USMC goahead for 4,476 M27s

[carbonrod]

Did this not get posted somehow? I checked all posts for M27, and those posted since by RichLPS, and came up blank.

http://www.military.com/news/article/corps-set-to-field-saw-replacement.html

Has anyone seen details of the bayonet lug BTW? Is it part of the gas block?

 

[Rich LPS]

There is a very good discussion about this over on Sig Form. One poster clearly explains the reasons behind the "somewhat" of a replacement of the M249.
Before anyone starts mouthing off again about what a terrible decision the Marines made, they need to go over there and read up. It was very "enlightening" to me.
At first I questioned the decision but after seein the Sig Form post I've changed my mind.

Long live the HK416. It might not be the greatest gun for full time supression but as a standard Infantry Rifle with a heavy 16 inch barrel I think it's hard to beat. Is it that much better than a standard M4, I don't know. Is it worth the extra money. Again I don't know.

I'm of the belief that US Forces should deliver 416 upper kits to their Combat Arms / Shooters. The rest of the masses can stick with the regular M4 / M16. This would not be a big change, same manual of arms, not alot of extra training needed. It would also limit the expense of a whole-sale change. Being able to use the exhisting lowers and parts already in the system is a big plus.

According to some reports the HK416 IAR entry realy kicked ass on the Colt and FN entries. The Marines shot the #### out of these test guns so I question the arguments / tales of massive failures with the HK416, in all sorts of ways (Bolts..receivers...buffers...lowers...) at the 20K mark....or 7K mark....or whatever.

Just a few thoughts,

Rich

 

[RevolverRodger]

Cool news

 

[y2k]

Fires from a closed bolt, No barrel change feature, and feeds from a magazine not a belt. Not much of a SAW weapon

 

[ESQ]

So, they are replacing the SAW with basically another M16ish gun. Strange...

Got a link to the SIG forum discussion?

 

[damndirtyape]

Fires from a closed bolt, No barrel change feature, and feeds from a magazine not a belt. Not much of a SAW weapon

I think that's why they're calling it an IAR.

 

[NavyShooter]

I'd comment, but it'd be outside my lane.

NS

 

[Gunnerlove]

Ultimax 100

 

[greentips]

Just an execuse to buy a piston rifle - the IAR is about the same weight as a M16A4 after the RAS M5 is installed.

Pretty soon people will wonder why the squad auto rifle guy is carrying a fullato IAR that is about the same weight as as the riflemen's M16A4 with better optics (TA11 + RMR). It is no brainer what you want to carry if you are in the squad. Sounds like a setup.

 

[enefgee]

If it were me, I think I might prefer a guy with a belt fed in a squad support role but then I thought riflemen were the bit that was supposed to provide accuracy.

 

[Gunnerlove]

If it were me, I think I might prefer a guy with a belt fed in a squad support role but then I thought riflemen were the bit that was supposed to provide accuracy.

Incorrect, riflemen carry stuff and draw fire Designated Marksmen provide accuracy.

 

[Savage]

Ulitmax 100 did not meet the USMC requirements .Dont be surprised if the USMC adopts the XM 8 as there standard battle rifle

 

[Power Pill]

I saw this gun on future weapons and i wasn't very impressed....just seemed like a full auto m16 to me. but of course Mac made it sound all bad ass..

30 round mag fed to replace 100 round (?) belt fed = major fail in my opinion.

 

[The Lorax]

If it were me, I think I might prefer a guy with a belt fed in a squad support role but then I thought riflemen were the bit that was supposed to provide accuracy.

COIN environment. Less shooting, more accurate shooting when shooting, less driving, more walking.