M4a1

[Tnchi2a]

I would use Infantry Weapons of the World for second ED it has a weapon stating rules.

[.45cultist]

I would use Infantry Weapons of the World for second ED it has a weapon stating rules.

Fire, Fusion & Steel gives a little more detail.

[unkated]

Sorry should have been more specific
was looking for official stats for the M4A1 assault rifle

Oh. That's a bit smaller than the Sherman Tank.

Considering that the M4A1 design was developed well-after 2.2 saw print, I'd say you are out of luck for official stats.

Looking at stats developed from the formulae in Infantry Weapons of the World, the changes involved are a small change from the M4, though I am not sure that is in print either (not handy at the moment).

This is what I have for the M4A1:

Wgt: 3.74 kg (includes mag
Cost: $940 (RL: $700 unit cost for M4 + $240 upgrade kit)
Ammo: 5.56N

ROF_Dmg__Pen_Blk _Mag_RclSS Brst _Range
10___2___2-Nil_4___30___3___16_137.5

Upgraded version of M4 carbine. Heavier barrel (to better handle automatic fire), picatinny rail. Done as kit applied to existing M4s.

Uncle Ted

[unkated]

Fire, Fusion & Steel gives a little more detail.

It has been my experience that Fire Fusion and Steel provides skewed results when applied to real world weapons. Either the weapons are notably heavier than their real-world design, or if held to weight and size, are underpowered.

If nothing else, the formulae used in Infantry Weapons are those used to develop the other weapons modeled in the Infantry Weapons Guide. So, whatever the difference is in the two modeling systems (FFS & Inf Weapons), using those in Inf weapons would be consistent with the rest of the weapons available.

Uncle Ted

[.45cultist]

It has been my experience that Fire Fusion and Steel provides skewed results when applied to real world weapons. Either the weapons are notably heavier than their real-world design, or if held to weight and size, are underpowered.

If nothing else, the formulae used in Infantry Weapons are those used to develop the other weapons modeled in the Infantry Weapons Guide. So, whatever the difference is in the two modeling systems (FFS & Inf Weapons), using those in Inf weapons would be consistent with the rest of the weapons available.

Uncle Ted

I had the second printing that had some corrections and the results seemed to be comparable to book stuff. I used it for rcl and range of a given barrel length. Beyond figuring barrel length, I don't use the entire rules set so it's just more detailed than IW. I hope 3HG gets their weapons book done soon.