In 2007, The US Army Ordnance Bureau believed it was ready for an entirely new service rifle. And no small arms expert, amateur or professional, could argue. The standard service rifle of the US military, the M16/M4 had been in service, basically unchanged, since 1965. And since it was first adopted, there had been hundreds if not thousands of reports of the rifle failing in combat. The problems were many - jamming, failures to fire, overheating in combat, and many more. , Barrels would glow red or even white hot after repeated firing in full auto mode and in some cases the barrel would actually bend from the heat, rendering the rifle completely useless. If the rifle was not kept scrupulously clean-a hard thing to do in the midst of a battle-carbon and unburnt powder could prevent the bolt from locking into place in the chamber with the result the weapon would not fire. Generations of soldiers, from Vietnam to Afghanistan, had to learn for themselves the hard way, what the Pentagon already knew but chose to ignore - America's longest serving service rifle was also the worst. While the rest of the military spent billions on high tech weapons systems like the $2 billion dollar B2 bomber-the American soldier and Marine was stuck with a second-class obsolete service rifle that might jam when they needed it most.By 2005 the Army knew that millions of service rifles were going to need to be replaced. After 4 years of fighting in 2 wars, many of the Army's rifles were totally worn out. They had been refurbished and rebuilt as much as they could and new rifles were needed. After extensive testing, the US army was almost ready to adopt the XM8 as the new service rifle-testing had shown the weapon was superior in every way to the M16/M4 system. The XM8 was lighter, simpler, modular design made it more adaptable to more combat roles, and mosti mportant -the XM8 was far more reliable and even cheaper. But the sale of the XM8 was inexplicably cancelled at the last minute and with no real reason given.Nevertheless, in 2007 the Army once again announced trials for a brand new service rifle and after a "whittling down" process, 4 rifles were chosen for consideration.In July 2007, the U.S. Army announced a limited competition between the en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M4_carbine en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_SCAR , HK416, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robinson_Armament_XCR , and the previously-shelved HK en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM8_rifle . Ten examples of each of the four competitors were involved. Each weapon fired 6,000 rounds in an extreme dust environment. The shoot-off was for assessing future needs, not to select a replacement for the M4.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_HK416#cite_note-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_HK416#cite_note-11The XM8 scored the best, with only 127 stoppages in 60,000 total rounds, the FN SCAR Light had 226 stoppages, while the HK416 had 233 stoppages. The M4 carbine scored "significantly worse" than the rest of the field with 882 stoppages.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_HK416#cite_note-armytimes-4In December 2009, a modified version of the HK416 was selected for the final testing in the en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M27_Infantry_Automatic_Rifle program, designed to partially replace the en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M249_light_machine_gun at the squad level for the en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine_Corps.en.wikipedi It beat the three other finalists by en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabrique_Nationale_de_Herstal and en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_Defense . In July 2010, the HK416 IAR was designated as the en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M27_Infantry_Automatic_Rifle , and 450 were procured for additional testing.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_HK416#cite_note-M27-13Once again, the XM8 was the clear winner and once again, the Army backed out of procuring the new rifle at the last minute. And yet again, no clear reason was given for their decision. What could have been their reasoning? Budget concerns? No, thousands of new rifles had to be purchased anyway and the only question was from whom. Function? Again NO, in the Army's own tests and tests by others, the XM8 had repeatedly proven to be not just slightly but SIGNIFICANTLY more reliable then the existing M16 rifles.The Army's decision to reject the XM8 not once, but twice, remains a mystery known only to the procurement/ordnance geniuses tramping clumsily around the halls of the Pentagon trying not to bang their heads on the door frames. The army had the chance to procure a superior service rifle for its troops and had deliberately blown it - TWICE. As of today, in 2014 the US military continues to use the obsolete and inferior M16/M4 system, and no new service rifle is even under consideration. The American soldier and Marine continues to be burdened with a 50 year old, obsolete, and proven inferior and unreliable service rifle that is older then the soldiers who must trust their lives to it.