What do you guys think of the comparison of the new profile of the m4 compared to most current sub-guns. Is the m4(possibly the whole m-16 line of arms) just an overgrown, body armor piercing, sub-machinegun? Don't flame me out of existince but it really is. What about the p-90? Does the fact that it defeats armor make it an assault rifle? My understanding was that a sub-guns shoot pistol calibers(no armor penetration: mp5).As I understand an assault rifle fires something larger than a pistol but smaller than a battle rifle. The assault rifle usually(?) defeats body armor. Basic question I am getting at. Does the ability of a round to defeat armor change the gun from a sub-gun to an assault rifle
.This atleast seems to be the trend in todays military. Body-armor defeating sub-gun sounds like an oxymoron to me. In my opinion they all go bang just at different rates and decibels
.