Colt&FN get M16 Contracts

[HappyGunner]

FN Manufacturing, Columbia, S.C., was awarded on Dec. 21, 2007, a $33,670,649.00 firm-fixed-price, contract for M16A3 and M16A4 Rifles to support the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Marine Corps. Work will be performed in Columbia, S.C., and is expected to be completed by Dec. 31, 2010. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. Web bids were solicited on Sep. 10, 2007, and nine bids were received. TACOM LCMC, Rock Island, Ill., is the contracting activity (W52H09-08-D-0121).

Colt Defense, Hartford, Conn., was awarded on Dec. 21, 2007, a $ 15,925,000.00 firm-fixed-price contract for M16A3 and M16A4 Rifles to support the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Marine Corps. Work will be performed in Hartford, Conn., and is expected to be completed by Dec. 13, 2010. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. Web bids were solicited on Sep. 10, 2007, and nine bids were received. TACOM LCMC, Rock Island, Ill., is the contracting activity (W52H09-08-D-0122).

[Sturmgewehre]

That's good I suppose.

My issued rifle was a M16A2 made by Colt. Great rifle... I wish I could have kept her.

[bennnn]

Thought this was old news... FN has had the top spot since the late 80's.

[HorseSoldier]

HK couldn't afford enough Congressmen to get a dust test on this one, too?

[Greg Bell]

Clearly not. Colt and FN have managed to keep getting contracts for a rifle that consistently gets beaten by HK weapons in actual testing. Yay for lowest bidder and corruption! Sorry troops!

[PPGMD]

So the military could spend $400 for a weapon system that works 99.9916% of the time (553 stoppages of the M-16A4), or they can spend $1,500 on a weapon system that operates 99.9965% of the time. With that $1,100 they can buy ACOGs to top them with.

[Jeffenwulf]

Just have FN send a SCAR-H my way instead and I won't protest.

[Greg Bell]

PPGMD,

If you don't mind my asking, what costs $400 and what costs $1500? Not the XM8 I presume?

And represent the numbers how you like, we know the XM-8 performed SEVEN times better than the m4 in the dust testing. I can't recall how the M16 did. Poorly I can safely assume.

[22-rimfire]

Great. Maybe that will keep Colt around for another 3 years.

[Greg Bell]

Hey, is Colt's president still in favor of the creation of a federal gun permit and gun owner licensing and testing?

[10-96]

Whatever happened to the 6.8SPC and 6.5 Grendel tests?

[Jeff22]

If you were issued an M-16A2, it was NOT made by Colt.

FN has produced ALL the A2s.

[10-96]

Not so Jeff. I was issued a A2 that was made by Hydro-Matic Transmission Corp., Div of General Motors. It had a 1:9 bbl, and that was fine for Reservists until we got mobilized for OIF- then we got FN's with 1:7's. Yes, I still have access to the records- I was the unit armorer.

[PPGMD]

If you don't mind my asking, what costs $400 and what costs $1500? Not the XM8 I presume?

$1,500 is the cost of the 416 with BUIS with the excise tax subtracted out (the stoppage rate was from the XM8 which is likely more expensive but I can't find a cost figure). I am sure that it can get around $1,000 with a large contract since that price for a single gun on a LE demo letter. The $400 is the cost I was quoted that the M16A4 costs the Corps.

The M16A4 has 553 stoppages IIRC, it was from the summer test to determine the amount of lube to use in a desert environment.

Yes seven times better, how about we show what those numbers really mean. Since the M-4 is not related to this contract I will leave those numbers out:
XM8: 99.9965%
MK16 SCAR Light: 99.9962%
416: 99.9961%
M16A4: 99.9916%

Yes the XM8 is 5 times better then the M16A4, above 99% you are splitting hairs.

It seems like people expect that every time that the military orders more rifles that it has to do a competitive test on every single new rifle available on the market. So then the military will have a dozen different weapons in the supply line, or spend billions every year replacing it's entire stockpile.

[p99guy]

XM8 and G36 both suffer in one area....too much full auto will damage(melt) the polymer receiver parts and stop the weapon, long before a M4 overheats and warps the gas tube(which is fixable)....You dont want a melty rifle to repel human wave attacks do ya lol (oh and they get cracks as well)

So while they eat dust, the receiver melting was a tough one for the testers to gloss over. So while the M4 never has been or will be anything near perfect, it works well enough. The G36 on the otherhand will never see widespread use other than Germany, and a license built version for Mexico.
Its as innovative as a plastic Armalite AR18. (and yes I have used G36KE1's)

[Greg Bell]

P99,

PPGMD and I are veterans of a long stalemate on this issue (and Horse too). Be prepared for soul-crushing boredom if you join in.

