Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: MillCreek on August 05, 2017, 09:05:10 PM
-
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/08/05/breaking-7-62mm-rifle-replace-m4-carbine-interim-combat-service-rifle-solicitation-released-us-army/
Amazing, if true.
-
Why only 50,000 rifles? Will there be some sort of time-share scheme in place?
-
Not this stuff again.
-
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/08/05/breaking-7-62mm-rifle-replace-m4-carbine-interim-combat-service-rifle-solicitation-released-us-army/
Amazing, if true.
Amazing? Nah. Amusing? Yeah.
:rofl: :old: :rofl: :old: :rofl: :old: :rofl: :old:
The progression of "fixes" to enhance the power of the .223 Remington in order to transform it into a battle cartridge rather than a varmint cartridge has always been a grand source of amusement to me.
Humph. I may have to find other sources of amusement now.
Terry, "The .223 is eminently suitable for noxious critters up to about 75 pounds," 230RN
-
(https://s2.yimg.com/sk/3802/12686000273_70b4a1a24c_c.jpg)
Tried and true.
If we must have something that costs 3x more with plastic bits:
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F10%2FSIG-716-courtesy-sigsauer.com_.jpg&hash=0a842e3ce80c3a50eddc241a8e8667cdc0dded7a)
I'd give the SCAR 7.62 an honorable mention, but having shot the thing I just can't like it. And since these recommendations are entirely subjective to my opinion, it gets left off :P
-
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/GP_WASR-10_63_in_After_Market_Tactical_Setup.jpg)
-
If they are going to go to the trouble of picking a new rifle, they might as well open up the cartridge also as they are lots of existing choices that might be lighter than 308 and still have better effectiveness than 223. However, it sounds like there is weak justification to change.
-
If they are going to go to the trouble of picking a new rifle, they might as well open up the cartridge also as they are lots of existing choices that might be lighter than 308 and still have better effectiveness than 223. However, it sounds like there is weak justification to change.
Isn't there some advantage to standardizing on what the machine guns use?
-
Isn't there some advantage to standardizing on what the machine guns use?
This. 7.62 is already in the supply chain.
-
https://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx?item=F1JRBM59308&utm_source=AIM+Surplus+Main+List&utm_campaign=981fb5b428-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_08_03&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6870497a6a-981fb5b428-18064977&mc_cid=981fb5b428&mc_eid=2d3cb38bb0
If not the M14, how about this?
-
This. 7.62 is already in the supply chain.
I was thinking that wasn't the best reason to make the decision, but it would probably be a big reason for the Army. Sure, it is effective, but with weight and everything else, does it make sense overall?
From the article, the issue was about penetrating newer body armor, but apparently the existing 7.62 couldn't penetrate it either. From what it says, both can do the job with newer armor piercing ammo. So I am not sure what is pushing the desire to change.
I am sure an AR10 variant could be fielded that isn't much heavier than the M16 variants. If they did change, that would be an interesting development. If nothing else, the civilian AR10 rifle market would get more standardized.
-
I was thinking that wasn't the best reason to make the decision, but it would probably be a big reason for the Army. Sure, it is effective, but with weight and everything else, does it make sense overall?
From the article, the issue was about penetrating newer body armor, but apparently the existing 7.62 couldn't penetrate it either. From what it says, both can do the job with newer armor piercing ammo. So I am not sure what is pushing the desire to change.
I am sure an AR10 variant could be fielded that isn't much heavier than the M16 variants. If they did change, that would be an interesting development. If nothing else, the civilian AR10 rifle market would get more standardized.
I don't disagree with any of those points, just making the obvious argument. The 7.62 has been around forever, and there are plenty of viable rifles in the caliber already, without trying to reinvent the wheel.
We've been phasing out the SAW for the IAR, I see no reason they couldn't just AR 10 that thing and have a viable medium caliber carbine like you mentioned.
-
The Army has been on a crap eating downhill trend ever since those pantywaist *expletive deleted*che nozzles got rid of a cartridge with REAL stopping power!
