Why does?

Why does PrepHole think the XM5 rifle will fail?

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I like that new FN rifle

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This, the FN one is what the military wil go to when they see the XM5 isn't working out

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah it looks a lot more sensible compared to the pig that is the M5. I wonder if it will be another m14 story or if it'll be a remake of the Johnson m1941

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      So do I

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous
  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why does the XM5 think that PrepHole will fail?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      We always fail.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't. All in all it seems like an upgrade.

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >think it will
    I KNOW it will you little cunt

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Wrong

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yes, you are.

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It'll probably suck and get sidelined in favor of m4a1s for a few years then see widescale adoption as the improved m5a1. Either that or it'll go the way of the OICW.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      OICW my beloved. They could nail that project so easily with how far tech has come. A practical sized support direct fire update on the XM25 would be gorgeous for engaging entrenched or housed targets. I’m sure we’d end up seeing a Uke take out an IFV with one if we spammed enough.

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I know people have probably said this a million times on this board but god DAMN that thing is ugly.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Once they realize they'll have to change doctrine around going from a battle load out of 210 rounds to 140, and I think the machine is going from 600 to 400 , they'll say it doesn't work. Which is a shame because I think going back to a rifle round is badass.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      they already did, why do you think they're integrating IVAS with things like the Switchblade? good luck advancing under accurate fire from over 800m while what used to be the mortar team rains down suicide drones on you, backed by artillery.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >good luck advancing under accurate fire from over 800m
        Why do you retards think that just because the scope can range and tell you drop that suddenly 800m shots are a walk in the park? It doesn’t account for wind, it doesn’t hold the rifle steady, it doesn’t squeeze the trigger. For fucks sake an 800m shot from a bench with a scope with more than 8x magnification isn’t easy. I’d argue it’s actually hard.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Reminder that even snipers aren't necessarily making first round hits at those distances. Knowing that you only have to worry about windage when making corrections for a followup shot is a massive advantage.

          >it doesn’t hold the rifle steady
          While you're going to want something to rest the rifle on for 800 meter shots, there's is pic related that came out of that TALOS power armor program for not quite as long range work without needing a rest.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Why do you retards think that just because the scope can range and tell you drop that suddenly 800m shots are a walk in the park?

          Because it also calculates windage and puts the reticle at the calculated spot for both stationary and moving targets? Just look at MemeThumbs video on it.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It doesn't calculate windage, it does show estimated wind holds I believe.

            If you had a drone between you and the target maybe it could provide windage data to the scope, but I doubt they would showcase this unless they're confident it'll work and right now I doubt they're that confident.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Because it also calculates windage and puts the reticle at the calculated spot for both stationary and moving targets?
            No it doesn’t. It has leads for a 10mph crosswind and for the speed of an average soldier when moving. Just like dozens of other reticles. It only calculates drop because that can be calculated purely off ranges.

            If I’m wrong, how is it measuring wind down range? How is it calculating how fast someone is moving, at what angle, and how far to lead? Also what’s the furthest you've ever shot with a scoped rifle with what caliber and magnification? Be honest.

            This scope is awesome and I want one. Knowing range without breaking your aim is awesome. But it doesn’t make long distance shooting automatic. Only people who have never done that will claim that it does.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            How can the scope compensate for (or know) anything other than ambient windage? What about the wind speed and direction at 100, 200, 300 etc yards?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Why do you retards think that just because the scope can range and tell you drop that suddenly 800m shots are a walk in the park?
          I've noticed a running trend of NGSWtards where they seem to have very little understanding of what shooting beyond a couple hundred meters entails.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >NGSWtards where they seem to have very little understanding of what shooting entails
            You could have said that and it would be just as accurate of a statement

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It's not about hitting at 800 yards. It's about hitting so close at 800 yards that getting closer or returning fire is difficult to impossible. If 1 in 20 shots is hitting you at that range and you have 6 dudes shooting at you, that's a hit every 3-4 shots per troop. That's not even including the implementation of the XM250 which is going to be a nightmare to fight against at that range by itself.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            So you went from “accurate fire” to “hit in the general vicinity”. Nice. If your plan is to have your whole squad suppress a target at 800m and only 1 bullet per mag gets a hit, then each soldier can engage 7 enemies before they are empty. Sweet.
            >That's not even including the implementation of the XM250 which is going to be a nightmare to fight against at that range by itself.
            The round is way better for a GPMG and I admit that. But is it really that much different than a 240? Also remember there is no quick change barrel per the Army’s request. Have fun keeping up suppressive fire when your barrel melts

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >But is it really that much different than a 240?
              M240 is ~22lbs, even in the newest, lightest configuration, older ones are even heavier.

              The M250 is 14.5lbs with suppressor and bipod.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I thought we were talking shooting not weight.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Weight is part of shooting anon.

                Weight also determines how much ammo you can carry.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I thought we were talking shooting not weight.

                Just for example, 100 rounds of 6.8x51 weighs ~6.75lbs so that extra ~8lbs is another 100 rounds of ammo you can carry.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                [...]
                Just for example, 100 rounds of 6.8x51 weighs ~6.75lbs so that extra ~8lbs is another 100 rounds of ammo you can carry.

                You said
                >That's not even including the implementation of the XM250 which is going to be a nightmare to fight against at that range by itself.
                And are trying to use weight to justify this statement. Come on Sigger, you can do better.

                I even admitted 6.8 is an improvement for LMGs. It’s compared to the 240 which is more for fixed/semi fixed locations or a M249 which is underpowered for the desired use. There needs to be an upgrade. That said, just explain why it’s
                > going to be a nightmare to fight against

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Are you a glockfag?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No. Also not an argument.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I'm the original guy you replied to. I didn't make the argument for weight, but the XM250 is overall better than the M240 with better range. Being lighter is a huge advantage for a class of weapon that is well known to be heavy as shit.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >XM250 is overall better than the M240 with better range.
                Which is offset by the lack of quick change barrels. There’s also the practical limit of how far people can see and see hits. That’s why I’m saying it’s not a game changer.
                >Being lighter is a huge advantage for a class of weapon that is well known to be heavy as shit.
                That’s true which I even admitted it.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >each soldier can engage 7 enemies before they are empty.
              With near impunity? Yeah, that's pretty sweet. You're talking about being able to win a fight against a 5x+ larger near-peer force with minimal casualties. Get closer and that number increases significantly while still far outmatching enemy capability. How many hits are you getting with an M4 at that distance even with 1000 rounds of ammo WITH the other guys shooting back with what is essentially a DMR? Volume of fire isn't as high because your suppression is more effective, meaning the effect of each round is several times higher than ineffectively lobbing intermediate rounds with weak magnification.

