Nobody doubts the M4 is an assault weapon. Are there any material differences between an M4 and an AR15?

[BULLDOG]

Typical of gun grabbers to make an outrageous comment (AR-15's are easily converted to full automatic) and then move on without comment as if it is fact. The fact is that it's not easy and some AR's could blow up and the biggest thing is that no gunsmith would touch one because it could get you substantial time in the slammer. To my knowledge there is no account of a "converted" AR used in a crime.

Not only are converted ARs not used in crime but neither are legal Class III machine guns. If I remember correctly only one Class III has ever been used in a crime and that is when an off duty policeman found his wife in bed with another guy and grabbed his privately owned M-16 and shot the SOB. A crime of passion.

ARs and what these stupid Moon Bats call "assault weapons" are not the weapon of choice for criminals. Not by a long shot. The weapons of choice are cheap handguns that can be easily concealed.

Only about 400 long guns are used for crime in a year and ARs are only a subset of that category. There are more shotguns used in crime than ARs. Didn't Joe Dufus tell us to arm ourselves with shotguns?

People who use the term "assault" weapons fail to realize the definition of the word. Are we to change the name of a chef's knife used to 'attack' or 'assault' someone to an, heaven forbid, ASSAULT KNIFE. The left is great at throwing incendiary terms around such as calling a protest an insurrection.

Misuse of words does tend to become a problem. I find the use of the term communist to describe anything the poster doesn't particularly care for to be extremely funny.

 

[BULLDOG]

The M4 is the main rifle used by the US military, and no one could question that it is an assault rifle. The M4 is capable of full automatic fire, and 3 round burst, and the AR15 is not. Of course, it would be illegal, but the AR15 can easily be converted to allow those types of fire. Other than that difference, what makes an M4 an assault weapon, and an AR15 not?

I’ve got nothing else to do so I’ll be your huckleberry.

Other than a slew of cosmetic differences and the selective fire options on the M-4, there really isn’t a major difference. The only one of note is barrel length. Long guns sold to civilians must have a minimum barrel length of 18” (generally 18.5” or longer) without a Federal license.

Which is why I question the ban on the sale of M-4 style firearms to the public. I do not believe, and will never be convinced that ANY firearm or weapon available to the US Military and/or LEOs should be restricted from possession or use by the US Citizenry.

While I disagree with you about whether all guns available to the military should be available to civilians, yours is the first unambiguous and strait forward answer from a right winger in the entire thread. Thank you.

 

[Concerned American]

Typical of gun grabbers to make an outrageous comment (AR-15's are easily converted to full automatic) and then move on without comment as if it is fact. The fact is that it's not easy and some AR's could blow up and the biggest thing is that no gunsmith would touch one because it could get you substantial time in the slammer. To my knowledge there is no account of a "converted" AR used in a crime.

Not only are converted ARs not used in crime but neither are legal Class III machine guns. If I remember correctly only one Class III has ever been used in a crime and that is when an off duty policeman found his wife in bed with another guy and grabbed his privately owned M-16 and shot the SOB. A crime of passion.

ARs and what these stupid Moon Bats call "assault weapons" are not the weapon of choice for criminals. Not by a long shot. The weapons of choice are cheap handguns that can be easily concealed.

Only about 400 long guns are used for crime in a year and ARs are only a subset of that category. There are more shotguns used in crime than ARs. Didn't Joe Dufus tell us to arm ourselves with shotguns?

People who use the term "assault" weapons fail to realize the definition of the word. Are we to change the name of a chef's knife used to 'attack' or 'assault' someone to an, heaven forbid, ASSAULT KNIFE. The left is great at throwing incendiary terms around such as calling a protest an insurrection.

Misuse of words does tend to become a problem. I find the use of the term communist to describe anything the poster doesn't particularly care for to be extremely funny.

Or like calling a riot a peaceful protest, eh? Portland, Seattle, Minneapolis, St. Louis, Marxist/Communist BLM, 2020.

 

[Concerned American]

first unambiguous

The premise of the OP is ambiguous, moron. BTW, unless you are speaking of a narrow waterway, the word is STRAIGHT.

