You're an idiot.
Ok, here is my idea. According to Marine reports, the furthest engagement distances in Iraq were 300 meters. Snipers took care of everything beyond that distance. They had two main gripes: One the M16/M4s would jam too much because of sand blowing everywhere. (Now maybe your AR-15 type rifle is great at the range, but you cannot deny all of the complaints about reliability coming from our soldiers in the Middle East.) The second complaint was that the 5.56 round was very unreliable. Sometimes three torso shots would only slow down the target, and sometimes one shot worked. Overall there was great dissatisfaction in the round. The on thing the Marines did like was the ACOG sight. It does not rely on batteries, provides magnification, can be used day or night, can be used at all engagement distances, and it has internal adjustment.
Now ask anyone and theyíll tell you that the 870 is the most reliable weapon around. Yes, buckshot only works at very close range, but who said we could only use buckshot? The round Iím interested in is the sabot slug. When fired from a fully rifled barrel it can group nicely at 300 meters. Without a doubt it is powerful. So this is what Iím getting at:
Wouldnít you get an excellent weapon if you put a fully rifled slug barrel with a cantilever on a combat shotgun, and topped it off with an ACOG? As far as I can see it meets all of the requirements: itís reliable, durable, lightweight, accurate, powerful, and can operate from point blank range out to the maximum engagement distances. It would also be capable of firing non-lethal and breaching rounds.
It would not be a good official replacement for the M16/M4, but I think it would be popular among Special Forces, Marines and any other soldier who could get one.
What do you think?
go look at "new combat shotgun" post i started a couple of days ago, see a 5 ft 0 in. tall lady weighing in at 99 pounds fire this thing in full auto. here's a screen shot from the video:
video links are in the first post.
The role you are discussing is typically refered to as a designated marksman. The M14 serves this role well, plus the shooter has the option of engaging targets further than 300 yards.Originally Posted by landshark
As for non-lethals like the M1012/1013, you're not engaging protestors from any more than 50 yards.
And your a f**king asshole, how about making a post every now and then that actually contributes to a topic.Originally Posted by Sir Zach of R.
I agree with One_A the M-14 typically serves the role you explain. The M-14 DMR is typically what the marines use.
The Marines have their shop build up the M14s in stock, while the Army buys COTS M1A versions from Springfield. A soldier I had spoken with told me that his unit employed ACOG 4Xs on their rifles.Originally Posted by MVSpartan117
Good point. Thanks.
Hey jackass I'm on your side! In my opinion it would be inane to replace the M16 and M4 with a f*cking shotgun.Originally Posted by MVSpartan117
I don't care whos side your on, you don't need to come out swinging with a freeaking insult and not even explain yourself.
Your the idiot, this guy was making an honest proposal just to see what people thought and all you say is "your an idiot."
I think we all know who the real idiot here is....
Regardless of whose ďsideĒ youíre on you donít need to be a jerk. Also, please point out why you donít like my idea.Hey jackass I'm on your side! In my opinion it would be inane to replace the M16 and M4 with a f*cking shotgun.
inane: Lacking sense or judgment.
The main reason I don't like your idea is cuz I've heard about three other dudes on three other forums who have had the same idea, and they prettty much received the same treatment from me and every other person who has common sense. And may I ask, how acurate would this shotgun be at 300 yards.
I have made 4'' groups at 300 yards with sabot slugs. (5 shot groups.)