But, while you are at it, do you want to point me to a source for your information on the XM-8 melting? Just wondering, because NO ONE has been able to do so yet. It is, as far as I can tell, total internet B.S.. Everybody talks about "tests" or "my buddy in special detachment wango tango sez so," but nobody has coughed up anything other than anectodatal (i.e. "trust me") evidence or just links to somebody else on the web that says so. I suspect you have been misinformed, but hey, I would be saying the same thing except one day a few years back I started asking folks for their evidence, and they never were able to come up with anything.

In short, please show me why you said this about the XM-8:

So while they eat dust, the receiver melting was a tough one for the testers to gloss over.

What is your source for this? If you don't have one, fair enough, but I think you are repeating b.s..

By the way, "too much full auto fire" will damage and/or melt any gun, so I presume you are talking about something unique to the XM-8.

The G36 on the otherhand will never see widespread use other than Germany, and a license built version for Mexico.

Although I hesitate to address this because the G-36 is not at issue here, the G-36 is acutally one of the most successful rifles of modern times. Name another new rifle since the 1970s that has been adopted by more militaries? You will notice that it has wide adoption among special forces groups. Odd for gun with so many easily detected flaws.

- Italian Gruppo di Intervento Speciale special operations group of the Carabinieri, Aeronautica Militare for the RIAM Special Forces group. -
French GIGN and RAID.
- Bundeswehr and Bundespolizei (German Federal Police).
- Georgian Army special operating forces, presidential guard.
- Indonesian Army Kopassus and Indonesian Marine Corps Denjaka (G36C and G36K).
- Latvian Army and Speciālo uzdevumu vienība (Latvian special forces).
- Lithuanian Army adopted the G36V and G36KV in 2007. [1]
- Irish Army Rangers.
- Jordan Special Forces.
- Malaysian Army Grup Gerak Khas and Royal Malaysian Police Pasukan Gerakan Khas counter-terrorist units (G36C).
- Nepalese Army.
- Norwegian Navy Kystjegerkommandoen.
- Philippine Navy Special Warfare Group and Philippine Army Light Reaction Battalion.
- Polish police and special forces GROM (G36K), Government Protection Bureau (G36K, G36KV and G36C).
- Portuguese Marine Corps, Portuguese Republican National Guard, Portuguese Air Force Pol�*cia Aérea (military police) and NFOT (former-RESCOM).
- Singaporean STAR unit.
- Spanish Armed Forces (G36E).
- Särskilda Skyddsgruppen (Special Protection Group, SSG) and Nationella insatsstyrkan (National Task Force, NI).
- Royal Thai Navy SEALs, Royal Thai Marines RECON Battalion.
- UKSF, CO19.
- Cypriot National Guard.
- Finnish Border Guard rapid response units.
-

PPGMD,

Here is how the hair splitting worked out in the last test...

XM8: 127 Class I, II and III stoppages.
Mk16 (5.56 SCAR): 226 Class I, II and III stoppages.
HK 416: 233 Class I, II, and III stoppages.
M4: 882 Class I, II and III stoppages.

Either way, the M4, and M16 just don't perform as well. That is why Delta force and Seal team 6 get them, they like to be able to split hairs.

[Wildalaska]

Great. Maybe that will keep Colt around for another 3 years.

LOL....well they made 100 plus before the M16 was even invented..

You do know that Colt defense (M16s) and Colt manufacturing (SAAs and 1911s) are seperate companies...??

Wildmore1911spleasefolksAlaska TM

[Greg Bell]

I wish Colt (not colt defense) would come out with a series 70 1911 with a beavertail, Novaks and no front serrations. I have an XSE and the duckbill and front serrations are annoying. I am probably going to send it to get an Answer backstrap from Novak's like my sweet ass commander...




BTW Wild, Cormack McCarthy RULES! Pynchon stinks!

[Jermtheory]

represent the numbers how you like, we know the XM-8 performed SEVEN times better than the m4 in the dust testing.

one rifles number of failures relative to another is meaningless without the context no(the number of rounds fired)?

that line of reasoning seems to latch onto the number of failures and dismiss the total of rounds fired.

doesnt the percentage give the context far better?

that fraction of a percent may very well be enough justification for a change in a case like this.i wouldnt be the one to tell a soldier in harms way otherwise.

is it the best in sand?apparently not.

but in those conditions its still pretty damn impressive for such an "unreliable weapon" imo.

