Sig M5

What was the Military thinking replacing the m4 with this? It is way heavier, has significantly less ammo, is far more unwieldy in full auto or burst, and too long.

While yes, a larger bullet is probably necessary for future body armor, such engagements would also be inside cities and indoor environments, where a compact gun and more bullets would win the day.

And yes, it has greater range, but you can’t expect most soldiers to reliably hit things past 300 m regardless.

  1. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Have you tried crying about it?

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      No but i have tried fingering my rectum which worked moderately well

  2. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    waah waah wahhh

  3. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Fuck ya mudda
    Brudaahhh

  4. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    They had their heads up their behinds, as per usual. Yeah it's only a matter of time before they run back round' to the M14, you just wait.

    -Buck "Doc" McBrackland, signing off!
    -------------------------------------------------------------------
    5648399 posts

    -USMC 1997-1998, 164th "Hell Devil Hounds"

    -Ar15.com Gold Account (2002-present)

    "Set em' up, line em' down, size em' up, and hit em' where it hurts!" - Cpl Larry "Steel Hands" McBuckland, USAF "Bloody Rhino Heads"

    "Millennials wouldn't know a hard day's decent work, if it slapped em' upside the head, and tied their bootstraps in a knot!" - Cpl Gerald "Hell Tiger" Morris, USCG, 991st "Blue Shark Devils"

    “M16? Looks like stumbled two steps too far from the sweet spot!” - Sgt Ron “Brick Breaker” Lesterson, USMC, 132nd "Dust Devil Riders"

    Proud HaYovel volunteer! https://serveisrael.com/

    https://www.npr.org/2012/03/07/148076026/christians-provide-free-labor-on-gnomish-settlements

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      i love parody boomer sigs

      but you forgot the classic car... seems like a Mustang guy to me

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        It's a boomer, gotta be a vette. Throw in a "fix or repair daily" stab at ford

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        It's a boomer, gotta be a vette. Throw in a "fix or repair daily" stab at ford

        served 1 year in the late 90s though

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          Shit, a neoboomer. Mustang or charger then

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        >but you forgot the classic car
        Fuck, good catch. I'll add one, maybe a 68 Judge or something.

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          >maybe a 68 Judge
          gotta be more generic, this is a neoboomer NPC zogbot we're talking about

          • 7 days ago
            Anonymous

            How about this:

            -'90 Pontiac Firebird (jealous? then you and the missus got somethin' in common!)

            • 7 days ago
              Anonymous

              my cousin had that car and it was a pussy magnet lol. good choice

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          I'm stealing your art and using it every chance I get. Especially outside of PrepHole

  5. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Somebody is getting kickbacks. The intentions are sound, but it doesn't appear to deliver on anything it tried to without glaring and potentially fatal compromises, so I can only conclude that it was a UCP scenario of corruption mixed with incompetence. In actual practical terms, I think it will augment DMs or only be issued to half your riflemen; but it remains to be seen how it is handled by the units who get it.

  6. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    All the crying about this thing is making me like it more.

  7. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    We've seen this before....

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous
  8. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    It's only going to be around for 5 years, same as the M14, it's a pallette cleanser before the main course, clearing away the decades of light 5.56 usage which has been doctrinally ingrained. Changing how the military fights is what it's there for whilst still being in a similar enough firm factor. The real replacement won't be seen until then.

  9. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    I guess they felt obliged to adopt something, having been working on it since 2004. Trouble is the requirements weren't physically possible, hotter .308 in a 13" barrel but still able to penetrate lvl4 armor at 600 and also able to be used in tight quarters without compromise? A fantasy gun, it was never going to work but nobody had the spine to take the L and accept that their expectations weren't realistic. Frankly if they'd left it with replacing M240s and SAWs, nobody would have a problem, but they kept the failed rifle program as well for some reason.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      The problem is, the "winner" had nothing to do with what they'd been working on since 2004. Instead, it was cobbled together within just the last few years, and was actually the heaviest of the three entrants once ammo is included.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      its doable if they went with a bullpup design. but they didnt

  10. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    >look mom, I posted it again

  11. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    >chink shills spamming this thread because they're mad they're armor is useless now.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      >chink shills spamming this thread because they're mad they're armor is useless now.
      even though its true you cant deny the problems the m5 has

  12. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah, that would be a problem if these guns were ever getting used, but you're not accounting for all the other shit in the pipes alongside it. All the IVAS, smart artillery and network integration mean that infantry are basically just drone or artillery observers now. If a rifle squad sees an enemy, their helmets and smart scopes will immediately tell every himars or loitering switchblade in the AO where it is and its getting levelled without the riflemen ever firing a shot. So sure, if it was just the XM5 being adopted then out next deployment would be one big tongo tongo ambush, but its not just the XM5 and you're missing the forest for all the trees.

