thing...or reciprocal, but not exclusive.
Post by: seeker_two on September 18, 2008, 07:23:55 AM
...which I'd be for if they could do one in .243Win or .260Rem....
Post by: Modifiedbrowning on September 18, 2008, 11:33:17 AM
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on September 18, 2008, 05:10:26 PM
All they have to do is bring back the AR-18 in 6.8. Most modern Western piston rifles are based off the AR-18 design anyway.
I'd buy one in a heartbeat.
Post by: Antibubba on September 18, 2008, 08:07:27 PM
Quote
I was going to ask if we hadn't heard all this before, but the article does point out a few things that I haven't heard before.
Like what?
No such argument can be made without looking at this:
http://www.mouseguns.com/compare.html
Post by: yesitsloaded on September 18, 2008, 09:07:57 PM
Post by: Manedwolf on September 18, 2008, 10:56:18 PM
I think we should look to the Deawoo as how to do it right. Folding stock, piston, and the thing even takes AR mags.
I am very impressed with the engineering of mine. It's like they actually sat down and determined what was best about the AK and AR designs and took all the good parts. Without the interjection of any "I have a GREAT idea, no, really, this is new, it's my idea, we're going to do it anyway" egotism that screws stuff up.
Post by: thebaldguy on September 19, 2008, 04:33:36 PM
Oh, that's right. It's just tax dollars being wasted. It's not like it's REAL money.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 19, 2008, 08:10:07 PM
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on September 19, 2008, 08:13:22 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 19, 2008, 08:59:34 PM
Post by: Iain on September 19, 2008, 10:55:13 PM
I wondered about the 6.8 MM round; why is it that the wheel needs to be reinvented? I know the cartridge is supposedly based on the old .30 Remington cartridge. There are lots of good cartridges out there such as the .243/.270 Winchester, .25-06, .280 Remington, etc. Why not use an existing cartridge and a new rifle based on the M-16 design?
Oh, that's right. It's just tax dollars being wasted. It's not like it's REAL money.
Oh, that's right. It's just tax dollars being wasted. It's not like it's REAL money.
My limited understanding agrees with fistful's necessarily very limited understanding.
The other factor is the size and weight of the ammunition. The .243 and .270 are based on the .30-06 and the .308 (can't remember which way round, or even if that is absolutely accurate) so they are substantially bigger than 5.56 reducing the amount that can be carried, I suppose to the point that no more .243 can be carried than .308 could be.
Post by: Boomhauer on September 20, 2008, 03:26:57 AM
Quote
I thought the purpose of the 6.8 was that it fit the existing magazines. No?
6.8 fits the overall length of the AR magwell.
I don't know why ya'll are getting so giddy about this. Wait until the politics get involved...as they always do when selecting new equipment. We could end up with something that is worse than the AR (like the XM-8)...
And there is also the "we don't want it if it wasn't invented here" syndrome.
Post by: K Frame on September 20, 2008, 03:41:39 AM
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 20, 2008, 04:21:03 AM
My limited understanding agrees with fistful's necessarily very limited understanding.
Nice jab.
Post by: Manedwolf on September 20, 2008, 04:23:39 AM
Mike, are you on crack? There's no way a Trapdoor Springfield is going to fit in an AR magazine.
But you could fit the M4 inside the buttstock trap of the Springfield. As a spare.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 20, 2008, 04:25:07 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on September 20, 2008, 04:27:02 AM
Post by: AmbulanceDriver on September 20, 2008, 04:29:28 AM
HOLY.................
What the [censored] *IS* that thing?
?
Post by: qdemn7 on September 20, 2008, 04:33:32 AM
What the [censored] *IS* that thing??
Looks like a punt gun. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punt_gun
? Post by: Manedwolf on September 20, 2008, 04:36:14 AM
HOLY.................
What the [censored] *IS* that thing?
?Yeah, it's a punt gun. They were secured bow to stern on a punt or a canoe or other boat, and used to take down an entire flock of geese or other birds at once with several pounds of powder and shot, for commercial market hunting. That's how people brought a whole bunch of birds to market.
That's the general reaction when someone brings one out now, though. There's YouTube videos of people firing one. It pushes the boat backwards.
