PDA

View Full Version : What do you guys think about this M4 setup?


doughboy334
07-21-2008, 5:15 PM
Well he has an M4, but I'm going to do almost the exact thing when I buy my DD rail. I only have a carry handle, no BUIS (yet).

http://img110.imageshack.us/img110/4705/87885gk0.jpg

Lance Cpl. Aaron S. Garcia shoots an M-4 carbine during close quarters battle sustainment training at the Central Training Area’s Range 8 . The Marine Corps Base Provost Marshal’s Office Special Reaction Team conducted the training to improve the SRT members’ skills with the M-4 carbine and M-9 pistol during several live-fire combat drills. Garcia is a military policeman with SRT.
(Photographer: Lance Cpl. Richard Blumenstein : III Marine Expeditionary Force Public Affairs)

from http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=134050

Guntech
07-21-2008, 5:22 PM
looks sweet! seems kind of pointless since you already have the iron sights though...

doughboy334
07-21-2008, 5:24 PM
the eotech helps alot in close to medium aiming

J_Rock
07-21-2008, 5:24 PM
Looks like they might have some wandering zero issues with their eotechs ;)

super six-four
07-21-2008, 5:27 PM
My buddy had a set up like that. It was really front heavy. He eventually took the EOtech off and went with iron sights.

Ballistic043
07-21-2008, 5:30 PM
silly setup!

vandal
07-21-2008, 5:53 PM
There's not much to like about that carbine.

Bad: Non-frefloat handguards

Bad: Eotech

Bad X2: Eotech on non-frefload handguards

Bad x3: Eotech on non-free-floated-handguards, forward mounted

Bad: Old-school M4 stock

Bad: Carry handle

Don't know what that target designator is but I will give it the benefit of the doubt

Bad: remote pressure switch
Bad x 2: remote mounted in a bad location

Bad: standard trigger guard

Why would he not pull off the carry handle and move the Eotech to the receiver where it belongs?

aplinker
07-21-2008, 6:17 PM
There's not much to like about that carbine.

Bad: Non-frefloat handguards

Bad: Eotech

Bad X2: Eotech on non-frefload handguards

Bad x3: Eotech on non-free-floated-handguards, forward mounted

Bad: Old-school M4 stock

Bad: Carry handle

Don't know what that target designator is but I will give it the benefit of the doubt

Bad: remote pressure switch
Bad x 2: remote mounted in a bad location

Bad: standard trigger guard

Why would he not pull off the carry handle and move the Eotech to the receiver where it belongs?

There's nothing wrong with an eotech, but the answer for a lot of your questions is that he's in the military, he gets what he's issued, and BUIS are likely not something common, so he gets a carry handle and has to make do.

Prowler
07-21-2008, 7:24 PM
There's nothing wrong with an eotech, but the answer for a lot of your questions is that he's in the military, he gets what he's issued, and BUIS are likely not something common, so he gets a carry handle and has to make do.

+1 Look at the shooters in the background. They're all using the same set-up. I don't think it was his choice or configuration.

Pryde
07-21-2008, 7:52 PM
Eotech on handguards = Epic Fail

There's no better way to melt the seals inside the housing and let the nitrogen out of the scope.

paladin4415
07-21-2008, 8:35 PM
That must be an older pic. I see military units training where I work all the time, and nobody has that bad a setup any more. Besides, most, if not all Eotech's have been scrapped by the military.

Solidsnake87
07-21-2008, 8:43 PM
I use that set-up on my CAR A2 carbine--cept with an aimpoint. Its a functional set-up but it is annoying to have the dot site so far forward from the irons. The rear irons block the dot easily and really force you to keep a consistent hold on the rifle. There is no freedom of movement of your head with respect to the site in this set-up at all. The set-up also slows reaction time on distanced targets, Just my opinion. I plan on undoing my setup and putting the aimpoint on a traditional M4. CAR rifles seem to be more fun as stock rifles, imo. Definitely looks cool. I saw my particular CAR setup in a RRA ad and built mine up like it--just to find out I should have just placed the dot on an M4 type carbine.

http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/5057/img1810vc6.jpg

Eotech on handguards = Epic Fail

There's no better way to melt the seals inside the housing and let the nitrogen out of the scope.

