06-14-2013, 10:47 PM
Those test data figures were so skewed, it's nothing funny. They recorded 2rd bursts as malfs even if only 2 rounds were left in the mag, and inadequate or no lubrication was used on the M4's in the old tests against the XM8, which is a horrible POS. The XM8 had limited metal rails and a trunnion mounted in....a polymer receiver. Guess what happens when you run a polymer receiver rifle like that in high-volume? Yeah, its barrel droops and things stop working.
This whole carbine program was boom-era defense contractors lobbying for a piece of the pie, riding on age-old myths about M16 performance, thinking they could easily rig the tests to show their older tech operating systems could out-do the DI system, and they failed to demonstrate a significant improvement. Now that the budget is in a bust cycle, the Pentagon and Army aren't so eager to facilitate a porktractor's pocket-lining, given they are facing cuts all over the force, and lots of soldiers-especially SF types, really like the M4.
This whole carbine program was boom-era defense contractors lobbying for a piece of the pie, riding on age-old myths about M16 performance, thinking they could easily rig the tests to show their older tech operating systems could out-do the DI system, and they failed to demonstrate a significant improvement. Now that the budget is in a bust cycle, the Pentagon and Army aren't so eager to facilitate a porktractor's pocket-lining, given they are facing cuts all over the force, and lots of soldiers-especially SF types, really like the M4.