What will be the next US army rifle? - Page 10
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Long Guns > General Rifle Discussion > What will be the next US army rifle?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-21-2014, 07:21 AM   #91
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 308
Liked 37 Times on 29 Posts
Likes Given: 36

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercator View Post
Comparing one round to another is good reading, but it is inaccurate. The real choices are, do you want 20 of 7.62x39, or 30 of 5.45x39 with a flatter trajectory and a tumbling bullet. (Numbers rounded up) All that in bursts or full auto, with rapid depletion. We know their answer- same as ours.
Well...as you said, all is relative.I agree with you.Why don't we talk about the 4.85x49mm that has to be used in the British SA80 in the '70 and shown to be superior to the 5,56x45(M198)(It wasn't adopted because of political and economical reasons)?If the comparison is all about the amount of ammo somebody can carry, this would be the way to go.

What is a good caliber in my opinion? 6,5x45mm or 6.35x45mm.
It would combine the accuracy(including flatter trajectory) and controllability of a 5,56 and the penetration and stopping power of the 7,62.The amount of ammo somebody can carry would be superior to the 7,62 but inferior to the 5,56...it would be simply the right amount of ammo to carry.

A comment concerning the amount of ammo to carry in combat:
I was trained to fight with the 7,62x39.I was used to carry from 150(5 mags) up to 300 rounds(10 mags-in terms of weight, we're talking about cca 3,5kg or 7,71 lbs).In combat I have never ran out of ammo, neither in CQC - "shoot 'em up" situation(Shooting at anything that moves).If you know your rifle well and know how to shoot, you'll make almost every single round count.
Having more ammo is definitively better running out of it, but do you really need to have 400-600+ rounds in a real combat situation(E.g. An assault)??As far as I can see, such amounts of ammo per soldier is excessive, maybe only acceptable in a hard-to-maintain defensive position.
__________________
Mark_Van_Goth is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2014, 01:15 PM   #92
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mercator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Indiana
Posts: 4,601
Liked 1955 Times on 1356 Posts
Likes Given: 999

Default

Can't argue with personal experience. Decisions are made upstairs. The 6.8 Rem was introduced with high hopes to replace the 5.56 NATO, but did not make it very far. The 5.56 is not a KO winner, it wins by points. Same for the 5.45.

__________________
"You can't reason with a flying crowbar"
Mercator is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2014, 04:16 PM   #93
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 308
Liked 37 Times on 29 Posts
Likes Given: 36

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercator View Post
Can't argue with personal experience. Decisions are made upstairs. The 6.8 Rem was introduced with high hopes to replace the 5.56 NATO, but did not make it very far. The 5.56 is not a KO winner, it wins by points. Same for the 5.45.
You can't argue with personal experience an I wish you that you never will(War was never and will never be a nice thing).Regarding all the rest:anything that can kill is somenthing effective.I don't like the 5,56 but I have to admit it has its own advantages that cannot be ignored.I don't know why they dropped the 6,8 thing, it should go forward.
__________________
Mark_Van_Goth is offline  
ratpacker Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2014, 08:51 PM   #94
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Quentin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 6,548
Liked 1004 Times on 705 Posts
Likes Given: 1004

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_Van_Goth View Post
Well...as you said, all is relative.I agree with you.Why don't we talk about the 4.85x49mm that has to be used in the British SA80 in the '70 and shown to be superior to the 5,56x45(M198)(It wasn't adopted because of political and economical reasons)?If the comparison is all about the amount of ammo somebody can carry, this would be the way to go.

What is a good caliber in my opinion? 6,5x45mm or 6.35x45mm.
It would combine the accuracy(including flatter trajectory) and controllability of a 5,56 and the penetration and stopping power of the 7,62.The amount of ammo somebody can carry would be superior to the 7,62 but inferior to the 5,56...it would be simply the right amount of ammo to carry.

A comment concerning the amount of ammo to carry in combat:
I was trained to fight with the 7,62x39.I was used to carry from 150(5 mags) up to 300 rounds(10 mags-in terms of weight, we're talking about cca 3,5kg or 7,71 lbs).In combat I have never ran out of ammo, neither in CQC - "shoot 'em up" situation(Shooting at anything that moves).If you know your rifle well and know how to shoot, you'll make almost every single round count.
Having more ammo is definitively better running out of it, but do you really need to have 400-600+ rounds in a real combat situation(E.g. An assault)??As far as I can see, such amounts of ammo per soldier is excessive, maybe only acceptable in a hard-to-maintain defensive position.
All that can be argued in dozens of threads but the bottom line of this thread: the US general issue service rifle, its gas system and its 5.56 ammo will not be replaced until something significantly better comes along.

