What will be the next US army rifle? - Page 3
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 01-19-2014, 04:00 PM   #21
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 48
Liked 6 Times on 5 Posts
Likes Given: 36

Default

Sometimes finding that reputable source for things is the problem - too much junk on the internet now that overpowers the truths...

__________________
Cutlass327 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2014, 04:07 PM   #22
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
JW357's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 6,724
Liked 3726 Times on 2283 Posts
Likes Given: 1224

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cutlass327 View Post
Sometimes finding that reputable source for things is the problem - too much junk on the internet now that overpowers the truths...
Here's one. All I googled was "army new rifle tests" and it was the first thing that comes up.

Now I guess KNOWING what is a reputable source and how to tell can be problematic for some. That is a separate issue.

http://m.military.com/daily-news/2013/06/13/army-kills-competition-to-replace-m4.html
__________________

Always have clean socks.

JW357 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2014, 04:37 PM   #23
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
jon1992d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania
Posts: 681
Liked 55 Times on 31 Posts

Default

The only weapon I could see them switching too is the Scar but that's still so far out of reach. Not only are they expensive but retraining everyone on the new platform would cost so much not taking in the amount of time. I'm 100% ok with the standard issue rifles that all the branches currently use.

__________________

Have Gun....Will Travel

jon1992d is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2014, 04:50 PM   #24
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 308
Liked 37 Times on 29 Posts
Likes Given: 36

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonM View Post
none of it is true. its all internet mall ninja wishful thinking. actual tests by the dod proved that piston driven m16/ar15 are NOT more reliable than direct impinge driven m16/ar15. they are about the same. since di is cheaper to build and easier to maintain there will be no switch ever to piston driven m16 platform.



the m16 already has. the soviets are phasing out and have been phasing out the ak47 for a 5.45 cartridge since the 80's. the soviet military almost never totally shelves anything so it wiulll be quite a while before the ak47 totally leaves soviet service.

until someone invents a cheaper more compact lighter means of deleviring lethal energy to a target for war purposes the 5.56 m4 carbine is going to be in the hands of our troops
Well...I disagree with you on one point: the direct inf. Is NOT as reliable as the short stroke ga piston is.You don't believe it? Try to put a rifle with direct inf. into water, pull it out and try to shoot it.You can watch the receiver blowing up(exploding) because of the pressure.Try to do it with a short stroke gas piston...it will not happen.

In terms of reliability(from the best to the worst)
1)Long stroke gas system(AK like)
2)Short-stroke gas system(Sks, g36,HK 416,etc)
3)Roller delayed(G3)
4)Direct infringement(M16,M4,etc)


Sent from my PAP4500TDUO using Firearms Talk mobile app
__________________
Mark_Van_Goth is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2014, 04:52 PM   #25
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
JonM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Rochester WI,Rochester WI
Posts: 17,593
Liked 5683 Times on 2970 Posts
Likes Given: 377

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1992d View Post
The only weapon I could see them switching too is the Scar but that's still so far out of reach. Not only are they expensive but retraining everyone on the new platform would cost so much not taking in the amount of time. I'm 100% ok with the standard issue rifles that all the branches currently use.
they are expensive because they are imported much like the m9a1 from beretta if they were adopted as a new issue rifle FN would expand their facilities here and you would see scar prices drop to around the cost of a decent colt ar15.

training is the same as a m16 if you can operate a m16 you can operate a scar16/17 controls are all in the same places and troops are currently trained with rds and acogs.

the reason there is no switch to the scar platform is it is not a strategically better bullet launcher than a m16. its tactically better in a lot of ways but not strategically better which doesnt justify the cost of switching.

while i love my scar17 (best damn semi 308 period) its not a big enough leap to justify the disruption of switching just to shoot the same 5.56 or 308 round. even so troops needing a 308 dmr are using scar17's in combat as an issue firearm. but thats a limited use role also filled by several other platforms. its not serving as a front line battel rifle in our military
__________________

"Gun control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound." — L. Neil Smith

The problem with being stupid is you cannot simply decide to stop doing dumb things...

JonM is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2014, 05:51 PM   #26
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...I disagree with you on one point: the direct inf. Is NOT as reliable as the short stroke ga piston is.You don't believe it? Try to put a rifle with direct inf. into water, pull it out and try to shoot it.You can watch the receiver blowing up(exploding) because of the pressure.Try to do it with a short stroke gas piston...it will not happen.
...
Splitting hairs aren't we.

If you don't drain water from a submerged rifle before shooting, well expect bad things to happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quentin View Post
... The Army looked at brand new factory tuned piston ARs for general issue and found that they weren't significantly more reliable than old DI M4s pulled out of inventory. Something like 99.5% vs. 99% so why spend the money.

My choice of rifle? The Army made the right decision.
__________________

______
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  
3
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2014, 06:06 PM   #27
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: The Edge of Darkness
Posts: 6,495
Liked 4790 Times on 2679 Posts
Likes Given: 1736

Default

Gees! This is scary. We have too many Government insiders on this forum. I thought these guys were only "snooping", the Tea Party. Of course it maybe we have too many people who believe the Gun Store "Preachers"?

__________________
nitestalker is offline  
Axxe55 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2014, 06:47 PM   #28
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mercator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Indiana
Posts: 4,616
Liked 1960 Times on 1361 Posts
Likes Given: 1001

Default

Reporting to HQ. A true patriot spotted. Send digital convoy. Over.

Mark, what are you getting at? Someone's getting nervous. You don't think the military is on it?
__________________
"You can't reason with a flying crowbar"

Last edited by Mercator; 01-19-2014 at 07:01 PM.
Mercator is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2014, 08:18 PM   #29
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
Reporting to HQ. A true patriot spotted. Send digital convoy. Over.

Mark, what are you getting at? Someone's getting nervous. You don't think the military is on it?
There is no reason to be nervous I'm just curious and want know more...if the military would be on it(nothing is impossible), then it would be much better(they would give the best answers...I don't think it is a " military secret"..)I don't think I'm interesting and relevant enough to the US government to be a potential threat

Sent from my PAP4500TDUO using Firearms Talk mobile app
__________________
Mark_Van_Goth is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2014, 08:23 PM   #30
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
JonM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Rochester WI,Rochester WI
Posts: 17,593
Liked 5683 Times on 2970 Posts
Likes Given: 377

Default

My time in the military I honestly never remember digging a foxhole in a swimming pool and shooting at radio controlled sharks...

I'm not sure exactly where this desire to fire guns underwater comes from since bullets only go about 12-24 inches under water depending on caliber. Prolly should get rid of the m240 m60 m2 since they don't work under water.

__________________

"Gun control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound." — L. Neil Smith

The problem with being stupid is you cannot simply decide to stop doing dumb things...


Last edited by JonM; 01-19-2014 at 08:25 PM.
JonM is offline  
2
People Like This 
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