              Get closer and it only gets worse. At 400 yards, you're only able to shoot somewhat accurately while the XM5 is hitting every other shot faster than you can line it up.
              >Have fun keeping up suppressive fire when your barrel melts
              Again, more effective fire means you don't need to shoot as much.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >With near impunity? Yeah, that's pretty sweet.
                >the other guys shooting back with what is essentially a DMR?
                So can they shoot back or can’t they? You’re inconsistent. Did you forget about overmatch anon? We need overmatch? PKMs and SVDs can outshoot our .308s by hundreds of meters. So we need overmatch.
                >You're talking about being able to win a fight against a 5x+ larger near-peer force with minimal casualties
                What? How do you come to that conclusion?
                >while the XM5 is hitting every other shot faster than you can line it up.
                I would love to see you prove that.
                > Again, more effective fire means you don't need to shoot as much.
                I’m talking on the LMG. You have sustained, rapid fire with a LMG. That’s the point. Are you honestly defending a non-quick change barrel in the current year+7?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Are you honestly defending a non-quick change barrel in the current year+7?
                Yes, because the army specifically asked to REMOVE the quick-change barrel that SIG has in the design (and still offers in the design to foreign militaries)

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >it’s smart because the army said so
                Lol. Lmao. Post guns sigger

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Why doesn't the army want a quick change barrel? Is this on the M5/M7 or the M250?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                M250, and they claim its not needed since it only takes a couple minutes for an armorer to swap the barrels.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Because they are idiots. But since they work for the DoD some people claim they are infallible and can’t be questioned. LMGs need the option for a quick change barrel.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Nice. If your plan is to have your whole squad suppress a target at 800m and only 1 bullet per mag gets a hit, then each soldier can engage 7 enemies before they are empty. Sweet.
              You do realize that having the average rifleman be able to score hits on 7 different people, during extended range firefights beyond the effective range of the rifles most countries issue, on a single combat load would, be an absolutely massive upgrade over the current status quo. That's video game level body stacking.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >You do realize that having the average rifleman be able to score hits on 7 different people,
                You are making this up. You have nothing to support they can do this. Also if we’re only getting into 800m firefights why don’t we give everyone Barrett’s and let them shoot them enemy from a mile out? If everyone on our team was a sniper the enemy could never hit us

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            And where does the vast majority of combat take place? 0-400m or 500+? Again, it doesn’t keep the rifle steady and pull the trigger. You think pvt rameriz has the control to do that on a 800 yard shot? While holding a 13.5lb rifle?
            >Imagine if the thing can recognize and target optics on enemy vehicles and suddenly your rifle is capable of crippling targeting capability on tanks. Maybe it picks out weak points for machine guns and now your tank's only defense is its main gun.
            Adding a wish list of futuristic items doesn’t change what the gun can do right now. Those same fanciful items can be put on the scope and mounted on any gun. That’s not inherent to the XM5

            >each soldier can engage 7 enemies before they are empty.
            With near impunity? Yeah, that's pretty sweet. You're talking about being able to win a fight against a 5x+ larger near-peer force with minimal casualties. Get closer and that number increases significantly while still far outmatching enemy capability. How many hits are you getting with an M4 at that distance even with 1000 rounds of ammo WITH the other guys shooting back with what is essentially a DMR? Volume of fire isn't as high because your suppression is more effective, meaning the effect of each round is several times higher than ineffectively lobbing intermediate rounds with weak magnification.

            Get closer and it only gets worse. At 400 yards, you're only able to shoot somewhat accurately while the XM5 is hitting every other shot faster than you can line it up.
            >Have fun keeping up suppressive fire when your barrel melts
            Again, more effective fire means you don't need to shoot as much.

            Getting some powerful "videogame strats translate directly to IRL" vibes here...

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >AR15 fags use the same logic to justify their shitstick
              You just described the very logic of McNamara's Wiz Kids in adopting the M16, as they took a look at data and simply said "more rounds gooder" and then bludgeoned Army into compliance. Suppressive fire from rifles is a meme, only accurate fire from rifles and suppression from machine guns matter.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          If your gun CAN shoot at 800 yards, 400 yard shots are going to be way easier than with a gun that is only effective at 400 yards max. It's at those ranges where the fancy scope is really going to shine when it takes 1/4 the time to line up a shot and those shots are 4x as accurate. Being effectively twice as accurate at twice the range is going to present a major problem for enemy infantry.

          I bet there could be further upgrades to the scope that would make your rifle effective against enemy armor. Imagine if the thing can recognize and target optics on enemy vehicles and suddenly your rifle is capable of crippling targeting capability on tanks. Maybe it picks out weak points for machine guns and now your tank's only defense is its main gun.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >If your gun CAN shoot at 800 yards, 400 yard shots are going to be way easier than with a gun that is only effective at 400 yards max.
            Very true and a lot of people miss this, you can see similar ideas at work with precision rifle changes made for smaller units in the last several years, one of the main reasons for going to larger "over powered" magnums is that they have so much less drop and wind drift than predecessors that they're MUCH easier to get good hits with at moderate ranges as opposed to extending maximum effective range. This makes it easier to have more people qualified to a basic degree of proficiency with them

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            800 yard gun will be different than door kicking gun. Can you imagine if everybody door to door with Zastava M91, shooting inside?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              M16 OAL was 39-40" and we did door kicking with those in desert storm and the start of GWOT.

              Obviously, M4s were being adopted at the time however which brought OAL down to ~30-33" (depending how far you had the stock extended) but for many years door kicking was done with full-size M16s, even ones with underslung grenade launchers.

              The XM7/M7 is only 36" OAL with the stock extended, and it has a folding stock that still allows you to operate the gun, so if you really wanted to go compact, you can.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                With the ambi controls that actually does look decently compact and still shootable.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Those M16s were also 9lbs compared to 13.5lbs. With controllable FA fire

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                you're delusional if you think an M16 was just fine and dandy for door kicking but the XM7 is somehow dogshit.

                Get your 5.56-obsessed head out of your ass.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Where did I say it’s fine and dandy? I pointed out OAL isn’t everything

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                If an M4 is 85/100 for door kicking
                an M16 is 75/100
                an XM7 would be at least 70-75/100 too.

                XM7 is also going to destroy level 3 plates at close range and blow through any interior walls or furniture being used as cover.

                I'm just tired of retards acting like the XM7 will be HORRIBLE for close-range door-kicking duties when it's just bullshit, it'll be fine. It might not be QUITE as good as the existing M4 SPECIFICALLY in door-kicking duties, but the advantages elsewhere more than make up for that.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >XM7 is also going to destroy level 3 plates at close range
                No one uses these.
                >and blow through any interior walls or furniture being used as cover.
                This is as much a liability as it is a feature. You don't know how much we're trained to take into account noncombatants that could be inside as well. It's a decent chunk of the CQB training course.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Who cares? You can blame the gun if you hit a non-combatant through a wall. Shit happens in door kicking, it's somewhat expected to a certain extent.

                I'd rather have a gun that CAN kill whoever is behind furniture/walls than find out my 5.56 isn't penetrating and I might as well be throwing spit balls.

                Again, the idea the M4/M16 is just fine for door kicking but the XM7/M7 will be dogshit and get people killed is just asinine.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I don't think you really know what you're talking about, and the direct implication of civilians being merc'd through walls is that your own friendlies can as well. Have you ever done a proper killhouse course? Slinging magnum rounds in room-to-room fighting is asking for trouble. It's literally less dangerous to just use Mr. Frag whenever possible.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I personally have been advocating for a new PDW caliber for the army to use as a dedicated doorkicker caliber. Something like 5.7x28 but using the same hybrid case SIG is using for 6.8x51 to increase chamber pressure and velocity.

                I'm just tired of luddites insisting 6.8x51 is going to be an abject failure and only our lord and saviour 5.56 has a place in our small arms.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I'm just tired of luddites insisting 6.8x51 is going to be an abject failure and only our lord and saviour 5.56 has a place in our small arms.
                So in response you kneejerk into saying magnum rounds are just dandy for room clearing?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, because they are.

                You insisting they're not is retarded.

                Do you think we couldn't door clear in WWII because we had .30-06?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Yes, because they are.
                I just gave profession-related reasons why they aren't.
                >You insisting they're not is retarded.
                And how much instruction have you received?
                >Do you think we couldn't door clear in WWII because we had .30-06?
                This is childish, we also had steel pot helmets then, should we just revert to that? Switch to Garands while we're at it? Or should we keep the more advanced, more effective equipment and methods that have developed since then?