I will admit that it's hard to believe that the rifle I carried in Vietnam in 1968 and slightly modified versions are still in service today. But that just proves how good it is; if the thing didn't work well it wouldn't still be issued.
__________________

______
The biggest issue with assembling an AR isn't so much getting the parts together right - it's getting the right parts together. You'll remember the quality of a gun long after you forget how much you paid for it.
________________________________________
US Army 1966-69, VFW Life Member, Retired Geek

Quentin is offline  
bluez Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2014, 09:20 PM   #95
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,250
Liked 390 Times on 253 Posts
Likes Given: 1400

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizord1 View Post
I wish it was the G36k, but that won't happen.
The G36 may just yet be the best Military issue rifle on the planet.
But it is very expensive.
I think we would be looking at a rifle that is not too much more cost than the current gen of rifle
__________________
https://www.numbersusa.com/content/

Primary Rifle:
LWRC M6A2 w/ Eotech512

Primary Handgun:
Ruger GP100 Royal Phoenix
bluez is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2014, 09:24 PM   #96
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,250
Liked 390 Times on 253 Posts
Likes Given: 1400

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercator View Post
Can't argue with personal experience. Decisions are made upstairs. The 6.8 Rem was introduced with high hopes to replace the 5.56 NATO, but did not make it very far. The 5.56 is not a KO winner, it wins by points. Same for the 5.45.
I respectfully disagree.
the 6.8 SPC is the product of some bored SF guys who decided they wanted a better cartridge regardless of cost and the result is the dubious 6.8 a thing halfway in performance between 5.56 and 7.62.

Why anyone would want to introduce a cartridge when 7.62x51 is great with a DMR rifle and 5.56 is great with an assault rifle is not real clear.

But someone likely needed some accomplishment bullet points on his OER to the 6.8 SPC came about at great taxpayer expense
__________________
https://www.numbersusa.com/content/

Primary Rifle:
LWRC M6A2 w/ Eotech512

Primary Handgun:
Ruger GP100 Royal Phoenix

Last edited by bluez; 01-22-2014 at 02:24 AM.
bluez is offline  
Quentin Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2014, 11:21 PM   #97
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
TimL2952's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lockport,New York
Posts: 1,327
Liked 188 Times on 131 Posts
Likes Given: 304

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluez View Post
The G36 may just yet be the best Military issue rifle on the planet.
But it is very expensive.
I think we would be looking at a rifle that is not too much more cost than the current gen of rifle
Again, the HK416...Much cheaper than the G36 and still almost identical to the current platform. The cross over training would be minimal and it takes the same GI issue magazines and uses the same ammo.

I think people just want to see a major leap like m14 to the m16, but I don't see that happening.

It's also modular, coming in different configurations and caliber sizes.

Disclosure, sound effects added to make it seem like he's always shooting it on full auto.
http://youtu.be/F17Pet5zBtw
It was also rumored at one point that the USMC would be purchasing the HK M27 IAR to replace the SAW, and slowly the m16s and m4s, but I haven't been keeping up with it. I'm not a soldier, and I know the lighter guns would be a benefit, but I feel like you lose something when going to a magazine fed squad support weapon over a belt fed LMG like the SAW
http://youtu.be/fQR_9sye984
__________________

Last edited by TimL2952; 01-21-2014 at 11:34 PM.
TimL2952 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2014, 12:12 AM   #98
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Vincine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Adirondack Mts.
Posts: 3,336
Liked 1739 Times on 898 Posts
Likes Given: 1338

Default

I get to post #100!

I think the next rifle isn't even gonna be a rifle, It's gonna be like a video game hand controller and a soldier will be able to destroy an enemy combatant's credit rating right from his living room. That's what i think anyway.

__________________
"Sometimes I pretend to be normal, but it's boring and I go back to being me."
"You might as well be yourself, people won’t like you anyway."

Last edited by Vincine; 01-22-2014 at 06:52 AM.
Vincine is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2014, 12:32 AM   #99
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
TimL2952's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lockport,New York
Posts: 1,327
Liked 188 Times on 131 Posts
Likes Given: 304

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincine View Post
I get to post #100!

I think the next rifle isn't even gonna be a rifle, It's gonna be like a video game hand controller and a solider will be able to destroy an enemy combatant's credit rating right from his living room. That's what i think anyway.
Hurray sarcasm?
__________________
TimL2952 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2014, 01:09 AM   #100
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Vincine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Adirondack Mts.
Posts: 3,336
Liked 1739 Times on 898 Posts
Likes Given: 1338

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimL2952 View Post
Hurray sarcasm?
Not sarcastic, just whimsical.
__________________
"Sometimes I pretend to be normal, but it's boring and I go back to being me."
"You might as well be yourself, people won’t like you anyway."
Vincine is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
In Reversal, Army Bans High-Performance Rifle Mags Bigcountry02 Legal and Activism 3 05-27-2012 04:17 PM
U.S. Army~Between the .38 and .45 ACP Bob Wright Ammunition & Reloading 4 08-16-2011 02:22 PM
One Man Army dnthmn2004 The Club House 5 07-28-2011 04:07 PM
Army M24 Sniper Rifle Fixes in the Works IGETEVEN General Rifle Discussion 8 03-11-2010 05:15 AM