Replies

Safety was another concern. The M-4’s bolt can ride forward when the selector switch is on safe, allowing the firing pin to strike a bullet’s primer.
“Numerous soldiers showed us bullets in their magazines that had small dents in the primer,” the Army report said.

Ouch! That could be a real problem. In a combat situation you need to have a round chambered at all times – if not actually in combat the safety should be on and the finger on the selector.

Reliability complaints also found fault with the oil soldiers and Marines used to clean their weapons. In the dusty, sandstorm-plagued battlefields of Iraq, weapons became clogged with sand, trapped by the heavy oil, called CLP.

From my experience weapons oil has been a complaint as far back as 1966.
In Viet Nam (on Army boats) we used axle grease on the exterior of our M2s and M60s, and used motor oil on the interior.
We had a real white glove inspection from a team sent over from Fort Eustis – the only gig was on weapons maintenance. They insisted we use the issue light oil. We cleaned the weapons under their supervision and applied the light oil – and everyone watched the rust immediately form on the barrels. The issued oil was worthless in the high temperature, high humidity salt air.
One size seldom fits all.

Both soldiers and Marines also noted problems with the M-9 9 mm pistol.

But we can’t go back to the tried and true M1911 .45 pistol – unless NATO also changes.

According to a report I read, the M1911 has become the sidearm of choice once again for those who can get their hands on it. The M-9 just doesn't have the same stopping power as the M1911. Tommy Franks himself carried an M1911. When you are to the point where you are using a sidearm, you are not worrying about accuracy or kick so much as you are worried about stopping the jihadi who is fifteen feet away from you and closing fast. Several SF guys complained that they would have to tap a jihadi 3 times with the M-9, while a .45 would do the job with only one tap.

The most popular, iirc, has become everyone's favorite 1911, the Kimber .45. My friend the gunsmith, who is also a range safety officer for a PD down here, swears by the Kimber, as do plenty of others. My prediction? The M9 is quietly shelved as officers and NCO's start carrying the Kimber, NATO standard or no NATO standard.

The complaints about the composition of the gun oil have been confirmed to me by this friend of mine.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

Primer indents are not necessarily a problem. Military priners are 'hard' relative to civilian components for this very reason. M1 Garand ROUTINELY and normally indents the primer of a chambered round. Not a big deal, provided the round is fed from the mag or clip. Spring tension from mag or clip slows the bolt enough that the firing pin strike is light. Without mag/clip some rifles, including M1, can slam-fire. But that is not how they were designed to be used.

And can we PLEASE get news people to learn the difference between bullet and cartridge?

"Numerous soldiers showed us bullets in their magazines that had small dents in the primer,” the Army report said."

This is hardly news, as you probably already know. The whole issue of "slam fires" has been one of the most ballyhooed and yet inconsequential "issues" related to the AR-15 series of weapons. It seems scary, but it's not a problem. The firing pin is light enough and the primers hardened enough to where this is a non-issue, at least in my experience. I've seen hundreds of thousands of rounds fired through ARs in all sorts of conditions, and have personally expended tens of thousands myself, and never experienced a slam-fire.

Cheers,