Army Awards New M4/M4A1 Contract to FN


FN Manufacturing has outbid Remington Arms Company and Colt Defense LLC., to win a contract worth just under $77 million to make M4A1s for the U.S. Army, according to an industry source. The award notice  was posted on Federal Business Opportunities on Feb. 22 with an initial value of $9,370,615.

This is the latest round in what has become a hard-fought battle to equip soldiers with a better carbine.

The drama all began when the Army chose Remington over Colt, the original maker of the M4, last  April to make 120,000 M4s and M4A1 carbines. That award meant that more soldiers would go into combat with the M4A1, a SOF version of the carbine that features a more durable barrel and a full-auto trigger. The Army’s decision to dump the  three-round burst setting will give soldiers a more consistent trigger and better accuracy.

The GAO did rule in favor of Colt’s first protest over the Army’s miscalculation of royalties it would receive for contract awards on its M4 design. The July 24 ruling forced the Army to rework the original solicitation so the vendors that fell into the competitive range could submit new price bids. All gun makers involved were forced to reveal their previous price bids for the original $84 million contract to keep things fair.

Colt officials then filed an Oct. 9 protest with the GAO three weeks after the Connecticut-based gun maker received the Army’s amended Sept. 21 solicitation. The GAO denied Colt’s second protest in a Nov. 16 decision.

This latest decision makes FN the only maker of both M16A4s and M4 carbine variants for the U.S. Military (I think.) The majority of the contract will supply M4A1s to the Army as part of its ongoing effort to upgrade its fleet of M4s.

About the Author

Matthew Cox
Matthew Cox has been a defense reporter since 1998 and is an associate editor for He traveled to Afghanistan and Iraq numerous times from 2002 to 2008, covering infantry units in combat. Matthew was an infantryman in the 82nd Airborne Division.

90 Comments on "Army Awards New M4/M4A1 Contract to FN"

  1. Good glad to see the Army finally moving to get improved M-4s to solders. Feel bad for Remington. Hope they can win a later upgraded M-4 bid. Remember this is just the first batch of M-4A1 a larger around 250,000 will be bought later.

  2. Joshua Respecki | February 23, 2013 at 1:24 pm |

    Any new on the carbine competition?

  3. Johnny Quest | February 23, 2013 at 1:31 pm |

    That is what a union state – Connecticut – does for Colt, versus a non-union state – South Carolina – does for FN.

  4. I'm happy FN got the contract. Colt list their bread and butter M16 contract, and everyone was happy. Keep sending shitty weapons, don't be surprised when it gets cancelled. Now they are forced to tighten the belt and focus on the LE/ civie market, which they neglected. Remington isn't much better. FN runs a company that serves both mil and commercial markets with great satisfaction. The deserve this contract, and will give all the boys down range weapons they can stake their lives on. Because that's exactly what they are doing.

  5. Wow!! So FN, the foreign company who built factories in the US to sell us M240/249 mgs which we should have bought in the 1950's/70's out bid 2 US companies including Colt!! Remington is now stymied because of NY's new anti AR-15 rule so the factory will move! And once again US dollars will go overseas to another foriegn company. Looks like Newton did more than kill a bunch of innocent people. Colt and Remington are now out of the arms pictures and we have to depend on foriegn companies!! What a world!!

  6. Just remember the wisdom of Murphy, you're equipment was made by the lowest bidder…

  7. Also, who is paying for these new weapons> Remember the budget, sequesteration??!!

  8. So we're sticking with a marginal caliber and a dated platform. The least they could have done was chamber the rifle in a more-effective caliber. Same old same old.

  9. I have no complaint with the M16/M4 platform. I would like to see our service rifle chambered for a more robust caliber compatible with the platform.

  10. Anyone have access to the actual contract, or more detailed summary of the contract?

    Unless my math is wrong, winning bid of $77,000,000 for 120,000 is $641 bucks a piece. That seems VERY low considering civilian AR platforms are consistently running 2-3 times the contract price.

  11. Dears sirs,

    Before aproximately two years I saw on ASDA Exbition in Split,Croatia AR 15 and her clones examples ( manufacturer Springfield Armory , USA). Machine -Gun is very light and suitable,but i did not shoot with her ,and i saw all main competitors on military market,according guns ,maschine -guns and heavy mashine -guns.In USA ,and of course in all free World competition beetwen competitors is free , and that is it.