[Wildalaska]

BTW Wild, Cormack McCarthy RULES! Pynchon stinks!

Pynchon is god, dude

WildseeyasoonAlaska TM

[nemoaz]

An 8 lb 5.56mm.... no thanks.

[Greg Bell]

one rifles number of failures relative to another is meaningless without the context no(the number of rounds fired)?

that line of reasoning seems to latch onto the number of failures and dismiss the total of rounds fired.

doesnt the percentage give the context far better?

that fraction of a percent may very well be enough justification for a change in a case like this.i wouldnt be the one to tell a soldier in harms way otherwise.

is it the best in sand?apparently not.

but in those conditions its still pretty damn impressive for such an "unreliable weapon" imo.

Not really. The test was basically altered after the first round because the M4 malfunctioned about once every six rounds using Colt's suggested oiling method. After they came up with a new lubrication scheme just for the test, then they were able to get it up to one jam in 88 rounds. Who hoo!.

Obviously, there is nothing I can say. The facts are facts. Most of the bad stuff about the XM-8 and 416 is rumor and or/fabrications by people who have decided the M4 is "the best" or "good enuff." Endless claims are made with nothing to back it up. All we know is, when objective testing is done, EVERYBODY else beat the M16 and M4. As for the XM-8, the military tried to adopt it without all the red tape and rigamaroll. Christopher Dodd and Joe Lieberman, along with the rest of the Colt's politicians got the rifle canned because Colt didn't get a chance to compete (apparently, 40 years of putting out a substandard rifle was enough for the Army).

[p99guy]

Ahh Greg your not able to crush my soul even with the full backing of HK lol
The G36 and its off spring is the ultimate British Aerospace/ Sterling AR18, though BA no longer owns HK, the legacy of it lives on. If 100 organizations each own 200 rifles, does that make it universal? When the same question is posed about the P90 PDW on the internet, its deemed a resounding no.
The HK does have one thing going for it, and thats its overall price which makes it more cost effective in initial unit procurement than the M4 from Colt when purchased by anyone that isnt buying 300,000 units at a time(then Colt gives a really nice price break) Hell we can get a G36 cheaper than a MP5 these days at departmental cost. On the all guns melt front, the M16 and variants will warp a gas tube before it destroys the barrel or receiver- while that does put it out of action, its not permately harmed. Sources? being in on tests at Blackwater( you DONT want a XCR rifle either, they pulled out of the tests due to breakage, the SAR21 made it though ok though)
Im glad you love your HK's( I like my P7) but dont try to sell us that they are without problems/23rd century tech made from materials salvaged from Roswell lol.

I do miss ol' Phil Singleton being head of HK training Div, we knocked back a pint or two back in the day.(and it was intertaining to see the USAF combat arms folks as he er ah "damaged" thier rifle range with a HK69) and base housing called the Security Police because bullets was hitting their roofs after going vertical at the berm.(HK21)

So do you get a paycheck from HK ,or are you just an avid fan?

[PPGMD]

Not really. The test was basically altered after the first round because the M4 malfunctioned about once every six rounds using Colt's suggested oiling method. After they came up with a new lubrication scheme just for the test, then they were able to get it up to one jam in 88 rounds. Who hoo!.

The US Army finally acknowledged what veterans on combat has said for years, the M4/M16 work better when well lubed. The training manual was written by supply line people where it's easier to store weapons with less lube. Colt hasn't been involved in writing the training manuals in years. Hk also recommends applying "generous" amounts of lube on the 416 IIRC.

Here is how the hair splitting worked out in the last test...

The M16 wasn't included in that test because it wasn't one of the weapon systems being considered. The M-16 has the rifle length gas system which lowers the amount of junk that enters the weapon, as such it has fewer stoppages then the M-4 with it's carbine length gas system. As I said in the past thread "seven times better" is useless without stoppages. Particularly considered the XM8 has 11 stoppages that required an armorer to fix (about 10% of all it's stoppages), so yeah it has less stoppages but the ones it had were much much worse then the average stoppage on an M4 or M16 (only 2%).

[HappyGunner]

LOOKOUT Colt, FN, H&K CERBERUS is coming