                Tone down the emotion and think rationally.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Think logically, you're acting like 10 less rounds and 3-4lbs of weight + an extra 3-4" of length and a bit more recoil is difference between great infantry rifle and a dog shit infantry rifle.

                That's childish and moronic.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >difference between great infantry rifle and a dog shit infantry rifle.
                I'm not even talking about that. I'm purely addressing your substandard points about the .277 round being implemented in room-to-room engagements. Unless you reign in your histrionics, we're done here.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >10 less rounds
                >3-4lbs more weight
                >extra 3-4" of length
                >substantially more recoil
                >not sizable factors in an infantry rifle
                don't even know what to think about this thread anymore, jesus.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                like

                >NGSWtards where they seem to have very little understanding of what shooting entails
                You could have said that and it would be just as accurate of a statement

                said, these people haven't done a lot of actual shooting beyond a range setting.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                A 33% reduction in combat load, 4 lbs of extra weight, and 4" of added length, and a "bit more recoil" (which for the M7 is more than a bit, and you know that) are absolutely huge factors for a combat rifle....

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It’s 70 rounds less which is a 33% reduction. 3-4 more pounds is 30-40% more. Those are huge.
                >a bit more recoil
                Is a massive amount more recoil in actuality. You can’t have a massive increase in power without an increase in recoil. You want magnum round performance you get magnum rifle recoil. That’s only offset if your rifle is heavy as fuck.

                I doubt you’ve ever carried a rifle or pack significant distance.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >you're acting like 10 less rounds and 3-4lbs of weight + an extra 3-4" of length and a bit more recoil is difference between great infantry rifle and a dog shit infantry rifle
                If you said this was just a literal copy-pasted argument made for the M14 over the M16 in a Ordnance Dept. conference room 60 years ago I'd have believed it.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                If we were ever going to want a dedicated PDW, the P90 is fine. Assault rifles were invented for the sole purpose of having a room clearing gun that could also work as a service rifle to simplify logistics. I don't think we're ever going to see a dedicated PDW be used for military ops ever again.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                If we were ever going to want a dedicated PDW, the P90 is fine. Assault rifles were invented for the sole purpose of having a room clearing gun that could also work as a service rifle to simplify logistics. I don't think we're ever going to see a dedicated PDW be used for military ops ever again.

                >PDW for direct action use
                Wut? The entire purpose of a PDW was to offer more firepower than a handgun for soldiers who would only be issued a handgun, while being more compact than a service rifle. PDWs for direct action use goes against the entire purpose of the design and makes zero sense outside of video games that try to balance every gun.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Scale up the p90 to 5.56

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                you dumb moron, do you actually think M855A1 is going to be having issues swiss cheesing interior furniture or that we're going to be completely tossing aside the decades of refined room clearing methods we've made that allows for efficient room to room clearing with mindlessly blasting through walls?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >CAN kill whoever is behind furniture/walls than find out my 5.56 isn't penetrating and I might as well be throwing spit balls.
                What do you think are inside homes and buildings that stop 5.56? Please. I want to hear it.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                In Europe? Several inches of brick, stone, or concrete.

                Not everywhere is the US with drywall, or Iraq/Afghanistan with mud huts.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Several inches of brick, stone, or concrete.
                So things that would also stop a 6.8

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >XM7 is also going to destroy level 3 plates at close range
                Irrelevant since no one uses those. Even M193 from longer barrels at interior distances.
                >and blow through any interior walls or furniture being used as cover.
                Literally any centerfire rifle can too
                >I'm just tired of retards acting like the XM7 will be HORRIBLE for close-range door-kicking duties when it's just bullshit, it'll be fine.
                Yeah it’s fine. Didn’t mean to say it’s awful for that. I think there are other detriments which are problems. Room clearing is gay anyhow. Chuck in a grenade and call it a day or leave it to the hostage rescue teams

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            well thank God we never have any combat within 0-400m

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            And where does the vast majority of combat take place? 0-400m or 500+? Again, it doesn’t keep the rifle steady and pull the trigger. You think pvt rameriz has the control to do that on a 800 yard shot? While holding a 13.5lb rifle?
            >Imagine if the thing can recognize and target optics on enemy vehicles and suddenly your rifle is capable of crippling targeting capability on tanks. Maybe it picks out weak points for machine guns and now your tank's only defense is its main gun.
            Adding a wish list of futuristic items doesn’t change what the gun can do right now. Those same fanciful items can be put on the scope and mounted on any gun. That’s not inherent to the XM5

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >And where does the vast majority of combat take place? 0-400m or 500+?
              Only because shooting at 500+m is ineffective with current armament. You need to get into 400 yards when your gun is only good out to 400 yards. You're trying to make the gun fit with current assault rifle doctrine when it's evolved past it. Indoor fighting is a legitimate concern, but outdoor engagement is dynamic and doctrine can be modified to fit your capability.

              The existence of the F-35 makes it way easier to see the benefit. We have an aircraft right now that is basically the Eye of Sauron that can survey enemy movements with impunity and lets your guys on the ground work around its information.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >the only reason people don't shoot beyond 500m is because the guns aren't good enough
                Once again, people who don't really shoot commenting on this matter.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, retard. 5.56 struggles at 500 and makes accurate fire difficult. Shooting that far is difficult on its own without your shots dropping like a rock. Knowing the exact hold with faster travel time makes hitting a lot easier. Yes, you will have to line up the shot and that's makes shooter skill an issue, but the smart scope makes it possible where an M4 would be improbable.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                If you think that a BDC is enough to turn your average infantryman into a marksman at 800m then I don't know what else to tell you.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Knowing the exact hold with faster travel time makes hitting a lot easier.
                Except for that whole wind and moving target thing. Yeah those don’t matter
                >Yes, you will have to line up the shot and that's makes shooter skill an issue,
                I love how you gloss over the most important component by far. The whole
                >every soldier is a marksman
                Has been proven wrong time and time again throughout history. Wrong before WWI, wrong in WWI, WWII shows volume of fire matters, and it was wrong again with the M14. A scope won’t make it true now.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                If you think that a BDC is enough to turn your average infantryman into a marksman at 800m then I don't know what else to tell you.

                Anon, the hold for wind drift on the hybrid case loading of .277 Furry at 1000 yards is comparable to 5.56 at 600 yards, and at 500 yards is comparable to 5.56 at 300 yards. That, plus the fancy scope with built in atmospheric sensors and ballistics calculator that gives the soldier a precise hold for drop at the specific range they're shooting at will massively boost the ranges that soldiers will be able to get hits at.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You're still not taking into account the human factor of trying to hit those ranges. Why you people think a BDC will make these long distance shots feasible for a typical infantryman is blowing my mind, but then again I've worked with said infantrymen for years so I guess I have a better grasp of what limitations are at play here.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Have your SEEN the videos of people using the scope? They nail shots at long range on the first shot.

                It's not going to do EVERYTHING, but having a predicted bullet drop for the range instantly displayed in the reticle, being able to set multiple targets at multiple ranges and swap between them very quickly with a new bullet drop displayed for each, that's just good technology that CAN be incredibly useful.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Have your SEEN the videos of people using the scope? They nail shots at long range on the first shot.
                On the range.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                don't be mad, we COD now.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                wtf that's awesome. does something like that exist?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It's literally what the NGSW scope does.

                It doesn't account for windage for you, but it does bullet drop calculation with a button press (just like in COD) and shows you the bullet drop with an LCD overlay in the scope.

