the nice thing about the m-4 is it is more mobile than the m16 especially inn vehicles the range is not as good i might say though i would never take a m4a1 into batll for the siple fact that it has become invauable in harsh terrain like iraq as well as others and the army is already staring to phase it out

car-15 are peices of crap its like a bb gun a shortend m4

I'd rather go with an M-16 (A-4 model to be exact).

It's purely looks for me (I would personally feel a little more confident with a medium-sized rifle like the M-16, versus something smaller like the M-4).

As I understand it, most engagments are well within the max range of both rifles, so max range shouldn't be much of an issue (unless you are an SDM).

I'm for 'quad-50s' myself...

I am an M4 fan! Through and through. Being onboard vehicles, heavy or light, the M4 is an invaluable tool. Aside from its compact size, its accuracy, range, and equippable rail system are on par with the M16A4. When you have to hump LRRP equipment into an AO, having the little guy (M4) makes sense in the "fluid battlefield" environment. Its differences from its big brother are negligible in performance.
I'll forego an M14 for the good ol M24 Remington 700. Again, its not the wimpy 5.56 green tip, its high quality 7.62 X 51mm NATO. And the round will definitely let you know you're DRT. (Dead Right There)

Either M-16 A-2 or A-4, or any of the M-4 variants will do fine.
Of course if I had to choose I'd pick the M-4 just cause it's shorter, but not better by any means.

And if I had any choice at all I'd never go back to combat with a stoner type weapon again, friggin garbage.

Gimme a Valmet or something, besides....it's not the weapon, it's the shooter...you can have the baddest rifle in the world and if you can't hit crap with it, it turns into the baddest club in the world.

Plenty of people today still catch a one way trip to hell thanks to a 7.92X57mm out of a Mauser all around the world, cause the shooter knows what he's doing, not cause he's got an M-4 with a M203 and tons of useless crap hanging from it.

weatherman's got the right idea....

Wouldn't Quads be a tad heavy?

not when you drive them. Its much more preferable to reach out and touch someone from a distance....

Like a tank? Makes for a grand entrance.

M-14/A1 is still the best damn rifle I have ever used.

Coachman: It is the only rifle I ever used. I had to qualify with the M-16 but was always issued a M-14. An excellent weapon at 300 meters. Heavy though.

Seeing As I would be in Iraqistan(pun) I would choose an m4 because it has the similar features as the m16 but shorter for CQB But if I had my choice for a main and a backup gun in Iraqistan I would Choose a M1 Garand carbine with 20rd clip in 3006cal (like the Italians came up with post ww2) and a HK US SOCOM MK1 Pistol with red dot scope. If I had That and a Months worth of MRE's I could go LONEWOLF In Iraqistan.

WEAPON OF MY CHOICE

Ok Coachman -- what is it? It looks like a cross between the M1 and the M14.

Correct me if I'm wrong but that looks like a FN Model 49 From the Argentine Navy .308 Cal 20 round mag you could get one for around $700 if I remember corectly

[IMG]www.gun-world.net/old/ italy/beretta/bm59/bm59.htm[/IMG]

THIS IS NOT A M14 OR M1A OR M1 SOCOM. ITS A ITALIAN BM59 ITS A M1 GARAND WITH A A LITTLE MODIFICATION

quote:

www.gun-world.net/old/ italy/beretta/bm59/bm59.htm

hmmmm, brings up a japanese website with no link to english.

H&K G3 is the best

I would go for the M4. It is more useful in urban warfare/