Post by: freedom lover on September 20, 2008, 08:55:29 AM
Take a lever delayed (from the FAMAS) or roller delayed (from the G3) action, tweak it, put it in an ergonomic stamped steel and polymer shell that can be equipped with current optics/accessories and good sights, make it use AR mags until the new caliber is adopted, give it a SCAR charging handle and buttstock, a quality barrel, and get it under 9lbs and you'll have a very reliable infantry rifle. Hopefully the accuracy would be decent enough for battlefield use and the rifle cheap.
An operator probably would'nt be able to convert the barrel length and caliber to another in the field unless alot of work was done to the design, but it could probably be done at the armory (if the barrels were free floated and most of the internals came welded together), but at least the different versions would all use the same basic, mass produced shell.
One other thing. This design would probably would'nt be accurate enough for a DMR.
Post by: Mabs2 on September 20, 2008, 09:05:02 AM
Post by: yesitsloaded on September 20, 2008, 10:07:56 AM
Post by: MechAg94 on September 20, 2008, 10:12:11 AM
Post by: Mabs2 on September 20, 2008, 02:44:45 PM
Other than a barrel swap or caliber change in seconds?
Yea besides that. I dig changing calibers easy. Like buying a .223 and when they come out with the 6.8 barrels just swap them.But as far as "you can turn this dedicated CQB rifle into a precision rifle in seconds" I don't get it. Just buy two rifles, imo.
Post by: De Selby on September 20, 2008, 04:07:38 PM
I think if they're lucky, the best thing the .gov folks will get out of a new project to replace the M16 series guns is...something that is nearly as good as the M16.
Post by: Manedwolf on September 20, 2008, 04:31:25 PM
The AR platform is the easiest rifle to shoot accurately I've ever come across. It points well, the sights are good, and the thing is just plain...accurate.
I think if they're lucky, the best thing the .gov folks will get out of a new project to replace the M16 series guns is...something that is nearly as good as the M16.
I think if they're lucky, the best thing the .gov folks will get out of a new project to replace the M16 series guns is...something that is nearly as good as the M16.
You need to shoot more rifles, then.
And "accurate at 300 yards" means less when someone is fighting someone right there, when the thing jams up because talcum powder sand is blowing.
Post by: yesitsloaded on September 20, 2008, 05:07:46 PM
Post by: Boomhauer on September 20, 2008, 05:17:18 PM
Quote
I ran the weapons check in at the last ROTC shoot and we had weapons malfing within 200 rounds. Well used Colt m16a4s. Bolts getting sticky and a few FTEs.
Tell us more...
Lube type? Standard CLP?
Running wet, minimum lube, or dry?
Ammo type? Running a .22 conversion kit, standard ammo, blanks, or training rounds (if ya'll even use those...)?
Post by: yesitsloaded on September 20, 2008, 05:45:48 PM
Post by: Boomhauer on September 20, 2008, 05:50:06 PM
Quote
Lubrication and Cleaning
There are a great number of myths that surround the AR platform, and many of these have taken on the status of Urban Myths. One very prominent myth is that the gun runs better dry. The AR series runs significantly better wet than dry, but there are those that approach this with such great trepidation that they steadfastly refuse to use only a very tiny bit of lube on their carbines, causing them to cease functioning after a very short while.
Hundreds of e- net posts speak of using little lube on the carbines, believing that too much lube be the cause of all problems. A friend, a retired Marine MSgt and a prolific Class 3 collector, looks at lube like it was 2 day old cat urine, and is absolutely phobic about putting anything more than a drop or two on any gun. Our experience is that after poor magazines and operator induced malfunctions, dry guns are a major cause of stoppages. We see this in every class we have ever attended or taught, and we are satisfied that our observations regarding lubrication are correct.
Consider that your carbine is a machine, and like an internal combustion engine, it requires lubrication to make it function. There are certain wear points in the gun that need attention, and failure to do so can cause a stoppage. A good rule of thumb is to look for shiny marks, which indicates metal to metal contact. If it shines, get it wet.
This is the cleaning protocol that I use. This isnt the way, but rather A way. I dont pretend to know everything, and I wind up learning something new about every day. Not using what is listed below wont necessarily get you killed, make you unattractive to a potential mate, nor make you unpopular at the local gin mill.