                Works great in COD, not sure how well it will work in real combat though

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Works great in COD
                I got a 740 meter first-shot headshot with it last week. It's pretty fun to hit people at exteme range in warzone 2.0

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Its literally the vortex scope from the m4 program. Not pictured is how squad mates can designate positions that will show up in your reticle when you aim with it.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yes. People who are way better shots than the typical grunt, shooting from a fucking bench.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                They're still just aiming where it tells them to, and potentially using the suggested wind holds as needed

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                moron have you ever shot a rifle?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yup, you have no idea what the scope does do you? There are tons of videos you can watch if you wanted to learn something instead of looking retarded.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >still hasn’t posted guns
                >still doesn’t deny never shooting at distance
                >still doesn’t deny not even shooting a rifle
                By your own admission here

                It's literally what the NGSW scope does.

                It doesn't account for windage for you, but it does bullet drop calculation with a button press (just like in COD) and shows you the bullet drop with an LCD overlay in the scope.

                Works great in COD, not sure how well it will work in real combat though

                In the post directly above, you say that it doesn’t account for windage. And as I have shown you have 7ft feet of wind drift at 1000 yards with 6.8. Yet you still claim the average grunt can hit that…

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >our wind holds are comparable to 5.56 at 60% the range.
                And those holds are considerable.

                Why are we assuming there is always a steady wind and why are we assuming it can never be accounted for?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Why are we assuming there is always a steady wind
                Because that’s the easiest way to estimate. Which you’d know if you shot at the distances you say are so easy
                >and why are we assuming it can never be accounted for?
                Why are you assuming the scope IS accounting for it?

                Post guns fag. Here’s a common one of mine

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I never said the scope was, I said it had suggested wind holds and it's up to you if you want to use them or not, but even if you don't, your first shot will still be closer than if you didn't have a bullet drop calculation at all to assist you.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yes you have. You’ve repeatedly claim it tells you exactly where to aim.

                Post guns.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                moron have a nice day.

                It's literally what the NGSW scope does.

                It doesn't account for windage for you, but it does bullet drop calculation with a button press (just like in COD) and shows you the bullet drop with an LCD overlay in the scope.

                Works great in COD, not sure how well it will work in real combat though

                >It doesn't account for windage for you, but it does bullet drop calculation with a button press
                That's what I've said in all of my posts.

                Just because you selectively choose to understand what you're reading doesn't change what I've written.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                So

                >Even a fucking .30-378 weatherby has nearly 10ft of drop at 800 yards. But somehow grunts will be able to make those shots with more drop. And all it takes is a rangefinder. Sure…
                [...]
                >BDC

                These are disingenuous. The scope tells you exactly where your bullet will go. Actually getting on target is hard on its own, but you arent hitting shit if you don't know where your shot is going to land in the first place. That's the difference between being a couple feet off and a few yards off.

                >Why do you retards think that just because the scope can range and tell you drop that suddenly 800m shots are a walk in the park?

                Because it also calculates windage and puts the reticle at the calculated spot for both stationary and moving targets? Just look at MemeThumbs video on it.

                Arent you? It’s someone else with no knowledge about long range shooting saying that the scope tells you where to aim?

                Post guns. We know you don’t have any. We know you haven’t shot any

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You tell me

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Ok. Still waiting for you to post a single firearm.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Only because shooting at 500+m is ineffective with current armament.
                Confirmed for never shooting at that range. Yes it’s 100% the gun and nothing to do with the inherent difficulties that increasing distance has on making hits.

                Even a fucking .30-378 weatherby has nearly 10ft of drop at 800 yards. But somehow grunts will be able to make those shots with more drop. And all it takes is a rangefinder. Sure…

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Even a fucking .30-378 weatherby has nearly 10ft of drop at 800 yards. But somehow grunts will be able to make those shots with more drop. And all it takes is a rangefinder. Sure…

                If you think that a BDC is enough to turn your average infantryman into a marksman at 800m then I don't know what else to tell you.

                >BDC

                These are disingenuous. The scope tells you exactly where your bullet will go. Actually getting on target is hard on its own, but you arent hitting shit if you don't know where your shot is going to land in the first place. That's the difference between being a couple feet off and a few yards off.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The scope tells you exactly where your bullet will go.
                What is windage.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                We are talking sub 1000m yes it matters a little, but it's not MASSIVE, and again if your first shot is within a foot or two, that's a simple quick correction compared to 5-10 yards where you're having to walk your shots towards your target more slowly.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >We are talking sub 1000m yes it matters a little, but it's not MASSIVE
                Oh my fucking God have you even seen a range that goes beyond 500?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >We are talking sub 1000m yes it matters a little, but it's not MASSIVE
                Lol. Lmao.

                I was being super generous using a .30-378. With that it’s still 65” of wind drift at 1000 yards with a 10mph crosswind. 5.5ft of drift. It’s 13.5” at only 500 yards. When we use 6.8 specs it’s 83.5” of drift at 1000 yards. That’s 7ft you fucking troglodyte.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                the fact you're not even taking windage into account is classic NGSWtard behavior

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The scope tells you exactly where your bullet will go
                Which it doesn’t do. For like the 4th time, confirmed for never shooting at distance.

                I also find it hilarious you haven’t refuted people calling you out in this.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Even if it didn't tell you EXACTLY where it'll go, it'll be pretty close allowing manual correction for follow up shots.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >allowing manual correction for follow up shots.
                At ~900m. By the average infantryman. In combat conditions.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                See:

                [...]
                Anon, the hold for wind drift on the hybrid case loading of .277 Furry at 1000 yards is comparable to 5.56 at 600 yards, and at 500 yards is comparable to 5.56 at 300 yards. That, plus the fancy scope with built in atmospheric sensors and ballistics calculator that gives the soldier a precise hold for drop at the specific range they're shooting at will massively boost the ranges that soldiers will be able to get hits at.

                . Your wind holds are comparable to 5.56 at 60% the range.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I don't think you fully grasp how significant the windage impact is, and even then, you're displaying a lack of comprehension about what goes into long range shooting. You can have the reticle magically tell you where it will land, but at the ranges we're discussing here the average infantryman is STILL going to struggle because the human body is not a clamped bench rest.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I don't think you fully grasp how significant the windage impact is,
                One of the main kinds of shooting I've enjoyed over the past couple years is shooting .22lr out to 200 yards, where I'm dialing similar corrections for wind to this at 900-1000 yards.

                >because the human body is not a clamped bench rest.
                So fucking what? This isn't a single ethical shot in hunting, or not wanting to waste money completely missing what you're shooting at at the range. This is infantry combat where the vast majority of rounds normally don't hit anything. The entire point of this is to simply get the likely dispersion tight enough that there's a much higher probability of one of those shots hitting what the soldier is aiming at, rather than so low of a probability that the gun is only rated as being effective against an area target at that range.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >This is infantry combat where the vast majority of rounds normally don't hit anything.
                Then wouldn’t you want to carry more rounds?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Because it's now technologically possible to significantly increase the effective range against point targets that an infantry rifle is capable of, and this is being adopted alongside new systems that greatly increase the situational awareness of infantry and will reasonably increase possible engagement distances.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >our wind holds are comparable to 5.56 at 60% the range.
                And those holds are considerable.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Even if it didn't tell you EXACTLY where it'll go,
                It doesn’t. Post guns

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >good luck advancing under accurate fire from over 800m
        That assumes whatever area you're operating in allows you to engage from 800m away and doesn't force you into typical infantry engagement ranges. The XM5 is a rifle being touted as the next generation of smalls arms when it's really a rifle developed to fight the last war.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >typical infantry engagement ranges
          See:

          Anon, the NGSW program doesn't exist in a vacuum. It's being adopted alongside and is designed to be integrated with other hardware that's intended to significantly increasing the situational awareness of infantry so that they can respond with accurate fire. When soldiers have HUDs, the ability to spot targets like in the Battlefield series, and squad level drones enabling an unprecedented level of situational awareness at longer ranges, the post WWI status quo of focusing primarily on volume of fire breaks down.