  13. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    I wonder if this was just a roundabout way for them to adopt the virtus. It makes more sense, they go through this bullshit and finally everyone is perfectly unhappy with this rifle that got death by design committee and the entire time the Army knows that they're just going to be like "Well we're standardizing on the carbine length variant (The Virtus) with the situational mission based capability of a force multiplying long range SPC RECCE with synergistic tactical applications when required as a mission based logistical application"
    They can't just adopt the virtus because it's not a big enough improvement over the M4, but the M4's are old and it probably costs as much to modernize and repair them and they'd rather just get new shit. Plus piston guns are 110% less gay

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      why are you gay

  14. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    why

  15. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    They were thinking that future wars will be fought with the weapons of whoever has the initiative to make them first. That adversaries will have to spend money, time, resources and research trying to come up with a solution to it. AND that they can outspend, out train and out think almost every other military on the planet, so losing a few inches for cqb, a few extra pounds and a few less rounds in the mag is a small price to pay.

  16. 7 days ago
    Anonymous
    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      >pentagon wars
      Figure the 'reformers' would be here too

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      >needs software updates to even hit the target
      Windows is restarting
      Please do not turn off your XM5
      Applying update 1 of 43
      Your XM5 will restart several times

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Fun fact: Traditionalists doubted 5.56 so much they actively sabotaged many tests for it so they could "move on and go back to what's important."

      Because the thought at the time was
      > It needs to kill a man in a single shot.
      > You don't need that much ammo, and if you do you'll never be too far from a supply line.
      > If it's too light, it's uncontrollable and flimsy.

      Change will always be resisted, but the future will drag us forward no matter how hard we kick and scream.

      On one hand, the swap to something new was inevitable.
      Ever since the Acog became mostly standard, infantry has became pseudo-snipers in most situations, while still having the firepower for closer engagements.

      While I think 277 Fury needs more work to be good, it's still better than the dogshit Textron was trying to sell, so I consider that a win.

      On the other, I am very disappointed in Sig.

      The MCX was a decent rifle. It had issues, namely using the guide-rods as glorified spring retainers instead of guiding the BCG, but the proper short-stroke piston made it accurate and reliable.

      The Spear, however?

      The MCX Spear uses the same system as the FN SCAR, where you have a short-stroke piston-head and a long-stroke operating rod. This system causes recoil to feel way worse than it actually is.
      The only benefit to such a system is that it would be easier to quickly change barrels in an LMG configuration, but the M250 already has a solution to that exact same issue that doesn't rely on braindead engineering.

      Compare this to the AR-10, which does everything it can to make the recoil feel in-line with the barrel, and thus easier to control.

      Or the Stoner 63, which is infinitely more configurable so you can at least optimize your kit for your specific role.

      Hell, even the M14 edges out this flaw by having the piston (which uses the predecessor to the system the SCAR adopted) on the underside of the gun, making the recoil slightly bearable.

      Realistically, the US military should've adopted the MCX Virtus for 5.56, forced Sig to use an AR-18 BCG, and then adopted AR-10's for the new caliber.

      However, lobbying and office politics beats out logic any day, so we're stuck with what we got:
      An Assault Rifle originally made for full-length calibers, a Battle Rifle originally made for intermediate calibers, a new type of bullet, and fancy new electronics.

      The M250 is good, though, and other than a few nitpicks I think Sig actually did a good job.

      This. Fucking, this.
      I don't understand why the military didn't just adopt S-25's in a new caliber, and with the new optics. It'd save a shitload of time, and resistance wouldn't be as ridiculous.

      I agree that the M250 is good, though. I personally don't like the side-fold feed-mechanism, but it's just me being mad I can't slam down the cover and feel badass anymore.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        I don't believe anybody has sabotaged the XM5s tests, the results simply aren't that impressive.

  17. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    On one hand, the swap to something new was inevitable.
    Ever since the Acog became mostly standard, infantry has became pseudo-snipers in most situations, while still having the firepower for closer engagements.

    While I think 277 Fury needs more work to be good, it's still better than the dogshit Textron was trying to sell, so I consider that a win.

    On the other, I am very disappointed in Sig.

    The MCX was a decent rifle. It had issues, namely using the guide-rods as glorified spring retainers instead of guiding the BCG, but the proper short-stroke piston made it accurate and reliable.

    The Spear, however?

    The MCX Spear uses the same system as the FN SCAR, where you have a short-stroke piston-head and a long-stroke operating rod. This system causes recoil to feel way worse than it actually is.
    The only benefit to such a system is that it would be easier to quickly change barrels in an LMG configuration, but the M250 already has a solution to that exact same issue that doesn't rely on braindead engineering.

    Compare this to the AR-10, which does everything it can to make the recoil feel in-line with the barrel, and thus easier to control.

    Or the Stoner 63, which is infinitely more configurable so you can at least optimize your kit for your specific role.

    Hell, even the M14 edges out this flaw by having the piston (which uses the predecessor to the system the SCAR adopted) on the underside of the gun, making the recoil slightly bearable.

    Realistically, the US military should've adopted the MCX Virtus for 5.56, forced Sig to use an AR-18 BCG, and then adopted AR-10's for the new caliber.

    However, lobbying and office politics beats out logic any day, so we're stuck with what we got:
    An Assault Rifle originally made for full-length calibers, a Battle Rifle originally made for intermediate calibers, a new type of bullet, and fancy new electronics.

    The M250 is good, though, and other than a few nitpicks I think Sig actually did a good job.

  18. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    >It is way heavier
    lift more
    >has significantly less ammo
    >far more unwieldy in full auto or burst
    train more
    >too long
    manlet

Your email address will not be published.