I fired the M4 carbine for the first time at the old Firepower Branch at Quantico in 1986. The Army wasnt doing anything with the project and gave a small number (I believe seven or eight) to (then) Maj. Jack Muth, the OIC at the time. The nomenclature was XM-4, and they were marked as M16A2s, but the genesis was there. We put a great number of rounds through those guns, and I have shot a lot more since then. I have learned a lot since then, and will continue to do so.
Remove the bolt from the bolt carrier. Turn the bolt carrier over and observe the shiny area on the bottom. This is a wear point. The slot that the bolt cam pin rides in is another wear point, as is the chromed hole in the bolt carrier that the bolt rides in. The entire bolt carrier can use a coat of lube, but pay particular attention to those areas. The military also states that a drop down the bolt carrier gas key is required. The bolt itself requires a coating of oil, paying particular attention to the bolt rings and the lugs. Those bolt rings function just like the piston rings in your car engine. How long do you think your ride would last without lube?? A properly cleaned and lubed carbine should go at a minimum of 500 rounds to 1000 rounds without any cleaning at all. However, using a suppressor will cut that number down drastically, as will firing multiple rapid fire strings or firing with the selector switch on Group Therapy . I advise shooters that during the chow break they should place a few drops of oil into those two gas ports on the right side of the bolt carrier. The lube will get into the gas rings located handily nearby and keep your gun running smoothly.
Finally, a few drops of oil into the underside of the charging handle is not a bad thing.
The AR system runs much better wet then dry, and we see that during every class. Understand that it is not the amount of lube used, but also the placement of the lube. At one class a very experienced shooter was having functioning problems. He pulled back on the charging handle to show me that the bolt was wet, but when he released the CH I could see that the area on the BC adjacent to the gas holes was dry. I placed two drops of Slip 2000 into those holes and the gun ran fine.
The moral of this story is not just to put lube on, but put it on in the right places. Keep in mind that when at class and shooting 400-1000 rounds per day, the bolt will get blown dry. Adding oil during break time will keep the gun running and keep you learning new skill sets instead of becoming frustrated with a constantly malfunctioning gun.
In the 90s I worked for another government agency that had a large budget. We had a fair number of guns and a lot of ammunition, so on the down days I had the opportunity to play and run some informal tests. While the exact results have been lost to the ages, some salient points remain embedded in my brain housing group. A totally dry gun will run approximately 100-200rds before seeing problems. A clean but properly lubed gun in good condition should go from 500 minimum to 1000 maximum.
More lube is not necessarily bad. I submerged the bolt and bolt carrier assembly into a bucket of oil, shook it off and placed it into the carbine. It ran like a clock though I only had enough time to fire off 4 mags worth of M855 through it.
I have used every type of lube imaginable, going from WD-40 (especially good when you have a dirty gun), 3 in 1 oil, suntan lotion, butter to Vagisil- dont laugh, it works. I may not want to use any of them for the long haul, but for a quick fix it beats having a non functioning gun.
The type of lube you use is something else that is full of mythology and sprinkled with fact. While the military uses CLP that PM comic book several years ago cautioned against using it for cleaning as it promotes carbon . Why it only promotes carbon for cleaning and not lubricating is a mystery to me, but I dont use CLP for anything anymore. Commercial choices abound, from mystical concoctions of Sergeant Majors brew to a host of this is the best stuff ever made and well sue anyone who says different crap.
I prefer to stay away from most petroleum based products, and use Slip 2000 for lube, and that same companies 725 Cleaner and Degreaser for the other chores. Slip 2000 is aqueous based, eliminating a lot of the contamination issues seen with petroleum products, and their products flat work. I have found Slip 2000 to be excellent and the owner, Greg Connor, is a great American. If I need grease, it will be TW25B (known in the Marine Corps, where it is used on the up gunned weapons stations on AAVs) as elephant sperm . Mad Dog Labs MD7 is something else worth looking carefully at, and it appears to work well.
Cleaning is another hot button topic, and a great many (especially AR detractors) really believe that the AR has to be kept meticulously clean to function. While having a clean gun is never bad, neither do you have to put up with the white glove nonsense.
