Jeds Pack [WiP] On hold for a month or so

That sucks...the m4 has approx. a 1 in 500 chance of jamming every time it shoots, the newer m16s have less than a 1 in 1000 chance of jamming according to an us army study. If I was a marine, I would be pretty sad.

Not sure how true that us considering they share the exactly same internal parts... The marines have been testing the m4s fie the past few months and havent reported anything anything about problems

It is due to the m16's direct impingement system. Basically, the gasses following the bullet in the barrel go up a little tube and go push the bolt back. With a 20 inch barrel, this system usually works fine, but the closer the port that the gas enters through is to the chamber, the more the gas has a harder time getting into the little tube, increasing the likelyhood of a failiure. Due to the shorter barrel of carbines, the gas entrance port has to be closer to the chamber. Here is a gif that demonstrates how direct impingement works: infothread.org/Weapons%20and%20Military/...6/gasimpingement.gif

Boulder119 wrote: It is due to the m16's direct impingement system. Basically, the gasses following the bullet in the barrel go up a little tube and go push the bolt back. With a 20 inch barrel, this system usually works fine, but the closer the port that the gas enters through is to the chamber, the more the gas has a harder time getting into the little tube, increasing the likelyhood of a failiure. Due to the shorter barrel of carbines, the gas entrance port has to be closer to the chamber. Here is a gif that demonstrates how direct impingement works: infothread.org/Weapons%20and%20Military/...6/gasimpingement.gif

but the M16 has a longer barrel than the M4? but you said a shot barrel jams more???

M16 has a long history of jamming.

Boulder119 wrote: It is due to the m16's direct impingement system. Basically, the gasses following the bullet in the barrel go up a little tube and go push the bolt back. With a 20 inch barrel, this system usually works fine, but the closer the port that the gas enters through is to the chamber, the more the gas has a harder time getting into the little tube, increasing the likelyhood of a failiure. Due to the shorter barrel of carbines, the gas entrance port has to be closer to the chamber. Here is a gif that demonstrates how direct impingement works: infothread.org/Weapons%20and%20Military/...6/gasimpingement.gif

Oh i completely forgot about that! true there was a problem with the gasblock being shorter on the M4 but i guess they figure something out since they were given the all clear to dump the M6 asap.

@Penguin the gas block on the M16 is longer and works much better than the M4 thats the problem hes talking about.

TankHunterCobra wrote:

Boulder119 wrote: It is due to the m16's direct impingement system. Basically, the gasses following the bullet in the barrel go up a little tube and go push the bolt back. With a 20 inch barrel, this system usually works fine, but the closer the port that the gas enters through is to the chamber, the more the gas has a harder time getting into the little tube, increasing the likelyhood of a failiure. Due to the shorter barrel of carbines, the gas entrance port has to be closer to the chamber. Here is a gif that demonstrates how direct impingement works: infothread.org/Weapons%20and%20Military/...6/gasimpingement.gif

but the M16 has a longer barrel than the M4? but you said a shot barrel jams more???

M16 has a long history of jamming.

Neither the m16 nor the m4 are marvels of reliability, but the m16 is more reliable. The 'nam era m16's had a 1 in 500 chance of jamming, but the newer ones have below 1 in 1000. But the m4 is a 1 in 500 chance. The point is that the m16 has bad reliability, but the m4 is worse. Don't get me wrong though, neither of them is a bad gun.