The world loved the FAL, they just realized their soldiers are underfed and undertrained. Only good ol' America can mandate sub 9lb battle rifl-ack what the frick USMC
Once we find out that 4/5s of Chinese issued body armor is made of canvas and sawdust they'll fall back on the M27, keep the M250 and keep some Spears for DMR roles.
>they'll fall back on the M27, keep the M250 and keep some Spears for DMR roles
The whole point is to have a single caliber throughout the squad. Having 5.56 and 6.8 at the same time negates this entire point.
Now your LMGs can't share ammo with your riflemen and vice versa.
Your LMGs and riflemen can't share ammo anyway in a 6.8 system because one is still belted and the other mag-fed. You're not simplifying any logistics beyond the factory production line.
It's not as if body armor would make a difference -- the nu sig meme round can't penetrate plate without a penetrator, no different from anything else that exists.
This still baffles me. The army is literally making “the gun that woulda won Afghanistan!” cope rifle that still needs Chinese tungsten to pen Chinese armor.
>I hate GT
I hate how his videos used to be good before he joined LeviathanTribe but he's forced to make garbage now because the only way for guntubers to make money is to be DemolitionRanch knockoffs.
Personally I think it's a fine design that will likely be let down due to manufacturing defects more than anything else. I do wonder what it's service life will be, will it last nearly 60 years like the M16 or will it usher us back to the old system of rifles being upgraded every 20-30 years if not sooner? Really I think they made the mistake with banking on old tech put on life support rather than going with CT. If you ask me the Textron bid had so much room to grow, I could easily see it serving near or into the next century in one form or another
it won't, army is gonna use these as DMR, issue M250 to replace the saw (ammo compatibility here is a meme because the mag feed on the SAW was always shit and the ammo for it is on belts anyway) and get a new model of AR type rifle, maybe even the m27 but maybe not. best chance for sig is the army adopting the MCX spear LT, the 5.56 version, there's real reasons they made it.
>issue M250 to replace the saw
I thought the M250 was going to replace both the SAW (M249) and the GMPG (M240). No reason to go with such a massive cartridge 6.8x51mm/.277fury if they're keeping the M240.
>terminally online homosexuals crying about a weapon they’re never going to have to carry around for FTXs or shitty JRTC rotations
Shut the frick up already Christ almighty how many times do you morons need to have this discussion
I mean, we're literally paying for it anon. All of us. We can have opinions on how our tax dollars are spent and how it will affect our military and industry duh.
it will be replaced with a piston driven AR derivative. Maybe they will get one of the current vaporware ideas like polymer cased or caseless ammo to work, but until we get man portable lasers we've probably plateaued rifle development.
Gun aside, why was having the same cartridge for the LMG and rifle so important? Couldn't they stick with what they had or just adopt 7.62×51 for the rifle?
It seems to me that the US just keeps screwing over other NATO by picking a cartridge only they will use when there's a good option already in use
7.62 is allegedly too heavy and bulky
It's mostly a supply thing, instead of figuring out how much of one to bring and how much of another to bring, they can just load up the truck with the same thing and call it a day
>US adopts a rifle with future-proof caliber >baby duck syndrome morons can't understand that this rifle is not for a "war in 5 years", but for "war in 30 years"
XM7 is a good system. It's time to (gradually, slowly) get rid of legacy shit like 5.56 (for frontline troops), M113 and A-10
No not for grunts. >less capacity >carrying less mags >slower accurate follow up shots >heavier
Good luck using fire and maneuver to assault a position or doing cqb with that moron stick. I think some other anon said a while ago they're still carrying m4s for cqb.
>this is the modern day M14
Many people say that ... and the are completely wrong.
M14 comparing to M1 didn't bring more range and penetration. Its opposite. M14 was somewhat weaker than M1A.
M7 has complete overmatch against 7.62x51 in range and power, 5.56 is not even a contest.
But people miss the point that M14 was short and weak.
>M14 was somewhat weaker than M1A.
The M1A was the civilian M14, what you meant was the M1 Garand. >M14 comparing to M1 didn't bring more range and penetration.
Ballistically the 7.62x51mm NATO was extremely similar to the 30-06 used in WW2. Most people think of modern 30-06 thats almost as powerful as .300 WinMag but 30-06 wasn't that powerful in the past (which is why they had to invent .300 WinMag).
The world loved the FAL, they just realized their soldiers are underfed and undertrained. Only good ol' America can mandate sub 9lb battle rifl-ack what the frick USMC
>the world loved the FAL
yeah cause pre 2000s people barely knew shit about shooting.
>yeah cause pre 2000s people barely knew shit about shooting.
this might be the most profoundly moronic statement i've read on this board in 16 years.
He's unironically correct, a whole lot of people were in the military for a few years and they all got trained better than Nam and WW2 vets
>comparing draftees to volunteer soldiers
jesus christ this board has fallen off the deep end.
we deserve better
Yes.
Once we find out that 4/5s of Chinese issued body armor is made of canvas and sawdust they'll fall back on the M27, keep the M250 and keep some Spears for DMR roles.
>they'll fall back on the M27, keep the M250 and keep some Spears for DMR roles
The whole point is to have a single caliber throughout the squad. Having 5.56 and 6.8 at the same time negates this entire point.
Now your LMGs can't share ammo with your riflemen and vice versa.
