Will 416s and SCARs replace M4s anytime soon?

[zoot]

Yes I know this is a stupid topic and I will get flamed.*imagines your gonna get raped poster* But here I go anyway.

I was on some other forums a few days ago and there was a poster making statements like

-"The M4 will be standard issue for regular army for another decade but for SOCOM, the gun has no relevance"
-"SEALs are using SCARS and 416s and a varity of other weapons"


Basically, I told the guy he had no idea what he was talking about, and that the M4 was still very much in use by SF.

Of course, then he starts saying that he has six active duty SOCOM friends and they all use the SCAR and what not.

Frankly I think he's lying thru his teeth. I think I've read here on military photos that select SOCOM units were NOW getting their first shipments of SCARs from FN from march to april.

And as for the 416, I don't know if any unit is officially fielding them except OMG D3L74!


SO my question is this. Was I right to have said that the M4s were still very much in use? OR like the guy said, are M4s pretty much phased out by now?

[Laworkerbee]

I suggest you grab a shovel and dig like there is no tomorrow.

Because you are about to take some serious incoming...

[zoot]

Yeah I've been around here enough to know that. I dont really care, I'll tkae the risk. I just want to expose this punk kid.

[Laworkerbee]

You should provide a link

[8thidpathfinderpower]

From what i have gathered..the M4 is the defacto weapon for the US Armed forces for the for seeable future. BUT...SOCOM is supposed to fielding the SCAR soon, and I do believe they regular army is testing the HK416

I can hear the incoming rounds already....

[Exer]

The m4 is not phased out when not being used by a small number of SF. And how can he possibly know what the SOCOM is giving to Special Forces?

[Freibier]

This is all nonsense, evrybody knows that omfgdelta is using plasma rifles in the 6.8Megawatt range

[Exer]

Dont forget the lightsabers.

[Mr. JOSHUA]

From what i have gathered..the M4 is the defacto weapon for the US Armed forces for the for seeable future. BUT...SOCOM is supposed to fielding the SCAR soon, and I do believe they regular army is testing the HK416

I can hear the incoming rounds already....


Oh, sorry, thats the red beans and rice I had last night.

[silveykyle]

Yes I know this is a stupid topic and I will get flamed.*imagines your gonna get raped poster* But here I go anyway.

I was on some other forums a few days ago and there was a poster making statements like

-"The M4 will be standard issue for regular army for another decade but for SOCOM, the gun has no relevance"
-"SEALs are using SCARS and 416s and a varity of other weapons"


Basically, I told the guy he had no idea what he was talking about, and that the M4 was still very much in use by SF.

Of course, then he starts saying that he has six active duty SOCOM friends and they all use the SCAR and what not.

Frankly I think he's lying thru his teeth. I think I've read here on military photos that select SOCOM units were NOW getting their first shipments of SCARs from FN from march to april.

And as for the 416, I don't know if any unit is officially fielding them except OMG D3L74!


SO my question is this. Was I right to have said that the M4s were still very much in use? OR like the guy said, are M4s pretty much phased out by now?
At least your honest

[HoboWithAK]

Yeah I've been around here enough to know that. I dont really care, I'll tkae the risk. I just want to expose this punk kid.

So you come here to ask the question?

That's like going to a brothel to ask for marital advice.

[Andreas]

Yes I know this is a stupid topic and I will get flamed.*imagines your gonna get raped poster* But here I go anyway.


Devine Prophecy

[stevochino]

Devine Prophecy
he's also got aids, and syph.

[KillerBD]

I wasn't aware of all the M-4/M-16s being broken and needing immediate replacement with the HK-416 and SCAR.:cantbeli:

Seriously their is NO NEED to replace the M4 or M16 in the U.S. military with a weapon that will do the SAME THING. As I've said before, unless their is some sort of a quantum leap in ballistics technology, then their won't be a need to replace the M16.

[Frost]

unless their is some sort of a quantum leap in ballistics technology, then their won't be a need to replace the M16.

Let's face the truth; the M4/M16 is an old weapon-system and the SCAR and HK416 are indeed better. But ballistics won't change drastically, because that's mostly determined by the caliber.

Weapons are becomming older and older and the heavy use of them in Afghanistan and Iraq puts a heavy strain on them. They simply wear out. When stocks of spare parts are becomming smaller, than it's a good idea to change weapons. The USMC already changed to the M16A4. The Army did a partial change to the M16A3 shortly before Iraq and now changes to later versions of the M4. Early versions of the M4 are due to be replaced by newer versions. So weapons are being replaced already.

The only thing keeping the US from changing to a completely new (and better) weapon is the large stocks of spare parts and the fact that setting up a new production line large enough to handle to demand takes some time and a lot of money. When a new weapon will be fielded (and not just a new version of the M4/M16) you will see that it will first be used by small units and the entire change can take a decade for a military as large as the US (reserve units included).

[Chops]

Await SMGLee definitive answer on USSOCOM SCAR issue but I understand it's fairly imminent- field trial examples will potentially still be out there. M4 will still be used as/when until SCAR replacement filters through and more than likely for a long time after. 416s are currently the domain of the HSLD guys- JSOC and I believe AWG.

[-[Crosshair]-]

I'd like to see M468 uppers instead.

[mohica]

Let's face the truth; the M4/M16 is an old weapon-system and the SCAR and HK416 are indeed better.


The HK 416 is seeing (possibly has seen at this point) very limited use and won't be officially adopted by anyone in any quantity. If it was imminent a gas piston upper was required by the military, Colt would be right there with barrels blazing to offer their superior wares. This may come to pass at some time in the future and remains to be seen.

Colt has the contract for M4's as everyone knows. If and when the bid goes out again for M16's, my guess is they are gonna do everything they can to take it back from FN. Both weapons will be around for some time to come in one form or another.

The SCAR may not be all it has been touted to be. The possibility of similar weapons that will give the SCAR a run for it's money are on the horizon so it could get interesting. The SCAR will probably be adopted in limited quantities but it is doubtful it will be used beyond that and most likely will never be a general issue weapon.

[gaijinsamurai]

As much as I'd like to see soldiers equipped with HK416s and FN SCARs, I don't think it will happen anytime soon.

[LaoSexMachine]

Why all the animosity towards airsoft here? We never say anything bad about real gun guys in the airsoft section, but everytime I come here there's always some guy with a 'holy than thou airsoft players' aura around him

and you wonder why?

[ZoneOne]

-;2397006']I'd like to see M468 uppers instead.

Some troops in Iraq are ALREADY not getting the amount of 5.56 they want. What makes you think that adding a different caliber into the mix would help things out?

Honestly the only ppl really supporting the 6.8 change are the people who have their money in on it.

[BrianT]

I can guarantee you that the majority of SOCOM units are using standard M4A1s.

[mohica]

As much as I'd like to see soldiers equipped with HK416s and FN SCARs, I don't think it will happen anytime soon.

The 416 ain't as great as some would like you to believe. It is a decent weapon but inferior to the Colt 1020/1033 as well as the "M5". SMG Lee disagrees with me on this but I think the LWRC system is better than the HK.

After seeing the potential of the Magpul Masada at SHOT, it could be the SCAR killer. That is why I was saying the SCAR after all the technical support they enjoy, quality engineers, and the money and time spent by FN to develop the SCAR, a little company out of Colorado spends $70,000 and 3 months and comes up with the Masada. American ingenuity and perseverance at it's best. Screw HK and FN.

[HoboWithAK]

The HK 416 is seeing (possibly has seen at this point) very limited use and won't be officially adopted by anyone in any quantity. If it was imminent a gas piston upper was required by the military, Colt would be right there with barrels blazing to offer their superior wares. This may come to pass at some time in the future and remains to be seen.



Colt already has offered. The DoD has declined. Multiple times. If there was a need for a gas piston upper, which there isn't, there would already be one circulating. If you drink the HK koolaid, you'd believe that the 416 wouldn't stop running the you took the piston and snapped it in half, and threw it in Lake Erie. Their **** is really getting old.

[-[Crosshair]-]

Some troops in Iraq are ALREADY not getting the amount of 5.56 they want. What makes you think that adding a different caliber into the mix would help things out?

Honestly the only ppl really supporting the 6.8 change are the people who have their money in on it.

I don't really care, it was a suggestion.

Soldiers whine about 5.56 not having enough knock-down power... 6.8mm would be the intermediary between 5.56 and 7.62, and you just need new uppers, really.

[Klatuu]

The Most Coveted Rifle in Iraq and Afghanistan:
(Form all the guys I've talked to, anyway)

http://www.veteranscava.org/Me%20-%20M14%20sniper%20rifle.JPG

http://img45.imageshack.us/img45/8329/m14sopmod3kmgl7.jpg

http://www.olegvolk.net/gallery/d/2935-2/hominids8657.jpg

Of course, some of us are always going to prefer rifles to carbines.

The SCAR looks to be a pretty decent weapon. I like the heavy version.

[mi35d]

Read, "The Black Rifle" and you'll see Colt actually had a working prototype M16 with a piston operating system built in the mid 60's. It's nothing new.

[BrianT]

Conveted? I think not. I suppose it does great in the DM position, but I'll take my M4 for everything else.

[KillerBD]

^I think the U.S. military should re-introduce the M1906 7.62x63mm (.30-06) round. Possibly make a highly modified M-14 that would be able to fire the 7.62x63mm ammunition.

It would be similar to the good old 7.62x51, but it would have longer range, be better at peircing body armor, and it has more muzzle energy.

Here is a comparison:
http://ammoguide.com/cgi-bin/aicompare.cgi?sn=VpvPVDXRfg&in=1&xl=1

[BrianT]

^I think the U.S. military should re-introduce the M1906 7.62x63mm (.30-06) round. Possibly make a highly modified M-14 that would be able to fire the 7.62x63mm ammunition.

It would be similar to the good old 7.62x51, but it would be longer and better at peircing body armor and putting down the enemy.

Here is a comparison:
http://ammoguide.com/cgi-bin/aicompare.cgi?sn=VpvPVDXRfg&in=1&xl=1
Or we could just use a M4, so I can bust through a door and shoot a guy in the face like 6 times in a split second because 5.56 has no kick. Not to mention it weighs like nothing, so I can carry a ****load of 5.56.