          , unless you're talking about some fantasy situation where the AO is an island in the Bermuda triangle where radio waves stop working, or some fantasy situation where the US decides to declare war on the rest of NATO/aliens/the US from a parallel universe/another force that would reasonably be near peer.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah, ammo capacity.
      Thought on FN?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        What is that wraparound grip on the handguard? Will it fit on aero's quantum handguard?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Why the fuck didn't FN have this shit ready for the NGSW???
        Or is this for a different program and they just couldn't be bothered to do both?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          there were specific requirements for ngsw coming from the military side.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          DoD program, not Army

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          NGSW required the use of the 6.8x51 round, you could customize the case type, but overall size and the bullet dimensions were set in place.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            As others have said, this case length is just too long, forcing an AR-10 sized action and a heavy bitch gun. Coming up with a new case length in between 5.56x45 and 7.62x51 is a much better idea.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              They wanted cartridge case internal grain capacity to play with, it's what they're missing with the existing 5.56x45. Only 28.5 gr H2O available for powder in 5.56. Whereas you have basically double that when you step up to the 7.62 cartridge case size.

              Double the potential powder capacity gives the army a TON of loading options for now, and the future when they can potentially safely run 120k+ PSI loadings.

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The biggest regret will be that we had yet another opportunity to invest in, research, and get a leg up in other countries with telescopic and/or polymer cased ammunition, and instead chose S*gs cope solution brass-steel cased ammo hybrid bullshit, which invariable set the future of firearms back another decade.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      the only people coping are retards who think plastic ammo could ever work.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >7.62 too heavy, get rid of it
        >5.56 doesn’t pack a big enough punch, get rid of it
        >go back to what is essentially a full size rifle round, while still using brass casing, meaning they can’t even carry as much as they should
        We’re going full circle with the 7.62/5.56 bullshit. Without lighter ammo, there’s not much to be done.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Look at Ukraine, anon. Massing SAF does not win conflicts in the future against near peer nations.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The biggest regret will be that we had yet another opportunity to invest in, research, and get a leg up in other countries with telescopic and/or polymer cased ammunition

      This. The weight savings and cooler operating temperatures of polymer could have completely changed how we fight wars. Imagine a helicopter carrying twice as much ammo for the same weight.

      I wish we could see the official reasons Textron got rejected, because it seems like with a little more work to fix the faults, Textron would have been much more of a gamechanger

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >I wish we could see the official reasons Textron got rejected, because it seems like with a little more work to fix the faults, Textron would have been much more of a gamechanger

        It couldn't meet the reliability requirements with the rifle or the ammo. Plastic fags stay coping.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The biggest regret will be that we had yet another opportunity to invest in, research, and get a leg up in other countries with telescopic and/or polymer cased ammunition

      This. The weight savings and cooler operating temperatures of polymer could have completely changed how we fight wars. Imagine a helicopter carrying twice as much ammo for the same weight.

      I wish we could see the official reasons Textron got rejected, because it seems like with a little more work to fix the faults, Textron would have been much more of a gamechanger

      We don’t need more fucking plastic leeching into the soil and water supply. Fuck polymer casings

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        But copper mining and lead pollution is a-okay? Polycase usually has a steel base too, meaning you can pick them up with a good magnet

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Copper doesn't nuke your fertility

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >But copper mining
          Localized in one location
          >and lead pollution is a-okay?
          Not a thing unless you eat a ton or are exposed to vapors.

          Neither fuck with the water supply like plastics.

          >Polycase usually has a steel base too, meaning you can pick them up with a good magnet
          Only useful on ranges and if people care. Which you know a lot wont

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yes.
          >t. mine geologist

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Honestly the only reason I’m against it. Eventually it would hit the civilian market as commonplace and I don’t want to litter all over my land when I shoot

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        We do need more plastic leeching into the soil and water supply - the soil and water supply of our adversaries.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's ok once the marines show how effective a Do-It-All Direct Impingement AR15 in 5.56 will do in the next conflict the army will quickly switch back the round by utilizing the SIG SPEAR LT LMFAO

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Army learn from Marines

      you could be a comedian, anon.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I don't think it will fail. I think it is a miraculous thing, the optic practically aims for you at practical distances, and PIP in all new NODs with a pissing hot rifle cartridge along with the most integrated Squad and Platoon comms we've ever seen in history is absolutely kino.

      I think the redundant charging handles are kind of dumb, but in the same way a forward assist is just kind of there 99% of the time.

      > Be Muhreen Core
      > Need a rifle that shoots further than the M4A1
      > Adopt another 5.56 rifle
      > It's not even 18-20"

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's a complexly designed battle rifle with a pissing hot barrel burner for a cartridge, all manufactured by a company with a questionable reputation.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    /thread

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      unironically retarded and you always look retarded every time you post this.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      No Sigger, you didn’t get that right

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's going to fail because of 3 things.
    1.) the full power cartridge absolutely cannot be tolerated without full hearing protection. 5.56 can be, although it does lead to hearing loss, 277 furry will be immediate hearing loss similar to a 357mag
    2.)the suppressor will be a full on requirement for operation. The fact that the current iteration has a detachable suppressor and not integral means the gun is going to be known by stupid grunts at inaccurate after they've bashed the detachable permanently out of alignment
    3.) price

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      any reason they didn't pursue more of a "big schv" type round?

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    it exchange's the M16/M4's advantages in size, weight, capacity, ruggedness, ergonomics, refinement, low-cost, and god knows what else in exchange for marginally better terminal ballistics designed to penetrate body armor that doesn't actually exist

  14. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They should have just paid FN for a 6.8x51mm rechamber of the SCAR-H which we already fuckin have / have infrastructure to support, and not to mention is a much lighter and softer recoiling rifle to begin with.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      or KAC with the sr25. im curious how 6.8x51 does with DI

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      or KAC with the sr25. im curious how 6.8x51 does with DI

      Also this Scar exsited could've bought the new fn lmg as well

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    XM7, not XM5 anymore

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Since then, the service learned that the M5 name is used by Colt Industries for one of its 5.56mm carbines.

      >As a result, the NGSW Rifle will now be called the XM/M7.

      >The NGSW Automatic Rifle will continue to be known as the XM250/M250, PM SL said in a short press statement.

      weird

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >The Colt M5 Carbine is truly the next generation in a long legacy of Colt high performance assault weapons.
        Colt trolling on their website

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Wasn't the M5 just a commercial model name tho? Why the hell would the military care about a commercial name when they already have multiple M1s 2s etc.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The way army nomenclature there can be many M1s, but there can only be one M1 rifle.
          So, for example:
          >CARBINE, CALIBER .30, M1
          The M1 carbine
          >CARBINE, CALIBER .30, M2
          Full auto M1 carbine
          >CARBINE, CALIBER .30, M3
          Full auto M1 carbine with a night vision scope
          >CARBINE, CALIBER 5.56MM, M4
          14.5" AR15

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Wait so why is the Sigger not under the rifle naming scheme? It's no carbine

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              It has a 13" barrel so yes it is a carbine.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No it doesn't

                Doctrinal carbine

                The new optic plus suppressor hanging off the end contradicts a doctrinal carbine

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Well wikipedia says it has a 15.3 inch barrel, so it's still considered a carbine. Generally speaking, rifles with barrels under 18" or so inches are called carbines by today's standards.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I wish I had the confidence you do to go through life this stupid

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Seethe, cope, mald, dilate, etc.

                >rifles with barrels under 18" or so inches
                technically it's under 20".

