B5 Systems

Feel The SURG – USSOCOM Seeks Suppressor Upper Receiver Group for M4A1 Carbines

On 12 April, USSOCOM’s Directorate of Procurement released a solicitation for the long anticipated Suppressor Upper Receiver Group.

According to the government, “The SURG weapon upgrade of the M4A1 Lower Receiver Group will allow the Warfighter’s weapon to be optimized for continuous suppressed use.” Interestingly, there’s no requirement that the upper feature an integral suppressor, just that it is suppressed.

Vendors have been working on this project for quite sometime as SOCOM has collected data in order to dial in the requirement. As you can imagine, most of the major players have all teamed up which explains the relatively short lead time until submissions are due.

Potential offerers have until July 13th to answer. Specific information requires an account with Fed Biz Opps.

Visit www.fbo.gov.

37 Responses to “Feel The SURG – USSOCOM Seeks Suppressor Upper Receiver Group for M4A1 Carbines”

  1. Chuck says:

    Seems like a preamble to HK 416 uppers.

    • Pat says:

      yeah that sounds about right

      • Joglee says:

        I disagree. It sounds like they are wanting a gun built around a dedicated suppressor that direct threaded.

    • The Stig says:

      My first thought too.

    • Controller says:

      I disagree, the 416 is heavy and not that easy to maintain. I think a gas impingement rifle will win. Especially one that does not bleed gas all over the user. And one that keeps your hand guard relatively cool to the touch.

      • Lasse says:

        You obviously haven’t done maintenance on a 416 if you think it’s “not easy”. The entire platform is a dream to clean and do maintenance on compared to M4s…

        • Controller says:

          Disagree, I have done maintenance, removing hand guards to clean to piston is not easy. I agree its easy to clean but that is not maintenance. The parts to keep that gun running are so specialized. VS a standard M4/AR. Its far easier to get more parts for an M4 than a 416. Also when you suppress a 416 it gets just as dirty as an M4 so the cleaning portion of it goes out the window.

          • Lasse says:

            Lock bolt to rear, unscrew the rail (a single screw with a flathead (Gerber, the HK-HK hook or the bolt itself can all be used)) and remove the piston. If you think that’s anything other than easy, then I hope you have an adult with you at all times.

            As for part shortage, how about ordering the needed amount of replacement parts? Sure, you as a civie can’t buy replacement piston parts, but neither should you.

      • LCSO264 says:

        It is heavy, yes, although the latest version (A5) is less so. Not sure what you mean by easy to maintain, it doesn’t get much simpler than a rod and spring? As for the gas bleed while suppressed, that is dependent on what suppressor is being used…

        • Controller says:

          True it does not get much simpler but, unless the user uses the stock hand guard, cleaning to clean the piston requires the user to remove the hand guard. Also the amount of Aftermarket hand guard available are 2 maybe 3. Additionally not all regular M4 parts work with it for the upper. Another thing is that with a suppressor the BCG still gets dirty and crusty like a normal BCG.

      • habu says:

        the 416 is very easy take from a Nam vet who hated impingment becaused they failed and are still failing

    • CAP says:

      I have to disagree. A DI setup with a gas port correctly sized to match a corresponding dedicated suppressor would be better than a piston setup. It would be lighter and would have parts commonality with existing systems.

      Overgassing is the biggest issue when adding a supressor to an AR. If you intend to always run the upper suppresed, you can use a reduced size gas port and eliminate the effects of overgassing.

      • oscar says:

        Except the majority of the gas that is blown back when suppressed is thru the bore so gas port size, selector, unicorn magic won’t help for 80% of the back pressure.

        • CAP says:

          The same thing happens on any piston gun.

          I wasn’t talking about the increase in fouling from the suppressor, but the over-pressurization of the gas system that occurs when you mount a supressor to an AR. This leads to exsessive bolt carrier velocity which causes a number of function issues. If the rifle will always be suppressed, you can reduce the size of the gas port and eliminate the issues of overgassing.

          There’s not much you can do about the increased fouling of the action from the suppressor, which would be the same regardless of operating system.

          • 18Derp says:

            You deserve a gold star!

            It’s and people still actually think that piston systems are cleaner suppressed. I understood where all the misdirection comes from, all those 2008/2009 YouTube 3D animations of DI guns shitting themselves and piston retrofit kits operating with no gas whatsoever… lol, PistonMania 2008… A simpler time.

  2. BillC says:

    It’d more interesting to know what their definition or parameters for “continuous suppressed use” are.

    • Pat says:

      you know “That damned Yankee rifle that they load on Sunday and shoot all week!” lol

  3. PTL21 says:

    Has any company other than LaRue revealed their submission during Shot Show 2016? Would love to find out what suppressors other big name manufacturers went with, as it’s time to buy a can before 41F kicks in.

  4. Gear Guy says:

    Glad to see it says “Best Value” and not LPTA (Lowest Price, Technically Acceptable). LPTA has been a nightmare to deal with when dealing with contracting these last couple of years.

  5. Forrest says:

    HK and OSS just won one contract for a suppressed rifle for SOCOM didn’t they? I see them doing well here as well. The OSS suppressor on a piston rifle would be fairly clean and without the added back pressure from a traditional suppressor, parts wear wouldn’t be nearly as much of an issue.

    Yeah, they’re a bit louder than other suppressors, but if you do it right, all the bad guys are dead and it doesn’t matter who heard what…

    • 18Derp says:

      lol. Another koolaid drinker huh? It’s after Shot Show, you won’t really hear much about how amazing OSS is until next Jan.

      • Franklin says:

        Oh why?
        Seems like the OSS suppressor meets all the requirements of the RFP. Why wouldn’t it be Part of the submitted proposals.

        • 18Derp says:

          “Seems”.

          Not a real military quality can. It’s a dual or triple thread on, mystery materials, never actually been tested along side real military cans, I strongly suspect wouldn’t pass real testing, heavy, claims of mirage are grossly optimistic…. 100% marketing driven company from my experiences at SHOT.

          When you haven’t sold any product but have multiple suites with tattoo artists, open bar with menu, and someone selling expensive watches in the corner – doesn’t tell me this is a company I want to beta test for.

          Maybe the product is legit, I’m just skeptical having had peripheral experience in the silencer industry.

          • Jon says:

            Contact State Department FTU, I understand it was shot along side the Current socom approved can and was much quieter, didn’t over drive the gun and out performed that system in repeatable accuracy. You may not like the way the company did business a few years ago, but until you have seen the can shoot in person I would hold my comments.

  6. 18Derp says:

    Thread on semi-perm attached. About damn time.

    “Quick Attach” has been a marketing game for too long. It makes sense for a fun-time can, but any real gun should have its own can, it’s part of the gun, it doesn’t come off.

    Maybe this will finally encourage SIG to get around to making the SRD556. AAC will resurrect the Ranger3. We’ll get proper AR cans that are sub 12oz.

    It almost makes too much sense that the entire upper with a dedicated can is being considered.

    • Joglee says:

      I have noticed a trend with guns like the DD ISR and others using dedicated direct thread suppressors and gas ports built around the suppressor.

  7. Joglee says:

    Sig MCX is a likely contender here.

  8. Carlos says:

    Daniel Defense ISR?

    • Joglee says:

      Something along those lines. Been a lot of companies makings uppers with integrated suppressors.

  9. If the gas port over gassing when supressed is a problem why not just use or develop an adjustable gas port? I know that they are available now I have just never built with one yet.

  10. JG says:

    So…. $2B USD or so…none of the entrants will meet the binary requirements. No go. The m4a1 will get an adjustable gas block and the program will get scrapped. Thats my prediction.