M4 potency/accuracy

[taco86 156]

So much BS refeeding going on here...  The 5.56 was not designed as a "maiming round", infact it's lethatlity when tumbling inside soft tissue is often greater than a higher gr rounds that have less tendencie to yaw inside the target...  The major reason for moving to 5.56 was to introduce a significantly lighter cartrige, thus vastly increasing the number of bullets a typical soldier would cary.  Significantly reduced recoil compared to larger rounds also allows for much tighter groupings when firing at high rates of fire.

 

The 5.56 certainly is not a perfect round, and like the rounds it "replaced" still has quirks.  An issue commonly reported is the tendency for the round to swiss cheese thin targets at closer ranges resulting in very little KE transfer.  That being said, the round was designed to kill, and it does so very effectively.

 

The m4 we have in game atm is some kind of abomination though...  You should be able to thread a keyhole at 100m, but in game it's hard to even place rounds consistently on a dinner plate sized target at that range.

Edited March 4, 2014 by taco86

[TheWanderingMan 170]

So much BS refeeding going on here...  The 5.56 was not designed as a "maiming round", infact it's lethatlity when tumbling inside soft tissue is often greater than a higher gr rounds that have less tendencie to yaw inside the target...  The major reason for moving to 5.56 was to introduce a significantly lighter cartrige, thus vastly increasing the number of bullets a typical soldier would cary.  Significantly reduced recoil compared to larger rounds also allows for much tighter groupings when firing at high rates of fire.

 

The 5.56 certainly is not a perfect round, and like the rounds it "replaced" still has quirks.  An issue commonly reported is the tendency for the round to swiss cheese thin targets at closer ranges resulting in very little KE transfer.  That being said, the round was designed to kill, and it does so very effectively.

 

The m4 we have in game atm is some kind of abomination though...  You should be able to thread a keyhole at 100m, but in game it's hard to even place rounds consistently on a dinner plate sized target at that range.

 

I'm simply repeating what I was taught during skill at arms lessons in phase 1 + 2 training bro, instructors said that we switched from the SLR to L85 because the round was lighter and more likely to maim rather than kill.

 

Not trying to discredit your info because it makes perfect sense. I'm simply repeating what I've heard from qualified 'experts'.

Edited March 4, 2014 by TheWanderingMan

[taco86 156]

I'm simply repeating what I was taught during skill at arms lessons in phase 1 + 2 training bro, instructors said that we switched from the SLR to L85 because the round was lighter and more likely to maim rather than kill.

 

Not trying to discredit your info because it makes perfect sense. I'm simply repeating what I've heard from qualified 'experts'.

My post came off a bit harsh, sorry for that, just woke up and no coffee for me yet.

[hellcat420 212]

While this is true. It was never considered or thought to be "more humane" it was designed to wound. A wounded man ties up resources and manpower than outright killing a man.

if you shoot a man and kill him you take one person out of the fight, if you wound him you take 2-3 people out of the fight.

[Irish. 4886]

Its super realistic that if my handguard or buttstock is not a particular brand and in perfectly new condition that I will not be able to hit anything accurately beyond 20m... especially considering that the barrel of my M4 is in brand new pristine condition. Its the buttstock that really makes the bullet fly through the air anyhow...

 

DERP. 

[gomeowmeow 45]

dayz, where ARs shoot 5 inch groups at 20 meters

[rybo 171]

Anyone who is former military (mostly expert shooters) will understand this and i hope others do as well

 

I have had the M4 quite a few times in game but find its accuracy and potency appalling. I have personally qualified from 50/100/200/300/500m out with iron-sights (Carrying handle for DayZ, like anyone ever uses it for that) that were painted with rifle black and qualified expert numerous times.

Does anyone else feel retarded when you have to pump 10-20 rounds at 10-50m to kill someone in game? Or that you need pristine ACOG or w/e optics to be effective over 100m? Also, since when is an M4A1 full auto? Last i checked it was safe/fire/burst.

 

Topic beat to death.

 

Wouldn't call myself an expert shooter. Never had training past my middle school NRA sponsored shooting team taught by a former Nam Marine. Ahhh the Good O'l Days...Back when we brought guns to school and no one had a second though when you walked on campus..

 

As a hunter I know what your talking about. I shoot yote at 600yards with a 556 M4 type rifle..

 

They destroyed the accuracy unless you put Magpul parts on your gun. Absurd...

 

They destroyed the damage outright and turned it into a bee-bee gun. My Red Rider does double the damage.

 

 

 

 

Last bit. Believe it or not the US Mil has had Full Auto M4A1's. Being used in mass I have no idea but I'm sure you can read the jist at AR Fifteen Dot com.

 

Ive also seen one in RL. Not sure if it was a Sear swap though or such. There not legal in my state so my knowlege on that subject is limited..

 

 

Edited March 4, 2014 by RyBo

[rybo 171]

So much BS refeeding going on here...  The 5.56 was not designed as a "maiming round", infact it's lethatlity when tumbling inside soft tissue is often greater than a higher gr rounds that have less tendencie to yaw inside the target...  The major reason for moving to 5.56 was to introduce a significantly lighter cartrige, thus vastly increasing the number of bullets a typical soldier would cary.  Significantly reduced recoil compared to larger rounds also allows for much tighter groupings when firing at high rates of fire.

