Finally, after all the initial bluster during its introduction in the 1980s, the Malaysian Defense Minister has announced that the MAF is abandoning the Steyr assault rifle in favor of the US made Colt M4 Assault Rifle claiming that it as a more advance weapon - compared to the problems encountered with the Steyr.

Is the MAF convincing itself going forward in adopting the M4 carbine that has 80% of its basic components from the M16, which date back to the late 1960s Vietnam War period ?

Malaysia has licence to make M4 assault rifles

The Star, 5 November 2007 - Monday

KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia has a licence to manufacture M4 carbine assault rifles locally and the potential to export them to other countries in the future, said Defence Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.

“We are buying the firearms from the United States but have the licence to produce them now through a local company,” he said yesterday.

Najib, who is also the Deputy Prime Minister, said they decided to go for the United States-made M4 Carbine as the Steyr rifle had problems because of its limited research and development technology. The Steyrs have been used for 15 years.

“The M4 Carbines are more suitable, effective and have extra capacity compared with the Steyrs.

“We took this decision as we want to enable our soldiers to be soldiers of the future, equipped with the latest modern technology,” he said during question time with student leaders after closing the Overseas Umno Club's leadership course.

The US Congress, he said, had approved the sale of the rifles, which should be delivered in the near future.

Last year, Najib had presented a letter of intent to SME Ordnance Sdn Bhd (SMEO) for the procurement of 14,000 rifles in a RM70mil deal.

SMEO had signed a contract with Colt Defence LLC for the weapons.

While it was not practical to produce all military needs locally, Najib said the country was doing well as it was producing its own Offshore Patrol Vessels and was in the process of producing unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) locally.

“UAVs are the way forward in war tactics and many armies are using them as this will help reduce the number of casualties,” he added.

m4 is a good weapon..they have use it before…we have use it..the american still using it…

it’s a good weapon, and now can be more cheaply produced in mass, why not?

some how i prefer the SAR21

SAR21 is better in many way…but we are not talking about our own rifle…

It is significant to note that MAF did not select another bullpup rifle.

It is also significant that they selected the M4 over other conventional layout weapons.

Is light weight a consideration?

...

I read earlier that MAF selected the M4 becos of its ability to configure individual weapons due to the P rails.

The Steyr, though advanced in the 70's and introduced a lot of new concepts, is now a victim of its own success as it is not a flexible system like the M16/M4.

And for local manufacture, I'll bet the M4 is a lot easier to make than the Steyr.

Steyr has a faster bullet veolcity than M4 right?

But the accuracy would not be as good as before no? It has shorter barrel than M16 and its previous steyr which affects muzzle velocity. Though I must say the M4 allows several accessories to be equipped. I think the M4 main feature would be versatility.

“We took this decision as we want to enable our soldiers to be soldiers of the future, equipped with the latest modern technology,” he said during question time with student leaders after closing the Overseas Umno Club's leadership course.

I don't think M4 fits the bill for this. I personally think TAR-21, FN SCAR, G36 or XM8 would be a more suitable rifle if they want a "soldier of the future"

Originally posted by cloud210:

But the accuracy would not be as good as before no? It has shorter barrel than M16 and its previous steyr which affects muzzle velocity. Though I must say the M4 allows several accessories to be equipped. I think the M4 main feature would be versatility.

I don't think M4 fits the bill for this. I personally think TAR-21, FN SCAR, G36 or XM8 would be a more suitable rifle if they want a "soldier of the future"

No. HK416!

i like my M4 during army times… light and compact

Hmmm... interesting.

Now that Malaysia has acquired the license to manufacture M4 components, I wonder if any of these parts will eventually make their way into the US civilian market.

I, for one, will be thrilled at the prospect of building an AR-pattern rifle with a lower receiver marked Proton M4.

Originally posted by cloud210:
But the accuracy would not be as good as before no? It has shorter barrel than M16 and its previous steyr which affects muzzle velocity. Though I must say the M4 allows several accessories to be equipped. I think the M4 main feature would be versatility.

I don't think M4 fits the bill for this. I personally think TAR-21, FN SCAR, G36 or XM8 would be a more suitable rifle if they want a "soldier of the future"

you're kidding right ? ... this one is not halal ! ...

