Here's my on this. It's been a while since I shot competitively, but I've got lots of experience with the M14 and the M16A2.
When I was enlisted in the 90's, you qualified out to 500 meters with the A2 that had a 1:12 twist. When we would shoot competitions, we pushed that back to 600 yards, and they would still shoot accurately at that range, but you had a greater advantage if you could shoot a heavier bullet out of a 1:9 twist or faster. Shooting the heavier bullet out of the 1:12 seemed to still be a crap-shoot. A 20" or greater barrel in at least a 1:9 twist with the correct loads can be extremely accurate and effective killing machines at least out to 600 yards.
The M14 we would shoot very accurately out to 800 meters. It was heavy and long, but it wasn't nearly as picky about how clean it was. The same round could be shot out of a bolt-action rifle extremely accurately out past 1,000 yards, and it still had plenty of knock-down power at those long ranges.
I knew of a few guys that would plug their gas tubes on the AR to see how far they could shoot, and it would get them out to 800 yards or so, but at that range, the bullet could not maintain enough energy to push through the canvas backing on the target and the depression of the bullet in the paper target indicated that it would be a severe "keyhole" if it would penetrate.
Now I'm not sure what rate of twist the A4 with the shorter barrel has, but I'd have to guess that they increased the twist rate to make up for the shorter barrel. Regardless of the twist rate, the effective range of the A4 must be handicapped considerably when comparing it to it's full-sized counterpart.
Kind of like trying to find the "universal camo", I personally think the US Military is selling themselves short by limiting them to a "universal gun" or even "universal ammo". The A4 would be my weapon of choice of what's currently available for urban warfare and CQB, hands down. Now if we were to go back into an area like Nam where terrain dictated that you wouldn't be engaging a target beyond 500 meters, forget the stubbie and give me an A2. Now that we're in an area such as Afghanistan where longer distances are common and we're fighting against those who out-caliber and out-range us, then bring back the M14 or something along the lines of the AR-10. Yes, it would require additional training of our troops to familiarize them with multiple weapons, but they are tools of the trade, and each tool has a specific purpose and should be used as such. If it means protecting our soldiers and bringing more of them home on their feet, why would anyone hesitate?!
Anonym
When I was enlisted in the 90's, you qualified out to 500 meters with the A2 that had a 1:12 twist. When we would shoot competitions, we pushed that back to 600 yards, and they would still shoot accurately at that range, but you had a greater advantage if you could shoot a heavier bullet out of a 1:9 twist or faster. Shooting the heavier bullet out of the 1:12 seemed to still be a crap-shoot. A 20" or greater barrel in at least a 1:9 twist with the correct loads can be extremely accurate and effective killing machines at least out to 600 yards.
The M14 we would shoot very accurately out to 800 meters. It was heavy and long, but it wasn't nearly as picky about how clean it was. The same round could be shot out of a bolt-action rifle extremely accurately out past 1,000 yards, and it still had plenty of knock-down power at those long ranges.
I knew of a few guys that would plug their gas tubes on the AR to see how far they could shoot, and it would get them out to 800 yards or so, but at that range, the bullet could not maintain enough energy to push through the canvas backing on the target and the depression of the bullet in the paper target indicated that it would be a severe "keyhole" if it would penetrate.
Now I'm not sure what rate of twist the A4 with the shorter barrel has, but I'd have to guess that they increased the twist rate to make up for the shorter barrel. Regardless of the twist rate, the effective range of the A4 must be handicapped considerably when comparing it to it's full-sized counterpart.
Kind of like trying to find the "universal camo", I personally think the US Military is selling themselves short by limiting them to a "universal gun" or even "universal ammo". The A4 would be my weapon of choice of what's currently available for urban warfare and CQB, hands down. Now if we were to go back into an area like Nam where terrain dictated that you wouldn't be engaging a target beyond 500 meters, forget the stubbie and give me an A2. Now that we're in an area such as Afghanistan where longer distances are common and we're fighting against those who out-caliber and out-range us, then bring back the M14 or something along the lines of the AR-10. Yes, it would require additional training of our troops to familiarize them with multiple weapons, but they are tools of the trade, and each tool has a specific purpose and should be used as such. If it means protecting our soldiers and bringing more of them home on their feet, why would anyone hesitate?!
Anonym