 

[BULLDOG]

This GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call in a veterinarian and have it put down.

It's an honest question. All I want is an honest answer.

It’s not an honest question because the term “assault weapon” is not honest to begin with. There’s no such thing as an assault weapon. It’s literally the same thing as saying a butter knife is just a knife but a butcher’s cleaver is an assault knife. It’s just stupid.

I already acknowledged my mistake in using the term "assault weapon" instead of "assault rifle" earlier in this thread. Does the use of "assault rifle" make the question any more palatable to you?

 

[BULLDOG]

first unambiguous

The premise of the OP is ambiguous, moron. BTW, unless you are speaking of a narrow waterway, the word is STRAIGHT.

Thank you for the correction. I didn't notice your shiny little Grammar Police badge there on your chest. You seem to be quite proud of it.

 

[Paulie]

This GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call in a veterinarian and have it put down.

It's an honest question. All I want is an honest answer.

It’s not an honest question because the term “assault weapon” is not honest to begin with. There’s no such thing as an assault weapon. It’s literally the same thing as saying a butter knife is just a knife but a butcher’s cleaver is an assault knife. It’s just stupid.

I already acknowledged my mistake in using the term "assault weapon" instead of "assault rifle" earlier in this thread. Does the use of "assault rifle" make the question any more palatable to you?

No, it’s the same damn thing. And it’s the reason you’re not getting the answers you’re looking for. The same round the AR15 fires can also be fired from a much less scary looking brown hunting rifle. These are the kinds of details you clearly don’t understand, which make your position on this entire debate weak.

 

[Concerned American]

first unambiguous

The premise of the OP is ambiguous, moron. BTW, unless you are speaking of a narrow waterway, the word is STRAIGHT.

Thank you for the correction. I didn't notice your shiny little Grammar Police badge there on your chest. You seem to be quite proud of it.

Run puppy run.

 

[westwall]

I'm not seeing your point.

What is the material difference between this military issue M24 sniper rifle...

View attachment 489683

...and this extremely popular Remington 700 deer rifle...?


View attachment 489684

Remington Model 700 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

You should start a thread if you are looking for that answer. This thread is about the M4 and the AR15.

Figure it out, Einstein

AR-15 Vs. M4: Which Weapon Is More Formidable? AR-15 vs M4

AR-15 vs. M4 are two varying rifles with striking similarities. AR-15 is easily accessible to civilians. Whereas, the M4 is fully automatic.

www.custom-ar15.com

That is the only attempt at an answer in the entire thread.
1. Barrel - The M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped to receive a grenade launcher.
2 Ammo. - The Ar15 can be chambered for several different shells, but the M4 is only capable of 5.56.
3 Automation - Until 1986, both rifles were legally capable of full automatic fire, but the AR15 was modified in 1986. Conversion back to auto fire is neither hard or expensive, but is illegal. ------------this was noted in the OP.
4 manufacturer
5. legality. This has been discussed, but is not a material difference in the guns, or the way they work. other than the already mentioned full auto capability.
6 Category. This is how they are referred to on paper, and has nothing to do with material differences between the rifles, other than the auto capability.

You did point out that the barrel is shaped a little different, but the purpose of that was to attach grenade launcher. Hardly a material difference in the accuracy, speed, or capability of long term continuous use. You got anything else to add to your list? The rest of the differences in your link are really just distinctions without any real differences.

Yeah...other rifles are also convertible to full automatic fire....

See the North Hollywood shootout where the rifles were converted to fully automatic fire...yet, in the shootout...the two robbers, firing fully automatic at the police didn't manage to kill anyone.....both, however, were killed by police using semi-automatic weapons...

So again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location...in the North Hollywood shootout, the people they shot at were in the open, not in a building, and were behind cover.....so no one was killed by the fully automatic rifle fire.....however, again, both perps, even with their fully automatic rifles, were killed by police with semi-automatic weapons....

It isn't the weapon, it is the target location that makes all the difference....

Case in point...the 1984 FBI shooting, the two criminals had a mini-14 rifle, a semi-automatic rifle, and a pump action shotgun.....they managed to kill 2 FBI agents and wounded 5 others......