[KillerBD]

Or we could just use a M4, so I can bust through a door and shoot a guy in the face like 6 times in a split second because 5.56 has no kick. Not to mention it weighs like nothing, so I can carry a ****load of 5.56.

Hey it was just an idea. But thanks for shooting it down with your 5.56x45mm bullets though p-)

j/k:petting:

[Laworkerbee]

^I think the U.S. military should re-introduce the M1906 7.62x63mm (.30-06) round. Possibly make a highly modified M-14 that would be able to fire the 7.62x63mm ammunition.

It would be similar to the good old 7.62x51, but it would have longer range, be better at peircing body armor, and it has more muzzle energy.

Here is a comparison:
http://ammoguide.com/cgi-bin/aicompare.cgi?sn=VpvPVDXRfg&in=1&xl=1

No need for a highly modified M-14 that would be able to fire 7.62x63mm ammunition; no weapon chambered in 7.62x63mm would fit that role better than this
http://www.frenchparadise.net/modules/Page/html/images/bar-1918a2.jpg

[KillerBD]

^Ah yes, the dreadful white box with a red X in the middle....


I just thought the M-14 would be a good candidate for being re-chambered for that round, since it was developed off of an M1 Garand (which shoots the M1906 7.62x63mm ammunition).

[Laworkerbee]

Really I see it fine?

Big Bad Ass BAR 1918A2 ???

)k now I dont, ok thats better

[KillerBD]

^Ah, I know what the gun looks like, but I dont see your pic. here is another one:
http://www.world.guns.ru/machine/bar1918a2.jpg

[Sgt.Axeman1224]

Take a look at this Army times article.
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/02/atCarbine070219/

[Suicaine]

^I think the U.S. military should re-introduce the M1906 7.62x63mm (.30-06) round. Possibly make a highly modified M-14 that would be able to fire the 7.62x63mm ammunition.

It would be similar to the good old 7.62x51, but it would have longer range, be better at peircing body armor, and it has more muzzle energy.

Here is a comparison:
http://ammoguide.com/cgi-bin/aicompare.cgi?sn=VpvPVDXRfg&in=1&xl=1

granted it might provide some better performance over the 7.62NATO but .338 Lapua Magnum or .300win mag would again provide better performance than that.

while i'm on the subject I've heard rumours of .338 Lapua Magnum GPMG's being considered, can anybody confirm this?

- Alex

[mohica]

Colt already has offered. The DoD has declined. Multiple times. If there was a need for a gas piston upper, which there isn't, there would already be one circulating. If you drink the HK koolaid, you'd believe that the 416 wouldn't stop running the you took the piston and snapped it in half, and threw it in Lake Erie. Their **** is really getting old.

Actually, Colt had one developed decades ago but there was really no interest so it was shelved. I don't know if I would go as far as to say they offered multiple times a gp system as a replacement as the gov't didn't see anything that needed replacing and was/is buying everything Colt can produce. You will note one of the Colt SCAR entries was basically the LE1020 operating system and it ran with flying colors during the trials. In fact, if Colt had a rifle chambered in 7.62x51mm that shared 60% parts commonality with the 5.56mm version, they might have won the trials.

I agree, Hk is getting tired, although, I still give them kudos for the MP5.


Read, "The Black Rifle" and you'll see Colt actually had a working prototype M16 with a piston operating system built in the mid 60's. It's nothing new.

Actually, it was the late 70's and it was the model 703, developed in a joint venture with Remington.

[jagermeister]

The Most Coveted Rifle in Iraq and Afghanistan:
(Form all the guys I've talked to, anyway)

http://www.veteranscava.org/Me%20-%20M14%20sniper%20rifle.JPG

http://img45.imageshack.us/img45/8329/m14sopmod3kmgl7.jpg



Of course, some of us are always going to prefer rifles to carbines.

The SCAR looks to be a pretty decent weapon. I like the heavy version.


i hope to god your kidding..........everyone knows the most wanted weapon is winchester 94.

[LaoSexMachine]

IMO the M4 doesn't need replacing. Those .308s and .30-06s are good to go until you end up being the one to haul all that weight plus you gear.

[Sgt.Axeman1224]

the problem is, is the government is doing everything on the cheap. They see the big issue as to having to stock parts for both weapons therefore being more expensive and a logistic pain in the arse. If you read the Army Times article, it explains how difficult it was to get a better buffer spring adopted by the army.

[Klatuu]

Or we could just use a M4, so I can bust through a door and shoot a guy in the face like 6 times in a split second because 5.56 has no kick. Not to mention it weighs like nothing, so I can carry a ****load of 5.56.

Or you could use a 7.62 and shoot him through the door only once and kill him before you enter the room. 600 rds of 5.56 weighs more than 100 rds of 7.62.

Suppressing fire requires lots of ammo, not killing shots. I'd be happy to let the rest of the squad carry 5.56. I want to be the guy with the M1A/M14. It's more reliable, too.

The main reason for the 5.56 is cost (s). Among those costs is the fact that it's easier/cheaper to train an average soldier up to the abilites of a carbine. To realize the potential of a real rifle takes more training, and you're going to wash more people out. It makes more sense from a budgetary perspective. From the perspective of the guy on the ground about to "bust through the door", being able to kill people in the room before you open the door is sometimes much more attractive, and the budget can go kiss somebody's ass. As Ripley says, "They can bill me".

[LaoSexMachine]

Or you could use a 7.62 and shoot him through the door only once and kill him before you enter the room. 600 rds of 5.56 weighs more than 100 rds of 7.62.

Suppressing fire requires lots of ammo, not killing shots. I'd be happy to let the rest of the squad carry 5.56. I want to be the guy with the M1A/M14. It's more reliable, too.

The main reason for the 5.56 is cost (s). Among those costs is the fact that it's easier/cheaper to train an average soldier up to the abilites of a carbine. To realize the potential of a real rifle takes more training, and you're going to wash more people out. It makes more sense from a budgetary perspective. From the perspective of the guy on the ground about to "bust through the door", being able to kill people in the room before you open the door is sometimes much more attractive, and the budget can go kiss somebody's ass. As Ripley says, "They can bill me".

WTF!! Bullshat!!! What the hell are you talking about? Not hard to teach a Marine or soldier becuase the caliber is different. Doubt on the squad level you are just gonna use one round per enemy.

[SMGLee]

SCAR-H just gone through a bolt redesign to work out some kinks.

SCAR-L is on schedule and it is ready for deliver within the months, if not already to soem units.

416 has been in wide deployment, 5000 plus units are in use by various operators.


M4 will be around for a long time, Colt is still making more and the patent on the M4 are due to ran out as the SOPMOD RAS package by KAC has already ran out on their patent. any one care to bid on the next batch of the RAS handguards and under bid KAC?

[deagle]

The HK 416 is seeing (possibly has seen at this point) very limited use and won't be officially adopted by anyone in any quantity. If it was imminent a gas piston upper was required by the military, Colt would be right there with barrels blazing to offer their superior wares. This may come to pass at some time in the future and remains to be seen.

Colt has the contract for M4's as everyone knows. If and when the bid goes out again for M16's, my guess is they are gonna do everything they can to take it back from FN. Both weapons will be around for some time to come in one form or another.

The SCAR may not be all it has been touted to be. The possibility of similar weapons that will give the SCAR a run for it's money are on the horizon so it could get interesting. The SCAR will probably be adopted in limited quantities but it is doubtful it will be used beyond that and most likely will never be a general issue weapon..


Is it me or is the SCAR over-rated ? has it even been field-tested against xm8 and other current rifles in service like m4, m16, g36 etc... ???

Even if it did out-perform m4, it has to be SIGNIFICANT to make it worth the purchase and converison.

[deagle]

No need for a highly modified M-14 that would be able to fire 7.62x63mm ammunition; no weapon chambered in 7.62x63mm would fit that role better than this
http://www.frenchparadise.net/modules/Page/html/images/bar-1918a2.jpg


gotta love the big bad BAR !! with a 30 rounder ... oh how sweet !!!

or gimme a m14 with 30 rounders !!

[Limeyfellow]

gotta love the big bad BAR !! with a 30 rounder ... oh how sweet !!!

or gimme a m14 with 30 rounders !!

The BAR was nice for the the 1910s, but really doesn't compare with even most rifles of the same class from 20 years after that date.

[jagermeister]

gotta love the big bad BAR !! with a 30 rounder ... oh how sweet !!!

or gimme a m14 with 30 rounders !!

you wouldnt love that big basterd if you had to pack it and its ammos heavy ass around.

[Klatuu]

WTF!! Bullshat!!! What the hell are you talking about? Not hard to teach a Marine or soldier becuase the caliber is different. Doubt on the squad level you are just gonna use one round per enemy.

Lol. It's hard to beleive anyone who ever even saw a rifle let alone used one could say that.

Shooting things 600-800 meters away with a 2700 fps MV/170-180 gr bullet is a very different prospect than teaching people how to shoot something 300 meters away with a 3000 fps MV/60-70 gr bullet .

Current basic marksmanship in the US military, while of a high relative contemporary standard, isn't as comprehensive as it was 40 years ago. The harder something is, the fewer people can accomplish it.

[mohica]

416 has been in wide deployment, 5000 plus units are in use by various operators.




Whooooa, I didn't think that many were in service. I was quoted less than 1000 units with some possibly already pulled.

The M14 is THE rifle in 7.62mm and it ain't that heavy. When used for it's intended purpose, it is an excellent platform, especially the SEI product improved Crazy Horse rifles.

[Freibier]

I bet u airsoft a lot, mr. klatuu chairborne

[James]

Lol. It's hard to beleive anyone who ever even saw a rifle let alone used one could say that.

Shooting things 600-800 meters away with a 2700 fps MV/170-180 gr bullet is a very different prospect than teaching people how to shoot something 300 meters away with a 3000 fps MV/60-70 gr bullet .

Current basic marksmanship in the US military, while of a high relative contemporary standard, isn't as comprehensive as it was 40 years ago. The harder something is, the fewer people can accomplish it.

