Jump to content

M4 v.s. M2 tactical


Recommended Posts

I am thinking of getting a HD semi-auto shotgun.

 

M4 seems cool. But what is the difference between M4 and M2 tactical? I mean functional difference, not the structure, because I know that M4 uses gas piston and M2 uses ID system.

 

More specifically, what is the advantage of M4 over M2 tactical?

 

M2 is simpler and easier for maintainance. M2 is cleaner. Without a gas piston, M2 is more like a malfunction free gun. Besides, M2 is much lighter.

 

So, I just do not understand why M4 over M2?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I am thinking of getting a HD semi-auto shotgun.

 

M4 seems cool. But what is the difference between M4 and M2 tactical? I mean functional difference, not the structure, because I know that M4 uses gas piston and M2 uses ID system.

 

More specifically, what is the advantage of M4 over M2 tactical?

 

M2 is simpler and easier for maintainance. M2 is cleaner. Without a gas piston, M2 is more like a malfunction free gun. Besides, M2 is much lighter.

 

So, I just do not understand why M4 over M2?

 

 

Well think about this: The stocks weigh the same. The barrels are the same length. Yet one is almost 1.5# heavier than the other. Those gas-pistons sure don't weigh 1.5#, and the modified BCG doesn't account for all of it either. so what does that tell you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much.

 

It's just beefed up and stronger in lots of areas, things were redesigned for the gas pistons, etc ... if you can afford it, I think you will be very happy with an m4.

 

And m2 is a fine weapon, but it's no M4 ... unless your intended use is for 3gun or something, then people seem to prefer the m2 for longer barrel and more magazine capacity.

 

Also, pick one ... Abrams M1A2 or armored car?

Edited by Duggan
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be the decenter and devils advocate in this group. I'm old, I can take the abuse. :D

 

Being able to own a firearm that is in current use by the (a) military has a certain cachette... that can sometimes be hard to define, rationalize or justify.

I can't totally exclude myself from this fascination either, as I've been in the deep end of that pool, once possessing FN FALs, H&K G3s, SIG AMTs, a whole slew of US arms... and other sundry mil-spec weaponry.

 

I find that the M2 does everything I need a shotgun to do. Is it better or worse than an M4 at flinging quantities of buckshot down the lane? No... only different in the sense that they are designed for, and have different (intended) missions in life. Pick your mission, pick your gun.

 

I went with the M2 for a few reasons. I have (developed) an aversion to gas system weapons. Might be silly, but no more silly than any other illogical rationalization.

I liked the lightness and maneuverability of the M2... I have carpal tunnel and tendinitis, so this is an important feature to me.

On the other hand, I'm a fairly recoil-proof person, so that feature of the softer shooting M4 carries no weight.

 

Caveat Emptor...

 

C

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other hand, I'm a fairly recoil-proof person, so that feature of the softer shooting M4 carries no weight.

 

Caveat Emptor...

 

C

 

Recoil proof eh?

 

I'd like to see you shoot a 577 T-Rex

 

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Recoil proof eh?

 

I'd like to see you shoot a 577 T-Rex

 

 

:)

 

Ah well... there are practical limits to everything.

I don't shoot guns that I know will do damage to me... much like I don't walk into walls or fall down stairs on purpose either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah well... there are practical limits to everything.

I don't shoot guns that I know will do damage to me... much like I don't walk into walls or fall down stairs on purpose either.

 

Touche, good sir. I also choose to refrain from doing intentionally destructive things ... at least on weekdays.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll be the decenter and devils advocate in this group. I'm old, I can take the abuse. :D

 

Being able to own a firearm that is in current use by the (a) military has a certain cachette... that can sometimes be hard to define, rationalize or justify.

I can't totally exclude myself from this fascination either, as I've been in the deep end of that pool, once possessing FN FALs, H&K G3s, SIG AMTs, a whole slew of US arms... and other sundry mil-spec weaponry.

 

I find that the M2 does everything I need a shotgun to do. Is it better or worse than an M4 at flinging quantities of buckshot down the lane? No... only different in the sense that they are designed for, and have different (intended) missions in life. Pick your mission, pick your gun.

 

I went with the M2 for a few reasons. I have (developed) an aversion to gas system weapons. Might be silly, but no more silly than any other illogical rationalization.

I liked the lightness and maneuverability of the M2... I have carpal tunnel and tendinitis, so this is an important feature to me.

On the other hand, I'm a fairly recoil-proof person, so that feature of the softer shooting M4 carries no weight.

 

Caveat Emptor...