    Yours Goran

  12. Since Belguim is making M4's, American companies can focus on our states malitia sales to citizens.

  13. FN will do a better job than would Colt or Remington on this contract. I wish we were transitioning this platform to the 6.8 SPC or even the 6.5 Grendel, but we seem to be in a chambering rut. You can go with heavier bullets and you can go with faster twists, but there's only so much you can do with a .223 Remington or 5.56mm NATO. Pentagon decision makers, it's time to beef up the firepower.

  14. Why not give the 300 blackout a look? All that's needed is a barrel change.

  15. This is bull. While FNH is an EXCELLENT weapons manufacturer, THEY ARE NOT AMERICAN. The damn Army has it's head lodged firmly up its rear end if they think it is OK to take a design from the company that created it, the company that has served this Nation well for many years, and give it to a foreign manufacturer. It's just wrong.

  16. There is nothing wrong with the 5.56 caliber, or the M4A1 platform. they both work incredibly well, and as Joshua stated, it's limitations are really in the shooter, not the weapon. Marines can easily kill targets at 500m with iron sights, and it's even easier with an ACOG. We are absolutely meticulous about cleaning and maintaining our weapons, and spend as much time doing that as we do training.

    The only shortcoming Marines have ever seen in the 5.56 round after decades of kicking ass with it, was it's inability to penetrate certain types of cover, such as car doors and windows. That was remedied with the creation of the SOST round.

    The Army has never spent as much time training as the Corps does, nor does it place the emphasis on maintenance discipline that we do. Malfunctions in the field, or perceived inadequacies in the capabilities of this particular weapons platform are rooted in Soldiers' lack of training, not the the M4's lack of capabilities, or those of it's round.

    If you want a more lethal weapon, and a deadlier round, the only solution is to get your butt out to the range and train some more…become as deadly and as accurate as you personally possibly can. Once you do, you will discover just how incredibly devastating this weapon and its current ammunition can be.

  17. I'll remember that next time I see a few of them executing women for going to school, they're great upstanding people…/sarcasm.

  18. Because past 200M .300 drops like a rock. Your holdover would be huge at 600M.

  19. Glad to see Colt loose. I don't care if they build them in Egypt. Until Colt, Springfield and the rest move out of United Socialist Republic of New England, let them and their unions make pencils.

    Jim Laubler, SF retired.

  20. So do the A1 improvements plus the harder-hitting M588 round mean the M4 is finally a mbr worthy of the finest infantry on the planet?

  21. If they issue soldiers fully automatic M4's, they'll whine about soldiers wasting ammo like they did with the M16A1. Why don't they just issue them semi automatic only M4's? I wonder what FN's upgrades will be to the M4? I'm guessing it will be a fully ambi controls,monolethic upper with free float barrel, and a more durable heat resistant barrel. I'm also glad to see Colt loose.

  22. Belgium doesn't make M4's.

  23. 6.8mm and 6.5 didn't pan out 5.56mm for what areal assault rifle does does a good job.

  24. They adhere to the mil-spec standards. But those are surely not the highest standards they could adhere to.

    The fact is, these company's look at their product and think:"what can we save money on and still meet the required specs?"

    That is something different than the normal way a company should operate:"How can i make the best product on the market?"

    Om not saying they will make a bad product, but its not their best.

    But we are sending our best boys out to the sandbox with these guns, thats the problem

  25. It's belgium that does not have to be a foreign land. They have virtually no army so the US could take it over in a day ;-)

    Lol, on the serious side:

    With Obama's one-world-agenda soon there will be no more foreign country's we will all be one through the UN. Doesnt that sound wonderfull?

  26. Civilians don't buy 120.000 at a time, and do not have the power to stack manufacturers against eachother.

    Civilians will pay anything for a rifle, and manufacturers know that.

    Also, as a civilian you pay for marketing and distribution and all that good stuff.

    So your price is in no way related to the price the army pays.

  27. Guerrilla and insurgent are two words for the same damn thing.

  28. Johnny Quest | February 25, 2013 at 3:16 am |

    Uhhh, no, I am relatively sure Colt is not happy to lose the contract. If you think otherwise, you are grossly mistaken.

  29. Great news. Fn is a very dynamic and innovating company. They deserve the contract.

  30. Surprise, surprise!! FN who makes the M16s, M240, 249s gets the M4 contract. Since they are in S Carolina and not under the new CT or NY assault rifle bans, they are going to make combat rifles without silly state laws interfearing. Colt, Remington, Ruger etc will be puling up stakes and heading south taking the jobs and tax money sith them! Stag Arms in Ct makes only M16 platform weapons, they are out of business!! You need a reliable source for weapons and FN is really it. NY didn't put in a military clause so when th eWest Point cadets go from WP to Camp Buckner they traavel on state roads and can be arrested for their assault rifles and 30rd mags!! Ft Drum is in trouble!!