Do you have and actual experiences with this? When I was in the USMC in the 1990s, a big part of our rifle qualification involved single, well aimed shots at 500m. With an M16.

Ezekiel was a Marine too. We tend to be good shots. In my day, recruits were held back in boot camp until they were able to qualify.

[Masai]

when will this hk416 VS m4/m16 fight die?

[KillerBD]

The BAR was nice for the the 1910s, but really doesn't compare with even most rifles of the same class from 20 years after that date.

Yea good one, "the 1910s" :cantbeli:

Back on topic.

As I've said before, it is POINTLESS to start a replacement of a rifle that does its job just fine, with another rifle that does its job just fine as well. Thats part of the reason why the XM-8 assault rifle project was cancelled, the XM-8 shot the 5.56x45mm NATO round, same as the M16. So their was no real need to replace it was a COOL looking rifle.

Their will be a time when the U.S. military needs to modernize its standard issue assault rifle. But until their is some sort of a major improvement in projectile technology, their wont be a need to replace the M16 with another gun the does the same thing.

Analogy for ya:

"Wow this hammer sure works great for pounding nails into walls, ya know what would work even better? A hammer painted red and twice the cost would work even better!!!"

[BrianT]

Or you could use a 7.62 and shoot him through the door only once and kill him before you enter the room. 600 rds of 5.56 weighs more than 100 rds of 7.62.

Suppressing fire requires lots of ammo, not killing shots. I'd be happy to let the rest of the squad carry 5.56. I want to be the guy with the M1A/M14. It's more reliable, too.

The main reason for the 5.56 is cost (s). Among those costs is the fact that it's easier/cheaper to train an average soldier up to the abilites of a carbine. To realize the potential of a real rifle takes more training, and you're going to wash more people out. It makes more sense from a budgetary perspective. From the perspective of the guy on the ground about to "bust through the door", being able to kill people in the room before you open the door is sometimes much more attractive, and the budget can go kiss somebody's ass. As Ripley says, "They can bill me".
How often did you just get to shoot indiscriminantly into a room without opening the door overseas? Besides if you did want to do that, that's what your friend 240B/G is for.

[MetroN]

Is there any difference between the HK416 and the C8FSW, like in the "interior way"?
Like, does the SFW have the "piston gas"-thing?

For the record, I know very little about the "interior things" of a weapon.

[mohica]

when will this hk416 VS m4/m16 fight die?

Probably when the lemmings that worship at the alter of Orbendorf quit touting everything HK touches as the best there is.

[Molli]

Is there any difference between the HK416 and the C8FSW, like in the "interior way"?
Like, does the SFW have the "piston gas"-thing?

The SFW is 'normal' inside. :)

[Indiana Jones]

Probably when the lemmings that worship at the alter of Orbendorf quit touting everything HK touches as the best there is.
Bollocks Sir, you could at least take the time to get the spelling right. It´s "OBERNDORF".
On a sidenote I find it not very surprising but quite amusing that this is coming from somebody who so obviously is a Colt (Harftord) fanboy and made- in -America kool-aid drinker. You rightfully criticize a particular mindset but exhibit quite similar tendencies. Do you get paid for these illusions !?
Sweet Jesus !

[mohica]

Bollocks Sir, you could at least take the time to get the spelling right. It´s "OBERNDORF".
On a sidenote I find it not very surprising but quite amusing that this is coming from somebody who so obviously is a Colt (Harftord) fanboy and made- in -America kool-aid drinker. You rightfully criticize a particular mindset but exhibit quite similar tendencies. Do you get paid for these illusions !?
Sweet Jesus !


Jonesy -

Spelling, i.e. Shantelly, Virginnee?

Yes, I do like Colt products, and definitely like the Colt gp systems better than the 416 hands down. I also like HK products, albiet limited primarily to the MP5 series. The only HK product I still own. The problem HK has is their attitude, like they are some kind of royalty. Well, they ain't. At one time they might have ridden a crest of recognition in this country based primarily I believe on the MP5's reputation, but not so much any longer.

If you can point out something HK currently manufactures and is in real use that is of superior design or performance over another manufacturers wares, by all means you have the floor. For that matter, something HK has ever made that was superior to someone elses stuff excluding the MP5 of course. If not, then bow out gracefully.

As for being a "made-in-America kool-aid drinker, sweet Jesus hell yes!

Most of my illusions I owe to windowpane and purple microdot.

[Indiana Jones]

Jonesy -

Spelling, i.e. Shantelly, Virginnee?

Yes, I do like Colt products, and definitely like the Colt gp systems better than the 416 hands down. I also like HK products, albiet limited primarily to the MP5 series. The only HK product I still own. The problem HK has is their attitude, like they are some kind of royalty. Well, they ain't. At one time they might have ridden a crest of recognition in this country based primarily I believe on the MP5's reputation, but not so much any longer.

If you can point out something HK currently manufactures and is in real use that is of superior design or performance over another manufacturers wares, by all means you have the floor. For that matter, something HK has ever made that was superior to someone elses stuff excluding the MP5 of course. If not, then bow out gracefully.

As for being a "made-in-America kool-aid drinker, sweet Jesus hell yes!

Most of my illusions I owe to windowpane and purple microdot.
H&K has an attitude problem, as in, bohoo, they don´t sell their funny stuff to us civilians? Well, they do indeed have that problem, but it is there for a reason.
If you familiarize yourself with US import legislations (that would have made Monsieur Colbert proud but are really a slap in the face of free entrepreneurship) over the last two decades, particularly the various, particularly arbitrary "Assault Weapon" bans, the policy adapted by H&K does seem rather sensible than arrogant. I do not think I can point out something in H&Ks armory that is by a wide margin superior to anything else there is on the market in its category. That is of course subject to personal preference however. The same applies to Colt, by the way, and I would be hard pressed to name anything currently on the market that is utterly superior to its competition in a way for example the MKb 42 (H) or the Ferguson Rifle were at the times of their respective introduction.
Still, both aforementioned maufacturers produce quite decent firearms, and I do not have any general reservations on buying or utilizing their products. Nuff´said.

And something else: The "Not made here" syndrome has led to American and other soldiers being armed with less- than- optimal firearms and therefore suffering unnecessary casualties before. For one´s own soldiers sake, one should drop chauvinism when it comes to armament.

[MetroN]

The SFW is 'normal' inside. :)

Thanks mate, but what do you mean by "normal"?

[Exer]

by normal he means standard.

[ed316]

Lol. It's hard to beleive anyone who ever even saw a rifle let alone used one could say that.

Shooting things 600-800 meters away with a 2700 fps MV/170-180 gr bullet is a very different prospect than teaching people how to shoot something 300 meters away with a 3000 fps MV/60-70 gr bullet .

Current basic marksmanship in the US military, while of a high relative contemporary standard, isn't as comprehensive as it was 40 years ago. The harder something is, the fewer people can accomplish it.

I have shot with Ezekiel on a number of occassions and he knows what he's doing. Battle weapons are simple to learn because they are made so the dumbest private can be able to work it. Like James said do you have any experience in those said rifles?

[MetroN]

by normal he means standard.

alright, nothing biggy then..

[Klatuu]

Do you have and actual experiences with this? When I was in the USMC in the 1990s, a big part of our rifle qualification involved single, well aimed shots at 500m. With an M16.

Ezekiel was a Marine too. We tend to be good shots. In my day, recruits were held back in boot camp until they were able to qualify.

A) The Marines do basic marksmanship better than the Army. There are perfectly good reasons for this, but it is a fact none-the-less.

B) Shame on any Marine who forgets why we shoot at things in the first place... to kill them. Shoot a 100-250 lb animal, species not dependent, at 500 yds with a 5.56 weapon. Shoot another, identical animal (or better yet, a large enough sampling to get really good data) with a 7.62 weapon. Note which is more lethal.

C) When I was in the Army, in the 1980s, I was an armorer (specifically, MOS "45 Bravo, Small Arms Repair", which is a side by side school at Aberdeen Proving Grounds for the USA and USMC). What I ended up doing in practice was teaching marksmanship to lots of weekend warriors who couldn't re-qualify when the time came. I know what it takes to TEACH someone to become proficient enough to be acceptable to the US military. I've also been shooting high power rifles since I was 5. That's 37 years. One can hit things at 1000 yds with a 5.56, but you can kill them at 1200 yds with a 7.62. I am not an expert (I say that because I know what a real expert can do, which is a good deal more than what it takes to get the badge on the uniform). I am, however, pretty damn good, and able to utilize the extra firepower, reach, and (often) precison of a more capable rifle. People who know the difference usually prefer it.

D) Never go past bullet point "C" with a Marine, they get lost and start calling the Navy and then the neighborhood really goes to Hell ;)


Battle weapons are simple to learn because they are made so the dumbest private can be able to work it.

Exactly my point. Add people without a Y chromosome into that and you see why we use the 5.56. It's a rifle even a girl can shoot, and carry around in between having to do so. When you stop being the dumbest private, you might be able to utilize a bit more. I'd bet you can.

I'm not arguing that it's a mistake or wrong for the military to use the 5.56, it makes too much economic sense. That's from the top looking down. I'm arguing what I'd WANT, which is from the bottom looking up, and what guys I know who know what they're doing tell me they want (and I don't know anyone in the Army anymore who isn't at least an E-7 with 20+). The "Spec Ops" guys tend to utilize 7.62 more than "regular" troops. There are reasons for that, chief among which is that it kills things better. Why else are they pulling 50 year-old rifles out of storage? Any one of you guys who've seen what happens when a M-240 (ya'll use that now, right?) hits someone vs. when M-4 , 16 in. barreled 5.56, hits someone in the same place knows it. And all that other equipment you carry is secondary at beast, and extraneous at worst. A solider is a man with a rifle, a man with a rucksack is a camper. The rest of that stuff is good, even life-saving, but the rifle is the defining peice of hardware.

I'm not putting down your rifle, guys. It was mine before it was most of yours, back when it went by the nomenclature "M-16A1" and was an actual rifle, not a carbine. I like the rifle, and have even paid good money for couple in civilian dress. But I also know the M-14 is a better weapon for someone who knows what they're doing. Give it a try. Shoot it a bit. Even better, kill a few things with it, then tell me you don't like it better.