My cleaning regime may be different from conventional protocol, but it works, and has stood the test of time. Ill field strip the carbine, and punch the tube with a wet patch. Leave the chemicals to do their work and get to the bolt/ bolt carrier assemblies. Clean the bolt carrier assembly by removing carbon from the bolt cam pin slot, inside of the bolt carrier (yeah, that chrome lined thing where the bolt goes in) and the bottom of the bolt carrier itself. You can use a wet pipe cleaner to clean the inside of the bolt carrier key. Do not put anything inside of the gas tube- it is unnecessary, and you will only stick debris in there that can do no good.
Use your toothbrush to clean the bolt, specifically the bolt lugs. Do not concern yourself with the carbon build up on the bolts tail. No matter how you clean it, it will just reappear the next time you shoot it. I had an armorer once tell me that the carbon promoted corrosion. That may well be if the gun is never shot, but I have yet to see a working bolt corrode away.
Attach that chamber brush to your cleaning rod and scrub out the chamber. I generally use a worn brush, wrap a wet patch around it and insert it in the chamber. Spin it a few times and replace it with a fresh brush. Spin that and then dry the chamber out. Clean out the locking lugs with cotton swabs. Clean out the upper receiver and charging handle. Your toothbrush and cotton swabs work well here. Take a few dry patches and clean the barrel. Note that I dont normally use a bore brush, and allow the cleaning fluid take care of the bore. Before the rockets start flying, I used to shoot Service Rifle, and am a High Master and a Distinguished Rifleman. I rarely used a brush on my M14NM or match AR15s. If I felt that the bore was heavily fouled I ran several wet patches through, and if I absolutely felt the need for a brush it was nylon- not copper. Never ever use a stainless steel brush in your barrel. Understand that this is for a carbine, which by virtue of its definition is a short-barreled rifle. The 5.56x45 mm service rounds and M4 carbines are certainly capable of hitting out past 500m, but it shines in fight that takes place under 200m. Bothering with inconsequential increments may not be useful under these circumstances.
However, if you have an SPR type, by all means give the care to that barrel that it deserves, but that care may be waster on a 10.5 -14.5 carbine.
Before reassembling, check your bolt rings for serviceability. Insert the bolt into the bolt carrier, and turn it upside down (preferably over something soft). If the bolt falls out on its own, you need to change the gas rings. If not, you are good to go. Dont get locked into the nonsense of misaligning the gas rings. The Colt Armorer Instructors state emphatically that the gun will run with one good ring, and I have done exactly that.
Any gun is a machine, and once in your paws it must be properly maintained. That does not mean incessantly cleaned with a Jesuit like fervor, but rather to take care of those particular areas that affect functioning. Keep a gun book and annotate it with a round count so that you can figure out when certain parts- extractor springs, gas rings, bolts and barrels need replacing. Keep it lubed to reduce friction and understand that the more you use it, the more parts need to be replaced.
If you have questions, contact me directly.
S/F
Pat Rogers
www.eagtactical.com
There are a great number of myths that surround the AR platform, and many of these have taken on the status of Urban Myths. One very prominent myth is that the gun runs better dry. The AR series runs significantly better wet than dry, but there are those that approach this with such great trepidation that they steadfastly refuse to use only a very tiny bit of lube on their carbines, causing them to cease functioning after a very short while.
Hundreds of e- net posts speak of using little lube on the carbines, believing that too much lube be the cause of all problems. A friend, a retired Marine MSgt and a prolific Class 3 collector, looks at lube like it was 2 day old cat urine, and is absolutely phobic about putting anything more than a drop or two on any gun. Our experience is that after poor magazines and operator induced malfunctions, dry guns are a major cause of stoppages. We see this in every class we have ever attended or taught, and we are satisfied that our observations regarding lubrication are correct.
Consider that your carbine is a machine, and like an internal combustion engine, it requires lubrication to make it function. There are certain wear points in the gun that need attention, and failure to do so can cause a stoppage. A good rule of thumb is to look for shiny marks, which indicates metal to metal contact. If it shines, get it wet.
This is the cleaning protocol that I use. This isnt the way, but rather A way. I dont pretend to know everything, and I wind up learning something new about every day. Not using what is listed below wont necessarily get you killed, make you unattractive to a potential mate, nor make you unpopular at the local gin mill.
I fired the M4 carbine for the first time at the old Firepower Branch at Quantico in 1986. The Army wasnt doing anything with the project and gave a small number (I believe seven or eight) to (then) Maj. Jack Muth, the OIC at the time. The nomenclature was XM-4, and they were marked as M16A2s, but the genesis was there. We put a great number of rounds through those guns, and I have shot a lot more since then. I have learned a lot since then, and will continue to do so.