  31. Larry Howard | February 25, 2013 at 5:32 am |

    Another goverment contract going to a foriegn company.

  32. FormerSFMedic | February 25, 2013 at 6:28 am |

    The .300 BLK might be on the table in the future. It was developed on request by the Military and has proven itself to work extremely well in combat. So, it was designed to exacting standards and is a battle tested cartridge. Anything already in the system/field is going to have a better chance than anything else out there. After spending quality time with the cartridge for the last 6 months I'm a huge believer in the cartridge. It would be a sufficient replacement for 5.56 although I do think a purpose built cartridge would be better. In other words, the .300 BLK is a great way to go as things stand but something that doesn't even exist yet would be better.

    @Joshua- It depends on the load and the rifle. Out to 300m I'm getting hits on a torso with no hold over. I would say 400m is about the capability of the average Soldier with the .300BLK.With that said, we took it to 800m before we ran out of range and we were able to do it consistently with a "hangtime" of about 4 seconds. The .300 BLK may be a more difficult cartridge to shoot outside of 400m but it's more terminally effective at that range. I think it would work well as a 5.56 replacement.

  33. fn has always built very nice weapons for everyone including hitler. we should not be buying weapons from europe companies. we need the jobs and all the money spent here. you can bet that fn has figured out a way to cheapen the weapons, after all it is in business to make money, and they always have. fn just bought better politicians than remington or colt. the m4 is not a good rifle for todays combat area's. soldiers need a 7.62 cal. rifle to use in the longer ranges of today's combat. upgrading the 240 & 249 to a .300 win. mag will also help. the further we keep the enemy from soldiers the better i like it. reach out and touch someone that cannot reach out and touch us is more to my liking.

  34. I think FNH USA If that's where the firearms are coming from make a great product. as you know they make the P-90 & the civilian PS-90 which are 5.7 x 28 with a top loading magazine and a 50 round capacity. it's a bull pup design and has been in service since 91 for military and law enforcement in full auto. Then the PS-90 was offered to the civilian market in semi auto and smaller ammo amount mags. it's a very proven weapon so if the M4 shows any signs of how the company makes it's carbines they definitely picked a good company. Good luck FNH and all the soldiers who will be carrying one in the future.

  35. Lance agree that the neither of the 6.5's or the 6.8 gives you a major jump. Just sad that a majority of your weapons are out of the fight and regulated to the "other guns to handle it". Your enemy combatant would do better setting up with an old K98 at 700M.

  36. Great! Another extention of the life of the outdated AR based rifle, a now 50 year old design. Never mind that its direct gas impingement action has proved to be unreliable under sustained automatic fire. (If your rifle quits during the fight, just grab another from a wounded comrade.) The Stoner design was cutting edge in 1962, but its early "teething" problems when introduced to the troops in 1965 was the cause of 100s of needless deaths when rifles jammed in fire fights in Viet Nam. Sure there were subsequent fixes, but the root problem, hot dirty gases being introduced to the bolt mechanism, have endured. Why are piston design rifles the choice of U.S. Special Forces, but are not available to the rest of our war fighters, like the HK 416? Money and politics. We always hear about the next cutting edge infantry weapon coming around the bend, but money to poiticians' campaign chests always manages to outweigh what's good for our people getting shot at. How many stories do we have to hear about outposts nearly being overrun in Afghanistan when our troops' M4 carbines get heated up and dirty and stop working? Our war fighters have endured and excelled in spite of their armament, not because of it.

  37. Josh,

    I am an ex infantry officer and a logistician. I have seen both sides of the issue with weapons and equipment so you need to be made aware of the fact that when you say there is a reason SOF stayed with the A-4 you may not be seeing the whole picture. As with other equipment SOF has they keep it because there may be better stuff out there but if it gets jacked up how are they going to get it fixed. The A-4 can be fixed anywhere we have soldiers where as the SCAR cannot. The SCAR is an awesome weapon but until Big Army gets it head out of its 5th point of contact and buys a more capable platform and calibar SOF will keep basically the same weapons just so it can be supported wherever. As far as the M855 round goes its far from adequate and always has been. The steel core meant to penetrate soviet body armor that was never fielded turns it in to a long range icepick. Optimal kill range is <100 meters which is why it was adopted. No one saw a need for long range engagement. However in areas where the enemy takes/smokes opiates the round even barrel close is inadequate. Good friend of mine (SOF BTW) is alive right now because his buddy shot the insurgent in the head with his M-4 after my buddy shot the guy at point blank range 6 times in the chest with his M-9! That kind of thing is why we went to the .45 ACP in the first place.

