[CGTRWK]

Entirely right, of course. And you've tangentially summed up the problem with the M4 pretty well - combat weapons do have to serve in a wide variety of situations, and the short and handy M4 with its foot and a smidge sight radius is every bit as useless as long range as your M16 on a tripod would be for going house to house.

I remain convinced that short barrel and all, putting a scope on the M4 would go most of the way towards matching the M16 at a distance.

[Criminal Number 18F]

I remain convinced that short barrel and all, putting a scope on the M4 would go most of the way towards matching the M16 at a distance.

Miles ahead of you. Special Ops units mostly put a Trijicon 4X ACOG on their weapons, as do an increasing number of just-plain-infantry folks. Check the photos. The Trijicon has a tritium-illuminated reticle. It's a good solid scope which can take an incredible beating (I know. I gave it one) and hold zero. It's very lightweight, too. Of course, the M4, M4A1, and M16A4 can all accept any rail-mounting scope, but the ACOG is issue.

And yes, you can hit men at 500 yards with an M4A1 and ACOG.

For CQB the EoTech holographic sight is popular.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F