Remove the bolt from the bolt carrier. Turn the bolt carrier over and observe the shiny area on the bottom. This is a wear point. The slot that the bolt cam pin rides in is another wear point, as is the chromed hole in the bolt carrier that the bolt rides in. The entire bolt carrier can use a coat of lube, but pay particular attention to those areas. The military also states that a drop down the bolt carrier gas key is required. The bolt itself requires a coating of oil, paying particular attention to the bolt rings and the lugs. Those bolt rings function just like the piston rings in your car engine. How long do you think your ride would last without lube?? A properly cleaned and lubed carbine should go at a minimum of 500 rounds to 1000 rounds without any cleaning at all. However, using a suppressor will cut that number down drastically, as will firing multiple rapid fire strings or firing with the selector switch on Group Therapy . I advise shooters that during the chow break they should place a few drops of oil into those two gas ports on the right side of the bolt carrier. The lube will get into the gas rings located handily nearby and keep your gun running smoothly.
Finally, a few drops of oil into the underside of the charging handle is not a bad thing.
The AR system runs much better wet then dry, and we see that during every class. Understand that it is not the amount of lube used, but also the placement of the lube. At one class a very experienced shooter was having functioning problems. He pulled back on the charging handle to show me that the bolt was wet, but when he released the CH I could see that the area on the BC adjacent to the gas holes was dry. I placed two drops of Slip 2000 into those holes and the gun ran fine.
The moral of this story is not just to put lube on, but put it on in the right places. Keep in mind that when at class and shooting 400-1000 rounds per day, the bolt will get blown dry. Adding oil during break time will keep the gun running and keep you learning new skill sets instead of becoming frustrated with a constantly malfunctioning gun.
In the 90s I worked for another government agency that had a large budget. We had a fair number of guns and a lot of ammunition, so on the down days I had the opportunity to play and run some informal tests. While the exact results have been lost to the ages, some salient points remain embedded in my brain housing group. A totally dry gun will run approximately 100-200rds before seeing problems. A clean but properly lubed gun in good condition should go from 500 minimum to 1000 maximum.
More lube is not necessarily bad. I submerged the bolt and bolt carrier assembly into a bucket of oil, shook it off and placed it into the carbine. It ran like a clock though I only had enough time to fire off 4 mags worth of M855 through it.
I have used every type of lube imaginable, going from WD-40 (especially good when you have a dirty gun), 3 in 1 oil, suntan lotion, butter to Vagisil- dont laugh, it works. I may not want to use any of them for the long haul, but for a quick fix it beats having a non functioning gun.
The type of lube you use is something else that is full of mythology and sprinkled with fact. While the military uses CLP that PM comic book several years ago cautioned against using it for cleaning as it promotes carbon . Why it only promotes carbon for cleaning and not lubricating is a mystery to me, but I dont use CLP for anything anymore. Commercial choices abound, from mystical concoctions of Sergeant Majors brew to a host of this is the best stuff ever made and well sue anyone who says different crap.
I prefer to stay away from most petroleum based products, and use Slip 2000 for lube, and that same companies 725 Cleaner and Degreaser for the other chores. Slip 2000 is aqueous based, eliminating a lot of the contamination issues seen with petroleum products, and their products flat work. I have found Slip 2000 to be excellent and the owner, Greg Connor, is a great American. If I need grease, it will be TW25B (known in the Marine Corps, where it is used on the up gunned weapons stations on AAVs) as elephant sperm . Mad Dog Labs MD7 is something else worth looking carefully at, and it appears to work well.
Cleaning is another hot button topic, and a great many (especially AR detractors) really believe that the AR has to be kept meticulously clean to function. While having a clean gun is never bad, neither do you have to put up with the white glove nonsense.
My cleaning regime may be different from conventional protocol, but it works, and has stood the test of time. Ill field strip the carbine, and punch the tube with a wet patch. Leave the chemicals to do their work and get to the bolt/ bolt carrier assemblies. Clean the bolt carrier assembly by removing carbon from the bolt cam pin slot, inside of the bolt carrier (yeah, that chrome lined thing where the bolt goes in) and the bottom of the bolt carrier itself. You can use a wet pipe cleaner to clean the inside of the bolt carrier key. Do not put anything inside of the gas tube- it is unnecessary, and you will only stick debris in there that can do no good.