I got a kick out of the airsoft comment. When I was a child, we shot BB guns and threw darts at each other. I hate clicking on a link thinking I'm going to see a real gun and end up with the inflatable-doll equivalent of a firearm. It's like clicking on a **** link thinking you're going to see some hot Brazilian chick with a round ass and slightly bushy ****, only to find out you're looking a hot Brazilian hemaphrodite with round ass and a schlong.

[mohica]

H&K has an attitude problem, as in, bohoo, they don´t sell their funny stuff to us civilians? Well, they do indeed have that problem, but it is there for a reason.
If you familiarize yourself with US import legislations (that would have made Monsieur Colbert proud but are really a slap in the face of free entrepreneurship) over the last two decades, particularly the various, particularly arbitrary "Assault Weapon" bans, the policy adapted by H&K does seem rather sensible than arrogant. I do not think I can point out something in H&Ks armory that is by a wide margin superior to anything else there is on the market in its category. That is of course subject to personal preference however. The same applies to Colt, by the way, and I would be hard pressed to name anything currently on the market that is utterly superior to its competition in a way for example the MKb 42 (H) or the Ferguson Rifle were at the times of their respective introduction.
Still, both aforementioned maufacturers produce quite decent firearms, and I do not have any general reservations on buying or utilizing their products. Nuff´said.

And something else: The "Not made here" syndrome has led to American and other soldiers being armed with less- than- optimal firearms and therefore suffering unnecessary casualties before. For one´s own soldiers sake, one should drop chauvinism when it comes to armament.


One of the reasons I quit working with HK when I was in LE supply is exactly what I am talking about and you it seems are not familiar with and it isn't a "boohoo". They are a pain in the ass wether it is for LE or civilian consumption. Wait, wait, wait, for weapons and/or parts. Paperwork, phone calls to check and recheck already late deleveries. Simple as that. In fairness I will say that Colt has on occasion been difficult but for different reasons which arguably "legitimate", like supplying the US Gov't. Like I said, HK thinks they are royalty, heck you can even see it the way they are at SHOT. "Don't touch that. Dont' take that apart". Will you HK rep disassemble that piece for us? "No".

By the way, I am very familiar with import legislation, gun ban legislatation, blah, blah, blah. HK's attitude started 20 or more years ago when MP5 was king. Everybody wanted one. That didn't hold true for the rest of the line. Most of the "new" stuff they have come out with since has seen only limited success.

What this whole discussion boils down to is the incessant references to the HK416 which may be a fine weapon, but it isn't the end all and is riding on the coat tails of the MP5's success. The only people that keep bringing it up are the HK freaks. I would purchase one if it were the only piston system available, but that isn't the case. I have shot the 416 and it is decent. I have not shot a POF only because I haven't taken the time. I have shot the LWRC and IMO, it is a better system than the HK system. In fact, as I have stated previously, it may be design wise the best of the breed including Colt. So as you can see, I am not soley a Colt guy but I don't see the 1020/1033 being released for several years if at all. I have wanted a gp that worked for years, hell I still have an old Rhino system around here somewhere. Now that we are afforded some options, a decision will be made. The choices are:

Colt: probably won't see it for several years if at all.
POF: have heard good an bad. Runs but has some quirks like having to take apart and put piston in reverse if using a suppressor.
HK: runs well, a bit complicated versus other gas piston systems for disassembly. Replacement parts and such would be a problem knowing HK's history.
LWRC: unique in design among the piston systems. Can convert existing di uppers. Can use standard (existing by the millions and cheap) bolt groups with gas rings (non functional). Easy disassembly. Self regulating with no adjustment requiried for various ammunition or suppressor use.There you have it. My assessment. Others may have a different opinion. One more thing about American made. At SHOT this year one of my goals was to examine all the .45 ACP pistols from various manufacturers designed for the JSOC trials. Examined units from Glock, HK, FN, Tauraus, S&W, Springfield, and maybe one or two others. Far and away, the S&W M&P .45 was the best of the bunch. Tauraus was probably second of the lot. So, American made wins out. That sounds kinda nice doesn't it?

Please expound on your last statement of you post above:

"The 'Not made here' syndrome has led to American and other soldiers being armed with less- than- optimal firearms and therefore suffering unnecessary casualties before. For one´s own soldiers sake, one should drop chauvinism when it comes to armament."

[Freibier]

HK: runs well, a bit complicated versus other systems for disassembly. Replacement parts and such would be a problem knowing HK's history.What's so complicated in pulling out a pushpin?

[SMGLee]

1020 is done.....just got the word from Colt.

And no matter how you slice it, the LWRC is a not better then the HK.

I shot both and shot them side by side. The HK is a much better engineered system that is better sorted out. it is tough for a small company to stand as a major manufacture to go toe and toe against a giant like HK and for what LW has accomplished, they have done well, just not well enough. That being said, the LWRC is the best system a civilian can lay their hands on as far as a piston is concern in the near future.

[LaoSexMachine]

Lol. It's hard to beleive anyone who ever even saw a rifle let alone used one could say that.

Shooting things 600-800 meters away with a 2700 fps MV/170-180 gr bullet is a very different prospect than teaching people how to shoot something 300 meters away with a 3000 fps MV/60-70 gr bullet .

Current basic marksmanship in the US military, while of a high relative contemporary standard, isn't as comprehensive as it was 40 years ago. The harder something is, the fewer people can accomplish it.

I was an Expert shooter in the Corps and my secondary MOS was 8531. So I know how to shoot I have shot a an M-14 before. You said you rather have an M-14 while the rest of the squad carries M-16 and doing supressive fire. What are you gonna do when the enemy is behind cover? Twindle you thumbs till he's stupid enough to pop his head back up? I still talk to people in the Corps and never heard of them coveting an m-14 like you describe\.

[SMGLee]

I was an Expert shooter in the Corps and my secondary MOS was 8531.

8531....nice. very nice. 1st Marine?

[LaoSexMachine]

8531....nice. very nice. First Marine?

3rd Marines.

[Klatuu]

I was an Expert shooter in the Corps and my secondary MOS was 8531. So I know how to shoot I have shot a an M-14 before. You said you rather have an M-14 while the rest of the squad carries M-16 and doing supressive fire. What are you gonna do when the enemy is behind cover? Twindle you thumbs till he's stupid enough to pop his head back up? I still talk to people in the Corps and never heard of them coveting an m-14 like you describe.

1. Call in air/indirect fire on his position and either destoy him in place, or flank him while doing so, and destroy him from that direction.

2. If he's decided sticking his head out is "stupid", that's a soft kill for the purposes of doing the aforementioned air/indirect fire and flanking.

3. No matter what, he's going to need more effective cover from ME than he is from YOU.

4. Hey diddle, diddle, send Marines up the middle :).

WWII was fought, and won, against better soldiers than we currently face, by concripts using a 10 lb, 8 shot, 30-06, and facing the scenario you just described, usually without the benefit of 24-7 air support and never with computer/sattelite-linked indirect fire.

Qualifiying for an expert badge in the military is a lot easier than actually being one. The averge guy can't even be one. Having completed Marine marksmanship puts you closer to being a real expert than that average guy, but you can be better, and in many different ways. The average military-trained guy today isn't even close to being on par with the better old timers I knew when I was a kid. They grew up shooting, they shot to eat, and when they missed they went hungry. I think that military marksmanship training is the best way to quickly teach people who are unfamiliar with firearms a modicum of proficency. Guys who are really good shoot all the time, however.

Most of what I've heard directy about coveting the M-14 is from guys who've encountered either the drugged-up "insurgents" that take massive punishment from smaller caliber weapons, but fall quiker to havier stuff, like 7.62, the occasional 12 ga, or belt-fed 5.56. I've read some stuff on the internet here and there as well. Maybe it's not as much as I percieved, but I do know what I'd do, if I could.

FWIW, this made the rounds a couple years back:

http://dalesdesigns.net/weapons.htm

REPORT FROM A MARINE IN IRAQ


........ spent 7 months at Camp Blue Diamond in Ramadi. Aka: Fort
Apache. He saw and did a lot and the following is what he told me about
weapons, equipment, tactics and other miscellaneous info which may be of interest to you. Nothing is by any means classified. No politics here,
just a Marine with a birds eye views opinions:

1) The M-16 rifle : Thumbs down. Chronic jamming problems with the
talcum powder like sand over there. The sand is everywhere. Jordan says you feel filthy 2 minutes after coming out of the shower. The M-4 carbine
version is more popular because its lighter and shorter, but it has
jamming problems also. They like the ability to mount the various optical
gunsights and weapons lights on the picattiny rails, but the weapon
itself is not great in a desert environment. They all hate the 5.56mm
(.223) round. Poor penetration on the cinderblock structure common over
there and even torso hits cant be reliably counted on to put the enemy
down. Fun fact: Random autopsies on dead insurgents shows a high level of
opiate use.

2) The M243 SAW (squad assault weapon): .223 cal. Drum fed light
machine gun. Big thumbs down. Universally considered a piece of Finless Brown Trout. Chronic
jamming problems, most of which require partial disassembly. (that fun
in the middle of a firefight).

3) The M9 Beretta 9mm: Mixed bag. Good gun, performs well in desert
environment; but they all hate the 9mm cartridge. The use of handguns for
self-defense is actually fairly common. Same old story on the 9mm: Bad
guys hit multiple times and still in the fight.

4) Mossberg 12ga. Military shotgun: Works well, used frequently for
clearing houses to good effect.

5) The M240 Machine Gun: 7.62 Nato (.308) cal. belt fed machine gun,
developed to replace the old M-60 (what a beautiful weapon that was!!).
Thumbs up. Accurate, reliable, and the 7.62 round puts em down.
Originally developed as a vehicle mounted weapon, more and more are being
dismounted and taken into the field by infantry. The 7.62 round chews up the
structure over there.

6) The M2 .50 cal heavy machine gun: Thumbs way, way up. Ma deuce is
still worth her considerable weight in gold. The ultimate fight stopper,
puts their ****s in the dirt every time. The most coveted weapon
in-theater.