 

The 5.56 certainly is not a perfect round, and like the rounds it "replaced" still has quirks.  An issue commonly reported is the tendency for the round to swiss cheese thin targets at closer ranges resulting in very little KE transfer.  That being said, the round was designed to kill, and it does so very effectively.

 

The m4 we have in game atm is some kind of abomination though...  You should be able to thread a keyhole at 100m, but in game it's hard to even place rounds consistently on a dinner plate sized target at that range.

 

Holy shit congrats. You know what your talking about. :beans: :beans: :beans: :beans:

 

Not bashing anyone. It's a common myth that the round was made for wound for kills. The truth without blasting the page is Military politics are no different than the Civilian side. It's all about who you know and how good the deal is.

 

Acknowledgements: Eugene Stoner..

 

^---If you can't surmise that last sentence stick to the wound myth..

Edited March 4, 2014 by RyBo

[Bakercompany86 347]

 

The m4 we have in game atm is some kind of abomination though...  You should be able to thread a keyhole at 100m, but in game it's hard to even place rounds consistently on a dinner plate sized target at that range.

 

Right here.

 

I've been shooting my entire life.  I've fired most firearms available to civilians (within reason).

 

I had an AR-15.  I could have picked a booger out of Lincoln's nose on a penny at 100 yards.  While I don't expect that from a video game M4 (and my AR-15 was built with National Match parts), I shouldn't miss using iron sights at 40 yards, shooting while crouched.  That's just rubbish.

 

As far as the "cone of fire", I've always hated them.  It's fine for hip-firing weapons.  But when using iron sights, there is no reason you can't just let recoil do it's job.  I don't need some artificial BS to "make" me miss.

 

I want my M4 shots from a completely pristine weapon to be 100% accurate up to 100 yards.  I don't care if you want to have weather conditions affect bullet travel, that's fine.  But on a clear day/night, at 40 yards, with my iron sights clearly on the kill zone, I shouldn't miss.  It's garbage, and annoying.

 

What I'm referencing happened last night.  I was in a town, crouched, aiming at a Zed from no more than 30-40 yards.  I fired once...missed....fired again...missed....then the zombie came running straight for me.  As it closed the gap, I fired again....missed....and finally when it was roughly 15 feet away, I fired and finally hit it.  Rubbish.

[St. Jimmy 1631]

Yeah I hope the accuracy gets more realistic. If I can shoot with RK62 (almost a copy of AK47) crouched with iron sights without my glasses from 150m score 88/100 and I can't hit a shit with any weapon in DayZ. The spread is just wrong atm.

[hotcakes 348]

You can tell Rocket wanted the M4 as a cqc weapon for whatever reason. Otherwise, we would have M-16s.

[Bakercompany86 347]

You can tell Rocket wanted the M4 as a cqc weapon for whatever reason. Otherwise, we would have M-16s.

 

That's definitely a valid idea.  It does indeed seem like it was meant to be a CQC to short range option and literally nothing beyond that.  Which I guess won't be as big of a problem once more weapons are added.  I haven't found an SKS yet but I would like to test one out.

[taco86 156]

You can tell Rocket wanted the M4 as a cqc weapon for whatever reason. Otherwise, we would have M-16s.

I'm still hoping that once smgs are added, the m4 can be revamped to function more like it historically does.  The m16 though!  Boy would I love an m16a4 with (s-1-3) select fire, a 500m semi auto 5.56 rifle would be extremely good for this game.

[rybo 171]

That's definitely a valid idea.  It does indeed seem like it was meant to be a CQC to short range option and literally nothing beyond that.  Which I guess won't be as big of a problem once more weapons are added.  I haven't found an SKS yet but I would like to test one out.

 

Can't be. Hes former military. He would know that a barrel with a 14.5" vs 20" is not going to make much of a difference especially with a semi-auto...

 

I use a 16" out past 600yards with a M4 type rifle (Piston-XCR). It's no less accurate than my 20". All you gain really is FPS..Talking a whooping 50-FPS per inch for a total of only 350-FPS gain on 20" vs a 14". My paint ball gun shoots at a higher FPS.

 

To top that off. My 16" is more accurate cause it has a 1/7 twist allowing for bigger grain bullets vs my 20" 1/9 twist....

 

Maybe a Mil or former Military member can chime in. I believe that is the reason why we basically switched to the 14.5" barrels. The A2/3 is 1/9 twist which are best suited for 55grain(XM193) bullets. The 1/7 which is the new standard handles the 62grain(XM855). The reason for the switch is because they were getting the same accuracy and range with a slightly better material penetration granted with a slightly steeper drop. The Pro's out weighted the Cons...

 

I personally use 62grain and larger for shots beyond 500yards and the 55grains for plinking and target.

 

 

 

My conclusion..He had nothing to do with it. Blame one of the under paid Devs lulz. Someone put a 1 when it should have been a 0..