Use your toothbrush to clean the bolt, specifically the bolt lugs. Do not concern yourself with the carbon build up on the bolts tail. No matter how you clean it, it will just reappear the next time you shoot it. I had an armorer once tell me that the carbon promoted corrosion. That may well be if the gun is never shot, but I have yet to see a working bolt corrode away.
Attach that chamber brush to your cleaning rod and scrub out the chamber. I generally use a worn brush, wrap a wet patch around it and insert it in the chamber. Spin it a few times and replace it with a fresh brush. Spin that and then dry the chamber out. Clean out the locking lugs with cotton swabs. Clean out the upper receiver and charging handle. Your toothbrush and cotton swabs work well here. Take a few dry patches and clean the barrel. Note that I dont normally use a bore brush, and allow the cleaning fluid take care of the bore. Before the rockets start flying, I used to shoot Service Rifle, and am a High Master and a Distinguished Rifleman. I rarely used a brush on my M14NM or match AR15s. If I felt that the bore was heavily fouled I ran several wet patches through, and if I absolutely felt the need for a brush it was nylon- not copper. Never ever use a stainless steel brush in your barrel. Understand that this is for a carbine, which by virtue of its definition is a short-barreled rifle. The 5.56x45 mm service rounds and M4 carbines are certainly capable of hitting out past 500m, but it shines in fight that takes place under 200m. Bothering with inconsequential increments may not be useful under these circumstances.
However, if you have an SPR type, by all means give the care to that barrel that it deserves, but that care may be waster on a 10.5 -14.5 carbine.
Before reassembling, check your bolt rings for serviceability. Insert the bolt into the bolt carrier, and turn it upside down (preferably over something soft). If the bolt falls out on its own, you need to change the gas rings. If not, you are good to go. Dont get locked into the nonsense of misaligning the gas rings. The Colt Armorer Instructors state emphatically that the gun will run with one good ring, and I have done exactly that.
Any gun is a machine, and once in your paws it must be properly maintained. That does not mean incessantly cleaned with a Jesuit like fervor, but rather to take care of those particular areas that affect functioning. Keep a gun book and annotate it with a round count so that you can figure out when certain parts- extractor springs, gas rings, bolts and barrels need replacing. Keep it lubed to reduce friction and understand that the more you use it, the more parts need to be replaced.
If you have questions, contact me directly.
S/F
Pat Rogers
www.eagtactical.com
Post by: Manedwolf on September 20, 2008, 05:51:40 PM
AKs in third world countries run fine for decades with just a bit of motor oil now and again, and without any cleaning. That's your model for reliability.
Post by: Boomhauer on September 20, 2008, 05:58:35 PM
If it requires that much lube, that's all the more reason why it's not an ideal combat rifle for harsh environments. What if you can't get lube?
AKs in third world countries run fine for decades with just a bit of motor oil now and again, and without any cleaning. That's your model for reliability.
AKs in third world countries run fine for decades with just a bit of motor oil now and again, and without any cleaning. That's your model for reliability.
I'm not arguing for or against that. I'm just pointing out that yesitsloaded's ROTC unit is using minimal lube, when experience has shown that it should be run as wet as possible.
Post by: yesitsloaded on September 20, 2008, 06:01:26 PM
Post by: Mabs2 on September 20, 2008, 06:12:10 PM
Post by: yesitsloaded on September 20, 2008, 07:08:35 PM
Post by: De Selby on September 20, 2008, 07:15:55 PM
The AR platform is the easiest rifle to shoot accurately I've ever come across. It points well, the sights are good, and the thing is just plain...accurate.
I think if they're lucky, the best thing the .gov folks will get out of a new project to replace the M16 series guns is...something that is nearly as good as the M16.
I think if they're lucky, the best thing the .gov folks will get out of a new project to replace the M16 series guns is...something that is nearly as good as the M16.
You need to shoot more rifles, then.
And "accurate at 300 yards" means less when someone is fighting someone right there, when the thing jams up because talcum powder sand is blowing.
I suppose I could cite my own experiences with other rifles here and you yours, but one man's experience doesn't amount to much in the real world.
