Rowan Scarborough who has written some really great stuff is sadly trying to create a new M4 controversy rehashing old news and adding the efforts of one SF soldier who is refitting an unknown number of Special Forces M4’s.  Keep in mind an A Tm is 12 Special Forces soldiers.   

The Scarborough article implies results from studies show the M4 as highly unreliable but doesn’t specify which specific studies he’s referring to, likely because the studies that were done have been gone over with a fine tooth comb. The direct impingement systems were 1-2% more reliable with the M4 already in the high 90’s. The article goes on to cite sensational weapon failures at the battle of Wanat but doesn’t tell you is that any assault rifle fired on full auto like they were at Wanat would have failed.

Many approach the issue of what should be the issue battle rifle with a BFF weapon in mind and try to make the case for it. That’s not how it’s done. If one looks at our evolution from the Springfield-Garand-M14-M16 there has been at least a very significant if not doubling in performance in the areas of lethality, reliability or weight. There is no battle rifle in existence that gives that kind of technological leap in existence today.

Further the essay holds up weapons competitions as failures because they did not result in a change.  These competitions aren’t always waste. They provide industry motivation to push the technological frontiers. They also serve as occasions to gather performance metrics to counter the BFF weapon debaters and silence the Congressman trying to get a gun deal for the local industry.

While this two part article will generate a lot of discussion it really offers nothing new to the discussion.