                The first US carbine was 18" coming from a 24" "short" full-size rifle (M1 Garand)

                Yeah officially it's 20" but the Mk 12 SPR is called a "rifle" and it has an 18" barrel.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >No rebuttal
                >Ad-hominem
                Done.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Nice reddit logical fallacies
                My rebuttal is that your argument is patently retarded

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >rifles with barrels under 18" or so inches
                technically it's under 20".

                The first US carbine was 18" coming from a 24" "short" full-size rifle (M1 Garand)

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The first US Carbine used by US military had a 22" barrel

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Which was?

                The M1 Carbine was an 18" barrel coming from the M1 Garand's 24" barrel.

                If you're talking about some meme trialed gun that had a few dozen units see limited use I don't really give a shit as that doesn't count. That's like claiming the FN SCAR counts as a US infantry rifle because SOCOM happened to buy a few hundred of them.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Not him but Krag Jorgenson carbines for the cavalry. Not a meme gun, procured in serious quantities.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Doctrinal carbine

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Will be horrible for urban combat and is far too stupid for what the Americans will probably will be fighting and will not work in the combat conditions you are likely to be fighting in mainly concerte jungles like Taipei or Shanghai or Beijing or Seoul

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Overall great for the Taliban and the Russians in the trench across but other then that will be questionable until 30 rounds come into play or recoil is reduced

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Military's always preparing for the last war fought

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah I notice that

  17. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >suppressor
    That is why

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      elaborate

  18. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >It's a battle rifle that flies in the face of everything we have collectively learned about modern combat since WWI
    >Derived from a need that was retarded to begin with. "Our soldiers are being OVERMATCHED™ by Taliban who are using a mix between rocket launchers, medium machine guns and heavy machine guns that used to be fucking anti aircraft guns! WE NEED OVERMATCH™ CAPABILITIES!"
    >Blatant cash grab for MIC and politicians in bed with the companies
    >Fancy technology that sounds cool on paper but is just more shit to carry that when used in a real war, everything past 250 meters is vehicles to mortar/rocket/artillery/tactical nuke territory i.e. rendering the "advantage" of this rifle complete pointless
    >Body armor is a literal non issue since most of the killing by infantry against enemy infantry is usually done during the assault through phase of combat where grenades and mag dumping into fighting positions is the preferred tactic, which makes the latter task more difficult because meme round

    I'm sure there is more things but that's all I can think of off the top of my head.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Sorry, Amerishart. The super duper Ratnik Power Armor being deployed by Wagner in Ukr*ine right now is utterly impenetrable to 5.56.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Everything out past 250 meters is for nooks, artillery, tanks, etc.

      This isn't even true with 5.56mm and it's certainly not true if you have something like 6.8mm in your fire team level LMG.

  19. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  20. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  21. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Looks like steel 6.5 Grundel. Less than 80kpsi?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Its 6.5x43. Its performance is supposedly better than 6.5x39 Grendel’s and knocking on 6.5CM in terms of energy at range. Its action is a long stroke piston with a 3 lug bolt.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Nice. Who do you think has the bigger dick - Army procurement or this DoD program?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Honestly I think FN kind of nailed it. The NGSW program was odd from the beginning and I get this feeling like FN was thinking “christ, they don’t know what the fuck they want, well we’ve got this other small contract, lets do that project and low key show it off when its ready”.

            I think the best way I could describe it is like the Ferrari 550 vs the Ferrari 575. Ferrari made the 550 as their flagship front engine V12. Supposed to be one of the great Ferraris of all time. Then Ferrari contacted all of their 550 buyers and flew them to Italy for a luncheon to ask them what they wanted in the next iteration. The 575 was the result and it was soft, with a shitty transmission, and all kinds of minor compromises that made it an overall much worse car despite being newer and more powerful. Similarly the Army was telling gun companies what they wanted instead of letting the big forehead guys in lab coats at the gun companies come up with a solid but novel solution to modern small arms issues, which is what FN did this time around.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >“christ, they don’t know what the fuck they want,
              i think they know exactly what they want, its just unfeasable so manufacturers just go
              >sigh* we'll do our best

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Its like dealing with a toddler. The toddler is adamant about what it wants, but it doesn’t really know what that means and so in that regard it doesn’t really know what it truly wants in reality. It thinks it does, but it really doesn’t.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                this is what happens when you have POGs in the upper echelons of the military

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Reminds me of that Bradley design video

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous
  22. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  23. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    FN made it for a small special request contract as far as I can tell. It shoots a round that’s in between 5.56 and .308 in size and has a magazine well that is neither 5.56 stanag or .308 in size, it’s its own thing. 6.5x43mm with 6.5creedmoor-like performance from a smaller lighter rifle than a .308-sized gun.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This will be the army’s next rifle. The xm5 will be a DMR

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This will be the army’s next rifle. The xm5 will be a DMR

      So what eceleb shilled this that made so many posters here act like it's such hot shit?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        only thing in could find was atwitter post from FN herstal UK and a r*ddit post
        https://twitter.com/FNHerstalUK/status/1615043174493290497
        https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/10dxgi2/fn_65x43_mm_lightweight_intermediate_cartridge/

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nobody. It just makes a shit ton of sense. To the point where people naturally think, “shit, this is it”.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >It just makes a shit ton of sense.
          It's literally just yet another meme caliber to add to the combat rifle meme caliber pile, that's been having meme calibers added to it since before you got into guns. I'm pretty sure this isn't even the first gun to do an intermediate size action between 5.56 and 7.62 NATO either.

          t. someone who remembers 6.8 Special and 6.5 Grendel being hyped as the next big thing in the 00s, because 5.56 didn't have adequate stopping power or adequate effective range respectively.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I’m 39. I remember this ‘uge hype around 6.8spc just before the awb sunset. The thing is, this actually is the first time a big company has designed a cartridge that’s too big to fit stanag 5.56 mags and too small to reliably feed from .308 mags. Those two magazine sizes have been the primary drivers of meme wonder cartridges over the past 30 years. Everyone tries to shoehorn or neck down or neck up into one or the other.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >What if 6.5 Creedmoor... BUT LE SHORTER?!
          This is pointless and does nothing.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Bot a .308 case head. Meaning you can build a rifle and an action around it thats much lighter than a typical semi-auto .308 rifle which is whats needed for 6.5cm. FN claims 7.5lbs for that gun, which is about par for piston 5.56 and 7.62x39 guns, but firing a much more potent round.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              i think it is a .308 case head

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Its not. Its 11mm. .308 is 12.01mm and 5.56 is 9.6mm

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Sauce on where you got case specs from? I looked around and found nothing.

                11mm is 7.62x39 case head right?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >FN claims 7.5lbs for that gun, which is about par for piston 5.56 and 7.62x39 guns, but firing a much more potent round.
              Wait until you see the Ruger SAFR, which is 6.8lbs with a 16" barrel or 7.3 lbs with a 20" barrel, and uses a .308 length action.
              https://ruger.com/products/sfar/specSheets/5610.html
              https://ruger.com/products/sfar/specSheets/5611.html

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Tell me about the longevity of those locking lugs. Same goes for the POF revolution rifle or the PSA KS47 . For a rifle that’s plinked from time, it might be fine. But for hard use and abuse, i wonder.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Not the anon. I scratched my head about this one and did some googling.. I haven’t heard any issues about POF bolts breaking. They are made of this unobtainium called are met, apparently a lot stronger than steel.. It is quite remarkable that an AR15 sized bolt is withstanding the bolt thrust of a 308, and makes me think a hybrid case high pressure 5.56 can simply be adapted to the AR15 without receiver dimension changes.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >So what eceleb shilled this that made so many posters here act like it's such hot shit?
        When you see the Sig Spear, it's ugly. It's bigger than it needs to be. It's cobbled together from different parts found in the industry. Likely Sig just giving the Army what they whine for instead of telling them to fuck off and giving them what they SHOULD have. Other anons in the thread have alluded to it.

