Malaysian army replaces Steyr AUG with M4
- Thread starter Paxter
- Start date
knightrider4
Active Member
6.8mm
Not the right thread I know but I would like to know peoples opinions on the 6.8mm round offered by various small arms manufacturers, particularly for SpecOps.
Not the right thread I know but I would like to know peoples opinions on the 6.8mm round offered by various small arms manufacturers, particularly for SpecOps.
i'm no arms expert but here's my opinion
malaysian jungle is dense and maybe carbine can do the job as good as a full size rifle. both m4 and steyr are good firearms and compact in size but steyr has an upper hand with longer barrel and better reliability than m4. malaysian government is spending that lum sum of money for no gains. unless the army is looking at utilizing the RIS....but still, i would prefer m16a4 as MBR and stick the m4 to commandos
malaysian jungle is dense and maybe carbine can do the job as good as a full size rifle. both m4 and steyr are good firearms and compact in size but steyr has an upper hand with longer barrel and better reliability than m4. malaysian government is spending that lum sum of money for no gains. unless the army is looking at utilizing the RIS....but still, i would prefer m16a4 as MBR and stick the m4 to commandos
Mistaken
The M-4 is not a "Special Ops Weapon". Its used by the majority of infantrymen in the US Army. Also, if you want any weapon to be "accurate" as you said you have to have training. I could pick up any variety of weapons and as long as you show me how to zero the damn thing it will be accurate.Big-E said:
You are the one who is mistaken my friend. It is NOT used by the majority of infantrymen in the US Army. It is a "Special Ops Weapon." According to the DoD, the M4:olsen2782 said:
"has been adopted by United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) and is the preferred weapon of the U.S. Army Special Forces."
They go on to say of the A1 variant:
"The M4A1 can be found in use by many U.S. military units, including the Delta Force, U.S. Navy SEALs, and the U.S. Marine Corps' Radio Reconnaissance Platoons and Force Reconnaissance companies. The M4A1 Carbine is specially favored by counter-terrorist and special forces units for close quarters combat because of the carbine's compactness and firepower."
The weapon most used the the US Army is still the M-16. According to wikipedia...
"The M16A2 remains the main U.S. service rifle in the Army, while the Marine Corps upgraded to the more flexible M16A4 rifles in the 2000s"
You obviously don't know a thing about assault rifles, you cannot just pickup an assualt rifle (never having shot one) and zero it on target. Since you haven't shot three round and full auto blasts your groupings would be horrible!:shudder
Big E, hate to disagree with you, but...
I'm an Armor Officer, served in tanks, Cav, and as an Advisor, and have been assigned an M-4 in all of the above roles. Despite what might be said in some circles the M-4 is not a spec ops weapon. While initially deployed within the Special Operations community, the M-4 now serves across the US Army, I've seen MP's, tankers, Infantrymen, and others assigned it as a primary weapon.
As for picking the M-4 it's a good decision, the weapon is light, well balanced and since the development of rail systems it has incredible versatility, capable of mounting gun lights, optics, lasers, and other devices to improve it's effectiveness. Additionally it's common heritage with the M-16 means less spare parts to stock, simplifying logistics.
I'm an Armor Officer, served in tanks, Cav, and as an Advisor, and have been assigned an M-4 in all of the above roles. Despite what might be said in some circles the M-4 is not a spec ops weapon. While initially deployed within the Special Operations community, the M-4 now serves across the US Army, I've seen MP's, tankers, Infantrymen, and others assigned it as a primary weapon.
As for picking the M-4 it's a good decision, the weapon is light, well balanced and since the development of rail systems it has incredible versatility, capable of mounting gun lights, optics, lasers, and other devices to improve it's effectiveness. Additionally it's common heritage with the M-16 means less spare parts to stock, simplifying logistics.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Nope Steyr and Minimi are about to undergo a significant upgrade and will remain in Australian service for many years to come. I'll post details of the Steyr upgrade when they come to hand.Brutus Caesar said:
I'm inclined to agree with Brian ... mainly on the strength of this bit from the US Army Web Site.
http://www.army.mil/fact_files_site/m-4_carbine/index.html
which says that the M4 [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] " will replace all .45 caliber M3 submachine guns, selected M9 pistols, and M16 series rifles."
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] [/FONT]
http://www.army.mil/fact_files_site/m-4_carbine/index.html
which says that the M4 [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] " will replace all .45 caliber M3 submachine guns, selected M9 pistols, and M16 series rifles."