 

C

Sounds like you have it figured out for you. I couldn't agree with you more. I own both (M1 and M4), and the lightness of the M1 is incredible after handling the M4. The only downsides of the M1/M2 are questionable ability to cycle loads for which they are not designed and you do not have the option of hanging a lot of weight on the gun.

 

The Wolff heavy recoil spring alleviates these downsides to some degree.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Touche, good sir. I also choose to refrain from doing intentionally destructive things ... at least on weekdays.

Discretion is the better part of valor... so says the man who has survived a lack of discretion in the pursuit of valor. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
The only downsides of the M1/M2 are questionable ability to cycle loads for which they are not designed and you do not have the option of hanging a lot of weight on the gun.

 

The Wolff heavy recoil spring alleviates these downsides to some degree.

 

In complete agreement with your comments.

I am currently "playing" with the appropriate combinations of accessories to find a happy medium.

A sling and light are somewhat mandatory for my needs, as I live in the woods and tend to wander about.

I'm still undecided on a Nordic extended mag tube or a MT 1913 rail/6 shell carrier as a method of additional ammo carry.

I don't want or feel the need for both... and both combined may cause cycling issues.

Thru experimentation... and contemplation of my "true needs", I will decide on which is the better method.

 

The Wolff spring would be a sound purchase... should I get a case of "Zombieitis" and rationalize the need for 14 plus shells on the gun. (What... it could happen. :p)

Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of girlyman finds the M4 "heavy"? I mean, really. Your granddaddy humped a rifle that weighed over 10 pounds through W*** (why the **** is World War II "**"ed out!? Damn Obama!) and you are going to whine over going to the range or 3-gun tournaments with a shotgun weighing less than 8?

 

I think this is the first "mod" you should consider...

 

http://www.neuticles.com/

 

 

:p

Link to post
Share on other sites
What kind of girlyman finds the M4 "heavy"? I mean, really. Your granddaddy humped a rifle that weighed over 10 pounds through W*** (why the **** is World War II "**"ed out!? Damn Obama!) and you are going to whine over going to the range or 3-gun tournaments with a shotgun weighing less than 8?

 

I think this is the first "mod" you should consider...

 

http://www.neuticles.com/

 

 

:p

 

You can also ask:

What kind of girlyman finds the M2 "heavy-recoil"?

 

It is not about the weight that people cannot carry. It is just like your preference. Like me, I like light guns, and do not care much about recoil. I can shoot 100rds 300WinMag through my less than 7 pound Tikka T3 Lite.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Recoil proof eh?

 

I'd like to see you shoot a 577 T-Rex

 

 

:)

 

 

I have seen the video long ago.

A gun with a recoil that could not be handled by anybody, is a total failure. It is a failure design, if the designer did not to do it on purpose to make jokes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well think about this: The stocks weigh the same. The barrels are the same length. Yet one is almost 1.5# heavier than the other. Those gas-pistons sure don't weigh 1.5#, and the modified BCG doesn't account for all of it either. so what does that tell you?

 

OK, that is the point.

 

Maybe M4 uses heavier receiver or use steel to substitute alluminum? But does it mean that M2 tactical is not strong enough? If it is strong enough, why bother to build a thicker receiver?

 

If M2 is not strong enough......... that is another issue. But I remember M2's predecessor, M1 super 90, was used by police and been given high credit for its durability and liability. Then why should M2 be worse?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds like you have it figured out for you. I couldn't agree with you more. I own both (M1 and M4), and the lightness of the M1 is incredible after handling the M4. The only downsides of the M1/M2 are questionable ability to cycle loads for which they are not designed and you do not have the option of hanging a lot of weight on the gun.

 

The Wolff heavy recoil spring alleviates these downsides to some degree.

 

Excuse me, what is the "loads for which they are not designed"? What loads are designed to be used in M2?

 

And what kind of loads that M2 cannot handle?

Link to post
Share on other sites
In complete agreement with your comments.

I am currently "playing" with the appropriate combinations of accessories to find a happy medium.

A sling and light are somewhat mandatory for my needs, as I live in the woods and tend to wander about.

I'm still undecided on a Nordic extended mag tube or a MT 1913 rail/6 shell carrier as a method of additional ammo carry.

I don't want or feel the need for both... and both combined may cause cycling issues.

Thru experimentation... and contemplation of my "true needs", I will decide on which is the better method.

 

The Wolff spring would be a sound purchase... should I get a case of "Zombieitis" and rationalize the need for 14 plus shells on the gun. (What... it could happen. :p)

 

I guess it wouldn't matter if you had a hundred round magazine if you couldn't see anything. So go for the light, and take a hard look at Streamlight lights and mounts. They are so light in weight, you can add something else, like a mag extension or sling.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess it wouldn't matter if you had a hundred round magazine if you couldn't see anything. So go for the light, and take a hard look at Streamlight lights and mounts. They are so light in weight, you can add something else, like a mag extension or sling.