        When you see the FN IFC you think, damn that's very fucking nice. It's slim, it's sleek, long and short barrel versions would be easy, no weird frame or systems to get in the way. You don't lose capacity, weight gains are negligible and you get .308 like performance. Can you imagine carrying that 12lbs-13lbs Sig Spear with an optic and a Silencer? Soldiers just aren't going to fuck with that shit and put set it down from fatigue, and that's what you don't want. Soldiers should carry their weapons on their body 24/7.

        Army went with the Spear, Civilians are going with FN IFC and 6mm ARC. Civilians will win this one.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Soldiers just aren't going to fuck with that shit and put set it down from fatigue

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Opinions from nogunz doesn't concern me. Only thing you're used to carrying for miles is that buttplug.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >suggest soldiers are going to stop carrying their rifles
              >calls others noguns

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I'm not a soldier, but I am an expert in carrying rifles. It's just common human nature to set something down if its heavy and putting pressure on your shoulders. I think you're pretty fucking retarded, if you don't realize that common fact.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You're obviously a fucking snot nosed cake eating civilian who never heard the ballistic crack of a passing round and felt the electrifying sensation of death every passin round has crawling over your skin.. I fucking swear your skin can literally sense the bullets going by. Soldiers put even the light shit they got now down out of exhaustion. Even a bullet can seem to weigh more than your ass if you carry far enough and past exhaustion. I carried a battle rifle and still carry one today. But I'm a freak with a rare metabolic disorder that gives me inhuman levels of endurance, especially in extreme cold and high altitude. I've had to carry my teammates and their gear many times, because I knew they are just normal people. Well, drag them in a litter. I'd make them feel better by saying I need them to cover our six. And a couple of times it actually worked that way, they saw a threat and dealt with it before I could even turn around, so I just moved faster. But most soldiers are NOT going to handle that much weight in a rifle well on patrols or even stationary guard duty. The Army fucked up. They ain't getting the beef and cornfed country boys they used to. They're getting skinny limp wristed bitch boy gays at MEPS.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >fatigue isn’t a thing
                >history didn’t happen
                >soldiers haven’t complained about too much gear for 20 years
                >soldiers have perfectly fine knees and backs after deployment
                Post body

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >6mm ARC
          This is 264 USA or 6.5 freedom or whatever they'll call it.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          What is a sling for 100?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      this just looks like an AR

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah that's what PrepHole likes. If it's not another AR, then it's bad, unless it's an AR made by Sig, then it's bad. Keep up, gay.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Its neither internally or externally an AR

          try harder, shills... there is a shill zone called /arg/ u should try posting this bullshit there instead of sliding threads off the catalog u dickheads

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You tagged two people with opposite opinions, jackass.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              and i dont fucking care how 'bout dah

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Its neither internally or externally an AR

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        What do you expect a modern gun is supposed to look like? Modern AKs look AR-like to the point where the AKV-521 has a break apart upper and lower and the M19 has a fucking T charging handle. Moreover internally it has nothing to do with an AR

  24. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Reposting myself for the tenth time
    >at least 13lbs loaded with fancy scope
    >80k psi round with nearly 3000 ft lbs of energy
    >nearly uncontrollable in FA because of this round
    >barrel life severely diminished because of pressures
    >20 round mags for a battle load of 140 rounds
    >33% less rounds than now (or 50% if you want to say 20 to 30 vs 30 to 20)
    >mags weigh 40% more which is another 2.8lbs for a battle load
    >army making a new rifle for the last war (Afghanistan engagement distances) rather than for the next war (sub 500 yard engagements)
    I don’t see where any of this could go wrong

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >>army making a new rifle for the last war (Afghanistan engagement distances) rather than for the next war (sub 500 yard engagements)
      Is there really a reason to believe enemies are going to try to get even closer to the US to fight? Especially with all the situational awareness boosting hardware for infantry the US is pushing for along with this.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Look PrepHole has its worn out meme and it's going to drive it into the ground. Get used to it.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Soviets tried to get as close as possible to Germans in Stalingrad due to German firepower advantage. Not saying it’s a perfect analogy but it may very well be the case that you’d rather hug US soldiers than sit back and get wrecked by their fancy scopes, drones, air support, and artillery.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Then they just get wrecked by the US armor that's supporting the soldiers. Also, if the US Army does go forward with the IVAS, throwing ground surveillance radar on any armor supporting infantry and feeding that data to infantry in the area will definitely be the future of urban warfare.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You may be right, but I’m not as optimistic.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Afghanistan was open desert. Iraq was city fighting. Turns out the terrain has an influence on the average distances gunfights take place. The reality is is that most "average" terrains will only occasionally have sight lines stretching farther than 300 meters.

        >Is there really a reason to believe enemies are going to try to get even closer to the US to fight? Especially with all the situational awareness boosting hardware for infantry the US is pushing for along with this.
        If anything. The smartest move to make against the US if you're trying to decisively engage them (clear winner and loser from the fight rather than just pop shots and withdrawal) is to establish complex battle positions to allow for US forces to get within the center of your defensive position(s) before engaging them. That way they are well within minimum danger close ranges making it so that they are unable to utilize their heavier equipment and support such as artillery and air strikes. Furthermore, if they still do utilize them in a last ditch effort, it will be your men that are in covered and concealed fighting positions and the US soldiers that are up top and unprotected, essentially calling in artillery on themselves would only result in them taking the overwhelming amount of casualties. This was pretty much what the NVA meant when they said "grab them by the belts".

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Turns out the terrain has an influence on the average distances gunfights take place.
          Too bad they want one gun to fight in both.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Is there really a reason to believe enemies are going to try to get even closer to the US to fight?
        No but terrain dictates a lot of it. How many places have wide open deserts and mountain ranges and no infrastructure?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          American heartland.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >live in swamp and thick brush country, no visibility past 100yds max
            They’re gonna get fucked up. M14 all over again.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You should be looking at engagement distances in Ukraine.
        Both sides have drones, which makes crossing no-man's-land a suicidal task, there are constant artillery barrages and actual (if at times limited) armored support and yet small arms fire rarely needs to cross even 300 yards.
        Would either vatniks or ukrops benefit from having a rifle with greater reach and armor pen compared to the AKs and ARs they now have?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You're mistaking the unique terrain in A-stan essentially forcing the infantry combat doctrine for a calculated choice made by the people in it.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          To be fair, tons of Ukraine is open stretches of flat wheat fields.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            And that still is going to provide a load more sightline obstruction that then absolute barren expanses of A-stan's mountain valleys and flatlands.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Sure but there will still be occasions you can take shots, just look at all the Ukrainian snipers putting in work. If everyone in your squad has a gun and scope that can take those shots you'll see an increase in average engagement distance.

              As it is with 5.56 there is little point outside of suppression firing beyond ~400-500 meters. With 6.8x51 you could double that distance.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Okay, now imagine outfitting all of the Ukie infantry squads with nothing but SVDs, then telling them to retake a factory complex.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >occasions
                exactly. occasions. you're giving everyone a 13 lbs. rifle, castrating close-in fighting capability, dramatically reducing combat loadout etc. etc. for the *occasion* that you actually manage to get a 800m clear line of sight where your enemy is exposed.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >As it is with 5.56 there is little point outside of suppression firing beyond ~400-500 meters. With 6.8x51 you could double that distance.
                Then you call up the DMR or GPMG. We always had the means to address these relatively rare instances like what you described, but we weren't stupid enough to make our riflemen dedicated entirely to those instances by having it so EVERYONE was the DMR guy.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                If that was true why have we dropped the .30-06 then dropped the 7.62 NATO.