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oldammo.com%2F5070FA2.jpg&hash=4c9e201b429cbd73c95e6f91a9cb49f69905d299)
-
.45-70 as a minimum.
-
.45?
That's a tiny subcaliber piece of BS!
.50-70! Nothing is better!
-
Why do you people want our soldiers to die? If you settle for anything less than a .58-caliber ball, you should flee to Canada, with the rest of the dirty loyalists.
-
The Army has been on a crap eating downhill trend ever since those pantywaist *expletive deleted*che nozzles got rid of a cartridge with REAL stopping power!
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oldammo.com%2F5070FA2.jpg&hash=4c9e201b429cbd73c95e6f91a9cb49f69905d299)
Yeah, because they thought the troops were all too trigger happy to carry a repeating carbine.
-
For decades the military has been valiantly questing to discover the "Holy Gun," that one gun that will do all things and be all things for our soldiers.
It will be capable of being used as either a submachine gun or a sniper rifle, or anything in between (and fit the size configuration requirements of both) in a single standard package that can be issued to all troops without alteration.
It will fire a large-caliber bullet from a cartridge that weighs next to nothing.
It will have little to no recoil.
It will deliver crushing energy on target out to 2,500 meters.
It will have extremely high initial velocity with no muzzle blast.
It will require no cleaning no matter what type of conditions it encounters.
It will first be used to arm troops who ride into battle on armored unicorns.
No single firearm will ever be all things to all situations and all troops. The military has sort of accepted that with its hybrid until armament (5.56 primary, with designated marksman toting a 7.62).
Yet they persist in searching for the Holy Gun.
-
Weight. It all boils down to weight. Look at how much battle rattle the average grunt carries around. Upwards of 100 pounds of gear.
Anyone bitching about the .223 should have to saddle up a full load and carry around an M14 and full ammo pouches for a few weeks stomping around the hills in Afghanistan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w846UcmIo5o
-
HOLY GUN!
WE NEED THE HOLY GUN!
-
You want a more lethal Soldier, give us more damn time at the range shooting.
I doesn't matter what caliber you're shooting, if you can't hit what you're shooting at.
-
"You want a more lethal Soldier, give us more damn time at the range shooting."
Ah... a return to the days when every American was a natural born sniper, lethal at 2,000+ meters...
-
HOLY GUN!
WE NEED THE HOLY GUN!
Have they looked in Antioch?
-
Have they looked in Antioch?
Brother Maynard has it, but he's somewhere in Albion.
-
As long as we're re-arming how about we create an all SMG unit mounted on motorcycles?
Not carbines! Actual SMGs like MAC-10s or UZIs, suppressed and with super-cool holsters. Sidearms will be ludicrously large revolvers and scary-looking knives of uncertain utility.
The motorcycles will be of all types from hogs to dirtbikes and ricers.
The uniform will consist of leather, various bits of plate armor, chainmail, metal studs, chains and mohawks. The troops will get wide latitude in how they look, though a basic template will be in force (i.e. no hair below the collar).
Ok, sure they're mostly useless as combat troops but as display troops they would rock! Anytime a foreign country is doing a military parade and wants American troops to march along with we send these guys.
-
As long as we're re-arming how about we create an all SMG unit mounted on motorcycles?
Not carbines! Actual SMGs like MAC-10s or UZIs, suppressed and with super-cool holsters. Sidearms will be ludicrously large revolvers and scary-looking knives of uncertain utility.
The motorcycles will be of all types from hogs to dirtbikes and ricers.
The uniform will consist of leather, various bits of plate armor, chainmail, metal studs, chains and mohawks. The troops will get wide latitude in how they look, though a basic template will be in force (i.e. no hair below the collar).
Ok, sure they're mostly useless as combat troops but as display troops they would rock! Anytime a foreign country is doing a military parade and wants American troops to march along with we send these guys.
Not march. About five dozen of them ride through on loud pipe Harleys.