Guns Like firearms themselves, there's a wide variety of opinions on what's the best gun.

does the military need a new service rifle

Old 11-17-2006, 02:40 AM
  #11  
Nontypical Buck
 
elgallo114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sierra Nevadas., Ca
Posts: 1,050
Default RE: does the military need a new service rifle

The U.S. military is currently, as it always is, researching better weapons designs and calibers.

I'm not a fan of the M16 or M4, but they have not been as bad as a lot of people make them out to be. The last attempt at replacing the current weapon with a .308 FN/FAL lookalike failed reliability tests. Testing continues.

That being said, remeber that to replace a service weapon is no easy task. Even if they decided on one tomorrow, it would be 7 or 8 years before if became the standard. It took something like 9 years for the M16 to become the standard service rifle for all branches. In Vietnam, there were several Marine Units that never got them until the war ended.

I'm sure there's a lot more to it than one might think. I think we will see a replacement sometime soon,but I doubt it'll be a .243.
elgallo114 is offline  
Old 11-17-2006, 12:04 PM
  #12  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location:
Posts: 4,553
Default RE: does the military need a new service rifle

Actually the 6mm/.243 makes more sense for a new standard issue rifle than the .308 or larger caliber. Remember that it would be assigned/issued to all across services, different jobs from infantry to clerks and to men ans women. A 6mm/243. would be a big step-up from the .223 and would be a pretty good choice. Having more specialized rifles/firearms/weapon systems for more specialized job/MOS would also make sense.
Red Lion is offline  
Old 11-17-2006, 12:23 PM
  #13  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location:
Posts: 4,553
Default RE: does the military need a new service rifle



This is the wave of the future in the carbine varient.
Red Lion is offline  
Old 11-17-2006, 02:44 PM
  #14  
Nontypical Buck
 
HighDesertWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: A flat lander lost in the mountains of Northern,AZ
Posts: 3,171
Default RE: does the military need a new service rifle

ORIGINAL: Red Lion

Actually the 6mm/.243 makes more sense for a new standard issue rifle than the .308 or larger caliber. Remember that it would be assigned/issued to all across services, different jobs from infantry to clerks and to men ans women. A 6mm/243. would be a big step-up from the .223 and would be a pretty good choice. Having more specialized rifles/firearms/weapon systems for more specialized job/MOS would also make sense.
No not really!!
HighDesertWolf is offline  
Old 11-17-2006, 03:14 PM
  #15  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location:
Posts: 4,553
Default RE: does the military need a new service rifle

When it comes to shooting humans it would be a big step up from the .223.
Red Lion is offline  
Old 11-17-2006, 05:31 PM
  #16  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location:
Posts: 368
Default RE: does the military need a new service rifle

I think the milatry should not try and reinvent the rifle when they did a perfectly goob of doing it in the late 50's with the M-14, or the FN/FAL would be great. An my choice for a pistol would be a 1911 with fixed sights... i grew up right by reading Col. Coopers great words, and i think i turned out all right.
bigmatty65 is offline  
Old 11-17-2006, 05:45 PM
  #17  
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 27,585
Default [Deleted]

[Deleted by Admins]
Deleted User is offline  
Old 11-17-2006, 07:40 PM
  #18  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 493
Default RE: does the military need a new service rifle

Cma, accuracy is the only one, and that doesn't represent all of them, since some are good and some are crappy. When I 'm trying to shoot to stay alive, as opposed to a small group, give me a real battle rifle. The M1A or the FAL have the M16 beat all to hell!
fornra@yahoo.com is offline  
Old 11-18-2006, 03:39 AM
  #19  
Nontypical Buck
 
younggun308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 4,264
Default RE: does the military need a new service rifle

ORIGINAL: Red Lion



This is the wave of the future in the carbine varient.

I like the look of it, but the Heckler & Koch XM-8 has way too short of a barrel IMO.

What caliber is the M-4 in?

I don't think the M-1 would be a good rifle now, because it has too much recoil, and you jam your finger when trying to reload it.
I think the M-2 Johnson rifle was cool. It had a good capacity, and it was a carbine.
younggun308 is offline  
Old 11-18-2006, 06:37 AM
  #20  
Nontypical Buck
 
HighDesertWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: A flat lander lost in the mountains of Northern,AZ
Posts: 3,171
Default RE: does the military need a new service rifle

ORIGINAL: Red Lion

When it comes to shooting humans it would be a big step up from the .223.
No not really..... .223 = 5.56mm a 243 = 6mm, you do the math... with fmj ammo the 243 isnt gonna leave any bigger of a hole then a 223. besides the 5.56mm is known to tumble upon impact with flesh and bone I believe with the higher velocity and heavier bullet of the 243 makes for a much more stable projectile and it would just pass through causing far less tissue damage then what the 5.56mm is known to do.

something else to consider is with a service rifle the idea is to keep the lead flying. a 243 would over heat a barrel way to fast in a fire fight causing severe damage to the weapons barrel. I guarentee our armed forces really dont want to have to change the barrels of there service weapons after every fire fight.

IMO there is really nothing wrong with the 5.56mm. instead of worrying about the caliber our military should worry more about the platform it is fired from.
HighDesertWolf is offline  

Quick Reply: does the military need a new service rifle


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.