 

The light and sling are well sorted. The value of the mag extension vs. the MT carrier, both of which I have, is at question.

Again... for my needs, not the needs necessarily of others.

 

What kind of girlyman finds the M4 "heavy"? I mean, really. Your granddaddy humped a rifle that weighed over 10 pounds through W*** (why the **** is World War II "**"ed out!? Damn Obama!) and you are going to whine over going to the range or 3-gun tournaments with a shotgun weighing less than 8?

 

I think this is the first "mod" you should consider...

 

http://www.neuticles.com/

 

:p

 

I assume this is a somewhat tongue-in-cheek comment. I can't imagine anyone who's actually carried a firearm would choose to state such a bigoted generality with a straight face.

I take that back... I actually do know a couple fellas that would say that. Luckily for them, they have other values that make them socially redeemable. :p

 

I have physical limitations. Those limitations being the result of a time and place when I did carry a 10lb. plus rifle... the weight of which was the least of my concerns.

 

My M2, loaded and fit with accessories, which includes the afore mentioned MT 1913 rail/6 shell carrier, weighs 9.9 lbs. This weight is with the stock tube extension.

As I said earlier, I carry my shotgun frequently, sometimes for hours while wandering the woods. I prefer not to carry any more weight than I have to.

When I get my replacement tube from Nordic (the previous one was damaged in a fall) I'll weigh the two methods of shell carry, balance that against the round count desire, and decide which will serve me better.

 

C

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want a light, buy the M4. If you don't, buy the M2.

The inertia driven recoil system will be fine for you. The M2 is plenty strong. ****, half the owners of these guns won't set the gun down unless a rag is between it and the truck bed. The other half don't even shoot them. They take pictures of them with other assorted tac crap and dinner pic's and post them online.

 

A significant percentage of posts start something like this, [email protected]*##!!! I SCRATCHED MY xxx's BARREL!!!

 

Please console me while I contemplate washing my mouth out with buckshot!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Excuse me, what is the "loads for which they are not designed"? What loads are designed to be used in M2?

 

And what kind of loads that M2 cannot handle?

 

The M1/M2 are designed to cycle heavier loads. Some people report some success with lighter loads, but you can almost be guaranteed cycling problems with added weight AND lighter loads.

 

With a mag extension and a fairly heavy light, I had regular cycling problems. The Wolff heavy spring seemed to fix the problem. I changed to a much lighter light and haven't had a problem since.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The M1/M2 are designed to cycle heavier loads. Some people report some success with lighter loads, but you can almost be guaranteed cycling problems with added weight AND lighter loads.

 

With a mag extension and a fairly heavy light, I had regular cycling problems. The Wolff heavy spring seemed to fix the problem. I changed to a much lighter light and haven't had a problem since.

 

Is it so sensitive to the weight?

 

Besides, what does heavier loads mean? For home defense, usually, you are using 2-3/4" 0/00 buckshot. You would not use anything like 7-1/2 or #8 target load. Do you mean your gun have regular cycling problems when using the buckshots?

Link to post
Share on other sites
The light and sling are well sorted. The value of the mag extension vs. the MT carrier, both of which I have, is at question.

Again... for my needs, not the needs necessarily of others.

 

 

 

I assume this is a somewhat tongue-in-cheek comment. I can't imagine anyone who's actually carried a firearm would choose to state such a bigoted generality with a straight face.

I take that back... I actually do know a couple fellas that would say that. Luckily for them, they have other values that make them socially redeemable. :p

 

I have physical limitations. Those limitations being the result of a time and place when I did carry a 10lb. plus rifle... the weight of which was the least of my concerns.

 

My M2, loaded and fit with accessories, which includes the afore mentioned MT 1913 rail/6 shell carrier, weighs 9.9 lbs. This weight is with the stock tube extension.

As I said earlier, I carry my shotgun frequently, sometimes for hours while wandering the woods. I prefer not to carry any more weight than I have to.

When I get my replacement tube from Nordic (the previous one was damaged in a fall) I'll weigh the two methods of shell carry, balance that against the round count desire, and decide which will serve me better.

 

C

 

 

Get an M1 and SBS it. THAT is some lightweight firepower for ya!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it so sensitive to the weight?

 

Besides, what does heavier loads mean? For home defense, usually, you are using 2-3/4" 0/00 buckshot. You would not use anything like 7-1/2 or #8 target load. Do you mean your gun have regular cycling problems when using the buckshots?