    Also when you saw "all that is needed is bettere training on how to properly care for the M4" your saying something that is less than intelligent. They training is there its the leaders forcing the soldiers out from in front of the TVs to actually do the maintenance.

    FN is a good company and has been manufacturing barrels for the US Military for years. The facility is loaded up with retired and ex soldiers and its computorized milling machines are top notch. I've toured the facility.

    SwampDog The barrels overheat because back in the 80's when the army took over the A2 program from th Marines they changed the Marines design of the barrel to make it slimmer under the hand gaurd so they wouldnt have to redisgn the M-203 mounting brackets. The marines wanted that thicker barrel the entire length of the barrel to reduce the overheating problem. The new and retrofited M-4s will have the thicker barrel.

  38. bullsh** supposition

  39. At least they use American labor (maybe not union, but, American).

  40. Great job FN! I'm guessing they won because their overhead rates are way lower down in SC. Not sure but I'm assuming Colt, Springfield and other Northern Companies deal with unions etc while SC doesn't. Again, I don't know this for sure but I'm guessing it's a safe bet.

    I own an FNP-45 and I have an FN barrel on my AR, very happy with both.

  41. Lance, Thank you for the nomenclature correction.

    Josh, Think what you want about my story. Although I'm sure there is a lot of variations of an internet story this guy is a personal friend of mine. And you are right about shooting someone 6 times in the chest will kill anyone but you have obviously never dealt with someone high on one of several opiates and how they can be dead men walking. Lots of factors go into how fast you die that range from point of impact to the caliber and type of bullet and how much nervous system depressants you have consumed.

    Try actually reading some history as to why the army adopted the .45 ACP. You might actually learn something. BTW I saw an autopsy photo of a woman who shot herself 9 times in the chest with a .22 pistol.

    The only complaint I have ever heard about a SCAR is that it has a reciprocating charging handle. Thats it. Personally I love my SCAR-17s. Looks bulky, but its not. Felt recoil for the 7.62 is only slightly more than an M-4. I have a female friend that has had to have both shoulders rebuilt and she loves the weapon so much she wants to buy one for herself. Price of FN mags are horrindous but aftermarket polymor mags have brought the price way down. Since you cant name a problem with the SCAR I take it you've never shot one.

    Your statement about white glove clean is bullshit and indicative of the fact that you’re probably no higher rank than an E-4. In the old days weapon maintenance, like vehicle maintenance, was overdone and used to keep soldiers busy. Idle soldiers tend to get into trouble and training is too expensive to do continuously so make soldiers do make work. Basic weapons maintenance is essential to keeping your weapon functional. That means after a patrol is over at a minimum take your bolt carrier group apart and get out any dirt/dust as well as the receiver. Just as in the arctic, wipe all oil off as it’s a sand magnet. You remember that bullshit hero Jessica Lynch? None of her platoons weapons would function properly because no one cleaned theirs in the 90 days they were in country. The iraqi army in remote outposts would cover their large guns (AA and FA) as well as some automotive parts with used motor oil to attract sand and it formed a thick protective coating over the components to keep sand out. Don't be that stupid with your rifle.

    BTW anyone who uses motor oil on a weapon is a dumbass. Motor oil is to viscus and will gum things up. Why do you think in really cold weather area's they use 10 wt oil. In a pinch your better off using some breakfree until you get a chance to clean your riflr properly.

  42. South Carolinians may talk funny, but I don't think they're foreign.

  43. The profits still go to a foreign land. Colt and Remington employ more people in the U.S. than FN, so it would be better to give profits to U.S.-based companies who employ more workers than a foreign-based operation.

  44. Your post is a good example of your ideology speaking for you, rather than logic. Because Colt has Union workers, less of their money has an impact on the U.S. economy?!? The majority of the profits for this contract will go to Belgium, where they will be spent in the European economy.

  45. Two issue's: Look what gun manufacturer is standing up for the 2nd Amendment. You might be surprised:

    All of you should be joining this group of over 10,000 vets. Read the 10 orders they will not follow. They know our numbers in Washington D.C. The more liberal are actually afraid of us peaceful people.