Again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location.....in this case, the shooters were good shots.......the FBI weren't so good...

I am curious as to your point...where you would like to go with this....

The point is to find the material differences between the two rifles. In this thread I have learned the M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped so a grenade launcher can attach to it. Other than the auto capability, that is the only difference anybody has been able to mention.

well and the whole auto fire thing that you keep ignoring

I's not hard or expensive to convert an AR15 to full auto capability. It's illegal as hell, and you should be ready to spend a lot of time in prison, but it's not that hard to do.

If you have a file, pretty much any double action gun can be made full auto. The trouble is you can't stop it after you pull the trigger. AR's are simple to convert if you have the selector.

No, they aren't. As someone who actually HAS, legally converted an AR-15 into a M-16 it is actually quite easy if you have a full machine shop. Quite the opposite if you don't. And you need much more than just the selector lever, you need a disconnector, you need to drill the hole for the safety sear in EXACTLY the right position, if you're off by more than a couple of thousandths you're SOL. You have to change the bolt carrier, you have to change the firing pin, and, if you want it to work well, you'll need to upgrade the buffer, and buffer spring.

So, no. If you don't have access to a machine shop, it ain't easy.

 

[Concerned American]

This GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call in a veterinarian and have it put down.

It's an honest question. All I want is an honest answer.

It’s not an honest question because the term “assault weapon” is not honest to begin with. There’s no such thing as an assault weapon. It’s literally the same thing as saying a butter knife is just a knife but a butcher’s cleaver is an assault knife. It’s just stupid.

I already acknowledged my mistake in using the term "assault weapon" instead of "assault rifle" earlier in this thread. Does the use of "assault rifle" make the question any more palatable to you?

Any long gun used to assault another living organism could be termed an assault weapon, I submit, if I shoot a turkey with a black powder rifle, has that turkey been assaulted? I know--ambiguous--just like this useless thread. A waste of time.

 

[westwall]

The M4 is the main rifle used by the US military, and no one could question that it is an assault rifle. The M4 is capable of full automatic fire, and 3 round burst, and the AR15 is not. Of course, it would be illegal, but the AR15 can easily be converted to allow those types of fire. Other than that difference, what makes an M4 an assault weapon, and an AR15 not?

An assault weapon is whatever a given lawmaking body determines it to be – not the military, not gun manufacturers, and not message board posters.

Wrong again, as usual, from the Boards pseudo intellectual jack ass. ANY firearm is defined very precisely by the sum of its parts. Parts that have been designed, and perfected over decades of use.

 

[westwall]

What's the definition of an assault rifle? Ugly and black? The AR 15 could be converted to fire fully automatic with some gunsmith and as a matter of fact you can convert just about any gas operated rifle to fire fully automatic (some easier than others) but it is illegal. The M4 is equipped to fire 3 round bursts so it would properly be an assault rifle.

Most AR lowers are not M-16 cut. In order to make them like M-16s the lower receiver needs to be milled out on the inside and the shelf lowered. Then a hole drilled in the exact right place and a M-16 FCG put in.

It is possible to do if you have the right equipment and know what you are doing. However, the fact that it is illegal as hell to do it dissuades any law abiding citizen from doing it. Only those with criminal intentions would do it.

Having used a M-16 in a war and decades of range time with an AR as a civilian in my opinion the F-A function is fun thing to have but is not necessary.

My son who was in combat in Iraq said they never used the Burst function on their M-4s. He said their fire discipline was to use the machine guns for F-A suppression fire and the semi auto M-4s for more directed fire.

Of course that was different for us in Vietnam. We hardly ever clearly saw the little sonofabitches so we used F-A for pray and spray.

NO AR-15 lower is cut like an M-16. If they were, they are automatically ILLEGAL.

 

[Concerned American]

I'm not seeing your point.

What is the material difference between this military issue M24 sniper rifle...

View attachment 489683

...and this extremely popular Remington 700 deer rifle...?


View attachment 489684

Remington Model 700 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

You should start a thread if you are looking for that answer. This thread is about the M4 and the AR15.