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] [/FONT]
My personal assault rifle is an M4A1, the one without any rail. it's lightweight, highly reliable and easy to use. it never fail me.
if i see a target at long range, i have several options if i wish to engage the target at that range:-
1. call in artillery (if there's some close by)
2. Use Sniper (if there's one attached to my platoon/squad)
3. Use support weapons like FN MAG or Minimi.
there's several other options but i'm short of time to state all.
if i see a target at long range, i have several options if i wish to engage the target at that range:-
1. call in artillery (if there's some close by)
2. Use Sniper (if there's one attached to my platoon/squad)
3. Use support weapons like FN MAG or Minimi.
there's several other options but i'm short of time to state all.
jamesteo320
New Member
What about the Hk G36K, it is suitable for use in jungle warfare.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
How? So's a Golock. I wouldn't propose replacing Malaysia's Steyr with THAT though...
If you want to contribute to the discussion please do so. Do you have any experience in Jungle warfare or with using a G-36K? If not HOW can YOU say it's suitable?
FYI, the "K" in the name refers to the fact that it is the CARBINE version of the weapon.
Few Army's are prepared to issue carbines as their general service rifle.
Perhaps the G-36 "might" be the best weapon for Malaysia, but military forces don't make decisions based on off hand comments (I hope!). Rigorous testing of the weapons should be the deciding factor, besides cost, political/industrial/technical etc.
Not trying to pick on you, but contribute a bit more usefully or don't bother at all. Either way will comply by the rules.
Cheers
AD.
I agree that in Malaysia, contact at 300m and beyond is less important as you can't see that far.
Besides, every section would have sharpshooters/snipers/LMG etc for those distances.
Here are some points which I guess the M4 may be considered superior over the Steyr.
* light weight, the Steyr is heavy
* versatility, the MAF version of the Steyr has a fixed scope, I think...
* M203 GL. I dunno why... but MAF still uses the M16/M203 combo in Steyr-armed units. Singapore likewise uses the M16/M203 in SAR-21-armed units. I have seen that the Aussies mount GL on their Steyrs.
* Reloading with M16/M4 style weapons are faster, important in urban fighting.
None are BIG crucial differences, but it all adds up.
Besides, every section would have sharpshooters/snipers/LMG etc for those distances.
Here are some points which I guess the M4 may be considered superior over the Steyr.
* light weight, the Steyr is heavy
* versatility, the MAF version of the Steyr has a fixed scope, I think...
* M203 GL. I dunno why... but MAF still uses the M16/M203 combo in Steyr-armed units. Singapore likewise uses the M16/M203 in SAR-21-armed units. I have seen that the Aussies mount GL on their Steyrs.
* Reloading with M16/M4 style weapons are faster, important in urban fighting.
None are BIG crucial differences, but it all adds up.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
I have never used an M4, so I can't say for certain, but I doubt whether the difference is significant. The main difference between the M4 and the Steyr is the length of the barrel. The Steyr has a MUCH longer barrel, providing greater effective range.
The original Steyr had variants that came with a fixed scope OR a modular version depending on the users requirements. Australia called the "modular" variant the F88S and an equally large variety of scopes and other attachments could be fitted to it.
You are correct, Australia AND NZ mount "under-barrel" 40mm GLA's on their Steyr rifles.
Magazine changing speed is going to be more dependant on the skill of the user, not the weapon itself. I very much doubt whether the "speed" difference is measurable in any realistic way.
SASR and 4RAR (Cmdo) recently changed over from using the F-88 Austeyr to the M4. The official reason was it was more suited to "Amphibious" operations. An un-official reason is that the weapon could mount a greater range of "attachments". Of course now they have bitterly complained about the M4's "lack of range" in Iraq and Afghanistan so now SOCOMD issues SR-25 Sniper rifles... A LOT heavier and bulkier than any Steyr variant...
Personally I doubt it was for anything more than the fact that they were A) Allowed to and B) They think it's "cooler".
Ask a USMC soldier who has exercised in Australia what he'd prefer to use. I know the answer as I asked one this very same question once. He wanted to use my F-88C (and truth be known I wouldn't have minded a go at his M4)... The reason why? "Cause Steyrs are the sh*t man"...
Moral of the story? "The grass is ALWAYS greener"...
I'd rather we stick with the Steyr.
Much of our Infantry converted from G36 to G36k because the performance is close enough (and the same at the distances which you said are usual in Malaysia) and the handling of the shorter K is better.
Just a small comment and nothing more to contribute because I have defenitely not really an idea of jungle infantry warfare.
Just a small comment and nothing more to contribute because I have defenitely not really an idea of jungle infantry warfare.
Are you in the service and experienced with Steyr? If yes, I've nothing much to say since I am not, but from talking to the serving soldiers, nothing good about Steyr came out from them and most prefer M16 over Steyr.
Nothing good about the Steyr??? What do they say about it? I can't find a single thing WRONG with the Steyr (except perhaps that you can't fire it easily from the opposite shoulder, but it can be done), and I've used it for six years.
When you consider the extra length and reliability issues of the M16 and the lack of power for the M4 of the same length as a Steyr, I can't think why anybody wouldn't prefer the Steyr for conventional infantry work (CQB is another matter).
Unless Malaysian Steyrs are of lower quality... but since ours are F88s that seems highly unlikely.