USMC is buying 50,814 HK416 M27

[beltfed]

Piston for the win

I wouldn't necessarily say it is ground down to a piston v. impingement argument, but you might as well paint it as such as the writing is on the wall.
The M4 with a brand spanking new barrel still doesn't hold its own against the M27 under moderate to adverse conditions and a potentially dubious maintenance/cleaning schedule.

 

[blaxsun]

Regardless of the " DI vs Piston" debate, it's the barrel that's makes the difference at the end of the day, IMO HK has a superior barrel to Colt USA.

Better barrel, higher reliability with the piston system, runs cleaner and cooler...

 

[9.3 Hunter]

Considering there aren't even 50,000 grunts and that there will be more M27s than combat arms guys, it's safe to say that they do want to replace all the M4s.

50,000 is the contract. Theres probably over a million Marines........your count is about 5% of the Marine fighting force.

 

[VanIsleCam]

50,000 is the contract. Theres probably over a million Marines........your count is about 5% of the Marine fighting force.

Couple more than 200,000 from what I could find.

 

[mikethebike]

marine corps 2017: 175 000
cut from 202 000 in 2012

not all these guys are the super duper operators semper fi, so 50000 rifles sounds about right

 

[yohann160]

Asinine comments.

Bringing up the external piston debate is immaterial. Barrels overheat well before heat treated bolts and piston rods do.

The issue is that they are pressing into service a full auto capable closed bolt rifle without quick change barrels to fill the role of a SAW.

 

[mikethebike]

Asinine comments.

Bringing up the external piston debate is immaterial. Barrels overheat well before heat treated bolts and piston rods do.

The issue is that they are pressing into service a full auto capable closed bolt rifle without quick change barrels to fill the role of a SAW.

they want 50000 machinegunners without having 50000 SAWs

 

[blaxsun]

Asinine comments.
Bringing up the external piston debate is immaterial. Barrels overheat well before heat treated bolts and piston rods do.
The issue is that they are pressing into service a full auto capable closed bolt rifle without quick change barrels to fill the role of a SAW.

And here I thought they were doing it just to piss Colt off...

 

[Rebel Rouser]

Asinine comments.

Bringing up the external piston debate is immaterial. Barrels overheat well before heat treated bolts and piston rods do.

The issue is that they are pressing into service a full auto capable closed bolt rifle without quick change barrels to fill the role of a SAW.

They don't even fire them in full auto due to fire discipline.

 

[grelmar]

Regardless of the " DI vs Piston" debate, it's the barrel that's makes the difference at the end of the day, IMO HK has a superior barrel to Colt USA.

Under sustained automatic fire, quite often it's the gas tube that "fails." It overheats, softens, droops, and falls away from the receiver, (pinned inside the gas block, as we all know, so stays attached at that end), turning the gun into a very hot straight pull. There's a few "meltdown" videos floating around that show the phenomenon.

It's only one of multiple different failure modes that happen when an AR melts down under sustained fire, but if you can eliminate it, why not? Of course, by the time the gas tube fails, the gun is under extreme stress, and probably within a few rounds of something else giving way.

DI also heats up the bolt carrier group and receiver faster than a piston system does.

If they're looking at turning every rifleman into a machine gunner, and changing doctrine accordingly, it makes sense to move away from DI.

 

[Rebel Rouser]

Under sustained automatic fire, quite often it's the gas tube that "fails." It overheats, softens, droops, and falls away from the receiver, (pinned inside the gas block, as we all know, so stays attached at that end), turning the gun into a very hot straight pull. There's a few "meltdown" videos floating around that show the phenomenon.

It's only one of multiple different failure modes that happen when an AR melts down under sustained fire, but if you can eliminate it, why not? Of course, by the time the gas tube fails, the gun is under extreme stress, and probably within a few rounds of something else giving way.

DI also heats up the bolt carrier group and receiver faster than a piston system does.

If they're looking at turning every rifleman into a machine gunner, and changing doctrine accordingly, it makes sense to move away from DI.

It's designed that way. The gas tube is suppose to fail before you blow out the barrel.

 

[Rebel Rouser]

It did 29 mags/870 rounds before it turned into a straight pull. 900 rounds total for the test.

 

[-[Crosshair]-]

50,000 is the contract. Theres probably over a million Marines........your count is about 5% of the Marine fighting force.

Damn, you couldn't even use Google or Wikipedia before posting this? How embarrassing.

Edit: There are less than 20,000 grunts in the USMC (combat arms guys). So the contract calls for more than 2.5x the amount of M27s as there are 03XX MOS guys.

 

[greentips]

Damn, you couldn't even use Google or Wikipedia before posting this? How embarrassing.

Edit: There are less than 20,000 grunts in the USMC (combat arms guys). So the contract calls for more than 2.5x the amount of suppressors as there are 03XX MOS guys.

There are like 30+ or so battalions in the USMC, and there are already 3 IARs per squad ( 1 per fire team ) in the last 4000ish buy. Another 11K buy will essentially give an IAR to everyone in a squad but the team leader a HK, the sappers and armoured recce will get them , as well as extras to hold in stock and anyone that needs them in addition to the schools.

But you bet the leadership people down to company level will probably make a case they need a HK for themselves too, while 75% of your fighting companies are HK there is no reason to carry a M4 that is different from anyone else. The USMC got M320 too so mounting GL on rifle is not as important as before. When these people draw down the stock, they will eventually buy more. This is an exercise to curtail any whining and complaints of not running a service rifle trial, which will put USMC in more delay because of the congress and the "tri-service" commonality thing. Basically screw the Army and their continuous failure to make any small arms project happen. The USMC got all the right people, including Mattis as the SoD, so they are doing what they can to get their "infantry dream teams".