  46. Trying to shoot beyond 500m with a rifle is kind of pointless. I'm fairly sure snipers prefer to engage within 500m, but that's just me pulling a thought out of the blue.

    It's always been the role of the infantry to engage and eliminate the enemy. Preferably from a distance with the use of a radio. The infantry, this coming from my armchair General mindset, is there to deny the enemy and to move the enemy and to pin the enemy. Force the enemy to go where you want them to go and keep them there long enough for your support elements to come in and wipe them out. Then the infantry mops up and advances. Rinse and repeat.

    Sorry for the lecture, but I guess I'm just trying to provide a perspective on the lack of a need for rifles to extend reach beyond 500m. Even with the best scopes, you're going to be at the mercy of the elements— Etc. Blah blah blah, shutting up now.

  47. M16/M4 platforms in 7.62? Stop it, you're making me blush…

  48. Personally i think it's sad as hell that in this current economy that yet ANOTHER government contract is awarded to a foreign entity. IMO they shouldn't even be able to bid. Regardless of FN's great reputation, I am sure Colt or Remington would be well able to conquer any issues regarding reliability or accuracy. We need to fix our own problems before we go helping out everyone else in the world.

  49. ronc, yes

    bullets will typically travel 2-3 miles.

    SF medic is right per TM.

  50. Difference between max range and max effective range. A 5.56 after 2 miles of travel will bounce right off your chest. That is not very effective.

  51. FormerSFMedic | February 26, 2013 at 7:58 pm |

    I was wondering if anyone would notice that 3600m is from the TM. Nice catch sigmund! My comment wasn't necessarily aimed at educating as much as it was holding everyone to a standard. I have been absent from the comments at kitup for two months devoting all my time to fighting for our Second Amendment rights. With that said, I have the extra time now to participate in these discussions. Imagine my surprise to see dozens of comments containing misinformation, myths, inaccuracies, and opinion stated as fact. Some may think that I'm the information nazi but I don't see anything wrong with correcting or challenging misinformation.

    On that note. The maximum effective range and the maximum range of the M16A2 are both wrong.

    I just want to put out good information based on fact and experience. If I don't know the answer or don't have experience on the subject then I'll stay out of it. I'm back and I'm making sure we put out the best information possible!

  52. If I remember right CCI stingers use to say they would go 2 1/2 or 2 1/4. should of thought about it harder. It was focusing more on Effective range an in my head, that just shot way out there.

  53. One thing hasn't been brought up. Muscle memory. Due to the situation, I went out and bought a Berretta 92F. Why? Well, after being retired almost 10 years, I went shooting with a friend. He had a 92F. When I shot it, I made a nice silver dollar size hole out of a magazine. It was muscle memory. It was as if I had just trained with it yesterday.

    Keep in mind I had put more rounds through my service 92 than most people (we ran into a pile of 9mm at the end of a fiscal year). Between those times I tried a glock (yuk) and a S&W (not bad but not the same).

    Pretty much the same thing with a competition colt AR15. Was hitting the iron maden at 500 yards with iron sights and walmart ammo. Just feels natural.

    One mans opinion. But, human factors engineering brought a good weapon to the front. Same thing with the 1911 .45cal. The best pistols (IMHO) have that same ergonomic curve between the wedge of your thumb and the trigger (thus 92F and others).

  54. Swampdog, you nailed it 100%. Hard to believe that after 50 years our military has not dumped the gas impingement for the tried and true gas piston.

    I was "there" for the switch from the M-14 to the M-16 ….. USMC 1964 to 1968, and saw first hand the deadly failures of that rifle.

  55. Somethig something something… Merica… 7.62… bigger bullet… We should use my favorite…

    In this thead is nothing but folks whining about a those dang commie Europeans are building our guns, and how 5.56 is for wusses.

    Personally I do not care at all where a design comes from, or who owns the company that builds it. I want the best value for my tax dollar. If a domestic company cannot deliver that then some other company will. Its called capitalism and it rocks! America does not have a monopoly on good ideas, designs, proccesses, or quality manufacturing.

    I pay taxes to fund the military to defend the country, not to be a jobs program.

  56. This is not the same rifle as you carried then. While I'm not a major fan of direct impingement, I actually do like the H&K 416 and Sig 556 better, doesn't negate its positives. Many of your early problems were also related to ammo powder changes if I remember right (and God knows someone on this board will correct me if I'm wrong).