M4 having the shorter barrel may not be the best thing for general issue weapon! the fundanmental of the 5.56 ammo is the velocity and comparing a 14.5" BArrel to a normal 20" barrel on the A2 or the Steyr AUG will significantly reduce the capability.

Comparing the 20", 62 grain M855 ammo, an AUG and A2 full 20" barrel I am getting 3150 fps compared to a 14.5 that I am doing only 2850 fps... thats a significant drop in velocity at muzzle.

They should have looked into a piston based M4 like the HK 416 or the POF USA piston rifle ! Oh well! One step back for Malaysia !hee hee!

I bet you they chose the M4 becasue they can get it cheap and besides, I think the M16 patent have long expire and they could have got it or produce it without the big cost on paying royalty! So! cost maybe the issue !!

DaveC

Originally posted by Fatum:

you're kidding right ? ... this one is not halal ! ...

But its definitely better than the M4. it is more compact with equal or even better firepower than the m4 and the tip of the rifle is closer to you. You don't have to turn around so much around corners, most suitable for urban assault. usable in jungle warfare too, u can treat the trees as the corners in urban areas.

Oh well, like someone said, one step backwards for them

Originally posted by davechng:

M4 having the shorter barrel may not be the best thing for general issue weapon! the fundanmental of the 5.56 ammo is the velocity and comparing a 14.5" BArrel to a normal 20" barrel on the A2 or the Steyr AUG will significantly reduce the capability.

Comparing the 20", 62 grain M855 ammo, an AUG and A2 full 20" barrel I am getting 3150 fps compared to a 14.5 that I am doing only 2850 fps... thats a significant drop in velocity at muzzle.

They should have looked into a piston based M4 like the HK 416 or the POF USA piston rifle ! Oh well! One step back for Malaysia !hee hee!

I bet you they chose the M4 becasue they can get it cheap and besides, I think the M16 patent have long expire and they could have got it or produce it without the big cost on paying royalty! So! cost maybe the issue !!

DaveC

Yup agree.. They should keep their A2 as the main steed of their force. Trained special forces or urban force with the M4, for they might need that lightweight and compactness since they usually bring the battle to the enemy and are much more closer.

Furthermore, shorter barrel = slower muzzle velocity = less penatration/stopping power. If you're shooting from 700m, the guy at the other end hiding behind a light cover would probably be sufficient. Say he got shot, he probably just bleed and runs away to the nearest medic to be evacuated and live to fight another day.

I've been thinking about this question and i have some new opinions to share.

PART ONE - why the M16-based system again?

Because it makes PERFECT sense logistically for MAF to go for the M4.

Why?

From pics of MAF in Timor I've seen, MAF have stuck with the M16/M203 combo even in AUG-equipped units.

(The same problem plagues SAR-21 equipped SAF units.)

This means that there is still a high degree of familiarity with the M16-system by everyone in the forces.

And as someone mentioned: there is 80% part interchangeability with the M16 and MAF has a big stockpile of them.

If they introduce a third AR-type like a HK G36 or another bullpup, they may get marginal performance improvement over the M4, but the logistical mess would not be worth it.

Originally posted by cloud210:

Yup agree.. They should keep their A2 as the main steed of their force. Trained special forces or urban force with the M4, for they might need that lightweight and compactness since they usually bring the battle to the enemy and are much more closer.

Furthermore, shorter barrel = slower muzzle velocity = less penatration/stopping power. If you're shooting from 700m, the guy at the other end hiding behind a light cover would probably be sufficient. Say he got shot, he probably just bleed and runs away to the nearest medic to be evacuated and live to fight another day.

u sure or not 700m.....u noe human being at 700m how small??

even with the m16..u gotta aim higher....a whole lot

PART TWO - Why the M4?

So if logistically it made sense to go for the M16 system, why pick the short M4?

Two things happened during the time of the Steyr service:

A: MAF becomes increasingly mechanised.
B: MAF learns the value of a short weapon with scope mounting.

"A" needs no explanation.

Now "B"...

There are 2 types of settings in Malaysia, rural and urban. And rural usually means jungle. So the average MAF soldier will primarily be fighting well under 200m.

For this, the M4 is MORE THAN ADEQUATE.

And if you have a smalll, light weapon that enable your troops to be very nimble in the jungle or urban, that's tactically more useful than a long weapn that can shoot at 300m or 600m.