Figure it out, Einstein

AR-15 Vs. M4: Which Weapon Is More Formidable? AR-15 vs M4

AR-15 vs. M4 are two varying rifles with striking similarities. AR-15 is easily accessible to civilians. Whereas, the M4 is fully automatic.

www.custom-ar15.com

That is the only attempt at an answer in the entire thread.
1. Barrel - The M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped to receive a grenade launcher.
2 Ammo. - The Ar15 can be chambered for several different shells, but the M4 is only capable of 5.56.
3 Automation - Until 1986, both rifles were legally capable of full automatic fire, but the AR15 was modified in 1986. Conversion back to auto fire is neither hard or expensive, but is illegal. ------------this was noted in the OP.
4 manufacturer
5. legality. This has been discussed, but is not a material difference in the guns, or the way they work. other than the already mentioned full auto capability.
6 Category. This is how they are referred to on paper, and has nothing to do with material differences between the rifles, other than the auto capability.

You did point out that the barrel is shaped a little different, but the purpose of that was to attach grenade launcher. Hardly a material difference in the accuracy, speed, or capability of long term continuous use. You got anything else to add to your list? The rest of the differences in your link are really just distinctions without any real differences.

Yeah...other rifles are also convertible to full automatic fire....

See the North Hollywood shootout where the rifles were converted to fully automatic fire...yet, in the shootout...the two robbers, firing fully automatic at the police didn't manage to kill anyone.....both, however, were killed by police using semi-automatic weapons...

So again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location...in the North Hollywood shootout, the people they shot at were in the open, not in a building, and were behind cover.....so no one was killed by the fully automatic rifle fire.....however, again, both perps, even with their fully automatic rifles, were killed by police with semi-automatic weapons....

It isn't the weapon, it is the target location that makes all the difference....

Case in point...the 1984 FBI shooting, the two criminals had a mini-14 rifle, a semi-automatic rifle, and a pump action shotgun.....they managed to kill 2 FBI agents and wounded 5 others......

Again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location.....in this case, the shooters were good shots.......the FBI weren't so good...

I am curious as to your point...where you would like to go with this....

The point is to find the material differences between the two rifles. In this thread I have learned the M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped so a grenade launcher can attach to it. Other than the auto capability, that is the only difference anybody has been able to mention.

well and the whole auto fire thing that you keep ignoring

I's not hard or expensive to convert an AR15 to full auto capability. It's illegal as hell, and you should be ready to spend a lot of time in prison, but it's not that hard to do.

If you have a file, pretty much any double action gun can be made full auto. The trouble is you can't stop it after you pull the trigger. AR's are simple to convert if you have the selector.

No, they aren't. As someone who actually HAS, legally converted an AR-15 into a M-16 it is actually quite easy if you have a full machine shop. Quite the opposite if you don't. And you need much more than just the selector lever, you need a disconnector, you need to drill the hole for the safety sear in EXACTLY the right position, if you're off by more than a couple of thousandths you're SOL. You have to change the bolt carrier, you have to change the firing pin, and, if you want it to work well, you'll need to upgrade the buffer, and buffer spring.

So, no. If you don't have access to a machine shop, it ain't easy.

Nothing is easy without the proper tools, I wasn't suggesting it could be converted with a hammer and a screwdriver. SMH.

 

[BULLDOG]

This GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call in a veterinarian and have it put down.

It's an honest question. All I want is an honest answer.

It’s not an honest question because the term “assault weapon” is not honest to begin with. There’s no such thing as an assault weapon. It’s literally the same thing as saying a butter knife is just a knife but a butcher’s cleaver is an assault knife. It’s just stupid.

I already acknowledged my mistake in using the term "assault weapon" instead of "assault rifle" earlier in this thread. Does the use of "assault rifle" make the question any more palatable to you?

No, it’s the same damn thing. And it’s the reason you’re not getting the answers you’re looking for. The same round the AR15 fires can also be fired from a much less scary looking brown hunting rifle. These are the kinds of details you clearly don’t understand, which make your position on this entire debate weak.

