Comments on: M4 Carbine – wrong weapon for the job?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:07:13 +0000

What will the clueless retards at the NY Times discover next:
- That until recently there was a withering Ford versus Chevy debate among NASCAR fans?
- That in certain polite circles of their readership there is concern over the choice between Lexus and BMW, or Lamborghini versus Ferrari?
- That Obama lied?
- That we won’t recover the money spent bailing out CIT or Chrysler?

At Wanat, individual soldiers fired more rounds in an hour than the entire current and historical staff of the Times will use in several lifetimes. The barrels started melting. Our guys were surrounded and outnumbered 7.5:1 by determined attackers. They made do with what they had. The did what they had to do. They prevailed.

The .270 is a nice round. Nice flat trajectory makes it easy to use.

By: christopherfountain

christopherfountain — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:47:49 +0000

Fly they do discuss those points but another issue the soldiers claim, is that they’re issued metal-jacketed rounds designed to pierce Russian armored vests and when they nail a shirt-clad mussleman the round goes straight through him “like an ice pick”. That’s when I want my .45.

By: Cobra

Cobra — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:22:46 +0000

Never had a problem with my MRs, but they’re all of recent manufacture from respectable companies.

Their caliber, however, is a bit lame.

By: FlyAngler

FlyAngler — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:18:28 +0000

Chris:

It’s a complicated issue. Larger rounds with great terminal energy weigh more which translates into fewer rounds per pound. Fine for a sniper using 50 cal in a Barrett but not a great thing when on a multi-day mission in the mountains.

Also, high terminal energy means the potential for collateral damage is high. Not a big deal when fighting in open fields or desert but a problem with urban, close range engagements.

There are a myriad of other issues. I haven’t read the Times article but I am confident they don’t tread any ground not covered in other articles I have read.