7) The .45 pistol: Thumbs up. Still the best pistol round out there.
Everybody authorized to carry a sidearm is trying to get their hands on
one. With few exceptions, can reliably be expected to put em down with a
torso hit. The special ops guys (who are doing most of the pistol work)
use the HK military model and supposedly love it. The old government
model .45s are being re-issued en masse.

8) The M-14: Thumbs up. They are being re-issued in bulk, mostly in a
modified version to special ops guys. Modifications include lightweight
Kevlar stocks and low power red dot or ACOG sights. Very reliable in
the sandy environment, and they love the 7.62 round.

9) The Barrett .50 cal sniper rifle: Thumbs way up. Spectacular range
and accuracy and hits like a freight train. Used frequently to take out
vehicle suicide bombers ( we actually stop a lot of them) and
barricaded enemy. Definitely here to stay.

10) The M24 sniper rifle: Thumbs up. Mostly in .308 but some in 300 win
mag. Heavily modified Remington 700s. Great performance. Snipers have
been used heavily to great effect. Rumor has it that a marine sniper on
his third tour in Anbar province has actually exceeded Carlos Hathcocks
record for confirmed kills with OVER 100.

11) The new body armor: Thumbs up. Relatively light at approx. 6 lbs.
and can reliably be expected to soak up small shrapnel and even will
stop an AK-47 round. The bad news: Hot as Finless Brown Trout to wear, almost unbearable
in the summer heat (which averages over 120 degrees). Also, the enemy
now goes for head shots whenever possible. All the Crimp One Off about the
old body armor making our guys vulnerable to the IEDs was a non-starter.
The IED explosions are enormous and body armor doesn't make any
difference at all in most cases.

12) Night Vision and Infrared Equipment: Thumbs way up. Spectacular
performance. Our guys see in the dark and own the night, period. Very
little enemy action after evening prayers. More and more enemy being
whacked at night during movement by our hunter-killer teams. Weve all seen
the videos.

13) Lights: Thumbs up. Most of the weapon mounted and personal lights
are Surefires, and the troops love em. Invaluable for night urban
operations. Jordan carried a $34 Surefire G2 on a neck lanyard and loved it.

I cant help but notice that most of the good fighting weapons and
ordnance are 50 or more years old!!!!!!!!! With all our technology, its the
WWII and Vietnam era weapons that everybody wants!!!! The infantry
fighting is frequent, up close and brutal. No quarter is given or shown.

Bad guy weapons:

1) Mostly AK47s . The entire country is an arsenal. Works better in the
desert than the M16 and the .308 Russian round kills reliably. PKM belt
fed light machine guns are also common and effective. Luckily, the
enemy mostly shoots like ****. Undisciplined spray and pray type fire.
However, they are seeing more and more precision weapons, especially sniper rifles. (Iran, again) Fun fact: Captured enemy have apparentlymarveled at the marksmanship of our guys and how hard theyfight. They are apparently told in Jihad school that the Americans rely solely on technology, and can be easily beaten in close quarters combat for their lack of toughness. Lets just say they know better now.

2) The RPG: Probably the infantry weapon most feared by our guys.
Simple, reliable and as common as flys. The enemy responded to our
up-armored humvees by aiming at the windshields, often at point blank range.
Still killing a lot of our guys.

3) The IED: The biggest killer of all. Can be anything from old Soviet
anti-armor mines to jury rigged artillery shells. A lot found in
Jordans area were in abandoned cars. The enemy would take 2 or 3 155mm
artillery shells and wire them together. Most were detonated by cell phone,
and the explosions are enormous. You're not safe in any vehicle, even an
M1 tank. Driving is by far the most dangerous thing our guys do over
there. Lately, they are much more sophisticated shape charges (Iranian)
specifically designed to penetrate armor. Fact: Most of the ready made
IEDs are supplied by Iran, who is also providing terrorists (Hezbollah
types) to train the insurgents in their use and tactics. Thats why the
attacks have been so deadly lately. Their concealment methods are
ingenious, the latest being shape charges in Styrofoam containers spray
painted to look like the cinderblocks that litter all Iraqi roads. We find
about 40% before they detonate, and the bomb disposal guys are unsung
heroes of this war.

4) Mortars and rockets: Very prevalent. The soviet era 122mm rockets
(with an 18km range) are becoming more prevalent. One of Jordans NCOs
lost a leg to one. These weapons cause a lot of damage inside the wire.
Jordans base was hit almost daily his entire time there by mortar and
rocket fire, often at night to disrupt sleep patterns and cause fatigue
(It did). More of a psychological weapon than anything else. The enemy
mortar teams would jump out of vehicles, fire a few rounds, and then haul
ass in a matter of seconds.

5) Bad guy technology: Simple yet effective. Most communication is by
cell and satellite phones, and also by email on laptops. They use
handheld GPS units for navigation and Google earth for overhead views of our
positions. Their weapons are good, if not fancy, and prevalent. Their
explosives and bomb technology is TOP OF THE LINE. Night vision is rare.
They are very careless with their equipment and the captured GPS units
and laptops are treasure troves of Intel when captured.

Who are the bad guys?:

Most of the carnage is caused by the Zarqawi Al Qaeda group. They
operate mostly in Anbar province (Fallujah and Ramadi). These are mostly
foreigners, non-Iraqi Sunni Arab Jihadists from all over the Muslim world
(and Europe). Most enter Iraq through Syria (with, of course, the
knowledge and complicity of the Syrian govt.) , and then travel down the at
line which is the trail of towns along the Euphrates River that weve
been hitting hard for the last few months. Some are virtually untrained
young Jihadists that often end up as suicide bombers or in sacrifice
squads. Most, however, are hard core terrorists from all the usual
suspects (Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas etc.) These are the guys running around
murdering civilians en masse and cutting heads off. The Chechens (many
of whom are Caucasian), are supposedly the most ruthless and the best
fighters. (they have been fighting the Russians for years). In the
Baghdad area and south, most of the insurgents are Iranian inspired (and led)
Iraqi Shiites. The Iranian S!
hiia have been very adept at infiltrating the Iraqi local govt., the
police forces and the Army. The have had a massive spy and agitator
network there since the Iran-Iraq war in the early 80s. Most of the Saddam
loyalists were killed, captured or gave up long ago.

Bad Guy Tactics:

When they are engaged on an infantry level they get their asses kicked
every time. Brave, but stupid. Suicidal Banzai-type charges were very
common earlier in the war and still occur. They will literally sacrifice
8-10 man teams in suicide squads by sending them screaming and firing
Aks and RPGs directly at our bases just to probe the defenses. They get
mowed down like grass every time. ( see the M2 and M240 above). Jordans
base was hit like this often. When engaged, they have a tendency to
flee to the same building, probably for what they think will be a glorious
last stand. Instead, we call in air and thats the end of that more
often than not. These hole-ups are referred to as Alpha Whiskey Romeos
(Allahs Waiting Room). We have the laser guided ground-air thing down to a
science. The fast movers, mostly Marine F-18s, are taking an ever
increasing toll on the enemy. When caught out in the open, the helicopter
gunships and AC-130 Spectre gunships cut them to ribbons with cannon and
rocket fire, especially at!
night. Interestingly, artillery is hardly used at all. Fun fact: The
enemy death toll is supposedly between 45-50 thousand. That is why were
seeing less and less infantry attacks and more IED, suicide bomber
****. The new strategy is simple: attrition.

The insurgent tactic most frustrating is their use of civilian
non-combatants as cover. They know we do all we can to avoid civilian
casualties and therefore schools, hospitals and (especially) Mosques are
locations where they meet, stage for attacks, cache weapons and ammo and flee
to when engaged. They have absolutely no regard whatsoever for civilian
casualties. They will terrorize locals and murder without hesitation
anyone believed to be sympathetic to the Americans or the new Iraqi govt.
Kidnapping of family members (especially children) is common to
influence people they are trying to influence but cant reach, such as local
govt. officials, clerics, tribal leaders, etc.).

The first thing our guys are told is don't get captured. They know that
if captured they will be tortured and beheaded on the internet. Zarqawi
openly offers bounties for anyone who brings him a live American
serviceman. This motivates the criminal element who otherwise don't give a
Finless Brown Trout about the war. A lot of the beheading victims were actually
kidnapped by common criminals and sold to Zarqawi. As such, for our guys, every
fight is to the death. Surrender is not an option.

The Iraqis are a mixed bag. Some fight well, others aren't worth a
Finless Brown Trout. Most do okay with American support. Finding leaders is hard, but they
are getting better. It is widely viewed that Zarqawis use of suicide
bombers, en masse, against the civilian population was a serious tactical
mistake. Many Iraqis were galvanized and the caliber of recruits in the
Army and the police forces went up, along with their motivation. It
also led to an exponential increase in good intel because the Iraqis are
sick of the insurgent attacks against civilians. The Kurds are solidly
pro-American and fearless fighters.

According to .... morale among our guys is very high. They not only
believe they are winning, but that they are winning decisively. They are
stunned and dismayed by what they see in the American press, whom they
almost universally view as against them. The embedded reporters are
despised and distrusted. They are inflicting casualties at a rate of 20-1
and then see **** like Are we losing in Iraq on TV and the print media.
For the most part, they are satisfied with their equipment, food and
leadership. Bottom line though, and they all say this, there are not
enough guys there to drive the final stake through the heart of the
insurgency, primarily because there aren't enough troops in-theater to shut
down the borders with Iran and Syria. The Iranians and the Syrians just
cant stand the thought of Iraq being an American ally (with, of course,
permanent US bases there).

[mohica]

1020 is done.....just got the word from Colt.
And no matter how you slice it, the LWRC is a not better then the HK.

I shot both and shot them side by side. The HK is a much better engineered system that is better sorted out. it is tough for a small company to stand as a major manufacture to go toe and toe against a giant like HK and for what LW has accomplished, they have done well, just not well enough. That being said, the LWRC is the best system a civilian can lay their hands on as far as a piston is concern in the near future.

Done? As in a shelved project (again) or as in ready for manufacture?