If they are going to the maximum value, all the leadership will get them and basically anyone who need to carry anything longer than a pistol will get one.

And those who continue to argue it is not adding capability, the USMC likes it. Their NCO like it, their management likes it other than the price. No one seems to ever complain about the HK M27. Their ran an experiment involving a full battalion in a big ex to validate their doctrine. They have done more than anyone in proving they are making a good choice. We have yet to hear the US army doing any doctrinal work or experiment to support giving everyone a 12lb MBR + 2Lb optic and 210 rounds 7.62 NATO and to justify their latest RFP. We, ourselves, have yet to do anything as creative as the USMC in developing both weapons and doctrine in such a parallel manner. That is why we still have weapons of the Mid 90's dressed up in green furniture.

 

[Rich LPS]

Greentips,

As always well said. I just finished a course with some Marines. They are very happy with the M27, very accurate and reliable + stays clean. Nothing but praise from the troops carrying it.
Mobility and fatigue are key factors in this choice / doctrine.

Rich

 

[Stoner99]

Gentlemen please... just give in too the new reality.

Now and go out there and get one guys.

 

[-[Crosshair]-]

There are like 30+ or so battalions in the USMC, and there are already 3 IARs per squad ( 1 per fire team ) in the last 4000ish buy. Another 11K buy will essentially give an IAR to everyone in a squad but the team leader a HK, the sappers and armoured recce will get them , as well as extras to hold in stock and anyone that needs them in addition to the schools.

But you bet the leadership people down to company level will probably make a case they need a HK for themselves too, while 75% of your fighting companies are HK there is no reason to carry a M4 that is different from anyone else. The USMC got M320 too so mounting GL on rifle is not as important as before. When these people draw down the stock, they will eventually buy more. This is an exercise to curtail any whining and complaints of not running a service rifle trial, which will put USMC in more delay because of the congress and the "tri-service" commonality thing. Basically screw the Army and their continuous failure to make any small arms project happen. The USMC got all the right people, including Mattis as the SoD, so they are doing what they can to get their "infantry dream teams".

If they are going to the maximum value, all the leadership will get them and basically anyone who need to carry anything longer than a pistol will get one.

And those who continue to argue it is not adding capability, the USMC likes it. Their NCO like it, their management likes it other than the price. No one seems to ever complain about the HK M27. Their ran an experiment involving a full battalion in a big ex to validate their doctrine. They have done more than anyone in proving they are making a good choice. We have yet to hear the US army doing any doctrinal work or experiment to support giving everyone a 12lb MBR + 2Lb optic and 210 rounds 7.62 NATO and to justify their latest RFP. We, ourselves, have yet to do anything as creative as the USMC in developing both weapons and doctrine in such a parallel manner. That is why we still have weapons of the Mid 90's dressed up in green furniture.

I wrote suppressors instead of M27s in my post because they also released a new RFI for commercial suppressors and I got mixed up, oops. Not that it affects your true post.

 

[beltfed]

Asinine comments.

Bringing up the external piston debate is immaterial. Barrels overheat well before heat treated bolts and piston rods do.

The issue is that they are pressing into service a full auto capable closed bolt rifle without quick change barrels to fill the role of a SAW.

Irony. It's in your post.

 

[mikethebike]

There are like 30+ or so battalions in the USMC, and there are already 3 IARs per squad ( 1 per fire team ) in the last 4000ish buy. Another 11K buy will essentially give an IAR to everyone in a squad but the team leader a HK, the sappers and armoured recce will get them , as well as extras to hold in stock and anyone that needs them in addition to the schools.

But you bet the leadership people down to company level will probably make a case they need a HK for themselves too, while 75% of your fighting companies are HK there is no reason to carry a M4 that is different from anyone else. The USMC got M320 too so mounting GL on rifle is not as important as before. When these people draw down the stock, they will eventually buy more. This is an exercise to curtail any whining and complaints of not running a service rifle trial, which will put USMC in more delay because of the congress and the "tri-service" commonality thing. Basically screw the Army and their continuous failure to make any small arms project happen. The USMC got all the right people, including Mattis as the SoD, so they are doing what they can to get their "infantry dream teams".

If they are going to the maximum value, all the leadership will get them and basically anyone who need to carry anything longer than a pistol will get one.

And those who continue to argue it is not adding capability, the USMC likes it. Their NCO like it, their management likes it other than the price. No one seems to ever complain about the HK M27. Their ran an experiment involving a full battalion in a big ex to validate their doctrine. They have done more than anyone in proving they are making a good choice. We have yet to hear the US army doing any doctrinal work or experiment to support giving everyone a 12lb MBR + 2Lb optic and 210 rounds 7.62 NATO and to justify their latest RFP. We, ourselves, have yet to do anything as creative as the USMC in developing both weapons and doctrine in such a parallel manner. That is why we still have weapons of the Mid 90's dressed up in green furniture.

Yes but how many infantry batallions, I believe as per full sequestration in 2017 it was 21 infantry batallions, each infantry battalion composed of 3 companies of infantry, 1 weapons, 1 hq and 1 service. so that's like what 15000 men max involved in the two way range?

 

[sidester]

Good morning Gentlemen.
This thread is interesting but missing the important informations : detailed SPECS of the GUN.
I have been searching the WEB but I cannot find the specs, even on HKPRO website.
Is there somebody who can point them out?