Some of you say bullpup is the best solution. Well, they tried bullpups and for some reasons, they've decided they don't want anything to do with bullpups anymore.

Originally posted by Rockhound:

u sure or not 700m.....u noe human being at 700m how small??

even with the m16..u gotta aim higher....a whole lot

hehe...

Only a well-trained sniper with a serious sniping rifle 7.62mm or bigger can hit someone at that distance. And if target has to be out in the open standing still.

Originally posted by chino65:

hehe...

Only a well-trained sniper with a serious sniping rifle 7.62mm or bigger can hit someone at that distance. And if target has to be out in the open standing still.

eh..y u edit...i liked ure previous one

And now the question of the M4's killing power.

There will always be some incredible sories of people shot multiple times, blown up, burnt etc etc but keep fighting. Even in WW2 when everyone is using big calibre rifles this happened. In IDF there was one guy who was carried to the hospital with an unexploded RPG grenade stuck in his body. The doctor who did the succesful operation got a medal for bravery or something.

And then there are people who give up the ghost from one little .22 wound.

In battle you worry first about hitting the enemy, because that's not easy to do especially in jungles where you can't see the enemy. 90% of the time someone who's shot stops fighting.

...

And we are forgetting the most fundamental thing;

The M4 is NOT the only weapon in the section.

They have M203, LAW, SAW, sniper/sharpshooters just like everyone else. And these weapons allows them to cover the distance or do the jobs that the individual Rifle cannot.

These are the things that affect the outcome of a battle. Not the velocity of the bullet the few M4s in the section are putting out.

...

Even the excellent Australian troops in Vietnam admitted that it is the VOLUME of lead you send that is more important cos 90% of the time they can't see the enemy and vice versa.

So this makes the case for troops carrying more explosive area weapons like grenades, M203, LAW and even the radio to call for arty, a heck of a lot more important than the length of the barrel of the Individual Rifle.

A small, light rifle like the M4 also allows me to fit more useful gadgets.

A small, light rifle allows troops to wear body armour, carry LAW, radio, hand grenades, more ammo, more GL grenades, claymore mine etc etc.

...

The scope-equipped Steyr AUG iwith 30rd weighs about 4.3kg.

A similarly equipped M4 package is 1 kg lighter. And the scope will be much better than the standard AUG scope.

One kg is equivalent to 2 extra mags or 60 rounds of ammo. My choice is obvious.

...

And finally, my favourite quotation from some grizzled old Marine sgt: "I've shot folks with .22, 9mm, 5.56, 7.62, .45... they all died."

Actually,i would prefer if we are still using the old-school AK-47

Originally posted by Rockhound:

u sure or not 700m.....u noe human being at 700m how small??

even with the m16..u gotta aim higher....a whole lot

Ok la my mistake around 600 with proper optics. At that range, very hard to hit, + hit already not fatal unless you hit head.

Jungle fighting under 200m is tio ambushed liao, I don't think you want to be caught in that situation or unless you are trained in laying ambushes. If not stay at 300-600m away from the enemy, and use UAVs or other detection equipments(NV,thermal,motion etc etc). This is modern warfare, no longer rushing towards each other and hoping your blind/stray shots hit the enemy.

i actually brought this subject up to a friend who works closely with the steyr project in msia and this is his input.

since this is an inside source i'd say it has high credibility.

The Americans need to find someone to "adopt" their "over-produced" M4s, and we've answered the call.. Our DPM always said that we're not US followers, but think again..

Moreover, the local company who has the Steyr Project screwed-up by producing a lots of unreliable parts, including using cheaper / un-approved material to produce the parts, which caused jamming and other operation issues in the long run, and resulted in complaints and claims.. So the DPM must do something to keep the company from not loosing money to the foreigners ( I keep my finger cross on whether they loose money to someone else yah.. )..

My company tries to grab over the contract for the Steyr, but it'll not be an easy task too, as we're a Swiss/Germany company, and Swiss/German don't use Steyr..

seems like we're seeing something similar to the proton case, hahaha. gisborn almost got it rite, lol

Originally posted by Meia Gisborn:
I, for one, will be thrilled at the prospect of building an AR-pattern rifle with a lower receiver marked [b]Proton M4.
[/b]