I actually seem to find lots of pics of this setup in use with our troops. Perhaps they know something about it I don't? I can definitely argue that flip up rear sites with the dot close to the face is infinitely better for comfort and reaction time. I used an Eotech on the ultimak AK mount that fried after 10 range sessions. The heat in the ultimak mount really builts during rapid fire. If you use the AIMpoint high mounts this is not an issue at all. Ultimak replaced my site. On AR carbines, however, this really should not be a problem--I've shot my AR like this for the past year and through several high-round-count, rapid-fire strings.


http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/4718/5121ak8.jpg

5968
07-21-2008, 8:48 PM
Eotech on handguards = Epic Fail

There's no better way to melt the seals inside the housing and let the nitrogen out of the scope.

:iagree:

aplinker
07-21-2008, 9:19 PM
I use that set-up on my CAR A2 carbine--cept with an aimpoint. Its a functional set-up but it is annoying to have the dot site so far forward from the irons. The rear irons block the dot easily and really force you to keep a consistent hold on the rifle. There is no freedom of movement of your head with respect to the site in this set-up at all. The set-up also slows reaction time on distanced targets, Just my opinion. I plan on undoing my setup and putting the aimpoint on a traditional M4. CAR rifles seem to be more fun as stock rifles, imo. Definitely looks cool. I saw my particular CAR setup in a RRA ad and built mine up like it--just to find out I should have just placed the dot on an M4 type carbine.

http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/5057/img1810vc6.jpg



I actually seem to find lots of pics of this setup in use with our troops. Perhaps they know something about it I don't? I can definitely argue that flip up rear sites with the dot close to the face is infinitely better for comfort and reaction time. I used an Eotech on the ultimak AK mount that fried after 10 range sessions. The heat in the ultimak mount really builts during rapid fire. If you use the AIMpoint high mounts this is not an issue at all. Ultimak replaced my site. On AR carbines, however, this really should not be a problem--I've shot my AR like this for the past year and through several high-round-count, rapid-fire strings.


http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/4718/5121ak8.jpg

That guy is definitely NOT military.

Solidsnake87
07-21-2008, 9:42 PM
It was posted on the militarytimes website a while back. I thought it a cool pic. Special forces of some type maybe?

Pryde
07-21-2008, 9:47 PM
It was posted on the militarytimes website a while back. I thought it a cool pic. Special forces of some type maybe?

LOL,
I think you meant to say "speshul" forces. Or maybe "special needs" forces.

LIFEWITHOUT
07-21-2008, 10:11 PM
You keep your iron sights to back up a damaged SNEOSNECK.

Thado
07-21-2008, 11:07 PM
all that heat from a the barrell and the gas tubes (if not piston driven) will do lots of bad things to that dot sight.

DULLYJAY
07-22-2008, 9:11 AM
Not a thing bad haveing the sight up there, if you have the right mount.
The ARMS #39
http://www.impactguns.com/store/ARMS-39.html

Mac Attack
07-22-2008, 9:15 AM
... Besides, most, if not all Eotech's have been scrapped by the military.

Is this true? I thought the military was all hot and heavy about Eotechs. :confused:

haodoken
07-22-2008, 9:41 AM
Is this true? I thought the military was all hot and heavy about Eotechs. :confused:

Nope it's all about the AIMPOINT CompM4 type sight with the military. The eotechs are still popular with LE. All the infantry types (Army) I've served with have some sort of AIMPOINT M4 or an ACOG.

CHIGGA73
07-22-2008, 9:52 AM
you guys talk about the bad about the rifle...

all i saw was a guy with a rifle, being used like it should.

full auto or 3rnd burst? 30rnd mags?

i'd shoot the heck out of it if the military gave it to me and gave me ammo.

i don't see the problem here. i could live with it. I like it!

now building a CA compliant one like that...I have to agree with everyone's beefs.

Army
07-22-2008, 12:25 PM
The rifle is configured for CBC. The EOtech out front, keeps the sight body from blocking the shooters view of a room, roof, or courtyard. The carry handle is much stronger than any BUIS, and will take a hell of a lot more abuse.

The mag well grip (he's not holding the magazine) is very secure and compact, much needed when the team has stacked and is moving fast. The laser/light switch is in the perfect place for this hold.

Facing forward to present the most body armor, keeping both eyes open while shooting, heel-to-toe walking in a semi-crouch. This Marine is doing everything right.

Once you've been there, you better understand why that rifle is built that way. It ain't for "tacticool", but for efficiency.

aplinker
07-22-2008, 3:46 PM
I agree, but it's still making do with what he can get in the mil.

There are better solutions available.

The EOTech on the rail is STILL bad for a couple of reasons (EO's are heat sensitive and a non FF rail will shift POI).



The rifle is configured for CBC. The EOtech out front, keeps the sight body from blocking the shooters view of a room, roof, or courtyard. The carry handle is much stronger than any BUIS, and will take a hell of a lot more abuse.