Edited March 4, 2014 by RyBo

[taco86 156]

Rybo, I'm not former mil, but a 20 inch barrel is slightly more accurate at extended ranges than a 14.5.  The reality is that the difference in accuracy is very minute, and pretty much nonexistent inside of 300m though.  At extremely exaggerated ranges (like 800m) the 20 inch is going to be significantly better though.

 

Here is a reasonable article on the effect of barrel length on 5.56 nato ammo.

 

http://sadefensejournal.com/wp/?p=1093

 

Using m855 ammo, the difference in muzzle velocity between a 20 inch barrel and a 14.5 is right around 300 fps...  That's more than a 10% increase in velocity, which in the world of terminal ballistics, is actually quite significant.

 

Beyond accuracy, and gyroscopic stability, there is of course that "magic" 2,500 fps needed for the bullets to properly fragment.  The 20 inch barrel carries a velocity > than 2,500 to quite a further distance than the 14.5 inch, resulting in increased lethality, at greater ranges.  A m855 being fired out of a 20 vs 14.5 carries around 15% more energy as well, again, rather significant.

Edited March 4, 2014 by taco86

[rybo 171]

Rybo, I'm not former mil, but a 20 inch barrel is slightly more accurate at extended ranges than a 14.5.  The reality is that the difference in accuracy is very minute, and pretty much nonexistent inside of 300m though.  At extremely exaggerated ranges (like 800m) the 20 inch is going to be significantly better though.

 

Here is a reasonable article on the effect of barrel length on 5.56 nato ammo.

 

http://sadefensejournal.com/wp/?p=1093

 

Using m855 ammo, the difference in muzzle velocity between a 20 inch barrel and a 14.5 is right around 300 fps...  That's more than a 10% increase in velocity, which in the world of terminal ballistics, is actually quite significant.

 

Beyond accuracy, and gyroscopic stability, there is of course that "magic" 2,500 fps needed for the bullets to properly fragment.  The 20 inch barrel carries a velocity > than 2,500 to quite a further distance than the 14.5 inch, resulting in increased lethality, at greater ranges.  A m855 being fired out of a 20 vs 14.5 carries around 15% more energy as well, again, rather significant.

 

Cheers. Sums up what I believed be true.

 

Glad I got the numbers correct too!

Edited March 4, 2014 by RyBo

[taco86 156]

Essentially all I want Rybo is for there to be room for both the m4a1 and the m16a4 in this game.  I'd also very much like to see a 16inch barrel as a rare drop for the m4 essentially increasing the "fragmentation" range of the bullet by another 50m or so.  Either way, they need to get the m4a1 we have in game functioning as it should first.

 

Edit: I'm not sure what it is, but an m4 with a 16 inch barrel just looks proportionally sexy as hell.  Here is a pic of one with a flip up sight and some very "familiar" mods I snagged from google images.

 

Edited March 4, 2014 by taco86

[SFRGaming 718]

Just for the unnoficial record what kind of optics did you use? If any? And expert is just a score, im no Mark Whalburg here.

Iron Sights

[kragz 156]

I always laugh when people insist the 5.56 NATO was developed to be 'more humane'. Perhaps that was a consideration.

 

Glad you concede.

[rybo 171]

Essentially all I want Rybo is for there to be room for both the m4a1 and the m16a4 in this game.  I'd also very much like to see a 16inch barrel as a rare drop for the m4 essentially increasing the "fragmentation" range of the bullet by another 50m or so.  Either way, they need to get the m4a1 we have in game functioning as it should first.

 

Edit: I'm not sure what it is, but an m4 with a 16 inch barrel just looks proportionally sexy as hell.  Here is a pic of one with a flip up sight and some very "familiar" mods I snagged from google images.

 

 

That would be awesome! Barrel changes are relatively easy. Especially if you have the multi-tool. Can find them at Walmart for like $10.

 

It would be awesome to find a 20" or 22" barrel and turn your M4A1 into a SPR. Maybe throw a chance at finding lowers and uppers too. Nothing crazy. Just break the gun apart a little more. It would make finding a whole one rare and allow for a more modular weapon without just throwing in every type of M4/16 variant. Dunno, either way I would really like to find different length barrels for range and accuracy.

Edited March 5, 2014 by RyBo

[taco86 156]

 Especially if you have the multi-tool. Can find them at Walmart for like $10.

What if changing m4 (and other ARs and aplicable guns once they are added) parts required some form of multi tool :P

[rybo 171]

What if changing m4 (and other ARs and aplicable guns once they are added) parts required some form of multi tool :P

 

Deal! I don't take my rifle anywhere without my tool set...

Edited March 5, 2014 by RyBo

[-Gews- 7443]

I'm simply repeating what I was taught during skill at arms lessons in phase 1 + 2 training bro, instructors said that we switched from the SLR to L85 because the round was lighter and more likely to maim rather than kill.

 

Actually you switched to the 5.56 because the American influenced forced it upon NATO :lol: goodbye 4.85mm. Same story with the adoption of 7.62x51 over the ill-fated .280 British.