Of course, there are several different types of guns that fire the same caliber as others. What makes you think I'm unaware of that? I acknowledged the difference between assault weapon and assault rifle, because assault rifle is a specific term used by the military, and assault weapon is not. Real and verifiable answers to the material differences between those two rifles is pretty specific. If you are unable to offer any of those, or just want to whine about what you imagine my purpose for this thread might be, then you are free to go elsewhere. This thread is not a debate. I made no claims about the differences between the two rifles, other than to discuss claims by others.

 

[westwall]

I'm not seeing your point.

What is the material difference between this military issue M24 sniper rifle...

View attachment 489683

...and this extremely popular Remington 700 deer rifle...?


View attachment 489684

Remington Model 700 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

You should start a thread if you are looking for that answer. This thread is about the M4 and the AR15.

Figure it out, Einstein

AR-15 Vs. M4: Which Weapon Is More Formidable? AR-15 vs M4

AR-15 vs. M4 are two varying rifles with striking similarities. AR-15 is easily accessible to civilians. Whereas, the M4 is fully automatic.

www.custom-ar15.com

That is the only attempt at an answer in the entire thread.
1. Barrel - The M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped to receive a grenade launcher.
2 Ammo. - The Ar15 can be chambered for several different shells, but the M4 is only capable of 5.56.
3 Automation - Until 1986, both rifles were legally capable of full automatic fire, but the AR15 was modified in 1986. Conversion back to auto fire is neither hard or expensive, but is illegal. ------------this was noted in the OP.
4 manufacturer
5. legality. This has been discussed, but is not a material difference in the guns, or the way they work. other than the already mentioned full auto capability.
6 Category. This is how they are referred to on paper, and has nothing to do with material differences between the rifles, other than the auto capability.

You did point out that the barrel is shaped a little different, but the purpose of that was to attach grenade launcher. Hardly a material difference in the accuracy, speed, or capability of long term continuous use. You got anything else to add to your list? The rest of the differences in your link are really just distinctions without any real differences.

Yeah...other rifles are also convertible to full automatic fire....

See the North Hollywood shootout where the rifles were converted to fully automatic fire...yet, in the shootout...the two robbers, firing fully automatic at the police didn't manage to kill anyone.....both, however, were killed by police using semi-automatic weapons...

So again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location...in the North Hollywood shootout, the people they shot at were in the open, not in a building, and were behind cover.....so no one was killed by the fully automatic rifle fire.....however, again, both perps, even with their fully automatic rifles, were killed by police with semi-automatic weapons....

It isn't the weapon, it is the target location that makes all the difference....

Case in point...the 1984 FBI shooting, the two criminals had a mini-14 rifle, a semi-automatic rifle, and a pump action shotgun.....they managed to kill 2 FBI agents and wounded 5 others......

Again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location.....in this case, the shooters were good shots.......the FBI weren't so good...

I am curious as to your point...where you would like to go with this....

The point is to find the material differences between the two rifles. In this thread I have learned the M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped so a grenade launcher can attach to it. Other than the auto capability, that is the only difference anybody has been able to mention.

well and the whole auto fire thing that you keep ignoring

I's not hard or expensive to convert an AR15 to full auto capability. It's illegal as hell, and you should be ready to spend a lot of time in prison, but it's not that hard to do.

If you have a file, pretty much any double action gun can be made full auto. The trouble is you can't stop it after you pull the trigger. AR's are simple to convert if you have the selector.

No, they aren't. As someone who actually HAS, legally converted an AR-15 into a M-16 it is actually quite easy if you have a full machine shop. Quite the opposite if you don't. And you need much more than just the selector lever, you need a disconnector, you need to drill the hole for the safety sear in EXACTLY the right position, if you're off by more than a couple of thousandths you're SOL. You have to change the bolt carrier, you have to change the firing pin, and, if you want it to work well, you'll need to upgrade the buffer, and buffer spring.

So, no. If you don't have access to a machine shop, it ain't easy.

Nothing is easy without the proper tools, I wasn't suggesting it could be converted with a hammer and a screwdriver. SMH.

You implied that all you needed was the selector lever. You don't know anything about AR's if that is your level of knowledge.