From the testing available, well, it's weird-for so many stories of complete unreliability in the sand and uselessness at close in fighting, it seems that every testing procedure you put the rifle through manages to rate the weapon as one of the most reliable in the world. You'd think all the testing would reveal function problems as compared to other designs.
The fact that this system is chosen by special forces teams, other than the USofA's own, and by units that have a choice would seem to indicate that the available scientific data on the weapon's reliability is somewhat more accurate than the various internet screeds about the perils of the M16.
An early study of the M16 that I found, rating it on par with the M14 in reliability: http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=AD838604&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
Post by: yesitsloaded on September 20, 2008, 08:13:06 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 20, 2008, 09:02:49 PM
standard ammo, blanks, or training rounds (if ya'll even use those...)?
What means "training round"?
And FWIW, I'd be real surprised to hear of U.S. military (or ROTC) using .22 conversion kits.
Post by: Manedwolf on September 20, 2008, 09:58:18 PM
standard ammo, blanks, or training rounds (if ya'll even use those...)?
What means "training round"?
And FWIW, I'd be real surprised to hear of U.S. military (or ROTC) using .22 conversion kits.
I don't even know what that is, either. I've only bought, seen and used XM193 or M855, frangible (indoor) and tracers.
Post by: Boomhauer on September 21, 2008, 05:52:46 AM
The training round I am referring to is M862 Short Range Training Ammunition, which must be used with the M2 training bolt.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m862.htm
Quote
The 5.56mm SRTA provides a realistic restricted range training alternative to M193/M855 service rounds. The 5.56mm SRTA has a maximum range of 250 meters; an effective range of 25 meters (trajectory match and round to round dispersion comparable to the service ammunition) and provides a functional capability when used in the M16A2 Rifle with the M2 Training Bolt.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 21, 2008, 06:17:40 AM
Post by: freedom lover on September 21, 2008, 06:56:56 AM
I guess I'm just ranting. But, I'd like to know the information and opinions of the members of this site.
Post by: yesitsloaded on September 21, 2008, 09:14:33 AM
Post by: yesitsloaded on September 21, 2008, 09:27:37 AM
Post by: roo_ster on September 21, 2008, 11:57:34 AM
Post by: macpherson on September 22, 2008, 07:28:04 AM
The "wet as possible" AR15 requirements run smack into the sand & duct problem currently encountered by our troops.
It seems that the requirements for having a weapon that needs heavy lube is a bad situation in desert or dusty environments, and it also would be a severe problem in protracted engagements where soldiers may not have time or supplies to keep their weapons heavily lubed. Reliability should be the first and foremost requirement for an infantry rifle, which is not to say that cleaning should be ignored, but it should not be the "clean weapon 3-5 times daily or as often as possible" regimen that the AR seems to require now. For the ranges that most combat happens at in modern times, we'd be better off with a weapon that is accurate to 300m and a DMR/Sniper type weapon for anything longer. In that case, the inherent accuracy of the direct impingement system the AR uses isn't really necessary and should be removed for a more reliable system (i.e gas piston, blowback).
Post by: Balog on September 22, 2008, 07:55:38 AM
The "wet as possible" AR15 requirements run smack into the sand & duct problem currently encountered by our troops.
Yep. And when the system is annoying and difficult to clean thoroughly like the AR.....
As for the "Well spec ops folks choose it and they're LEET lol pwned" mentality....... special forces are a very bad yardstick. They have very different and specialized requirements, and what works for them may not work well for general issue.
Post by: Gewehr98 on September 22, 2008, 09:15:38 AM
Quote
Does anybody have ANY idea why more hasn't been done to create modern blowback operated rifles? They certainly sound like they're reliable enough. Maybe because of the inability to switch calibers like an AR? I guess they lack precision accuracy and modularity. But I think that reliability is more important in an MBR.
Blowback in which variation?
Pure blowback - hell no. The chamber pressures are too high for anything other than pistol-caliber cartridges or rimfires, and even the .45 ACP blowback guns have a huge bolt bouncing back and forth to provide enough mass to contain it all.
Roller-locked delayed blowback, ala' the HK and CETME? They work, keeping the bolt closed until peak chamber pressure has passed, but require fluting of the chambers to keep the spent brass extracting properly. Not a big deal for the military, but I reload all of my brass and absolutely hate running fluted brass through my resizing dies. People who own HK roller-locked rifles love them, but HK doesn't reciprocate with the warm fuzzies.
