[Neal in GA]

It's not "hype", and there may or may not have been politics in ditching the M14. But regardless, let me ask you a question, MT:

If you or a well-trained soldier shoot an M4 or M16 in burst mode at a man-sized target at say, 150 yards, how many shots will hit it? The answer is probably two, and possibly three.

If you shoot an M14 in burst mode (assuming they made this), at the same distance, how many rounds would hit the target? The answer is ONE.

The military wants an *effective* 3-rd burst mode in their standard issue rifles, for better or worse, for whatever reason. There is NOTHING you can do to improve the M14, to make it hit multiple shots on the same target, save making it nearly as heavy as a BAR, and then it's no longer a standard infantry rifle. Sure a 300-lb cornfed bubba with hands of steel can hold the gun tight enough to keep it on target in burst mode, but not the average soldier. That is apparently unacceptable to the military. Right?

End of story (until the .mil changes their doctrine on 3-round burst).

The Army would never use burst on a target at 150m. It's a moot point. Burst on M16s is only used when starting an ambush or to provide covering fire. Aimed fire at individual targets on select fire modes of operation is entirely irrelevant. The standard combat load (though most carry more) of an M16 is 7 magazines. How long do you think that'll last on burst? Even in MOUT (urban combat operations), we still use the semi-auto mode of fire. We have SAWs (and M240, M2 depending on mission) for the rock and roll stuff.