[Sarajevo]

I hated the M4 carbine. It was inaccurate, and people tended to add too many "gadgets" to it to increase it's effectiveness. Invariably, this "lightweight" weapon ended up weighing 10lbs (empty) with laser sights, ACOG, Taclight, etc. The only advantage I saw was it's short length, where it wouldn't butt-stroke the soldier as he was fast-roping.

Actually. I much prefered to carry the folding stock AK 47.

OTOH, the 6.5mm grendel has had many good reviews lately. I could envision this mod to carry over the M16 line instead of developing a totaly new weapon system from scratch.

[Manly Warrior]

Sarajevo;

I had to convince my senior NCOs (mostly Engr and Inf types) that the M4 was just as accurate at combat range as the A2. I wound up betting a C-note worth of Push-ups with my OPs SGM that I could clean the standard qualification scenario with a zeroed, open-sighted M4.

So, in the wind, sleet, rain and snow of a dreary November morning at Fort Drum NY a handful of years back, I proceeded to do so. 40 straight, then 18 more until I dropped one at 250m. My NCOs thought they'd better figure it out.

Granted, the stubby barrel does not add to range, but it certainly does not detract from accuracy.

I have compared many a platform to the AR- especially with a rail or a free floated hand guard system, no other combat rifle of old or new design can hold up to it-especially with a standard chrome moly nonchrome plated bore.

The best SKS or AK with issue ball can usually do no beter than about 4-6 inches while a mil-spec M4 with M855 will usually do half or better than that.....

Even an M14, stock issue, will hold not much less than 4 inches with M80 ball. True, occasionally you will find a hammer, but that is the exception, rather than the rule.

The 6.5 Grendel in a lightweight carbine is no significant improvement over the M4 in 556. To take advantage of the better interior ballistics possible from any of the AR sized wildcats (6.8 SPC incl), you NEED as long a barrel as reasonable-out to 26 inches is best. Each inch less of bbl length and you lose approx 25-50 f/s. No real gain of energy nor trajectory, just more blast, recoil and less capacity. (assuming a 6.5 Grendel will push a 120 BTHP at 3000f/s from a 26 inch tube, take of almost 50% (to get to 14.5inches) and assuming only 25 f/s loss per inch and your hot rodded killer slug now is a sedentary 2625fs hole puncher, actually slower than the M855 from an M4. Bigger longer bullet requires higher striking velocity to get the same destabilization effect than a faster, shorter slimmer projectile (I think it is called the Greenhill effect and related to rate of spin and change of media-as in air to flesh in this case).

Hitting a threat with a slightly bigger (.264-.224=.040”) bullet at less than optimum velocity for destabilization and you are back where you started with an M4 at ranges past 250-300m-its design limit.

Add 5.5 inches to the M4 and you get a still stubby tool with a slightly greater range of 400m or so before you lose terminal velocity below the 2400 f/s threshold. I do not recall many squad engagements past 250m in Iraq or other theaters, maybe a rifleman would be called on to fire on a stationary target at range with an M4 and a CCO, but not often. Call the SDM, Redleg or your CAP.

Until there is a quantum leap in technology, the AR is my choice. I know it's limitations, and know when to swap with the 30 caliber.....

Oh, an M4 at 10 lbs with optics and perhaps an aiming light is quite light compared to the 11.5 lbs of a Garand with sling and bayonet, or the M14 with one mag , sling an bayonet....

God Bless and thanks for your service.