    So I guess were looking for the game changer before we upgrade. Problem is there is nothing Sufficiently better. Unless your a race car driver does 2HP improvement warrant a change in your engine? No your not feeling it in your chevy malibu. Same goes for Spec ops does the slight bump in improvement warrant whole army change? No it's just not cost effective.

  57. Let's look at this whole foreign company thing from a logical perspective.

    FN has, and has for a while, a manufacturing plant in SC. These weapons are manufactured in a US facility with US materials and labor. The govt pays the money to FN USA. This is a subsidiary of FNH. FN USA pays taxes back to the govt since they are a US company. Now I'm sure that FNH sees money. They are the parent company after all. The money put into this project goes back into the economy in taxes just as much as it would through Rem or Colt. If you think for one moment that Colt or Rem doesn't invest in foreign interests you are sorely mistaken. FN is a solid company with a solid product.

    Hell. They're probably all owned by Disney anyway.

  58. Let's look at this whole foreign company thing from a logical perspective.

    FN has, and has for a while, a manufacturing plant in SC. These weapons are manufactured in a US facility with US materials and labor. The govt pays the money to FN USA. This is a subsidiary of FNH. FN USA pays taxes back to the govt since they are a US company. Now I'm sure that FNH sees money. They are the parent company after all. The money put into this project goes back into the economy in taxes just as much as it would through Rem or Colt. If you think for one moment that Colt or Rem doesn't invest in foreign interests you are sorely mistaken. FN is a solid company with a solid product.

    They're probably all owned by Disney anyway.

  59. Johnny Quest | February 28, 2013 at 6:44 am |

    Wa La!! The union representative is in the house!

  60. Johnny Quest | February 28, 2013 at 6:47 am |

    "FN will do a better job than would Colt or Remington on this contract."

    Please expound on what information you base this statement.

  61. If 80% of soldiers cant clean and lubricate our weapons properly then whats the point of talking about the weapon outshining any other platforms? i've only used mine a few times when the weather was cooperating with me or when i wasnt in a bog or other situations that helped make my m4 not be at its fullest potential. Most of us are not SF. So why compare us to them?

  62. Bob Alexander | March 1, 2013 at 5:24 pm |

    FN is great, glad to see them get this contract. I have their competition .45 and love it. You can drive a tac or shot a nat of the wall. The most accurate and reliable .45 out of the box I have ever own, even better than my old Colt .45. Way to go FN.

  63. Earl Rogers,Jr. | March 3, 2013 at 8:52 am |

    Lance, what up with you and the unions that you seen to hate so much.What have they done to you,not give you a job.Read about America before there were unions,I don't think you would want too work in any of the factory we use to have that was the manufacture of good.

  64. Bill Cain | March 3, 2013 at 9:35 am |

    NO, Damn it , I don't like the idea of selling our goods to some DAMN forgien country. COLT has done the US a favor providing our boys with the best arms ever made. Now these JERKS want to give it away??? What the hell are the IDIOTS thinking, oh sorry, they didn't think. We could use the MONEY her at home. DAMNED IDIOTS.

  65. Jack Klouseau | March 3, 2013 at 1:12 pm |

    I wonder how many of these fully auto's will find their way into the lockers of homeland security and their muslim allies in government……..sounds to me like an obozo move.

  66. So on the same basis you are saying that European countries should definitely NOT buy weapons made in the USA? The US exports far more defense equipment to Europe and elsewhere than it buys in. Would you be happier if Belgium decided not to buy US-made F-35s and ordered Chinese instead? How much do you think will come back to the USA from selling 36 F-35s to them as against the amount that FN sends back to Belgium for low value M-4s? It is called international trade. The USA should normally buy what is best, at the cheapest available price, wherever the manufacturing company is based, unless there are really good security reasons not to do so.

  67. Uhhh… cause this is a Military gear site, and he's responding to a post on a gun, and in that post he says something completely moronic.

    If you still don't get my point, have you ever received a weird look when discussing your firearm with someone who does not own a gun? It's because your friend, just for a second, is picturing you as Billywhat? Also, if you agree with Billywhat?, your friend was right. :)

  68. DB Cooper | March 4, 2013 at 1:40 pm |


    Federal procurement law says that the whatever has to be made in the US no matter who makes the item. In violation of the law the Stryker vehicles are made in Canada.

    BAE USA is an independent subsidiary of BAE England and they make a ton of missiles, avionics and shipboard fire control systems. FN already makes a ton of weapons and weapon components for us so in the grand scheme of things this is a noting contract for the military and they again avoid making the hard decision of what the armys future infantry weapon will be. The next rifles are going to have to be a serious improvement to satisfy everyone. Big Army wants hyperburst capability probably so they can go to an even smaller caliber round.