From another post, "Spoke with Bill Chartier at Colt and unlike what I had been told by him a few months ago ("possible end of March production start"), this project has slipped to the status of "I hate to say this, but unlike before I can't even begin to tell you when these may start production. We now have thousands upon thousands of current models on backorder that have to be completed, or MOSTLY completed, before we can even begin to start production and integration of the new piston products."

Is this similar what you were told?

We will agree to disagree on the HK vs. LWRC issue. I also shot them both and to be frank, not too much noticeable difference in actual performance to me. Not too sure what "better engineered and better sorted out" means. That is subjective. What I liked about the LWRC is the simplicity, self regulating ability, lighter weight, and ability to use some existing parts stocks. Is the LWRC "better" than the HK or vica versa? I don't know if it is "better" but I know I like it better. Again, that is subjective but I won't argue the case HK has more track record behind their products.

I suppose your logic will apply to Magpul and the Masada? Of course in it's infancy, but you saw it. You gonna tell me that it doesn't have the potential to blow the SCAR out of the water? I guess maybe the difference is I like rooting for the underdog, the little guy.

[8thidpathfinderpower]

What gets me is soldiers cry, and soldiers cry. The M16 series weapon will be around for a really long time to come. Its cheap to produce, the rounds have decent stopping power, and the weapon is great for soldiers with small hands(some males and females) and its easy to train the soldier to fire the darn thing.

The HK416, may be the ultimate M4, but Uncle sam is not going to splurge and buy them.

Scar and magpul weapons aside, I would rather have a M14 or an M16. Not a M4. Not that big a pain to move in and out tight spots, and the weapons actually have some range and stopping power.

The idea behind the M4 is a weapon thats able to be easily manuvered around in tight quarters. But, with the collapsable stock, it would seem like the wepon zero would be off if the stock is moved.

[JDZ]

2) The M243 SAW (squad assault weapon): .223 cal. Drum fed light
machine gun. Big thumbs down. Universally considered a piece of Finless Brown Trout. Chronic jamming problems, most of which require partial disassembly. (that fun in the middle of a firefight).

3
10) The M24 sniper rifle: Thumbs up. Mostly in .308 but some in 300 win
mag. Heavily modified Remington 700s. Great performance. Snipers have
been used heavily to great effect. Rumor has it that a marine sniper on
his third tour in Anbar province has actually exceeded Carlos Hathcocks
record for confirmed kills with OVER 100.



Well, I always thought the M249 is a Squad Automatic Weapon.
And why is he talking about the M24? I thought he is a Marine? They have M40A3s.
Are you sure he’s no pretender?


Or you could use a 7.62 and shoot him through the door only once and kill him before you enter the room. 600 rds of 5.56 weighs more than 100 rds of 7.62.

Suppressing fire requires lots of ammo, not killing shots. I'd be happy to let the rest of the squad carry 5.56. I want to be the guy with the M1A/M14. It's more reliable, too.

The main reason for the 5.56 is cost (s). Among those costs is the fact that it's easier/cheaper to train an average soldier up to the abilites of a carbine. To realize the potential of a real rifle takes more training, and you're going to wash more people out. It makes more sense from a budgetary perspective. From the perspective of the guy on the ground about to "bust through the door", being able to kill people in the room before you open the door is sometimes much more attractive, and the budget can go kiss somebody's ass. As Ripley says, "They can bill me".


I think 5,56 serves thus its critics quite well. There are many good reasons why it entered service: e.g. because it is lighter and it hasn’t such hard recoil so you can aim and shoot faster. And a standard rifle must be usable by all servicemembers, also women and weaker persons.

I also somehow doubt 7,62 is that more effective. I read that a target in Somalia being hit with an M60 by several rounds was still alive. And I also read that an Iraqi insurgent that was hit by a marine sniper with an M40 in the torso got away.
I personally think that many people overestimate the power of 7,62mm because you still have to hit a large blood vessel or get a head shot for an immediate kill.
For marksmanship discussion: There are squad designed marksmen for long range shooting. And as shooting training of former generations is concerned: Shooting at targets on a range over 500m or so is nice, but with no telescopic sights I doubt that you were able to make out a camouflaged enemy in the field. And so I conclude that soldiers and Marines today who have ACOGs are in reality somehow more efficient over those ranges.
And using 7,62 doesn’t mean you’re only making killing shots. Supressive fire is meant to suppress the enemy because you cannot fire him directly. You would have to do that with 7,62, too. And 600 rounds 7,62 weight more than 600 rounds 5,56.

And a little secret: you can shoot somebody through a door with an M16, too. And unlike an M14 you can shoot it one handed, not standing in front of the door…

[weizen]

Good post JDZ. Recently I saw a report on TV where a person who's legs were hit by 2 .50BMG's (doc said so) was getting treated. Except for his ampuatated legs the person was fine.

IMHO there is no silver bullet and shot placement is more important.

[Adam Wilhelm]

Project SALVO
In 1948, the Army organized the civilian Operations Research Office (ORO), mirroring similar operations research organizations in the United Kingdom. One of their first efforts, Project ALCLAD, studied body armor and the conclusion was that they would need to know more about battlefield injuries in order to make reasonable suggestions.[2] Over 3 million battlefield reports from WWI and WWII were analyzed and over the next few years they released a series of reports on their findings.[2]

The conclusion was that most combat takes place at short range. In a highly mobile war, combat teams ran into each other largely by surprise; and the team with the higher firepower tended to win. They also found that the chance of being hit in combat was essentially random — that is, accurate "aiming" made little difference because the targets no longer sat still. The number one predictor of casualties was the total number of bullets fired.[2]

These conclusions suggested that infantry should be equipped with a fully-automatic rifle of some sort in order to increase the rate of fire. It was also clear, however, that such weapons dramatically increased ammunition use and in order for a rifleman to be able to carry enough ammunition for a firefight they would have to carry something much lighter.

Existing rifles were poorly suited to real-world combat for both of these reasons. Although it appeared the new 7.62 mm T44 (precursor to the M14) would increase the rate of fire, its heavy 7.62 mm NATO cartridge made carrying significant quantities of ammunition a real problem. Moreover, the length and weight of the weapon made it unsuitable for short range combat situations often found in jungle and urban combat or mechanized warfare, where a smaller and lighter weapon could be brought to bear much more quickly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M16_rifle

I would take a 5,56 NATO gun any day rather lugging a 7,62 NATO around.

[James]

And something else: The "Not made here" syndrome has led to American and other soldiers being armed with less- than- optimal firearms and therefore suffering unnecessary casualties before. For one´s own soldiers sake, one should drop chauvinism when it comes to armament.

Well, the U.S. Military does use Italian, Swiss, and German designed pistols (Beretta, SIG, and HK), and Belgian designed machine guns (M249 and M240).

[MetroN]

Well, the U.S. Military does use Italian, Swiss, and German designed pistols (Beretta, SIG, and HK), and Belgian designed machine guns (M249 and M240).

And I havent heared of that much mal-function (spelling?) about any of the weapons, except the Beretta.

[James]

And I havent heared of that much mal-function (spelling?) about any of the weapons, except the Beretta.

Heard? Or experienced yourself?

People weighing in with baseless opinions is getting really old.

[MetroN]

Busted. No experience, just read of the internett. my opinion counts for nothing on this matter.

[SMGLee]

FWIW, this made the rounds a couple years back:

http://dalesdesigns.net/weapons.htm

REPORT FROM A MARINE IN IRAQ




This is an open letter, see if you can get a hold of the force recon report, it was classified back in the days, i am not sure what is the status now. They tell a complete different story.

Sad but true, a lot of weapon in the fighting Marine's hands are wore out and some parts are hard to come by. maintanance is a key point to any weapon systems. when they were called up a few years back, the chain of supply were not as well developed as it is now.

[SMGLee]

Done? As in a shelved project (again) or as in ready for manufacture?

Done as the rpoject has been shelved.





Is this similar what you were told?

It is performance related.




I suppose your logic will apply to Magpul and the Masada? Of course in it's infancy, but you saw it. You gonna tell me that it doesn't have the potential to blow the SCAR out of the water? I guess maybe the difference is I like rooting for the underdog, the little guy.

This could be possible, FN has a ton of cash behind it on a very well developed system that is thorothly tested by not only FN but also with the oprerators and SOCOM project team.

Masada is a great concept, they are looking for some one to be able to take that project off their hads and develope it further. this is a smart move as this will bring in big money that can sustain the project and make the gun a serviceable option for LE, Mil and civilians.

[BrianT]

Well, I always thought the M249 is a Squad Automatic Weapon.
And why is he talking about the M24? I thought he is a Marine? They have M40A3s.
Are you sure he’s no pretender?


Yeah he's either an idiot or a big fake. For one he said the 240 is being used more and more dismounted. It's pretty much the standard since '97. The SAW is not only not a M243 as you said, but it's not drum-fed either. It's belt or magazine-fed. New body armor that weighs 6lbs and still stops 7.62? What the **** unit is he in? The Space Marines?

[SMGLee]

BrianT,

ceramic plates with level 4 or even level 3 inconjuction can stop multiple 7.62x51 hits. They do weight about 6lbs front and rear.

[BrianT]

BrianT,

ceramic plates with level 4 or even level 3 inconjuction can stop multiple 7.62x51 hits. They do weight about 6lbs front and rear.
6lbs a piece maybe. Not total for the vest like he was saying.

[JDZ]

That guy surly wanted to look up the IBA's weight but only took the OTV. So I think that's another sign that he is a pretender.
At beginning of the war the Interceptor weighted 15,5 lb with SAPI plates (of course depending on size).

[HoboWithAK]

This is an open letter, see if you can get a hold of the force recon report, it was classified back in the days, i am not sure what is the status now. They tell a complete different story.

Sad but true, a lot of weapon in the fighting Marine's hands are wore out and some parts are hard to come by. maintanance is a key point to any weapon systems. when they were called up a few years back, the chain of supply were not as well developed as it is now.

The list of BS he posted has been called out numerous times already. It's a bunch of made up fairy tales. When was the last time the USMC employed the M24?