 

Yes, it is sensitive to weight. If you are using full-charge buckshot, you will have no problems with a mag extension and a full load of nine rounds. "Full charge" means 2 3/4", 3 3/4 dram equivalent (or close to it). It does not mean reduced recoil buckshot loads and it certainly doesn't mean bird shot or target loads or skeet loads.

 

It's when you add the second accessory that you might have problems. The old saying regarding the M1 is that you can pick one of the following: mag extension, sidesaddle, or light.

 

As I've stated many times, mine runs flawlessly with the mag extension and a light light. But this is after installing the Wolff heavy recoil spring.

 

Before the heavy spring, with the mag extension and a heavier light (Surefire M3), I had cycling problems, even with full-load buckshot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the original topic here which was M4 vs M2 and here is my viewpoint:

 

- First of all it irritates me when some of you make it sound like the M2 is a poor mans semi-auto.Once you remove price gougers less than $300 seperate the M2T and M4. I could have bought two of each yet brought an M2 home so........

 

- Both are durable enough to deal with anything anyone here is going to dish out to pretend like the M4 is built better in this regard goes right along with the cost argument.

 

 

This whole M4 vs M2 is just like my car which is a 2007 Corvette Z51 most people love it and know it's fast yet you always get the one guy who says why didn't you buy the Z06.

Edited by cody6.0
Link to post
Share on other sites
Back to the original topic here which was M4 vs M2 and here is my viewpoint:

 

- First of all it irritates me when some of you make it sound like the M2 is a poor mans semi-auto.Once you remove price gougers less than $300 seperate the M2T and M4. I could have bought two of each yet brought an M2 home so........

 

- Both are durable enough to deal with anything anyone here is going to dish out to pretend like the M4 is built better in this regard goes right along with the cost argument.

 

 

 

This whole M4 vs M2 is just like my car which is a 2007 Corvette Z51 most people love it and know it's fast yet you always get the one guy who says why didn't you buy the Z06.

 

 

A Benelli shotgun is reliable and all of the parts actually fit togather properly. Let's not compare it to GM cars. :p

 

But, if we must...

 

 

Z06 gives you dry-sump oil system, C6 is wet-sump.

Z06 gives you less weight by around 100#.

Z06 gives up 1 or 2 MPG IIRC.

The Z06 runs high 11's all day, the C6 low 12's to mid 12's.

Z06 will out-brake and out-handle the C6

 

In much the same way,

 

The M4 is more reliable than the M1/2 with ligher loads as a rule

The M4 has a metal trigger guard

The M4 can be had with a collapsible stock which makes running optics SOoooo much nicer

The M4 can accept accessories without choking.

The M4 doesn't kick nearly as hard (follow-ups are easier, even if recoil doesnt upset you)

 

Insiginificant you say? Not much difference in the C6 w/Z51 and the Z06 much like there isn't much need for a metal trigger guard on a shotgun?

 

Well, look at it this way. The C6 took over where the C5 Z06 left off, it doesn't feel as sporty as a C5Z, but it's "later and greater"...much like the M4 tougher and cooler than the M2/M1. You chose to spend the coin and get a C6, even though the benefits over the C5Z are mostly...but not all... cosmetic. In much the same way, I chose to get an M4 over an M2, even though the benefits are mostly...but not all... cosmetic. There is still a performance gap that cannot be denied.

 

Yes there are mechanical differences. Yes you will notice them.

Edited by Unobtanium
Link to post
Share on other sites

"The M4 is more reliable than the M1/2 with lighter loads as a rule"

True

"The M4 has a metal trigger guard"

Is there a reason I should care?

"The M4 can be had with a collapsible stock"

Yep, and it is terrific. I dearly love it without optics.

"The M4 can accept accessories without choking"

So can the M1/M2. Not as many as the M4, so if you just have to Rambo your shotgun out, go M4.

"The M4 doesn't kick nearly as hard (follow-ups are easier, even if recoil doesnt upset you)"

This, in my experience of shooting about 300 rounds of the same ammunition through the two guns, is wrong. If the M4 kicks less than the M1, it ain't by much. Why would it, other than due to the fact it is significantly heavier? Surely not due to that little 1/4" punch the pistons give the carrier, which only unlocks the bolt. From that point rearward, the operation of the two guns is identical, it seems to me.

 

I like both of them. Anyone who denigrates an M1/2, probably hasn't handled one side-by-side with an M4. The M1/2 is one of the finest tacticals ever made. If someone is concerned about weight, doesn't want to hang too much stuff on the gun, and intends to shoot full-load buckshot exclusively, the M1 is probably a better choice than the M4.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...