  69. DB Cooper | March 4, 2013 at 1:42 pm |

    SF and the rest of you guys that dont like the fact a foriegn company is going to make the rifle. If your in the military next time you go to the range look to see who made the bullets. Israeli arms. They also make about 10% of the rifle ammo.

  70. I agree when a new caliber come time to look at guns I like 6.5mm alot but its not going to happen 5.56mm is here to stay.

  71. DB Cooper | March 4, 2013 at 5:21 pm |

    The soviet tanks just dont have the range to engage an M-1 and the russians have been selling the 3rd world country their oldest ammo. The M-1 is just to damned heavy.

  72. Quit the flag waving BS. Colt did not create a damn thing. Stoner & Armalite did. When you type on your computer; do you care where the chips come from? What is more "American?"

    A Camaro made in Canada by Chevy or A Honda Civic made in Ohio?

  73. UAW garbage.

  74. You realize it is 2013 & not 1883? What's next? I need my TV made by Philco & my car still made by Studebaker?

  75. As stated, the weapons MUST be produced here, it is part of the contract. Thus we have the ability to always make the weapons. FNH USA as a seperate entity. If contract not met you could do many things from giving it back to Colt or in time of dire national emergency taking over their manufacturing plant. That is why the contract always specified they are made.

    When Beretta won thier contract for the M9, they had to come put in a plant to make them here.

    So after these "foreign" companies come and build a plant here (construction jobs) and hire americans to work and run these plants, you want to blame them for getting a little return on thier investment.

  76. So are you equally happy with how other countries would react if they were told that nasty protectionist Uncle Sam had stopped them bidding? 'Oh, let's stop the Yanks from selling us weapons and Boeing airliners and Apple computers and General Electric engines and Bose radios and mid-West grain and …' you get my drift. There is not much made by the USA that cannot be replaced by something pretty good made in Europe or Asia. In fact many foreign manufacturers would welcome an excuse to get successful US companies locked out of their home markets. Of course key defence products should be made in the USA. No one is going to suggest that foreign countries bid to build Trident or nuclear warheads. But we are not about to refight World War II and do not need to design and make every single item. Americans should be pleased that foreign companies are willing to invest in US factories, create jobs and make their products here. Does it make sense for the US to design and build weapons that are both inferior and more expensive if there is an alternative that can be manufactured in the States? If you want an all-American solution then US companies need to perform better in competition with their foreign rivals.

  77. Hello! I really like this blog. Tell me please – from where do you have information for ths post?

  78. Uh rah, Absolutely correct sir

  79. …the whole conversation and article is about guns…

    …and the comment was a bit nuts….

    Enchilada putting it together and saying that comment was the type of thing that made people think of us as "gun nuts" was perfectly logical.

  80. That's not true at all. Guerrilla is a word for a specific type of fighting or a fighter often using that type of fighting. Insurgent is a fighter fighting for a revolutionary or rebel type cause.

    Basically one describes a way a fighter typically fights, the other describes the reason a fighter fights. There are insurgents that are guerrillas, and there are insurgents that are not guerrillas. There are guerrillas that are insurgents, and there are guerrillas that are not insurgents.

  81. Disney? Sweet! I want the special edition Cinderella M4!

  82. SFC Earnán | March 23, 2013 at 4:38 am |

    Before the outbreak of this current buying-panic it was possible for a civilian to put together an M4-gery for not much more than $600: $90 lower receiver, $100 lower parts kit with M4 stock, $115 bolt carrier group, $300 barreled upper receiver assembly, $20 charging handle.

    Once the panic runs its course and backorders clear, we'll probably see even better prices for a while. After the first Obama panic it wasn't impossible to find $60 lower receivers and $100 BCGs.

  83. SFC Earnán | March 23, 2013 at 4:44 am |

    Colt and Remington fund — through the taxes they pay and the union dues of their employees — the Democratic Party that is trying to disarm the American people.

    If Colt and Remington are stupid enough to stay in Democrat-controlled states where their employees are required to be dues-paying members of unions that financially support the Democratic Party then Colt and Remington have demonstrated that they don't value their own interests enough to be considered reliable and rational outfits.

    Let 'em move to free states if they want DoD contracts.

  84. SFC Earnán | March 23, 2013 at 4:56 am |

    Unions have destroyed manufacturing in the US. And through their massive diversion of (mandatory in New York and Connecticut) member dues to the Democratic Party's coffers they have gained massive political power.