[ABNINF]

The Most Coveted Rifle in Iraq and Afghanistan:
(Form all the guys I've talked to, anyway)

http://www.veteranscava.org/Me%20-%20M14%20sniper%20rifle.JPG


Actually, I've been hearing that it's starting to go the other way. There's not a whole of maintenance support for M14/21's, the parts aren't easy to come by, so DM's are sticking with M4/M16A4's

[Adam Wilhelm]

Ref: M14...
Read on SOCNET that there is lacking armourers with experience on the system. So the M14 is slowly wearing out.

[Saber_Dart]

Or you could use a 7.62 and shoot him through the door only once and kill him before you enter the room. 600 rds of 5.56 weighs more than 100 rds of 7.62.

That has got to be one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. Ever tried to clear a Room? You don't just "shoot through the door", beside the fact of wasting ammunition and blind firing, what if there was a civilan on the other side? Explain that to the Military Justice System.

And the 5.56 not having enough stopping power? PLEASE. Why don't you go run out a couple yds and I'll shot you, see if you can do anything. Not having enough stopping power? I'd like to see the insurgent who tries to fire back after getting hit once or twice in the stomache/head. People don't seem to realize that these weapons are made to KILL. Not to mention the recoil benefits of the 5.56. Even a 9mm can kill someone, it dosen't take much, we are made of flesh, not steel. Jeez

[8thidpathfinderpower]

Ref: M14...
Read on SOCNET that there is lacking armourers with experience on the system. So the M14 is slowly wearing out.

You read on SOCNET...stop right there. I do not mean to bust you out, but, the M14 rifle is also compatable with the Springfield Armory M1A. And yes, MOST of the parts are interchangeable.

Do not believe everything you read in the chat rooms of these websites. They some times are laced with rumors and what ever.

The US Military is NOT EVER going to buy the HK416 in quantities, or anything worthwhile to make rearming the force a viable option. Instead, they will stick to FN Herstal, Baretta(THAT PIECE OF CRAP) colt, and in rare occaisions, SiG.

Personaly,I think the M4 is a piece of doo doo. But thats my opinion. I would rather carry into battle a M14 or a AK47/74/105. Or a M16A2. I do not like the concept of a collapseable stock, because of the prospect of losing your zero every time you moved the stock. And while the ever growing debate of whether this round is better than that round, well got some news for ya...ever actually seen what a 5.56mm round will do to a guy who has been shot? Might not be apparent on the out side, but that bullet fragments, tumbles, bounces off of bone and cartilage, causing major damage to the guy who was shot. Not to mention, the bullet and the M16/M4 are only a few weapons designed to actually out right produce a high probability of a first round kill.

Thats my take on the M16/M4. I do not know alot about ballistics, but I do know that I would not want to be on the recieving end of the bullet fired from that weapon.

People grip about the reliability of the M16/M4? Well, here is a tried and true method to fix that problem....CLEAN THE DARN THING!!!! It actually works.

[8thidpathfinderpower]

That has got to be one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. Ever tried to clear a Room? You don't just "shoot through the door", beside the fact of wasting ammunition and blind firing, what if there was a civilan on the other side? Explain that to the Military Justice System.

And the 5.56 not having enough stopping power? PLEASE. Why don't you go run out a couple yds and I'll shot you, see if you can do anything. Not having enough stopping power? I'd like to see the insurgent who tries to fire back after getting hit once or twice in the stomache/head. People don't seem to realize that these weapons are made to KILL. Not to mention the recoil benefits of the 5.56. Even a 9mm can kill someone, it dosen't take much, we are made of flesh, not steel. Jeez

Why would you want to shoot through the wall to get to someone? Thats what tanks, artillery, and airstrikes are made for.

[Adam Wilhelm]

8thID:
I know, i know it´s only teh inthernet but SOCNET is more valid than many other pages, for instance this one. p-)
It´s to many Walts and chairborne commandos here for my liking but hey... i should Harden the feck up!

[jagermeister]

this isnt a dig or anything man but how does a collapseable change make your rifle change your zero? ive never heard of that one....

[8thidpathfinderpower]

this isnt a dig or anything man but how does a collapseable change make your rifle change your zero? ive never heard of that one....

It changes the weapons seating with your shoulder, and it also changes the cheek and eye placement in reference to the sights. And that, can cause a person to lose their zero, especially with optics installed.

If you have a M16 or an M4, try it to find out what I am talking about.

That also goes for firing the weapon at a slant, on the side, or god forbid, what ever else bad shooting posistion there is.(I am sure some private, 2dlt, or marine will find one or more)

[James]

Not to mention, the bullet and the M16/M4 are only a few weapons designed to actually out right produce a high probability of a first round kill.

I think most users want their first round kill to happen immediately, instead of 10 minutes later when the guy bleeds out.

[Hydro]

It changes the weapons seating with your shoulder, and it also changes the cheek and eye placement in reference to the sights. And that, can cause a person to lose their zero, especially with optics installed.

If you have a M16 or an M4, try it to find out what I am talking about.

That also goes for firing the weapon at a slant, on the side, or god forbid, what ever else bad shooting posistion there is.(I am sure some private, 2dlt, or marine will find one or more)



Well, it won't change the zero per se, that will only occur if the sights shift. The weapon will be as accurate as the last time you zeroed it, but your eye and sight alignment will be incorrect. Of course, this will only happen if you continually shift your stock, switch between fixed and collapsed stocks frequently, and move the placement of the butt in your shoulder, which are mainly bad habits rather than a fault of the weapon system.

[Adam Wilhelm]

It changes the weapons seating with your shoulder, and it also changes the cheek and eye placement in reference to the sights. And that, can cause a person to lose their zero, especially with optics installed.

If you are using M68 CCO, Aimpoints M3 etc. it doesn´t matter where you place your head. Can you see the red dot you can shoot at the target.


Because of Aimpoint’s unique double lens system, the sights are parallax-free, meaning that no matter where on the lens you see the dot reflected, your point of aim will be your point of impact.

Aimpoint (http://www.aimpoint.com/products/why_aimpoint_sights)

[mohica]

Actually, I've been hearing that it's starting to go the other way. There's not a whole of maintenance support for M14/21's, the parts aren't easy to come by, so DM's are sticking with M4/M16A4's

Do not count the M14 out yet. There are some things coming down the pipe that will suprise alot of people including the manufacture of new parts. Not as bad as internet pundits say, the current parts situation wouldn't be so dire if the jerk-off Clinton hadn't cut up 750,000 units. Can you imagine? Let's see. The taxpayer paid for the R&D, paid to manufacture them, paid to mothball and store them, then paid to destroy them. Nice.

The M14 is a relatively simple weapon. With modernized parts and assembly methods, the rifle has been reborn. Check this site for information on the product improved M14

http://www.smithenterprise.com/

[jagermeister]

It changes the weapons seating with your shoulder, and it also changes the cheek and eye placement in reference to the sights. And that, can cause a person to lose their zero, especially with optics installed.

If you have a M16 or an M4, try it to find out what I am talking about.

That also goes for firing the weapon at a slant, on the side, or god forbid, what ever else bad shooting posistion there is.(I am sure some private, 2dlt, or marine will find one or more)

hmmm guess thats why sense my stock is all the way in or at my preferred length. No offense but only time consistent eye relief is a must is when your using irons or a scope. If your using a scope you have to have proper eye relief anyways so its gonna force you to get into the right position. Eotech aimpoint and all of that crap it doesnt matter were your head is.

[8thidpathfinderpower]

If you are using M68 CCO, Aimpoints M3 etc. it doesn´t matter where you place your head. Can you see the red dot you can shoot at the target.


Aimpoint (http://www.aimpoint.com/products/why_aimpoint_sights)

Do not count on it, especially when shooting a point target or in close quarters especially when you are trying to hit the target and not the other guy next to him.

I use aimpoint on my weapons at home, and I also use ACOG.(cotton picking expensive scope at over $1,000

[8thidpathfinderpower]

Well, it won't change the zero per se, that will only occur if the sights shift. The weapon will be as accurate as the last time you zeroed it, but your eye and sight alignment will be incorrect. Of course, this will only happen if you continually shift your stock, switch between fixed and collapsed stocks frequently, and move the placement of the butt in your shoulder, which are mainly bad habits rather than a fault of the weapon system.

Thanks for wording it right....thats what I was trying to say.

Back on topic...
In combat, it is really hard to hit your target, because of the stress of trying not to get killed, dust, debris flying around, channging posistions and other stuff a soldier faces.

Thats why the military has put a truckload of money into optics on weapons, and designing modifactions to current weapons to make it more comfortable and easy to use so the soldier can actually hit his target.

Comparisons between the HK416 and the M4 series weapons are both basicly the same. Except the different mechanical differences on how gas is recycled through the weapon, making the weapon more reliable in some instances, they are basicly the same.

And, here lies the problem. Why would the military spend millions on re-inventing the horse? Does not make sense.

7.62 vs 5.56....there is the real debate. You have a trade off...ability to carry more ammo, lighter, and hard hitting stopping power. But, here is the problem...NATO standard round is 5.56mm. How do you design a weapon that has a first round kill probability of the 7.62mm?

Enter the AR15 family of weapons. The weapon was designed just for the concept of a first shot kill. No other weapon besides the M1911, M2HBMG, and a cannon can top that.

Now with that being said, there are not that many weapons that promise a leap in technology that will out class the M4. The SCAR, altho promisising, does not offer that much more. Sure it has interchangeable barrels and all the bells and whistles of a new weapon, but it has yet to be proven. The HK416...promising, but why reinvent the horse?

Most of the operater/soldier problems with this weapon stem from one thing....operator maintenance. With the exception of barrel warpage after playing fireman joe for an hour, (M4 without free float RIS and attachment..ie M203, XM26, and what ever else can be bolted to the weapon)

[vajt]

If the military is smart, they would save money by keeping the M4's and wait until the next evolution, which to me will be either caseless or case-telescoped rounds. AAI is currently showing a prototype of a 5.56mm case-telescoped light machinegun.

http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1000

If you will spend that much money, might as well make it for the next technological jump, which is caseless/case-telescoped rounds. I see something like this as the next weapon for the US military, caseless 6.8mm weapon.

http://www.cryeassociates.com/12.htm#

-----JT-----

[ABNINF]

Personaly,I think the M4 is a piece of doo doo. But thats my opinion. I would rather carry into battle a M14 or a AK47/74/105. Or a M16A2. I do not like the concept of a collapseable stock, because of the prospect of losing your zero every time you moved the stock.

