In those two links you posted. Look on the side. And scroll down a bit.Really? If both are chambered in 5.56 NATO (standard for those rifles in their military variants), what magic does the G36 use to achieve 1.5X range using the same cartridge...? I could agree that the piston vs gas tube design is superior, though.
And using the word retarded is, well- retarded. Just an opinion. You're free to say what you wish, but it's a matter of presentation, presentation, presentation... :shrug:
G36 effective range 800M
M4 effective range 500M
Besides. If you can keep your hand on the trigger, and use your off hand to pull the bolt back, you can resume shooting, and stay on target much more easily, right?
Now I'm not saying the AR's aren't good. And the right person can make it work. Look at Chris Costa, that guy is an animal. But for an army the G36 would be much better suited, as it's just so much easier to use, and well... H&K.
I do love the looks of the M4 more than the G36, but I've seen shooting tests, and durability tests and the G36 are always better. You hear about stuff going wrong with M4s all the time, but how often do you have a problem with an H&K gun? I will, however, give the rate of fire to the M4.
Funny coincidence, V3 GB(G36) is much better than the V2 GB(M4.) Irrelevant lol.
I'm not just knocking the M4, I mean if I had to use it in a war, I'll gladly take it. But If I had a choice, I'd take the G36.