Your LMGs and riflemen can't share ammo anyway in a 6.8 system because one is still belted and the other mag-fed. You're not simplifying any logistics beyond the factory production line.
It's not as if body armor would make a difference -- the nu sig meme round can't penetrate plate without a penetrator, no different from anything else that exists.
This still baffles me. The army is literally making “the gun that woulda won Afghanistan!” cope rifle that still needs Chinese tungsten to pen Chinese armor.
I agree but must we have this thread every single day?
yes because they hit post limit and OP gets to have happy chemicals seeing it still exist on the catalogue the next morning
You can hide on topic threads like this and go slop up the board with your daily 50th Ukraine thread 🙂
I think I will, just to avoid b***hy losers like you
Good, less of you tards ruining actual /k/ threads.
>ruining actual /k/ threads
>repeated discussions using repeated talking points
LOL XM7 threads really are the modern 9mm vs. .45 threads
No, sadly 9mm vs .45 threads are still the modern 9mm vs .45 threads.
>Ukraine shill threads are ON TOPIC
lol you wish.
Please point out where I said or even implied that
>9mm vs. .45 threads
There's one of those right now, they haven't evolved or gone away.
Here's hoping
>on topic
>not spam
I hate GT
ever since he went full-moron his fans are more insufferable.
>I hate GT
I hate how his videos used to be good before he joined LeviathanTribe but he's forced to make garbage now because the only way for guntubers to make money is to be DemolitionRanch knockoffs.
Personally I think it's a fine design that will likely be let down due to manufacturing defects more than anything else. I do wonder what it's service life will be, will it last nearly 60 years like the M16 or will it usher us back to the old system of rifles being upgraded every 20-30 years if not sooner? Really I think they made the mistake with banking on old tech put on life support rather than going with CT. If you ask me the Textron bid had so much room to grow, I could easily see it serving near or into the next century in one form or another
it won't, army is gonna use these as DMR, issue M250 to replace the saw (ammo compatibility here is a meme because the mag feed on the SAW was always shit and the ammo for it is on belts anyway) and get a new model of AR type rifle, maybe even the m27 but maybe not. best chance for sig is the army adopting the MCX spear LT, the 5.56 version, there's real reasons they made it.
>issue M250 to replace the saw
I thought the M250 was going to replace both the SAW (M249) and the GMPG (M240). No reason to go with such a massive cartridge 6.8x51mm/.277fury if they're keeping the M240.
M240 is still being kept, but the M240 also isn't in most infantry squads.
The tip of the spear combat force will be moving to the M250 and M7 replacing the M249 and M4.
Hell if anything they've looked at maybe getting 6.8 caliber barrels for the M240s to keep them in service longer.
>terminally online homosexuals crying about a weapon they’re never going to have to carry around for FTXs or shitty JRTC rotations
Shut the frick up already Christ almighty how many times do you morons need to have this discussion
I mean, we're literally paying for it anon. All of us. We can have opinions on how our tax dollars are spent and how it will affect our military and industry duh.
>NOOOOOOOO! Don't care about starving children in Africa! You've just had breakfast!
But I don't care about starving kids in Africa
it will be replaced with a piston driven AR derivative. Maybe they will get one of the current vaporware ideas like polymer cased or caseless ammo to work, but until we get man portable lasers we've probably plateaued rifle development.
>whatever replaces it within a few years
It'll be replaced by the M16/M4
It really is the M14
>It'll be replaced by the M16/M4
Why must they fight against PERFECTION?
Gun aside, why was having the same cartridge for the LMG and rifle so important? Couldn't they stick with what they had or just adopt 7.62×51 for the rifle?
It seems to me that the US just keeps screwing over other NATO by picking a cartridge only they will use when there's a good option already in use
7.62 is allegedly too heavy and bulky
It's mostly a supply thing, instead of figuring out how much of one to bring and how much of another to bring, they can just load up the truck with the same thing and call it a day
>US adopts a rifle with future-proof caliber
>baby duck syndrome morons can't understand that this rifle is not for a "war in 5 years", but for "war in 30 years"
XM7 is a good system. It's time to (gradually, slowly) get rid of legacy shit like 5.56 (for frontline troops), M113 and A-10
No not for grunts.
>less capacity
>carrying less mags
>slower accurate follow up shots
>heavier
Good luck using fire and maneuver to assault a position or doing cqb with that moron stick. I think some other anon said a while ago they're still carrying m4s for cqb.
>this is the modern day M14
Many people say that ... and the are completely wrong.
M14 comparing to M1 didn't bring more range and penetration. Its opposite. M14 was somewhat weaker than M1A.
M7 has complete overmatch against 7.62x51 in range and power, 5.56 is not even a contest.
But people miss the point that M14 was short and weak.
>M14 was somewhat weaker than M1A.
The M1A was the civilian M14, what you meant was the M1 Garand.
>M14 comparing to M1 didn't bring more range and penetration.
Ballistically the 7.62x51mm NATO was extremely similar to the 30-06 used in WW2. Most people think of modern 30-06 thats almost as powerful as .300 WinMag but 30-06 wasn't that powerful in the past (which is why they had to invent .300 WinMag).
>whatever replaces it within a few years will be way better.
If it isn't made by SIG it will be, gone are the days of the P226 and SIG 556.
>implying that the M14 was bad
Peak midwit.
>t.
STOP FRICKING SPAMMING THE CATALOG