 

[BlackSand]

The M4 is the main rifle used by the US military, and no one could question that it is an assault rifle. The M4 is capable of full automatic fire, and 3 round burst, and the AR15 is not. Of course, it would be illegal, but the AR15 can easily be converted to allow those types of fire. Other than that difference, what makes an M4 an assault weapon, and an AR15 not?

.

You missed the boat on all this garbage.

You can fight about the M4 and the AR-15 until the cows come home.
You will never succeed with a gun control effort that attempts to identify firearms by names, types, or parts.
Adaptation an innovation always trumps the effort ... And they should have learned that with past Assault Weapons Ban.

The only way you can stop that is if you ban ... Shoots a bullet ... Which isn't going to happen ...

You are really just pissing in the wind and arguing about the irrelevant, no matter what side of the argument you are on.
You can get a custom made semi-automatic weapon that fires anywhere from a .223 to a 7.62 round for $1000.
It doesn't matter what the fuck they call it, or what it looks like.

.​

 

[BULLDOG]

I'm not seeing your point.

What is the material difference between this military issue M24 sniper rifle...

View attachment 489683

...and this extremely popular Remington 700 deer rifle...?


View attachment 489684

Remington Model 700 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

You should start a thread if you are looking for that answer. This thread is about the M4 and the AR15.

Figure it out, Einstein

AR-15 Vs. M4: Which Weapon Is More Formidable? AR-15 vs M4

AR-15 vs. M4 are two varying rifles with striking similarities. AR-15 is easily accessible to civilians. Whereas, the M4 is fully automatic.

www.custom-ar15.com

That is the only attempt at an answer in the entire thread.
1. Barrel - The M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped to receive a grenade launcher.
2 Ammo. - The Ar15 can be chambered for several different shells, but the M4 is only capable of 5.56.
3 Automation - Until 1986, both rifles were legally capable of full automatic fire, but the AR15 was modified in 1986. Conversion back to auto fire is neither hard or expensive, but is illegal. ------------this was noted in the OP.
4 manufacturer
5. legality. This has been discussed, but is not a material difference in the guns, or the way they work. other than the already mentioned full auto capability.
6 Category. This is how they are referred to on paper, and has nothing to do with material differences between the rifles, other than the auto capability.

You did point out that the barrel is shaped a little different, but the purpose of that was to attach grenade launcher. Hardly a material difference in the accuracy, speed, or capability of long term continuous use. You got anything else to add to your list? The rest of the differences in your link are really just distinctions without any real differences.

Yeah...other rifles are also convertible to full automatic fire....

See the North Hollywood shootout where the rifles were converted to fully automatic fire...yet, in the shootout...the two robbers, firing fully automatic at the police didn't manage to kill anyone.....both, however, were killed by police using semi-automatic weapons...

So again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location...in the North Hollywood shootout, the people they shot at were in the open, not in a building, and were behind cover.....so no one was killed by the fully automatic rifle fire.....however, again, both perps, even with their fully automatic rifles, were killed by police with semi-automatic weapons....

It isn't the weapon, it is the target location that makes all the difference....

Case in point...the 1984 FBI shooting, the two criminals had a mini-14 rifle, a semi-automatic rifle, and a pump action shotgun.....they managed to kill 2 FBI agents and wounded 5 others......

Again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location.....in this case, the shooters were good shots.......the FBI weren't so good...

I am curious as to your point...where you would like to go with this....

The point is to find the material differences between the two rifles. In this thread I have learned the M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped so a grenade launcher can attach to it. Other than the auto capability, that is the only difference anybody has been able to mention.

well and the whole auto fire thing that you keep ignoring

I's not hard or expensive to convert an AR15 to full auto capability. It's illegal as hell, and you should be ready to spend a lot of time in prison, but it's not that hard to do.

If you have a file, pretty much any double action gun can be made full auto. The trouble is you can't stop it after you pull the trigger. AR's are simple to convert if you have the selector.

No, they aren't. As someone who actually HAS, legally converted an AR-15 into a M-16 it is actually quite easy if you have a full machine shop. Quite the opposite if you don't. And you need much more than just the selector lever, you need a disconnector, you need to drill the hole for the safety sear in EXACTLY the right position, if you're off by more than a couple of thousandths you're SOL. You have to change the bolt carrier, you have to change the firing pin, and, if you want it to work well, you'll need to upgrade the buffer, and buffer spring.

