they tried a heavy barreled M16A1 back in the 80s, no joy. as for the MG36...i think the problem was just a piece of plastic that rests against the barrel melting, not the barrel itself. eh, who knows. I just plain think we oughta use the best weapon available. personally if we do switch over im going to miss the SAW, but like i said, who knows...crazy times we live in
thats just as bad as the berral melting.Originally Posted by crazyman
it causes the berral to come out of alignment with the gas parts and the oprod snaps. meaning your gun dont work. pretty bad. and this is accelerated greatly if the weapon is used as a saw is intended to.
's what you get for making a weapon with the same materials as a GI joe.
I think thats the whole point though, your average ROF coming out of a XM-8/ MG isnt going to be the same as the saw, and more than likely will be used much as a normal AR, but with intermittent bursts of Automatic, almost like the brits use with their LSW.
I'm not saying the XM-8 is good, but its not as bad as you're all making it out to be
If you are not willing to say it is "good" then we are on the same page, regardless of the reasons...I'm not saying the XM-8 is good, but its not as bad as you're all making it out to be
I think its a bit too early to cast final votes on the thing. we're testing the hell out of it, im going to wait and see what comes of this first lot thats they were working on now 'fore i start damning the weapon to hell
never said it wasnt good, its just not suited for that role, as an ar is porbly is as good and even surpasses the ar in some respects but its just not worth the cost.I think thats the whole point though, your average ROF coming out of a XM-8/ MG isnt going to be the same as the saw, and more than likely will be used much as a normal AR, but with intermittent bursts of Automatic, almost like the brits use with their LSW.
I'm not saying the XM-8 is good, but its not as bad as you're all making it out to be
The POINT though is WHY are we bothering testing it?
It could be a great gun. I have never said it was or was not. As an American citizen, though, I find my tax dollars better spent on something that will bring a massive change...
Example:
Switching from the Springfield 1903A1/2 to the Springfield M1 Garand. This was a massive change from a bolt action rifle to a semi-automatic rifle. The cartridge was the same, a .30-06 but the action was completely different, allowing a single unit...a squad or platoon to increase the amount of firepower dramaticaly.
Switching from the M1 Garand to the M14 Springfield was also a dramatic change, adopting a magazine fed rifle with a much more powerful cartridge that was adopted throughout NATO.
The same can be said for the M16/M4 system. It was also a dramatic change as well, going to a lighter but just as accurate cartridge (ignoring all entry level first use in Vietnam). The 5.56mm was a change in thinking allowing an infantryman to carry more ammunition. Have a select range of fire capabilities (depending onthe rifle). The wounding capability was fantastic though the penetration at distances was poor in comparison. The 5.56 was also adopted by NATO.
So, now we are talking about ANOTHER 5.56 system. The only difference between the M4 and the XM8 (because that is the ONLY valid comparison...the DMR version could be considered an M16 but it is going to be deployed, assuming the data we have is accurate, in small numbers anyways). Wow...so we are taking away rifles, when people are bitching about range and penetration, and giving them carbines!? With the ONLY net gain being a weapon system that requires less cleaning and is modular....well, the M16/M4 system is modular and regardless of what anyone tells you, a rifle regardless of the gas system is going to need to be cleaned.
The gun can be as good as the G36 and it won't matter a damn. Replacing the M16 with a fancy looking G36 is simply a F*CKING waste of money.
And when the DoD starts using "Mail Call" to justify its use...well...count me out. Far TOO many corrupt American Senators, House Reps, and Generals for me to simply say okay...I know how the game is played on the procurement end and this is nothing but BS...
again, cant say until we see the final product. Pretty good odds the weapon will change a ton before it becomes standard issue. personally i dont care if its a dramatic change or not. if the thing is better then our current weapons then i want it, because it may well save lives.
hell since im goin to the 82nd i'll probably see it fairly soon, so when i do, i'll let you know
I have sympathy with the argument that the advantages of the XM8, while real, are not so great as to justify the trouble and cost of changing...for as long as it remains in 5.56mm calibre. Now if it was introduced in 6.8mm, that would be a different matter!
Tony Williams
The XM-8 is designed to allow caliber change from changing it from 5,56mm over 6,8 up to 7,62mm!!!!!I have sympathy with the argument that the advantages of the XM8, while real, are not so great as to justify the trouble and cost of changing...for as long as it remains in 5.56mm calibre. Now if it was introduced in 6.8mm, that would be a different matter!
Tony Williams
So the US could adopt the rifle now and change just the receiver at the time when the 6,8mm is ready to use. So no big problem.
My thoughts: The US will equip just its infantry and SF with the XM8 and the other next generation weapons.
Please list those advantages.
Also, if you want a 6.8mm round why not just get new uppers and barrels for existing rifles?
Hey, guess what?
So is the M16/M4/AR15!
Again...a waste...
I realize we all have these "Well, I have a friend story", so here's mine.
A couple of friends that have been to Afghanistan and Iraq said they had to clean their M-16's a whole lot more because of the environment. Some of their weapons still jammed.
Was a military brat for over 20 years and have heard of this problem over and over and over.
Granted, it's not as bad as it was during Vietnam, however, I still hear these stories today.
I personally have no qualms using a foreign designed weapon. If it is on par, or even better than what we have now and most important, jams less, use it.
i can understand that, but the 6.8 was designed specifically for the m4. the entire round was made to be fired from that platform with minimum modification to the weapon. so again it remains a bit pointless to change over, and at this point i doubt we will see the 6.8 becoming standard issue any time soon, xm8 or not.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote