Why are people so against it? Is it because 97% of gun owners cant raise a 10lb rifle up for more than 30 seconds?
Why are people so against it? Is it because 97% of gun owners cant raise a 10lb rifle up for more than 30 seconds?
Why are people so against it? Is it because 97% of gun owners cant raise a 10lb rifle up for more than 30 seconds?
You legally cannot own firearms where you live
Discount SCAR in a meme caliber
>Discount
isn't it like, 2x the price?
Isn't the SCAR like a massive heap of dogshit compared to the Spear?
Yes. People only like the SCAR because of videogames.
Poorgays out in force today.
The spear costs more. You are the poorgay.
>n.....n.....no u
classic
but that was the SCAR queers point.
Obviously I've never fired one (cries in Canadian), but everything I've heard about it was negative.
Harsh recoil impulse, so bad that it breaks most optics.
Weird manual of arms.
A reciprocating charging handle that exists solely to injure the shooter or jam the rifle
And most importantly HEAVY
You are moronic
And you're a tripgay.
No he's correct about every one of those points.
>Obviously I've never fired one (cries in Canadian), but everything I've heard about it was negative.
YouTube experts is cancer, I hope it all collapses soon so we are rid of them.
>Harsh recoil impulse, so bad that it breaks most optics.
Fuddlore. No one who can afford a SCAR is putting a blister pack optic on it.
>Weird manual of arms.
How is that?
>A reciprocating charging handle that exists solely to injure the shooter or jam the rifle
SOCOM specified an RCH in their spec so that is what FN built. You can buy an NRCH version how, or a conversion.
How is it you know better than SOCOM what SOCOM needs?
>And most importantly HEAVY
The SCAR 17 is one of the lightest 308 autos out there. The AR18 in original guise is lighter, but that comes at significant cost. Pretty much all other pistol driven variant, including that shitbox Sig the US military is supposedly rolling out, is much heavier.
>No one who can afford a SCAR is putting a blister pack optic on it.
Completely untrue and it even kills rugged optics like the VCOG and quickly destroys LAMs as well. It's not a meme, it's a reality.
>How is it you know better than SOCOM what SOCOM needs?
Considering SOCOM dropped it pretty much immediately after realizing they fricked up, I'd say I do in fact know much better than them what they want.
In how many rounds did yours kill your VCOG? Your LAM?
>Considering SOCOM dropped it pretty much immediately after realizing they fricked up
SOCOM still issues the SCAR 20, having dropped used it to replace the SCAR 17.
>In how many rounds did yours kill your VCOG?
I've never used a VCOG, this guys died in 660.
>LAM
Killed mine under 1,000.
>I've never used a VCOG
Wow, so surprised.
>Killed mine under 1,000.
Sure it did.
You can be mad about reality or not, it doesn't matter since you do not own a SCAR. Thankfully I no longer do.
>How is it you know better than SOCOM what SOCOM needs?
Because members of SOCOM that didn't join for book deals and making movies post-service used the 417
The SCAR is a known optic killer. The only two I know from personal experience that hold up are the newer sideway battery Eotechs and the Elcan.
The SCAR has a really strong hatedom online, I like mine quite a bit more than the AR10 it replaced.
>Harsh recoil impulse, so bad that it breaks most optics.
Probably the softest shooting .308 I've ever fired.
>Weird manual of arms.
I have no idea where you got this.
>A reciprocating charging handle that exists solely to injure the shooter or jam the rifle
I've never been injured by it or had my SCAR jam, and the new ones have non reciprocating charging handles anyway because of all the ARgay b***hing.
>And most importantly HEAVY
Was this just bait all along?
>Harsh recoil
It shoots softer than an ar in 556
>obviously I’ve never fired one
We can tell
Yes. The only reason the SCAR was considered any good at all was because it was one of the early free float barreled rifles so it had accuracy advantages. Once everyone figured out what the magic was and that you could just do that with an AR the SCAR was done for.
>ground troops can carry infinite weight
>more weight and size for no benefit is good
it's all just so tiresome
though since i responded to a zero effort bot post I suppose I'm part of the problem
Don't worry, they're not carrying more weight, just less than half the ammo.
Did you buy a spear and are trying justify your horrible life choices? That's ghey
5.56cels gnashing teeth, losing hope, pounding sand, tearing their robes and raising clenched fists skyward as they cry out to God that He not make their $4000 AR15s obsolete
The only one pounding sand here is you for thinking 4000 is an amount of money worth getting upset over. You might as well have just said "I'm poor" and leave it at that.
Amount of time you've spent shooting: 0 hours
Amount of guns you have: 0
You’re projecting, anon.
AR cucks tend to be broke
Idiot. The big boolet but less VS little boolet but more has been in debate since ww2. You are a moron who doesn't understand how little people care especially when it comes to something that has 0 parts mag or ammo commonality.
the multiple charging handles are a stupid meme but the real reason is that it was designed to be full auto capable. I don't have to shoot one to know when you use the hot ammo you're only going to want to use it on semi.
It's a fricking M14
It's a big AR-18 with an AR-15 style BCG
I've also heard it'a really easy to jam, and that you can jam it if you reload to hard. What soldier is going to be in combat, run out of ammo, and reload all gingerly like it's a glass teapot and not a fricking rifle?
I heard that the Sig Spear contract allows the CEO to come over and frick your mom.
I heard it fricked my mom last night
>let's increase weight and decrease ammo loadout because some desk jockey genuinely thinks grunts are going to be making worthwhile 600m shots in a combat situation
Lol. Lmao.
"Lets turn everyone into a designated marksman!"
Yeah it does sounds moronic. Those cool scopes are probably sit in the arms room for life too.
Marines did, nearly got the ACOG removed
>nearly got the ACOG removed
huh
Decent b8
>We need more power to make longer range shots
>But also it's still going to be 4-6 MOA and we're not going to change our training regimen
>Don't worry, a fricking LPVO with a push-button BDC will make them all snipahrs
>What's gonna happen in the extremely likely event they find themselves room clearing with what's basically a battle rifle? Iunnolol
I don't think it's going to replace the M4 because it can't. If we try we'll relearn that people who need to do carbine things need carbines, people who need to do rifle things need rifles, and the laws of physics will always prevent you from having a carbine that can do rifle things.
>the laws of physics will always prevent you from having a carbine that can do rifle things.
Fortunately, there's a simple way to make a carbine-length firearm with a rifle-length barrel. And then you could maybe use modern technology to make a full-power cartridge weigh as little as a brass case 5.56 cartridge. And then maybe add in some recoil management technology so you can use it just like you would an assault rifle.
>buying the hype
Textron's design had greater weight savings and even that ammo was heavier than regular brass case 5.56mm. Also automatic rifle with 20 round magazines kek. People defending that can never make fun of the BAR again.
>Also automatic rifle with 20 round magazines kek
Uh, anon? Are you suggest the Spear doesn't use 20 round magazines too? Because that was what the NGSW requested?
I meant the automatic as it was called in the program to replace the squad automatic weapon. Both SIG and Textron submitted belt-fed designs for that.
The TV and Textron ammo were within 1 gram of each other, and they were both about 15% more than 5.56 instead of 20% more than 7.62.
The BAR was a good gun for its time, and the GD AR probably still had a higher effective rate of fire than the Jam Clearing Simulator 1984. The Marines seem to be perfectly happy without their SAWs.
Replace old beat-to-hell SAWs that have fired an insane number of rounds and they won't jam anywhere nearly as much. Its not the guns fault the Army and Marines suck at doing that. Only reason the same problem doesn't happen as much with the M240 is because it is built like a brick shithouse which is why it is so fricking heavy. I hear moronic privates can do a number on the M249 by going overboard with the cleaning regimen too.
Nobody likes shitass bullpups, that's why it lost. Because it's an inherently TERRIBLE design with zero redeeming qualities.
>terrible accuracy so the barrel length is useless
>terrible ergonomics so the short OAL is useless
>wowee sounds perfect said every nogunz and shiteater
The XM7 accuracy is just as bad. The purpose of the long barrel was to meet the Army's power requirement, which they then decided wasn't actually required after adopting the Sig.
Honestly, I'm a Textron shill and wish it had won, but of the three contestants the GD design clearly fulfilled the program requirements the best. Those requirements were silly though, and if the M16/M4 had been allowed to compete as in the SPIW/ACR/OICW programs, they never would have adopted any of them.
>The XM7 accuracy is just as bad
No, it's not.
Proof? Inb4 a test of a brand-new semiauto Sig.
>Inb4 a test of a brand-new semiauto Sig.
>wtf the same gun made by the same company doesn't count!
lol, so you admit it, you have no argument at all.
The civilian market has higher standards. The military just cares if it meets the requirements, which are 4 MOA new and replace at 6 MOA. A new CR6920 is more accurate than a new M4, and much more accurate than one that's been beaten on for years. Comparing a new MCX Spear to a heavily used NGSW prototype is certainly not apples-to-apples.
None of that is true.
Bullpups are an IQ test and you failed
>bullpups are so good that every country that adopted one is getting rid of it and their SOF have used M4s and HK416s as long as they've been able to
lol
>soldier are universally braindead morons
>armies all around the world are adopting a gun optimized for braindead morons
Yeah
Ah yes, the "you're just not smart enough to appreciate it" argument. Gun autism is really one of the worst kinds.
Reminds me of that one podcast with two vets and primary arms ceo. PA's ceo was shitting on the marines and their choice of reticle but then one of the vet a former marine began sneak dissing him every chance he got and laughing at him whenever he said something so stupid.
If you can’t appreciate a rifle length barrel in a very compact platform idk what to tell you. Manual of arms gays are the worst
>the AUG, the first bullpup to ever be adopted by a military, was used in a military that used conscription
>conscription is where you'd see a massive amount of morons put into service
>the AUG has since been phased out for years now
I wish you stupid Black folk who buy bullpups to be contrarian would be honest with yourselves
Everyone is sticking with AR platform because that's what burgers use and everyone wants parts commonality.
Burgers use ARs because it just werks and it's been long enough to have all its quirks polished and there's a variant for every purpose
>Everyone is sticking with AR platform because that's what burgers use and everyone wants parts commonality.
But there is no parts commonality, most of them are not using ARs but HK416s. Nobody is swapping parts between eachother.
They want ARs and HK416s because it is a simply superior firearm and a vastly superior manual of arms to all others ever created.
Its actually they've nuked their small arms industries and can't get anything beside cursed german bullshit or the US's hand me downs
>Its actually they've nuked their small arms industries and can't get anything beside cursed german
Not even close to true. They could buy shitty Austrian bullpups, spaghetti things, SCARs/belgian shitpups, or the Cz "totally not a scar guys".
But the answer seems to be pretty universally HK416 or AR-15 for any new acquisitions.
It's true and they did it for good reasons, marginal improvements in small arms are irrelevant war, better buy guns from someone else and spend your budget on drones,vehicles,missiles and guided shells specially if you are europoor and can't afford it
>it's true
No, it's not.
>improvements irrelevant
then why did they decide to go with the improvement?
moronic subhuman bullpupgay, your gun sucks and nobody likes it.
Yes, because while the bullpup is good the users aren't. Too stupid to train on a different gun. So dumb the Sig Spear has TWO (2) charging handles to accommodate their cattle brained troops who never saw a side charging handle before. I don't expect lowest common denominators to handle a great gun such as a bullpup.
>increased barrel length is useless because of bad accuracy
I wasn't aware increased barrel length only increased velocity and energy past 300 meters. I thought longer barrels improved power at all distances. Thank you for teaching me.
Why does increased velocity matter even slightly if your rifle is too inaccurate to be used at long range? The answer is it doesn't matter.
>terrible ergonomics
The magazine is slightly closer to the body. That's it. You have to put the magazine in near your chest instead of in front of your firing hand. This has never been a valid argument.
>slow to reload
>can't transition shoulders
>awkward prone
>awkward to impossible to brace off of structures
it's shit
>slow to reload
It's exactly as fast as a conventional layout. Again, your hand is just closer to your body, but the motion is exactly the same.
>can't transition shoulders
Meme tactic that gimps you more than it helps.
>awkward prone
It's not. 20 round .308 mags are completely unobtrusive when prone.
>awkward to impossible to brace off of structures
Bring your hand slightly further back on the handguard and it's easy. You're allowed to do that because there's practically no weight in front of the trigger.
Transitioning shoulders is extremely common, even in the most relaxed practical shooting like durr hunting.
I've shot as many white tails with my right hand as my dominant left just based on what direction they came from.
accuracy so the barrel length is useless
Genuine question: why is the accuracy worse on bullpups compared to a normal rifle with the same barrel length?
Barrel harmonics suffer because it's harder to make them freefloat. Trigger also sucks.
I see. I feel like the trigger thing shouldn't be inpossible to solve, but it's not like I'm a gunsmith. Thanks for the info anons
There've been a variety of ways I've seen.
Some Russians even connected a striker to the trigger that springs across to activate the actual hammer remotely.
There are a lot of ways to skin a cat, but some of them aren't worth the cost.
>terrible accuracy
>terrible ergonomics
You've never shot a bullpup. People shoot better with bullpups than conventionals. There are also accurate bullpups like the Hellion. The strongest opinions are held by the biggest morons
>There are also accurate bullpups like the Hellion
LOL
>VHS2: 2.3 MOA with shit ammo
>XM7: 2.5 MOA with match ammo
How did Sig manage to frick up so hard?
>Give soldiers all of 140 rounds to work with
>Rifle they're expected to plug targets at from 500m+ is, mechanically, capable of ~3MOA with match-grade ammunition in ideal range conditions
>This will balloon dramatically with grunts using military production ammunition in combat
This program gets more and more moronic with each passing month, not even joking
moronic tactifudds, guys in the 101st can't shut up about how accurate it is, Testing shows that it's about 1 MOA. The round is powerful enough to shred cover which muh 5.56 can't do.
>Testing shows that it's about 1 MOA
>The round is powerful enough to shred cover which muh 5.56 can't do
Alright, both of those things the SCAR 17 has been able to do for almost twenty years now.
the scar 17 has also been ugly and gay for almost 20 years now
Can't believe I'm agreeing with a tripgay
Also 6.8x51 CAN'T penetrate lvl4 plates without using a tungsten penetrator. Same as all other calibers used already like 5.56 and 7.62 NATO
>can't penetrate lvl 4 plates
wow nice meme moron https://www.stripes.com/branches/army/2024-04-17/army-new-weapon-soldiers-fort-campbell-13579208.html
You need to learn how to read. The article says steel plates, not lvl 4 armor. Recent gt video shows that the round can't even pen side armor after multiple shots lol
>recent video using solid copper non-AP boolets and not steel core AP ammo shows that it doesn't penetrate lvl 4 armor with non-AP rounds
wow do you have any other insights, moron?
>garandthumb
Redditthumb and other YouTubers should never be trusted ever
>Testing shows that it's about 1 MOA
Let's see a source on that.
A 3/8" steel barrier isn't NIJ level 4 armor. You basically can't buy steel level 4 plates anymore because while they'll stop M2AP, they get penetrated by basic b***h M855 and M193, which are far more common.
Solid copper bullets are also pretty common designs for armor piercing. We know however that the 6.8 EPR won't penetrate level 4, because it's the same bullet design and energy as M80A1, which also won't penetrate level 4. Sure, it's got a little higher sectional density which maybe could let it penetrate the same way that 5.56 can penetrate steel level 4, but M855A1 also doesn't penetrate ceramic level 4. Basically, it's impossible to say 100% for sure whether a 6.8 EPR can penetrate level 4 until we see someone try it, but there's a lot of evidence pointing towards "probably not" and absolutely none suggesting it might.
holy frick you moron, copper isn't used for armor piercing, it has a THREE on the mohs scale and density over 15% less than pure lead. It can be used as a jacket on an armor piercing round but that's completely fricking different. Do you have any idea how fricking stupid you are? Do you live inside an iron lung because you're too goddamn moronic to breathe on your own?
Copper is much tougher than lead and without a hollow tip they expand much less on impact, so they have much greater sectional density than most other kinds of bullets. Sure, it's mostly in regards to soft armor or steel, but solid copper bullets are legally armor piercing according to the ATF. You can look it up.
That's brass, you idiot
>And then you could maybe use modern technology to make a full-power cartridge weigh as little as a brass case 5.56 cartridge.
TV 6.8 weights 17.5 grams. Textron 6.8 weights 18 grams.
How about .277 fury?
No way that would never work!
This should have been rejected on looking moronic alone.
Americans would literally rather get shot in the face by an AK than use a bullpup.
>mfw no clown nose suppressor service weapon
i'll never forgive them for what they took from us
Stop trying to make fetch happen
We were robbed of the best future rifle
With a good optic, yes, you can. The USMC is moving toward all small-arms infantry being able to cover most small-arms roles.
This has always been the wet dream for small-arms infantry. Modern tech might actually make it a feasible concept.
The weight concern is a valid one, however, and US infantry needs their load cut by about half.
The Marines will be buying belt-fed LMGs as soon as they can once they actually end up in real combat again.
Don't think you're going to ever find a single gun that does it all. The assault rifle/carbine has basically already achieved peak compression.
Maybe they'll start deploying something like the XM250 or M240LWS at the squad level. The concept of the SAW was always fatally flawed though, there is no genuine need for an intermediate-power belt fed.
>load cut by half
That amounts to a weapon, ammo, and enough water and food for 8-10 hours of activity.
Modern troops use a lot more than just the absolute minimum.
Don't take my word for it, that's from the Pentagon's own mouth. 50lbs is considered to be the maximum load without reducing combat effectiveness.
Oh I fully agree, overburdened troops is a huge problem. I'd bet money that it is a large factor in people dropping out, and running away as fast as they can when their 2 years is up. Even 50 pounds is a lot to bear for extended periods of time (I mean years as a soldier).
With that said, modern troops would be reduced to just the clothes they have on, food water and their weapon with such a reduction.
SIG's CEO Is israeli, when you realize that it makes sense
(you)
There was a time where I would have taken that more seriously
I hate israelites and jeets and sig is run by ron cohen who uses indian parts and labor, do the math
The XCR should have won the SCAR trials
>design heavy ass battle rifle in a proprietary caliber with absurd chamber pressures for the sole purpose of maximizing armor penetration
>rifle can't even pen modern plates
lmao
>for the sole purpose of maximizing armor penetration
It does a lot more than that. Moving a projectile 3x the weight of 5.56 at the same speed is kinda a really big deal for terminal performance. That combined with the excellent BC means the Sig is vastly more effective than the M4 or even M110. It soundly btfos 6.5 and 7.62x51.
>That combined with the excellent BC
What's the BC of the 6.8 bullet?
Educated internet guesses are 0.27-0.29 G7 BC for GP round.
He wasn't using steel cored rounds. In fact one of the first things he says in the video is that these aren't the issued rounds.
It's always bullpup gays that get extremely mad at this thing.
Barrel life is ridiculously short.
10k rounds is what I've seen reported which is in line with what M4s are getting with M855a1.
Sig Speared my Butthole. Now I can't stop thinking about aliens.
/k/ was not like that in 2014. Don't talk about things you never experienced newbie subhuman filth.
>/k/ in 2014: m4 carbine RFLMAO , it's for limp wristed liberal pussies, that punny cartridge gets you killed in SHTF! Real man use Battle Rifles!
>US Army rolls out best Battle Rifle ever: no!!!!! Not like this!
Terminal contrarians.
>heavy
>new ammunition type to complicate logistics
>Sub optimal for close range
>Design partially based on experience fighting afghan mountain militia instead of conventional warfare
>Separate ammo for training LOLWUT
>High recoil
>heavier ammo
>Redundant (you can use heavier weapons to engage enemies at range)
>>new ammunition type to complicate logistics
Considering it will most certainly wind up replacing 7.62x51, not a big deal.
>Sub optimal for close range
true
>Design partially based on experience fighting afghan mountain militia instead of conventional warfare
When is the last time the US fought a conventional war and infantry was relevant? Korea? How many decades do we have to go before we accept the USAF will roll over any conventional force while infantry sits around with dicks in hand doing nothing?
>Separate ammo for training LOLWUT
Why do you think there's still surplus M193 four decades after the US adopted M855?
>heavier ammo
True
>Redundant (you can use heavier weapons to engage enemies at range)
You can, and this program includes a simply flat out better machinegun than any currently in service.
>this program includes a simply flat out better machinegun than any currently in service.
Yeah I wanted to shit on the 240 replacement like the spear but it's actually really good. The only issue being how much ammo a machine gun team can carry. They may cause issues with how long they can provide suppression for.
>better mg
>no qc barrel
>suppressed so it gets even hotter, faster
No QC barrel is a stipulation of the military for who knows what fricking reason. Sig does have a changeable barrel version which they'll no doubt be asked for once this dumb shit actually gets used.
Because soldiers dont shoot that much and if they do they'll only have like 7 mags on tap anyways. If you're past 7 mags in a firefight you're either going to get raped by allah's faithful or your under siege in a FOB.
It's because they put an expensive and highly advanced suppressor on the thing and don't want soldiers dumping those in the dirt and forgetting about them.
ammo for training LOLWUT
Anon US tankers use TP ammo almost exclusively.
Also since M855A1 US Army buys kinda "training" version of M855A1. Packaged In cardboard boxes for less cost for training and packaged in cans and bandoliers for combat deployment. So separate training 5.56 ammo kinda happened already but you missed the memo.
>heavy
True
>new ammunition type to complicate logistics
True but ammunition manufacturing capacity just needs to be scaled up and/or produced by other companies
>Sub optimal for close range
Says who and why?
>Design partially based on experience fighting afghan mountain militia instead of conventional warfare
What is your point here?
>Separate ammo for training LOLWUT
This is also true for 5.56 in the military when the tungsten rounds came out
>High recoil
Higher than an m16 yes
>heavier ammo
True. They will need to train soldiers et al to be more conservative with ammo and be more accurate. They will need to train people to a higher degree which I don't know if the Army can handle that.
>Redundant (you can use heavier weapons to engage enemies at range)
You really have no idea what you're talking about.
I really don't want to defend this rifle but people who have never had to use a rifle outside of a flat civilian range like you make it hard not to.
>Says who and why?
Fewer rounds for a given weight.
There is 0 advantage for high BC bullets inside the range the vast majority of engagements take place, and the disadvantage is fewer rounds for the effectively the same terminal result per round.
Right so it performs the same as other rounds but has range, accuracy, and penetration advantages not to mention it does all of this out of a 13" barrel. The weight part I agree with as it contradicts the doctrine developed with the m16+ so they will need to change doctrine.
Doesn't perform the same because objectively higher recoil makes it harder to put and keep shots on target.
>MKR
Just another Kelgren meme gun that does nothing but shoot ice picks.
>shoot ice picks.
Interdynamics mentions bullet tumbles easily and it's believable, bullet has extremely long ogive that pushes center of gravity forward.
What shoots icepicks is AK-47 and M14.
>There is 0 advantage for high BC bullets inside the range the vast majority of engagements take place,
You are just not thinking outside box. If you are aiming for say 300 meters range high BC makes possible to reach this range with very tinny cartridges
>The Interdynamics MKR
>cartridge weight is only 3.6 grams (that is not a typo)
War-gaming to justify some 3 star's existence because we haven't had a real war in 3 generations. This is the logic that put 1200M sights on a Lee-Enfield.
>Interdynamics MKR
I still don't get how the numbers from this are supposed to be possible. You're basically taking a .22 magnum cartridge (450J), necking it down to .182 (probably 400J), and then upping the pressure until it makes 800J. How is a .22 WMR case holding up to more than double the pressure it was designed for? You can increase the wall thickness, but that's going to have a real effect on (already limited) case capacity in a cartridge that tiny.
>still don't get how the numbers from this are supposed to be possible.
40K PSI and 25" barrel.
>You can increase the wall thickness
There wasn't any change in cases. Kellgren just pulled out existing .22 WMR ammo and necked these empty cases to 4.5mm.
>40K PSI and 25" barrel.
That doesn't explain it. Less than double the pressure and an extra inch of barrel doesn't get you double the power.
The case was allowed to expand. They basically cut the chamber from the mouth fully cylindrical so the brass could blow out into it to stop from rupturing.
Anyone ever got wall banged by a PKM?
I have in call of duty
Things a fricking gimmick.
it's just an excuse to keep the defense budget up.
308 is the ACME of all battle rifle calibers, there is no point in using anything lower than 30cal.
pic unrelated.
It's an early access gun. Gamers have been dealing with this shit for years. 10 years later you will reap the benefit and then we get to start all over again.
>Why are people so against it?
Most people are stuck in the past and refuse to accept innovation even when confronted with a modern weapon superior in nearly every way outside of meme fantasy scenarios.
5.56 is simply a dogshit round. We've known this since ‘Nam.
Sure, but that's not a great reason to adopt an additional dogshit round.
How is it dogshit? It has infinitely better ballistics and can defeat armor.
It can't defeat armor and it's effectively the same cartridge as .308 but out of a shorter barrel.
>It can't defeat armor
It can. Its one of the reasons why the US chose it. And before you send some cucktuber vid know that the rifles they’re using are civilian 5.56 variants
>and it's effectively the same cartridge as 308 but out of a shorter barrel.
And what exactly is wrong with that?
>It can. Its one of the reasons why the US chose it.
It literally cannot (penetrate level 4 armor, ie the only kind that matters), there was no armor penetration requirement for the cartridge development, and it does nothing that other cartridges that can't penetrate armor don't also do.
>And what exactly is wrong with that?
Nothing, except it doesn't add any new capability.
>It literally cannot (penetrate level 4 armor, ie the only kind that matters)
Russia doesn't even equip their guys with armor. Chinese level 4 armor is industry standard level 2
>and it does nothing that other cartridges that can't penetrate armor don't also do.
It's obvious it does otherwise the US army wouldn't be using it now
5.56 also penetrates NIJ level 2, so what additional capability is it adding?
>otherwise the US army wouldn't be using it now
The XM7 was adopted for reasons other than its combat effectiveness. There's a reason that the NGSW was the very first Army small-arms competition in living memory that hasn't also included some variant of the AR-15. The XM7 would have lost outright to an M4 or HK416.
Because it gives us superior range. I don't understand why people are throwing such a fit over superior ammo. What did you think 5.56 was going to be around forever?
Nah I do
>This is bait but M193 out of a 20 inch barrel creates heinous wounds
Debatable. And only against unarmored targets.
>and volume of fire is infinitely more important than anything else because more bullet=more hits and more suppression
Soldiers don't even use full auto anymore and thanks to the smart scopes you no longer have to spray and pray.
>Soldiers don't even use full auto anymore and thanks to the smart scopes you no longer have to spray and pray.
Does suppressive even work? In video games people are always doming my ass even if I laid down fire with my m249. That alone is proof that overwhelming fire superiority is a meme. Yes I am talking about squad.
In videogames people do massively moronic shit because of suppressive fire like crowd around single corner and shoot all together from there. Similar you can see from sandbox combat videos, when people rotate around single corner to dump rounds.
Or people in videogames stop at first available "cover" when under fire, even when this "cover" is nothing but cope deathtrap that get them killed ten seconds after. While they could've move 30 feet further and get superior position but they don't do that because brain screams "danger! stop!".
Or they stop advancing as team in assault , most weak heart seek cover, start "sniping", couple guys that keep moving get killed and assault losses momentum. While if they keep moving as team five they've just pushed defender through with number of bodies... but brain keeps screaming "stop!".
It doesn't have superior range in any meaningful sense. The gun isn't accurate enough and the soldiers aren't being trained to make 600+ yard shots.
Sure, if you want to call it that. The Army has been spending hundreds of millions of dollars on small arms development for the last 70 years with absolutely nothing to show for it but "we cut 4" off the end, again." They've been taking a lot of shit for their procurement practices after the failures of the SPIW, ACR, OICW, ICSR, etc, and the brass has been saying for years "Okay, it's different this time, we're actually going to make something useful and then use it." They were absolutely going to buy one of the NGSW designs regardless of how effective they actually were compared to our existing arsenal, because the alternative was significant political pressure including potential budget cuts and increased oversight of their other procurement programs.
Bruh most modern rifles are more than accurate/precise enough to regularly touch and wreck at 600+ yards, it's just that 5.56 is utter shit at it. An AR10 with 16" barrel can do it, this rifle can do it, you're just totally full of shit.
Seething tactifudds who think 5.56 is the pinnacle of munitions development need to be executed
This thread
>It doesn't have superior range in any meaningful sense.
It does
>The gun isn't accurate enough
More accurate than the M4 at long ranges
>and the soldiers aren't being trained to make 600+ yard shots.
Smart scopes make marksman training obsolete. Just put the enemies head on the little dot and its 1 shot 1 kill.
Suppressive fire means nothing for America as we can just call in an airstrike. Its not the 40’s anymore grandpa, your average infantry chad won't even use his rifle outside of dismounting from armored vehicles and cleaning up survivors after a plane blows up half a city in ten minutes.
>Smart scopes make marksman training obsolete. Just put the enemies head on the little dot and its 1 shot 1 kill.
The fact that you believe this is proof that you have no idea what you're talking about.
The acog turned all marines into designated marksmen anon, now imagine 2x the magnification and ballistic capabilities.
The addition of optics caused so many Iraqis to die from headshots that the government thought that troops were executing POW’s. The new smart scopes use AI to do all the aiming for you. You just aim at the little circle it projects on the screen and you’re near 100% accurate.
>Smart scopes make marksman training obsolete
This board is fricking unusable on Sundays
He's not wrong. You can dislike it all you want but it's the truth.
Why bother when the device does it?
Even without full auto the whole point of suppressive fire is well aimed fire and more bullet better for that.
>superior range
For the last 100 years, the vast majority of combat happens within 300 yards and most of that happens within 100 yards.
For the last 100 years soldiers have not had optics at all, let alone aimbot optics that do all the work.
>Those don't increase range substantially because soldiers are mostly looking and tracking targets with their unaided eyes
No they're not, they're getting them spotted by drone and thermal imaging. The future is not even now, it was last week and you are behind.
He's from a third world country, it's not his fault he's moronic.
> aimbot optics that do all the work.
protip noguns: an autoBDC does not an aimbot make, and you're still discounting the fact that there's a meatbag handling the gun and not a machine. this thread is fricking filled with kids who haven't even seen a shooting range that goes beyond 200y, let alone actually shot on one.
Have you not seen the system the Israelis are using? It is indeed straight up aimbot shit.
take a lot at a topographical map of Iran and compare to Afghanistan 🙂
That Israeli system is a complete meme.
Probably because most bullpups aren't freefloated.
Beyond that bad triggers make shooting accurately harder.
>shoot long range
>see where bullet hits dirt
>adjust accordingly and walk your shot in
Lmao its not exactly rocket science, even a monkey can do it
Yeah, except for the "see where bullet hits dirt" thing. Not every combat zone is a flat range in the middle of the desert, Mike.
know what I don't think you kids haven't shot long range before, I think you haven't shot at all. holy shit.
>You will always see where your bullet hits
>You will always have dirt to throw up impact
>You can totally afford to "walk in" your shots with all of 140 rounds to work with
>The enemy is going to just sit there and let you do it
What if I told you actual combat wasn't like an ARMA match against AI?
>aimbot optic
It just auto-adjusts your BDC based on you using a laser range-finder, not even accounting for windage.
Otherwise, it's just a standard LPVO.
it blows my mind how many people think that a laser range finder adjustment is enough to turn your typical grunt into a fricking sniper, and even if the optic DID take into account windage (it doesn't) you still have grunts in a combat situation shooting at enemies from a long-ass way away who are doing their best to not get shot....it's like they're going off video games show infantry combat to be like.
People think we're in Halo now, when really this is just an improvement on all those guides that would get etched into scope glass in the past.
SIG of all companies has been selling something genuinely more complicated to hunters and target shooters for years.
It isn't magic. The new LPVOs the army is issuing are a great convenience in doing the distance estimation for the shooter, but it is a change of degrees, not a paradigm shift.
>.it's like they're going off video games show infantry combat to be like.
You laugh but I promise you a good chunk of the shills in here are doing exactly that and the number of times I've seen comments saying something to the effect of it "being just like [insert tactical shooter from the early-mid 2010s]" ever since this shit hit has been nothing short of comical
>spotted by a drone
Okay, doesn't change that the actual soldier in actual combat is not going to be looking through the drone's camera while fighting.
He'll get a heads up about where a target is, potentially, but the fighting will still be done primarily under human sight, with optics used to get better shots on already identified point-targets.
Thermals aren't magic, and aren't all that great in many cases for a variety of reasons.
You are imagining we're dealing with cyborgs here instead of normal grunts who still have to see shit to shoot it.
>He'll get a heads up about where a target is
Yeah knowing their location and distance is kinda a big deal anon.
>Thermals aren't magic
Yes they are. People who say shit like this have never looked through current gen US thermals.
No, your chinese hunting scope thermal is not magic.
An approximate estimation based on a drone that doesn't account for conditions on the ground make that a boon, but only initially.
As soon as actual combat starts, the drone will really become significantly less useful because the amount of split attention necessary to actually utilize the information from it will be deleterious to performance.
This all compounded by this use of observation drones being readily achievable by both sides of most conflicts due to the low cost of implementing it. Meaning that a balance is re-struck and generally combat will end up at its standard distance once again.
There have always been significant limitations on thermals.
Every soldier would already be wearing them constantly if they were true wunderwaffen.
From what I've seen, drones providing aerial recon during trench assaults are INCREDIBLY effective, not for targets far away, but for the frickers hiding in a 2 by 2 hole operating on primal rat instinct.
The drone operators have to be very close to the frontline, and there's no doubt they have extensive cross training with the infantry units.
What I'm seeing is that the drone operators are in comms directly with the troops, and they know who the troops are.
So they're not saying "there's a dude 300 meters away at 215 degrees", they're saying "Bob throw another grenade, that fricker's still alive in there"
Anyways, if I spotted dudes 300 meters away from the fireteam I've on overwatch for, I'm calling in mortars at the very least, not asking infantry to get into a pissing contest
yeah can someone explain to me the logic of having my groundpounders lob their comically limited supply of bullets at a target a third a mile away tp, hopefully, get an eventual kill when I could just have explosives turn that target into tomato paste from the get-go?
>Okay, doesn't change that the actual soldier in actual combat is not going to be looking through the drone's camera while fighting.
Ha! You wish you were right. In ten years every grunt is gonna have a pair of AR googles that paints enemies bright red like its call of duty.
>Okay, doesn't change that the actual soldier in actual combat is not going to be looking through the drone's camera while fighting.
Late reply
IVAS solves this issue
The soldier can get thermal imaging from the drone overlayed into 3d for him to spot targets
>aimbot optics that do all the work
Knowing where the bullet will (theoretically) land is not "all the work," it's not even half. Knowing where your target will be when the shot lands, controlling your own body to facilitate a worthwhile distance shot, prioritizing engagement targets etc. etc. all comes into play, and if your combat loadout is going to be 1950s-tier this is going to be exceptionally important if you're wanting 95IQ Joe Garcia to get into a long-range plinking match with enemies bobbing and weaving between cover.
>aimbot optics that do all the work.
if you'd ever looked through an actual combat optic in your fricking life, even something as basic as a goddamned ACOG, you'd probably realize that we've had quick, easy and effective range calculators for decades. making it so a 11B mouthbreather just bushes a button to get the range down does not make him a sniper or even a marksman.
Fun fact: testing this method
https://www.everydaymarksman.co/marksmanship/sniping-4th-generation/
Against ACOG BDC demonstrated that S4G has better hit probability.
>the vast majority of combat happens within 300 yards
Yeah. Using sights like these:
And with optics you absolute mongoloid, there have ben entire studies on this topic done by people far, far more intelligent than you.
Optics have only been widespread for like twenty years
anon you're going to be amazed but take a guess what the typical engagement distance is of optic-equipped service rifles during those 20 rounds
depends on where you are.
>b-but
it's the true answer. Western Europe isn't Iraq isn't Ukraine isn't Afghanistan.
tbqh there is not a single thing wrong with having the sig meme machine for afghan valleys and m4a1s for urban warfare.
You mean that just because the US military adopted a new service rifle, that they can still use their other service rifles?
>Army adopts a new cartridge to replace both 5.56 and 7.62
>Continues using both 5.56 and 7.62 in addition to it
I mean, yeah, that sounds like the US military for you.
pretty much,complains about the M4 ranges stacked a ton after the acog's adoption.
as much as I hate cuckpups i honestly saw this one as the best of the 3,the silencer and the "MOA" killed it though.
lastly .277 is a meme when 7mm-08 aleready exists an needs like 2 inces more of barrel to get the same performance with a frick ton less of barrel wear and a lot cheaper
I do wonder if military knows they could extend an ar10 receiver 0.200" or so and get the performance they wanted without stupid wear and poor accuracy. They're buying all new belt feds too so why this had to be conventional AR10 length bullet is beyond me.
Are you implying that .30-06 from a 13" barrel matches .308 from a 20" barrel? Because that's not even close to true.
They originally did an in-house program trying to do exactly what you said in your post, and ultimately found that they had to sacrifice too much in the way of performance, reliability, etc to make it work. So they said "alright, new caliber and new rifle"
>conspiracy against the M4
Fricking hell! Neofuddlore being invented right before our eyes!
>Russia doesn't even equip their guys with armor. Chinese level 4 armor is industry standard level 2
You don't know what are you talking about.
> Most people are stuck in the past and refuse to accept innovation even when confronted with a modern weapon superior in nearly every way outside of meme fantasy scenarios.
Agreed
> 5.56 is simply a dogshit round. We've known this since ‘Nam.
Now you're just being dishonest. In which way is 5.56 'dog shit'?
>Now you're just being dishonest. In which way is 5.56 'dog shit'?
Can't penetrate armor or thick cover and can be knocked off course by fricking twigs. It also has terrible long-range ballistics.
5.56 was only adopted because the military wanted their soldiers to be able to carry more bullets which is made obsolete by modern mechanized fighting.
5.56 was adopted because it had better terminal ballistics and hit probability than M14 with M80 round within 300 yards range.
>5.56 was adopted because it had better terminal ballistics
Against unarmored targets
>and hit probability than M14 with M80 round within 300 yards range.
1950’s jungle testing isn’t representative of modern warfare
5.56 is 60 years old now. Its time for it to get the way of 30-06 and .45 Auto.
>5.56 is 60 years old now. Its time for it to get the way of 30-06 and .45 Auto.
You're right, it's time for 5.56 to be replaced with 6mm ARC and for the M4 to be replaced with an M4 with a 2mm larger bolt.
>You're right, it's time for 5.56 to be replaced with 6mm ARC and for the M4 to be replaced with an M4 with a 2mm larger bolt.
Glad you agree. Anyone using 5.56 in 2024 are dumbasses.
>1950’s jungle testing isn’t representative of modern warfare
Testing was done mostly on ranges.
Yeah. Testing for the requirements of a close-quarters jungle war in a world without drones, thermal imagery, or modern optics.
>Testing for the requirements of a close-quarters jungle war
Range requirements were derived by studies of US casualties in WW2 and Korean war. They showed that 80% of rifle wounds were inflicted by fire within 200 yards., so they added another 100 yards for proofing and called it range requirements for rifle.
>They showed that 80% of rifle wounds were inflicted by fire within 200 yards
Before modern optics maybe. However, our experience in the Middle East has shown that ranges of engagement have increased dramatically. 5.56 just simply can't get far enough.
We should be glad they were only using mostly 5.45 and x39. Imagine if russia had an ar10 equivalent in 54r.... that and the PKM wouldve forced a change of an issued rifle a decade sooner.
Then we would get Threat+4ed.
>A more than likely irons-only AKM with its thrown grapefruit trajectory 7.62 round is just as capable of 500y combat effectiveness as an ACOG'd M4
>PKP outranges an M240B by hundreds of meters, because reasons
What
Army boomers pissed and shit themselves and bought the M14 again because of this powerpoint.
You're looking at an (in)famous powerpoint spiel made by HK shill Jim Schatz to convince the DoD to purchase the HK417 which was in a death-spiral because it was becoming apparent it was a flaming turd. Don't look for factual data, this was meant to make grey-hared generals piss themselves and start throwing money at a "solution."
It's funny because the whole thing was supposed to work because of marksman training for all riflemen, lightweight cartridge technology, and rifles <2 MOA, and what the Army ended up going with was no additional training, a cartridge heavier than .308, and rifles 2.5 MOA with match ammo.
>work because of marksman training for all riflemen, lightweight cartridge technology, and rifles <2 MOA,
Russians don't have anything of that. But they have superior PKM chambered in overmatch 7.62x54R(Russian) cartridge that laughs at punny American toy guns.
But now American Army has 6.8x51 that overmatches 7.62x54R harder that it overmatches 5.56x45. Superior cartridge wins.
wait was the 417 a shitshow?
I don't know any of the actual facts behind it, but they dropped it in and went back to KAC.
>but they dropped it in and went back to KAC.
As a has-served I can tell you that if your product makes the US military go *back* to the M110, then you have fricked up royally
Yeah. Like I said I don't know a single thing about what actually went down, but the M110a2 is yet another KAC SR25, as is the A3. The Navy and Marines never bought the M110a1 (HK417) and went with a modernization program for their existing M110s.
So when anon says the 417 was a shitshow, I do believe he is correct because nothing short of a total catastrophe can really explain that bullshit.
It's funny just how despised the M110 is. Armorers especially hate them.
They were a fricking nightmare
It rather famously shit the bed during Bundeswehr trials and in American trials it repeatedly got its nut smacked by the SR25
Forgot to add that these failures were in accuracy tests, and considering these trials were for German/American DMRs...yeah
>before modern optics
Those don't increase range substantially because soldiers are mostly looking and tracking targets with their unaided eyes, rather than looking down their optics constantly.
Which is just common sense. When you're looking for someone/something, you're not going to spend all day looking through the FOV of your telescopic sight. Imagine even a hunter doing something like that.
> However, our experience in the Middle East has shown that ranges of engagement have increased dramatically
Classic midwit take that Afghanistan valleys are the new meta for combat engagement instead of being exceptionally rare.
This is bait but M193 out of a 20 inch barrel creates heinous wounds and volume of fire is infinitely more important than anything else because more bullet=more hits and more suppression
>In which way is 5.56 'dog shit'?
It's really not that great at killing
All rounds are effectively dogshit until you start going into autocannons and anti material. Adrenaline is capable of making humans do some insane bullshit so short of a CNS hit or turning body parts into mist, a person can keep going until the blood loss is too severe for the body to keep going.
>Why are people so against it?
It instantly obsoletes all AR owners who like to adapt the latest gear to their rifles. Now that the government is focusing everything on the Spear, the party is over for AR owners and now they have to fight for scraps of left over from Spear technology.
And best thing: AR-15 owners could've buy M855 ammo and LARP as "real military carbine with real military ammo"
But with 6.8, military 6.8 GP would never ever would hit civilan market. it's over for civilian peasants, your are not allowed to have "real military rifle" anymore.
You can already buy the "real military ammo," just with lead core instead of steel. It was supposed to be lower pressure than the combat loads, but then they reduced the pressure of the "real" ammo to civvie levels.
>You can already buy the "real military ammo," just with lead core instead of steel.
So not "a real military round". With M855 you can buy round US mil literally used in the past. (also M14 and M80 rounds).
But now party is over, civilians allowed to have only cope versions.
LARPers are seething and malding.
Why is OP almost universally a wienersucking moron homosexual? I just don't understand why homosexuals like this even exist. Something in the water maybe?
M14 v2
M14 was weaker than M1 though.
Honestly, I'm just mad SIG won with a conventional design when the intent behind the NGSW program was to force innovation.
I'm sure the gun itself will perform adequately in its intended role.
>separate training round because the round that does pass the NGSW requirements is prohibitively expensive and puts too much wear on the rifle
>amortizing internal parts that need to be replaced sevaral times during the receiver's intended lifespan
>said parts can only be replaced by the manufacturer
It makes me mad that SIG actually manages to make MORE money instead of less by refusing to innovate and turning personal arms into "weapon as a service".
But at the end of the day, these won't make a difference to the soldiers using them.
It's within about a pound of the M16 and the M27 is literally the same weight. People talking about weight don't know what the frick they're talking about.
>It's the same weight if you reduce your loadout to compensate!
Sigger cope.
Only people coping are AR fudds
It's 10 pounds dude what are you talking about??
It's heavier than a full length FN FAL which is 9 pounds.
For comparison the M16 is 6 pounds (before the fricking marines ruined it).
It's 0.8lb heavier than the M16A2/4 assuming you take off the Suppressor
The bullets are certainly heavier but that only amounts to what 2~ lb over standard (for half the ammo admittedly)
>It's 0.8lb heavier than the M16A2/4 assuming you take off the Suppressor
And the two (2) pound optic.
Does the M16 have some odd property that makes optics weightless?
Can you take a guess how much an ACOG weighs, anon?
It weighs just as much as it does on either rifle, anon
kind pointless to bring it up when comparing the difference in weight then isn't it?
It's a 13 inch barrel with super hot .308 case, you will never want to take off the silencer.
Comparing it to the M16A2, the rifle the USMC butchered, is unfair since the Sig hasn't been butchered yet by the USMC. We can do the M16A2 comparison when the USMC adopts the XM7 but with a 16 inch government profile barrel.
>M16
okay now do the actual issue rifle, the M4. the M4 is just under 6.5 pounds dry, the XM5 is just under 8.5. and that gap only increases when you account for the brick of an optic that comes in "between 2-3 pounds," the ~1 pound suppressor, and the significantly heavier ammo. all of this information is readily online, so not sure why the frick you're making up bullshit and accusing others of now knowing what they're talking about.
>the M4 is just under 6.5 pounds dry
And we use the M4a1 which weighs 7 lbs.
>and that gap only increases when you account for the brick of an optic that comes in "between 2-3 pounds,"
How much does that optic weigh when you put it on an M4?
and those studies concluded in the US Army building this rifle lmao, if you try to appeal to authority in this case it won't really work for you
>digging in
weekend noguns classic
>cries nogunz for no reason when facts are pointed out
>and those studies concluded in the US Army building this rifle lmao
What? No they didn't.
>How much does that optic weigh when you put it on an M4?
same, but the overall loadout is going to be significantly heavier with the M5, which is the entire point of this discussion if you were capable of following
Normal set up for the M27 is within a pound of the M5 dufus. The M27 works fine.
What does this do that my current .308 rifle doesn’t already do?
Be 6" shorter without being a bullpup, that's it.
It can go shorter but you would need to raise the optic, get one of those collapsible pdw stocks with a long toe and vertical pistol grips
But no one is ready for that yet. Some yurocuck nation is probably doing just that.
I mean in terms of ballistics. The point of this gun is that it has much higher chamber pressure to replicate .308 rifle performance out of a carbine. Apart from that it's basically an AR-10 carbine.
go through barrels faster than my dad goes through wives?
The shill campaign this thing, along with the P320, gets from people defending it online makes me think Sig has paid astroturfers to defend their honor anytime they are mentioned.
>all this gnashing of teeth over the US government choosing a new caliber
I don't get it. Why don't people seethe this much when the US military ditched a vehicle? Where are the Humvee lovers now that the Government is replacing them?
It's because they chose this thing over two options that had huge implications for bringing the civilian ammo market into the 21st century as well. Instead we got the "hurr Grug smash!" cartridge because it came along with a rifle that was the most like the old gun (because no one actually wanted any of the new guns).
>had huge implications for bringing the civilian ammo market into the 21st century
Bringing it into the 21st century means making non-reloadable cartridges that they don't want to sell to civilians in the first place? Make no mistake you clown, for all of Sigs flaws, and there are many, they are the ONLY company that was in that contest that would ever sell their gun to civilians.
Anon, you can buy TV ammo right now. It's just comically expensive because they don't have the economy of scale they would have from Army adoption.
>Anon, you can buy TV ammo right now.
Oh cool, can I buy the TV gun? No?
No, but I can buy a thousand different guns that can use and could benefit from (if the pricing wasn't such a joke) the TV ammo. I don't care about being able to purchase the firearms themselves, I have no more interest in the Amicus than the Spear.
And are, in fact, selling that gun to civilians as we speak
because its a worse AR10 that offers nothing compared to the other entries into the program
>because its a worse AR10
It btfos any AR10 the military has ever fielded.
>offers nothing compared to the other entries into the program
Aside from an operating system that isn't moronic and isn't a shitty bullpup no one wants. Also the machinegun packaged with it btfos the other contestants completely non-competitive offerings.
>Watched the video
>2.5-3 MOA with match ammo
Holy shit lmao. Imagine trying to land a hit on a tiny chink 600 yards away with this thing with EPR ammo after the barrel has seen 6000 rounds.
the XM7 will only be adopted as a new DMR and Sig will instead make uppers for the existing M4s that are reinforced to shoot bimetal case +p+++++ 556 with M855a1 projectiles
>Screencap this
I really want a sig spear lt in 7.62x39. I have not currently been diagnosed with mental disabilities; is this maybe grounds for me to quit waging and get neetbux?
no but it does make you eligible for euthanasia in Canada.
>Find magic lamp
>Rub lamp and summon genie
>Wish for a Sig Spear in 7.62x39
>Instead of wishing for 6.8 to be the price of 7.62x39
We have to go back.
I spent a day shooting one. It's nice, albeit probably about as snappy you'd except an AR in x39 to be. Functioned fine and has nice features overall. Still not entirely sure it's worth it at ~$2500, especially in a world with the mutant.
Anons forgetting about russians with mosins doming ukranians with ak74s and ar15s
>Anons forgetting a thing that has never been documented
Yeah, about that.