The mag well grip (he's not holding the magazine) is very secure and compact, much needed when the team has stacked and is moving fast. The laser/light switch is in the perfect place for this hold.

Facing forward to present the most body armor, keeping both eyes open while shooting, heel-to-toe walking in a semi-crouch. This Marine is doing everything right.

Once you've been there, you better understand why that rifle is built that way. It ain't for "tacticool", but for efficiency.

USN CHIEF
07-22-2008, 3:51 PM
That guy is definitely NOT military.

Right, he is with BWO. I really don't see anything wrong with the OP's set up. It has been proven in "Actual" combat to work so all you internet commandos quit criticizing something actually does work and has been proven to work in combat.:p

aplinker
07-22-2008, 4:18 PM
Right, he is with BWO. I really don't see anything wrong with the OP's set up. It has been proven in "Actual" combat to work so all you internet commandos quit criticizing something actually does work and has been proven to work in combat.:p

We're not criticizing the OPs set-up. He's asking whether or not it's the best choice. In which case, it's not.

Sure, it works and is a great solution if you're given the military issued parts, but you can make a better solution as a civilian and are willing to pick your own.

I'm sorry if we offended you for making fun of your boyfriend's picture. :p

Casual Observer
07-22-2008, 5:19 PM
That guy is definitely NOT military.

I know a guy who served along side that particular old timer in 2002 in Afghanistan. He is an OLD school SF guy IIRC.

Pryde
07-22-2008, 5:23 PM
The rifle is configured for CBC. The EOtech out front, keeps the sight body from blocking the shooters view of a room, roof, or courtyard. The carry handle is much stronger than any BUIS, and will take a hell of a lot more abuse.

The mag well grip (he's not holding the magazine) is very secure and compact, much needed when the team has stacked and is moving fast. The laser/light switch is in the perfect place for this hold.

Facing forward to present the most body armor, keeping both eyes open while shooting, heel-to-toe walking in a semi-crouch. This Marine is doing everything right.

Once you've been there, you better understand why that rifle is built that way. It ain't for "tacticool", but for efficiency.

That still doesn't account for the fact that the hot handguards will melt the EOtechs seals and that the KAC RAS is non-FF, so will not retain zero.

Although the magwell hold is effective for engaging single targets, you are going oversweep multiple targets due to the short grip axis, a VFG is much better. There is no reason why you should be using a magwell hold when there is a rail in place for a VFG.

Come on man, you've been in the Army a long time, I think you of all people would know that not everything they do in the military has sound logic behind it. There are plenty of decisions being made by some O3 in an air conditioned office deciding what is "best" for the troops.

Base PMO isn't exactly a front-line unit, even if it is a "SRT". I highly doubt that config would fly in a grunt unit.

scotthmt
07-22-2008, 6:29 PM
I personally dont like the look.

Army
07-22-2008, 7:08 PM
That still doesn't account for the fact that the hot handguards will melt the EOtechs seals and that the KAC RAS is non-FF, so will not retain zero.
He will engage with single taps, not burst, so the heat level will not rise too high

Although the magwell hold is effective for engaging single targets, you are going oversweep multiple targets due to the short grip axis, a VFG is much better. There is no reason why you should be using a magwell hold when there is a rail in place for a VFG.
Many of us have found FG's offer a less secure hold, and too often result in an awkward hold. The mag well hold, in the stance that Marine is in, is solid and far less prone to "oversweep" than you think. Not to mention that you take care of your sector first, and do not engage out of it...the team will handle the rest of the room. Rails are part of the weapon system now. Troops have little choice in handguards

Come on man, you've been in the Army a long time *sigh* Ya got that shiite right :) , I think you of all people would know that not everything they do in the military has sound logic behind it. There are plenty of decisions being made by some O3 in an air conditioned office deciding what is "best" for the troops.
Which is why boots adapt what works. We accept what we are given, then modify the weapons and systems to the environment. This Marine and his team has done just that

Base PMO isn't exactly a front-line unit, even if it is a "SRT". I highly doubt that config would fly in a grunt unit.
Seen it often enough to not doubt it at all
...

Pryde
07-22-2008, 8:11 PM
...

Nevermind actually,
I realized I had forgotten the lesson that I learned long ago which is: there's no sense arguing with a SNCO.

Good day sir.

USN CHIEF
07-22-2008, 8:15 PM
Nevermind actually,
I realized I had forgotten the lesson that I learned long ago which is: there's no sense arguing with a SNCO.

Good day sir.

You got that right:D:p