The FAMAS uses lever-delayed blowback, and still operates on the pressure of the cartridge pushing against the bolt face. Again, a fluted chamber ensures reliable extraction of fired brass. Works for the French, which is good considering their other rifles never saw much action in two World Wars.
Me? I want a Colt Potato Digger, even a semi-auto repro in .30 U.S. Government (known lately as .30-40 Krag) will do. Barring that, I have two of John Moses Browning's recoil-operated rifles, the Remington Model 8 and Model 81, which while while more complex than the AR-15/M16, don't poop where they eat, and I can run cast boolits all day long without fouling the non-existent gas ports.
Post by: MillCreek on September 22, 2008, 10:06:26 AM
Quote
I have used every type of lube imaginable, going from WD-40 (especially good when you have a dirty gun), 3 in 1 oil, suntan lotion, butter to Vagisil- dont laugh, it works. I may not want to use any of them for the long haul, but for a quick fix it beats having a non functioning gun.
On the upside, my AR no longer complains of itching since I started lubing it with Vagisil.
Post by: seeker_two on September 22, 2008, 11:36:45 AM
Quote
I have used every type of lube imaginable, going from WD-40 (especially good when you have a dirty gun), 3 in 1 oil, suntan lotion, butter to Vagisil- dont laugh, it works. I may not want to use any of them for the long haul, but for a quick fix it beats having a non functioning gun.
On the upside, my AR no longer complains of itching since I started lubing it with Vagisil.
Oh....the things I could say before Mike's ban stick strikes me dead.....
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 22, 2008, 12:16:09 PM
Quote
I have used every type of lube imaginable, going from WD-40 (especially good when you have a dirty gun), 3 in 1 oil, suntan lotion, butter to Vagisil- dont laugh, it works.
Oh, you know I'm gonna laugh. Ain't sayin' it don't work, but that right there is funny.
Post by: Gewehr98 on September 22, 2008, 03:20:30 PM
I've considered trying KY as a cast bullet lube once upon a time...
Post by: Crosshair on September 22, 2008, 06:31:03 PM
Oh, it's funny as hell.
I've considered trying KY as a cast bullet lube once upon a time...
I've considered trying KY as a cast bullet lube once upon a time...
Try Johnsons Paste Wax and Lee Alox, then tumble lube
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 22, 2008, 08:23:27 PM
Oh, it's funny as hell.
I've considered trying KY as a cast bullet lube once upon a time...
I've considered trying KY as a cast bullet lube once upon a time...
Try Johnsons Paste Wax and Lee Alox, then tumble lube
As a replacement for KY? I don't know if I could talk the ladies into that.
Post by: Intune on September 23, 2008, 02:03:35 AM
Quote
What means "training round"?
And FWIW, I'd be real surprised to hear of U.S. military (or ROTC) using .22 conversion kits.
We used 'em (.22 LR's) with our M60's during training. We would pull up to a miniature tableau of a town (think Matchbox-sized cars) and mount an M16 alongside our main gun. We would attach a solenoid actuator to the trigger. I never checked out the bolt but I remember that the mags had an insert and someone had to sit outside the turret to cycle the action by hand. We even had moving tanks & trucks. "ON THE WAY!" pop And FWIW, I'd be real surprised to hear of U.S. military (or ROTC) using .22 conversion kits.
It was great training & was fun!We also used an M2 .50 on a bigger range attached the same way. We would bust belts to arrange pure tracer ammo to mimic main gun rounds.
Not to get too political on this thread but one of the differences in the Carter and Reagan admins (for soldiers) was that all of a sudden we went from this type of training to full-sized, fire belching, mile-per-sec darts and Grafenwoehr dust!
I hate to say it but we actually got tired of shooting. Yep, I said it. Pallet after pallet of ammo, .45, .50, 105, etc. Could you imagine getting tired of shooting a grease gun? We did. It was the mag loading part that was a royal drag.
Alright, enough old Treadhead reminiscing. Back to pills & lubricants...
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 23, 2008, 02:16:39 AM
I don't know if I could talk the ladies into that.
I doubt that's the part you're having trouble talking them into.
Post by: Gewehr98 on September 23, 2008, 07:29:10 AM