Literally every video of an Ukranian or Russian killing multiple people with a gun has been with an AK-74
Dunno where the west guns and new AKs went
>Dunno where the west guns
After high casualty rates early on in the war and due to ammo constraints, it was decided that only special forces would use them enmasse.
>and new AKs went
Turns out the Kalishnikov’s designed by people other than Kalashnikov sucked ass. Yet again any of the decent ones are being used by whatevers left of Russia’s special forces.
2024...I am forgotten...
forever fish classic
Why is weight even an issue? Assaults nowadays are carried out using vehicles. Joe ain't gonna have to carry his rifle very far.
Because marching patrols still happen all the time.
>marching patrols
Enjoy getting drone dropper dumbass lmao. My thermal-equipped quadcopter can do all the patrolling.
marching patrols in 2024 lmao wtf is you thinking anon we got armored vics for a reason and the next war isn't going to be a policing thing, it's going to be occupational
This
Exoskeletons and electronic carts/robot dogs etc will help with weight too
>marching patrols
Pointless and just making yourself a drone target
>Weight
So I took my 1/1 spec M4A1 with TA31F optic, KAC RIS rail, and loaded USGI mag, and came in at 9.2 pounds. A loaded aluminum USGI mag is, rather famously, exactly 1 pound with M855. So with a combat loadout, you're at 15.2 pounds.
If we look at the M5, the (empty) base rifle is 10 pounds with the (mandatory) suppressor. Let's be generous and assume the XM175 optic suite is only 2 pounds (doubtful). The estimated weight of a 20 round M5 mag w/ .277 is at 1.5 pounds, so a combat loadout of 7 mags is 10 pounds. This brings us up to a total of 22 pounds, a 7+ pound difference compared to an M4 kit. Or roughly 50% more, with, 33% reduction in ammo capacity.
So....yeah, this is not in any way, shape or form similar weight-wise.
Ermmmmm, why hasn't anyone developed an intermediate caliber design like .458 but with a differently designed bullet so that it can pierce armor more effectively? You can use the same ar-15 dimensions and all you would be losing is a little bit of capacity.
>why don't they make a fatter and slower bullet to penetrate armor?!
because that's the exact opposite of how it works you subhuman moron
I don't like the three part case of the cartridge. Seems moronic. If brass can't handle the pressure to the point where they need a steel base, just use a steel case.
It's specifically a stainless steel case head. You can't form it the way you would a normal steel case.
It's still moronic. If they finally realized that 5.56 was gutless after 60 years, they could have just gone back to 7.62x51 and not fricked up their entire logistics chain, or gone with an established alternative like 6.5 Sneedmore if they really had to change to a full-size cartridge with a better BC.
They wanted .308 20" barrel performance, but carbine length. The XM7 barrel is only 13" long, which is why it needs the meme ammo. The other option would have been a bullpup, but obviously that was never an option that might have been selected.
They should have just paid someone to clone and improve the RFB but not make it out of cheap plastic clamshells.
The whole point of the LSAT program and its follow-ons was to reduce the soldier's burden, in order to reduce fatigue, increase mobility, and in all likelihood allow some other program to give him more stuff to carry.
This goal got hijacked near the finish line in favor of "muh overmatch" by generals who were upset that sniper rifles were out-ranging M-4s from the next mountain over in Afghanistan. So, instead of *lowering* the rifleman's burden, we're increasing it, and reducing the amount of ammo they can carry. Nevermind that the "overmatch" threat could have been neutralized using lightweight precision munitions which are far more accurate at long range than a rifleman trying to hold his weapon steady while taking fire (a smart scope can't fix *that*).
In short, it's the M-14 debacle all over again, but possibly even worse this time.
It is not an m14 debacle all over again. I think you missed the whole thread anon.
>using lightweight precision munitions which are far more accurate at long range
No 5.56 no matter how expensive will be able to do that
Cased telescoped 6.5mm Grendel and you're fricking golden.
Obviously not because if it was they would've chosen it
The army thinks that the average rifleman will engage targets out to 1000 meters. I will admit 6.5 Grendel is not ideal for that.
The only thing I wonder is if the airforce will be adopting a new "M16" in a couple of years...
The only reason the Army chose anything was because if they didn't they would have had their budget cut and an inquiry into their procurement practices.
That's kinda my point. At longer ranges, you're better off using guided HE rather than any kind of unguided bullet. The limiting factor isn't the optics, it's the ability of people to hold their arms unusually steady while bullets, fragments, and drones fly all around them. Research during and since WWII has shown this repeatedly. Guidance and HE-frag work together to eliminate this bottleneck. Fragments also neatly bypass body armor by peppering the target all over, which takes care of the armor penetration issue that supposedly helped to justify the large, heavy bullet.
>it's the M-14 debacle all over again,
But M14 was weaker than M1, while NGSW has total range and power overmatch over 5.56x45
Okay maybe Im moronic, but the way I see it, the only purpose of these stupid hot rounds is to use a short barrel? Like wtf, this cartridge is getting mogged by 8 mm Mauser when you use a longer barrel
It actively goes out of its way to avoid doing anything fricking new.
It's not gun owners that can't deal with the weight and recoil, it's all the gays and women in the modern military
I like the gun and want one if ammo prices for it ever drop but it's a shit weapon for the military
10lb rifles are incredibly common, maybe you're incredibly weak and out of touch with reality.
Because they're adopting the BAR in the current year and that's moronic. If long distance engagements are a vulnerability you need to close that desperately then issue marksman rifles out on the squad level like so many other forces do.
How exactly are they adopting the BAR?
The three arguments I’ve seen against the rifle are:
>Its too heavy
>The ammo is a meme and will wreak havoc on logistics
>It doesn't serve an identifiable purpose
All three arguments are stupid.
>Its too heavy
Its only 10 pounds. A FN-FAL and similar battle rifles weigh 9.5 to over that unloaded. Its fine. Mr. Infantry is just going to have to lift some more weights.
>The ammo is a meme and will wreak havoc on logistics
The ammo is not a meme and serves a vital purpose, and switching over to it will not be any harder than what the military has done in the past
>It doesn't serve an identifiable purpose
Its purpose is obvious. 5.56 isnt good enough in range or armor-piercing.
I believe that the only reason people are complaining is because they either don't understand anything and just accepts what their favorite larptuber says about it, or they're just butt hurt that SIG is replacing their obsolete 60’s ammo.
>Its only 10 pounds. A FN-FAL and similar battle rifles weigh 9.5 to over that unloaded. Its fine. Mr. Infantry is just going to have to lift some more weights.
Mr. Infantry is already carrying double the weight that he can effectively fight with, see picrel (I know it's marines, but a soldier's kit isn't any lighter)
>The ammo is not a meme and serves a vital purpose, and switching over to it will not be any harder than what the military has done in the past
The purpose of the ammo could have been served as well or better by cartridges that didn't necessitate a reduction in ammo loadout of more than half.
>Its purpose is obvious. 5.56 isnt good enough in range or armor-piercing.
Armor piercing was never a requirement or criterion of selection. Once again, there are ways to get more range out of an intermediate cartridge. 5.56 was never even close to optimal for internal or external ballistics, it was just an expedient COTS cartridge.
That thing's 10lbs?