I've never had a problem with losing my "zero" or had a POI change because the stock shifted. I shot my issue M4 with the old school 4 position out to 700m with an ACOG and didn't have any problems. Also, it holds up to a literal beating too. My PSG buttstroked an Afghan (that tried to take his weapon) 3 times, splitting his face open, knocking several teeth out, as well as rendering the guy unconcious. After that, I've never worried about it being "tough enough" either.




Do not count the M14 out yet. There are some things coming down the pipe that will suprise alot of people including the manufacture of new parts. Not as bad as internet pundits say, the current parts situation wouldn't be so dire if the jerk-off Clinton hadn't cut up 750,000 units. Can you imagine? Let's see. The taxpayer paid for the R&D, paid to manufacture them, paid to mothball and store them, then paid to destroy them. Nice.

The M14 is a relatively simple weapon. With modernized parts and assembly methods, the rifle has been reborn. Check this site for information on the product improved M14

http://www.smithenterprise.com/


Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of the M14/21. Given the choice I'd take one in a heartbeat. But if the armorer can't maintain it with parts, then it can become nothing more than a heavy stick. There's nothing wrong with the weapon itself, there just needs to be the proper support for it.

[8thidpathfinderpower]

I've never had a problem with losing my "zero" or had a POI change because the stock shifted. I shot my issue M4 with the old school 4 position out to 700m with an ACOG and didn't have any problems. Also, it holds up to a literal beating too. My PSG buttstroked an Afghan (that tried to take his weapon) 3 times, splitting his face open, knocking several teeth out, as well as rendering the guy unconcious. After that, I've never worried about it being "tough enough" either.





Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of the M14/21. Given the choice I'd take one in a heartbeat. But if the armorer can't maintain it with parts, then it can become nothing more than a heavy stick. There's nothing wrong with the weapon itself, there just needs to be the proper support for it.



Thanks.....thank you for clearing that up. I do know that changing cheek to stock posistion will throw your accuracy off. I am sorry I gave the impression that the weapon was weak....that was not my point. I do know, that you can warp a barrel with a high sustained rate of fire, especially in the M4s case, when you have attachments like the M203, and the XM26. That is why the devolopment of free floating barrels came into play.

To my knowledge, the M16A2 had that problem of barrel warpaage corrected with a heavier barrel, and the 3 round burst(altho thats not why it was designed with a 3 rd burst function)help fix the problem.

Now, on the M14, what gets me is there is a supply of spare parts out there, either newly devoloped modifactions for the rifle, or the existing civilian counterpart springfield armory M1A.

As I said before, soldiers will gripe about their weapons they are issued. They either are not cool enough, or they are inferior to what the other guy uses. But, when push comes to shove, all that counts is that the gun will go bang when you pull the trigger.

[mohica]

Thanks.....thank you for clearing that up. I do know that changing cheek to stock posistion will throw your accuracy off. I am sorry I gave the impression that the weapon was weak....that was not my point. I do know, that you can warp a barrel with a high sustained rate of fire, especially in the M4s case, when you have attachments like the M203, and the XM26. That is why the devolopment of free floating barrels came into play.

Warp a barrel? Hmmmmm. With all due respect, I think you may be reading too much internet commando BS. You would have to dump alot, I mean alot of rounds in rapid succession, to distort with any significance a barrel on an M16. It is a non-issue.

Free floating barrels came into play to enhance accuracy from the get go, not because you were firing enough rounds to "warp the barrel". That is a fallicy. There is a secondary purpose that with all the stuff hanging off the front end of these weapons now, free floating the barrel helps keep up the standards of accuracy by not putting any stress on the barrel.





To my knowledge, the M16A2 had that problem of barrel warpaage corrected with a heavier barrel, and the 3 round burst(altho thats not why it was designed with a 3 rd burst function)help fix the problem.

Again, with all due respect, more farytails. The M16A2 no more has the "barrel warpage" problem than the M4. Also, the 3rd burst mechanism was introduced as an ammunition conserving measure. It seems in the government's infinite wisdom, they would rather mechanically limit rate of fire than teach riflemanship.

The philosphy is that under combat situations, soldiers tend to shoot more than necessary to engage targets, sort of a spray and pray mentality. This was born out of the Viet Nam war when the gov't figured some outrageous amount of rounds was attributed to a single kill. Something crazy like 500,000/kill, I can't remember exactly what the figure is. That was with a draft heavy Army, so it could be argued it is not an accurate representation of current services and training.



Now, on the M14, what gets me is there is a supply of spare parts out there, either newly devoloped modifactions for the rifle, or the existing civilian counterpart springfield armory M1A.

Springfield Armory civilian M1A rifles are not synonymous with USGI M14 rifles. M1A receivers are not mil spec. Several parts on currently manufactured M1A rifles are not mil spec. Older manufactured rifles generally came with USGI parts but the receivers are a non mil-spec cast receiver.


As I said before, soldiers will gripe about their weapons they are issued. They either are not cool enough, or they are inferior to what the other guy uses. But, when push comes to shove, all that counts is that the gun will go bang when you pull the trigger.

I don't believe I ever heard anyone gripe because their rifle was "not cool enough" execpt possibly the gun show ninja wannabe. That is a just plain goofy statement.

[Biglug]

There is military support for M14 rifles but it is smaller and some units have more priority than others and money is put towards improving and maintaining their M14's more.
There have been and will be more contracts put out for parts needed and there are armorers trained besides outside armorers in the civilian sector used that work on M14's for the military with Smith Enterprises being probably the largest.
The M14 is a rifle though that through the superior intelligence of our decision makers in our military and goverment past and present have been out of main stream use for a while so the lack of parts and trained armorers on the system has gone with.:|

Most parts can be replaced by an armorer with a little knowledge on the system if he has them available and the main difficultly would be barrel replacement where the barrel needs to be indexed properly to the receiver with the tools to do it and than the bolt headspaced which may require some lapping (filing of the lugs)or a replacement bolt to get it.
This is also where parts in supply can come up short and hard to get for some and sending off the rifle to an armorer especially oversees can be a difficult hassle.

For any interested in learning more about the rifle in it's military and commercial history this is one of the best reference works there is.
http://www.imageseek.com/m1a/


here is Smith's site,

http://www.smithenterprise.com/index.html


and here is one of the best M14 forums there is,

http://www.m-14forum.com/upload/


As for the M1A, it's a commercial version of the M14. It's not an actual issue weapon so the usgi specs are only guidelines if the company want to use them. The usgi spec's in the first place are around 60 years old and things change in time and new outlooks go with them especially for a rifle who's use is revolving around cilivian owners like myself that want certain things out of the rifle like as much accuracy as possible and the best setup for myself.
The M1A receiver is a semi-automatic investment cast receiver but extremely strong with only a couple ever broken and mostly from bad loads in accidents.
The receivers have been reinforced and made thickers in some sections, the op rod track widened and SA op rod tabs made thicker with them, and certain surfaces of the receiver made better to mate with stocks to give a better bedding surface and contact to make a more accurate rifle. Someone could point out usgi spec as much as they want, but that doesn't always mean it's the end of all ends for a current military use weapon or civilian. The M14 was designed as a full auto rifle the military wanted to use to replace various weapons and learned from it that one weapon at present can't do it all.:bash:

They know better now and the M14 still shines today as an accurate, reliable, hardhitting, 7.62x51mm rifle that is excellent for certain jobs where others quite aren't.


http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c55/ChrisV196/normal_640.jpg?t=1175017321

[Indiana Jones]

Well, the U.S. Military does use Italian, Swiss, and German designed pistols (Beretta, SIG, and HK), and Belgian designed machine guns (M249 and M240).

I was not referring to the contemporary situation, and not solely to US forces, but a fine example would be the decision to stick with the M1919 (and later the adoption of the M60) in the aftermath of WW2; same with the Garand.

[H2O MAN]

There is military support for M14 rifles but it is smaller and some units have more priority than others and money is put towards improving and maintaining their M14's more.
There have been and will be more contracts put out for parts needed and there are armorers trained besides outside armorers in the civilian sector used that work on M14's for the military with Smith Enterprises being probably the largest.

Yeah, the future of the M14 is looking better all the time. Smith Enterprise, Inc. has new gas cylinders and is moving forward with new forged bolts and will also make new op rods. These parts are made for military use, but some will make there way into the civilian market. The combination of old USGI parts, new SEI parts and SEIs M80HT make for an enhanced battle rifle with previously unheard of levels of durability, reliability and accuracy.

SEI can transform your civilian M14 type rifle into an awesome M14 HDW.
Ron Smith has built two for me on forged Norinco receivers and they are excellent.

[crazyman]

we had several M14's during OIF 3 for the sniper team, SDMs, etc...good weapons, but we ran into the same problems people are talking about. getting SARP, bench stock items, etc was a problem. also, the only guy we had who was really smart on the system was an E7 who had a lot of sniper experience...our armorer had to do a lot of OJT. i know the army was messing with an SR 25-type weapon to replace them, but that idea seems to have died about when the SCAR started getting fielded. there was an article in army times about the HK416 awhile back...i also know we (the army) bought something along the lines of 80,000 or so M4's this year, so i highly doubt we'll be seeing anything replacing the M4 anytime soon.

[Biglug]

I honestly don't see where there will be a new common battle rifle for mass issue in the foreseeable future.
There's always so much red tape and bureaucracy to go through and for people to find and put the budget towards it seems hopeful.
With new votes going back to the Democrats and a possible Democrat president to come it seems very unlikely. One thing the Dems always seem to do is cut the military budget.


H2OMan, Yeh the future is looking pretty bright for M14's atleast for the civilian sector for a long time and for the military in what ever time span the current M14's hold out. With a 400,000 capable round count on your Winny, H&R and Springfield receivers and 450,000 for your TRW's there should still be alot of barrel and parts changes that can be had on the current M14's we have left.

I'm looking forward to Smith's new parts myself and plan to buy some atleast for spares.:)