So, no. If you don't have access to a machine shop, it ain't easy.

How many of those parts are easily and legally available for purchase? How much of that list can be found on the shelf of any large gun shop? Next, please list any parts that aren't easily purchased.

 

[Concerned American]

I'm not seeing your point.

What is the material difference between this military issue M24 sniper rifle...

View attachment 489683

...and this extremely popular Remington 700 deer rifle...?


View attachment 489684

Remington Model 700 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

You should start a thread if you are looking for that answer. This thread is about the M4 and the AR15.

Figure it out, Einstein

AR-15 Vs. M4: Which Weapon Is More Formidable? AR-15 vs M4

AR-15 vs. M4 are two varying rifles with striking similarities. AR-15 is easily accessible to civilians. Whereas, the M4 is fully automatic.

www.custom-ar15.com

That is the only attempt at an answer in the entire thread.
1. Barrel - The M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped to receive a grenade launcher.
2 Ammo. - The Ar15 can be chambered for several different shells, but the M4 is only capable of 5.56.
3 Automation - Until 1986, both rifles were legally capable of full automatic fire, but the AR15 was modified in 1986. Conversion back to auto fire is neither hard or expensive, but is illegal. ------------this was noted in the OP.
4 manufacturer
5. legality. This has been discussed, but is not a material difference in the guns, or the way they work. other than the already mentioned full auto capability.
6 Category. This is how they are referred to on paper, and has nothing to do with material differences between the rifles, other than the auto capability.

You did point out that the barrel is shaped a little different, but the purpose of that was to attach grenade launcher. Hardly a material difference in the accuracy, speed, or capability of long term continuous use. You got anything else to add to your list? The rest of the differences in your link are really just distinctions without any real differences.

Yeah...other rifles are also convertible to full automatic fire....

See the North Hollywood shootout where the rifles were converted to fully automatic fire...yet, in the shootout...the two robbers, firing fully automatic at the police didn't manage to kill anyone.....both, however, were killed by police using semi-automatic weapons...

So again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location...in the North Hollywood shootout, the people they shot at were in the open, not in a building, and were behind cover.....so no one was killed by the fully automatic rifle fire.....however, again, both perps, even with their fully automatic rifles, were killed by police with semi-automatic weapons....

It isn't the weapon, it is the target location that makes all the difference....

Case in point...the 1984 FBI shooting, the two criminals had a mini-14 rifle, a semi-automatic rifle, and a pump action shotgun.....they managed to kill 2 FBI agents and wounded 5 others......

Again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location.....in this case, the shooters were good shots.......the FBI weren't so good...

I am curious as to your point...where you would like to go with this....

The point is to find the material differences between the two rifles. In this thread I have learned the M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped so a grenade launcher can attach to it. Other than the auto capability, that is the only difference anybody has been able to mention.

well and the whole auto fire thing that you keep ignoring

I's not hard or expensive to convert an AR15 to full auto capability. It's illegal as hell, and you should be ready to spend a lot of time in prison, but it's not that hard to do.

If you have a file, pretty much any double action gun can be made full auto. The trouble is you can't stop it after you pull the trigger. AR's are simple to convert if you have the selector.

No, they aren't. As someone who actually HAS, legally converted an AR-15 into a M-16 it is actually quite easy if you have a full machine shop. Quite the opposite if you don't. And you need much more than just the selector lever, you need a disconnector, you need to drill the hole for the safety sear in EXACTLY the right position, if you're off by more than a couple of thousandths you're SOL. You have to change the bolt carrier, you have to change the firing pin, and, if you want it to work well, you'll need to upgrade the buffer, and buffer spring.

So, no. If you don't have access to a machine shop, it ain't easy.

Nothing is easy without the proper tools, I wasn't suggesting it could be converted with a hammer and a screwdriver. SMH.

You implied that all you needed was the selector lever. You don't know anything about AR's if that is your level of knowledge.

How far do you want to nit pick this ridiculous shit? I didn't see any prints or dimensions with your post either. C'mon man, the thread is stupid.