    I'm for anything that moves jobs from union states to free states and cuts the umbilical cord of taxpayer funding of the UAW and other appendages of the Democratic Party.

    I'd rather see gun-maker profits funding Belgian Euro-trash than the Democrats.

  85. Y is a foreign buz like FN getting any US contract when we have companies here that can supply our troops/Marines/Sailors/Airmen with a weapon we designed here in the states. I don't care about the BID…..these r US servicemen who need a US manufactured weapon.I have nothing against the Belgians or any other foreign gun manufacturer but we need to take care of our own….Americans……period.

  86. Billywhat? | March 25, 2013 at 5:21 am |

    Like i said, it's surely not a bad product. And it's at least better than the rusty old AK's the adversarys are walking around with.

    All i said was, let's let the company that wins the contract make the best rifle they ever could and not the cheapest.

  87. the caliber is not ineffective, its designed ineffective, they shouldve never got rid of m193 ball ammo and they wouldnt have half the complaints about the stopping power of the round, the m193 tumbled and fragmented due to its design and the rifles design, NATO ruled it inhumane…as if war is not inhumane? come on, and ruined the round by going to the m855 out of a 1/7 twist, the round is over stabilized and alot of the time just punches .22 caliber wholes and doesnt always fragment because of design flaws, and the 5.56 is designed for use out of a 20 in barrel like the m16 all you do is lose velocity by going to the 14.5 in barrel the m4 uses this is another contributing factor the shorter barrel, it wouldnt be a problem if they used the ammo they did before if they hadnt made these ignorant changes, theyd still have the stopping power, and russias 5.45 functions alot like the m193 ball ammo, they dont seem to care whether its humane or not, neither do the iraqis who use it all the time, i say fuck them go back to m193 who cares if its humane or not, what part of getting shot is humane at all? and we wont have this problem, as for the reliability of the platform is good, if you have a well built ar15 platform like the colt m4a1s reliability shouldnt be an issue as long as you take care of it properly, and they still make m193 ammo, the military just dont use it anymore, id rather have a round that caused horrible wounds then one thats "humane"

  88. FN. has always made very good weapons BUT, as been said before they are not American companies and I prefer American made products, that is my choice. the 5.56 cal. should be replaced at this juncture of up dating the standard arms. the 7.62 cal. would, in my opinion, make a very nice upgrade. the m4 can at this time be made to modify the 7.62 recoil everyone is worried about. the upgrade with full auto will in the long run save ammo, sounds like an oxymoron though, if you have ever fired a stoner series in 7.62 you will know what I am talking about as the round is much more robust than the 5.56. there is the plus side of moving to a better supply picture of not handling both cal.'s. YES the person stated the best way to handle whatever they give us is to……train train train and then train some more like the corps. and special ops. does. you cannot hit with it unless you train with it. if the 5.56 is what they give us that is what we will use. we should actually quit complaining about the subject as someone above our paygrade has made the decision to have a 5.56 cal. rifle, for what ever reasons, that we will be using.

  89. Sorry, FN and Toyota are American, they are incorporated in the United States. It is the same as any other American subsidiary, that returns a profit to it benefactor whether they are a wholly owned US company or foreign. True Toyota may import parts and assemblies from other places but so do GM and Ford. FN and Berretta do not import anything to make the guns. They are 100% made here now as stipulated in their contracts. Yes a lot of that money ends up in the conus. The workers are paid. Buildings are bought, machine and equipment, maybe even taxes are paid, though a lot of places give businesses a breaks to locate there. So you would rather pay Americans at Colt or Remington to build the rifle to mil-spec and get a larger profit than Americans at FN factory because a small part of the pie might go overseas. In other words say Colt charged $600 a rifle an actual cost to make was $500 you would rather them make $100 than FN who charged $550 for one that cost them to make $490, because $60 bucks might go overseas.[numbers are for illustration, no idea what actual is]
    Granted the 5.56 is probably not the best cartridge ever made but that is not the fault of the company. That lies with the people who specified that cartridge as the one to be used. Then again no one cartridge will ever be best for everything. 338 Lapua might be great for distance but wouldn't want to use it to clear a small house with that long barrel
    Sort of an M-14 fan myself but would not be fond of clearing a house with it either. .

  90. We can't fight any war anymore without support from our enemies/ I saw a critical circuit board from a major com's system not long ago. It said "Components made in China and assembled in Korea".

Comments are closed.