 

[westwall]

I'm not seeing your point.

What is the material difference between this military issue M24 sniper rifle...

View attachment 489683

...and this extremely popular Remington 700 deer rifle...?


View attachment 489684

Remington Model 700 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

You should start a thread if you are looking for that answer. This thread is about the M4 and the AR15.

Figure it out, Einstein

AR-15 Vs. M4: Which Weapon Is More Formidable? AR-15 vs M4

AR-15 vs. M4 are two varying rifles with striking similarities. AR-15 is easily accessible to civilians. Whereas, the M4 is fully automatic.

www.custom-ar15.com

That is the only attempt at an answer in the entire thread.
1. Barrel - The M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped to receive a grenade launcher.
2 Ammo. - The Ar15 can be chambered for several different shells, but the M4 is only capable of 5.56.
3 Automation - Until 1986, both rifles were legally capable of full automatic fire, but the AR15 was modified in 1986. Conversion back to auto fire is neither hard or expensive, but is illegal. ------------this was noted in the OP.
4 manufacturer
5. legality. This has been discussed, but is not a material difference in the guns, or the way they work. other than the already mentioned full auto capability.
6 Category. This is how they are referred to on paper, and has nothing to do with material differences between the rifles, other than the auto capability.

You did point out that the barrel is shaped a little different, but the purpose of that was to attach grenade launcher. Hardly a material difference in the accuracy, speed, or capability of long term continuous use. You got anything else to add to your list? The rest of the differences in your link are really just distinctions without any real differences.

Yeah...other rifles are also convertible to full automatic fire....

See the North Hollywood shootout where the rifles were converted to fully automatic fire...yet, in the shootout...the two robbers, firing fully automatic at the police didn't manage to kill anyone.....both, however, were killed by police using semi-automatic weapons...

So again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location...in the North Hollywood shootout, the people they shot at were in the open, not in a building, and were behind cover.....so no one was killed by the fully automatic rifle fire.....however, again, both perps, even with their fully automatic rifles, were killed by police with semi-automatic weapons....

It isn't the weapon, it is the target location that makes all the difference....

Case in point...the 1984 FBI shooting, the two criminals had a mini-14 rifle, a semi-automatic rifle, and a pump action shotgun.....they managed to kill 2 FBI agents and wounded 5 others......

Again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location.....in this case, the shooters were good shots.......the FBI weren't so good...

I am curious as to your point...where you would like to go with this....

The point is to find the material differences between the two rifles. In this thread I have learned the M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped so a grenade launcher can attach to it. Other than the auto capability, that is the only difference anybody has been able to mention.

well and the whole auto fire thing that you keep ignoring

I's not hard or expensive to convert an AR15 to full auto capability. It's illegal as hell, and you should be ready to spend a lot of time in prison, but it's not that hard to do.

If you have a file, pretty much any double action gun can be made full auto. The trouble is you can't stop it after you pull the trigger. AR's are simple to convert if you have the selector.

No, they aren't. As someone who actually HAS, legally converted an AR-15 into a M-16 it is actually quite easy if you have a full machine shop. Quite the opposite if you don't. And you need much more than just the selector lever, you need a disconnector, you need to drill the hole for the safety sear in EXACTLY the right position, if you're off by more than a couple of thousandths you're SOL. You have to change the bolt carrier, you have to change the firing pin, and, if you want it to work well, you'll need to upgrade the buffer, and buffer spring.

So, no. If you don't have access to a machine shop, it ain't easy.

How many of those parts are easily and legally available for purchase? How much of that list can be found on the shelf of any large gun shop? Next, please list any parts that aren't easily purchased.

All of them are legal. Except for in the state of californication. As far as availability goes, they aren't very available. When you can find them, they are expensive. And, because they are hard working parts, you can't just make them in a cheap 3D printer either.

 

[Missourian]

Nothing is easy without the proper tools, I wasn't suggesting it could be converted with a hammer and a screwdriver. SMH.

I'd say if you had the skill and equipment to perform the conversion...you also have the skill and equipment to mill the aluminum receiver...which makes the thread pointless.