                Oh right because they're retarded long range procure 0 benefits overthe infantry having MOAR AMMO.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >B-But My cod kill shot video
                Listen kids 99.99999999999% of all ammo is used to shoot IN THE APPROXIMATE DIRECTION OF INCOMING FIRE.
                You can build fucking railguns that shoot a mouse at 1000 miles. YOU'RE NEVER EVER GOING TO SEE THE MOUSE.
                'Cause the mouse isn't fucking stupid it knows that if you can see it you're killing it. So your job is to make sure the mouse keep it's head down by SCARING IT enough that it will stop shooting in YOUR approximate direction.
                That's how firefights really work IRL.
                You want to improve your riflemen capacity you issue them with one of those each.
                It's the SAW on steroids.

                That's why we went from 12 guys with one MG42 to 12 guys with two MG42s. To 12 guys with 3 MGs.

                The natural evolution is not a return to the M1 Garand. The natural evolution is to give MOAR MGs.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Thank God for the M250 and the light weight medium machine gun firing .338NM

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Anon, the NGSW program doesn't exist in a vacuum. It's being adopted alongside and is designed to be integrated with other hardware that's intended to significantly increasing the situational awareness of infantry so that they can respond with accurate fire. When soldiers have HUDs, the ability to spot targets like in the Battlefield series, and squad level drones enabling an unprecedented level of situational awareness at longer ranges, the post WWI status quo of focusing primarily on volume of fire breaks down.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >focusing primarily on volume of fire breaks down.
                Squad level drones will change the game. Rifles will be for self defense only, so they should be as light and unobtrusive as possible. Air, mortars, drones, and artillery will be the main killers guided by drone surveillance. Suicide first person drones will kill more people than rifles in a decade, so this whole conversation is pretty irrelevant. It's peacetime so no one really cares and Mensch Sauer makes the big shekels, but as soon as we go to war again we will realize.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Air, mortars, and artillery will be the main killers
                Has been the status quo for the past century you fucking retard, yet rifles have stuck around in more than just a PDW role. Increased precision of those, along with loitering munitions being thrown into the mix, isn't going to render service rifles obsolete. Besides that, it's not like the US isn't also developing technologies to better protect soldiers from those, because the military doesn't have a one track mind that can only focus on a single piece of new technology like posters here do.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >cool laser gun, bro. I just strapped some C4 to an RC airplane 6 confirmed kills

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >If that was true why have we dropped the .30-06 then dropped the 7.62 NATO
                Because you get 90% of the range and effectiveness for a shorter action with less weight, use less powder, and a huge cost savings over the billions and billions of rounds made. I hate the XM5 but the change from .30-06 to .308 made sense

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      No. The NGSW is to fight against an American “insurgency”.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >commercially available level IV armor can block AP rounds and some models can even stop 50BMG
        wut

        wdym it just takes a barrel change thats part of the whole thing

        .277 fury pressure is insanely high--it's not just a diameter issue.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >.277 fury pressure is insanely high

          are you retards still trying to use this meme?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >American insurgency
        >dosen't penetrate Lv.IV
        Wut

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Karl Kucksada showed it in full auto and it looks very controllable

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If that’s the only rebuttal you have then that alone is quite telling. Two other things. First, despite how much of a fag Karl is, he is quite a good shooter and practices far far more than the average grunt. Secondly, that was likely the training ammo. Not the full power ammo. Could be wrong about that though

  25. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    M14 but 10x the unit cost and with a cartridge that can't be adapted to any other weapon.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      wdym it just takes a barrel change thats part of the whole thing

  26. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    All I know is it's designed to use expensive ammo.... And if we've learned anything about the US military is they'd rather have their guns jam during battle, during war, than pay for the right ammo. I'm looking at you m16 in the Vietnam war.

  27. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Geissle, FN, Glock and others are have banded together to shilling the 6mm ARC as the future with their coming rifles aimed at the civilian, special forces and law enforcement sectors. Think AK round size with .308 power. US Army is going with 6.8Fury and 20,000 rifles. Personally, I think FN, Glock and Geissle have the right idea. Sig Spear will fall out of favor with how huge and heavy it is. 9lbs before you get into optics and ammo.

  28. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm sure it's a good rifle, but it is just so soulless design wise because of how much AR back compatibility it has. The entire lower receiver, grip, stock, magwell, just doesn't complement the upper attached to it.

  29. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Am I wrong in thinking that this will end up being used for DMRs, machine guns, and nothing else?

    I can kind of see the logic. On the off chance you're fighting somewhere like Afghanistan with super long lines of sight you can just give everybody one, but everywhere else, it's just a good 7.62 replacement.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Cities often have very long lines of sight. It's just that people flit in and out of cover quickly. Roads, even in forests, have long lines of sight.

      Some forests allow for quite long lines of sight (e.g. the birch groves around Flagstaff, the Pacific Northwest outside of the Olympia style rainforest) while others offer very low visibility and make movement incredibly slow due to brush (e.g., Maine or the Adirondacks).

      The problem in urban combat isn't lack of long lines of sight, it's the difficulty hitting people far out when they are moving between so many obstructions. The usefulness of 6.8mm in this context will live and die on how good the smart optic is or if they can implement true fire control systems like SHARP that will let people pick off a guy moving between buildings in the few seconds he is exposed.

      The other big question is how well IVAS and drone implementation works and how feasible it is to keep drones up consistently. Can they use increases loitering time sensor packages, something like a derigible?

      Because if you have full EM sensors helping you spot hostiles in the woods from a way off, there are shots that can be made in some types of forest at quite a distance.

      Aside from that, 6.8mm just has way better ballistics got the indirect fire role. No crazy maximum ordinate and rainbow trajectory, much better for raking enemies with traversing fire given short windows of opportunity. Also, larger rounds just suppress better. There is something terrifying about subsonic rounds falling around you, but it doesn't keep heads down the same way.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >The problem in urban combat isn't lack of long lines of sight, it's the difficulty hitting people far out when they are moving between so many obstructions. The usefulness of 6.8mm in this context will live and die on how good the smart optic is or if they can implement true fire control systems like SHARP that will let people pick off a guy moving between buildings in the few seconds he is exposed.
        This is also why they wanted a heavier bullet, so you can penetrate light cover (light masonry/wood/etc) even at ranges of 500-600+ meters while still having the energy/velocity to kill whatever is behind that cover.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        ukraine/russia war is showing us that fighting in cities just turns the cities into rubble. most casualties coming from mortars and artillery

  30. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I can't see the suppressor surviving the "E-4 test".

  31. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Couldn't even be used safely without custom SiG-made sound suppressor due to large muzzle blast and noise

    Nope.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      t.made it the fuck up

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Not him. Do you honestly think a 13” barrel magnum rifle caliber is usable with suppression? Shorty ARs are awful already. This is 45% more pressure and 80-90% more powder. Have fun with deaf soldiers.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          do you mean without ear protection?

          You shouldn't be shooting 5.56 without ear protection, let alone something larger.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No shit. 5.56 is bad enough now make is substantially worse. The concussion from a braked 6.8 will be awful also

  32. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >company that makes it couldn’t make a drop safe pistol in 2018
    >dozens of recalls on all new product launches
    >new round is 3 steps past bubbas pissin hot handloads
    I can’t see how this will go wrong

  33. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    /arg/ twinks and discord trannies of this board can't handle the devastating recoil of the weapon, so they hate it.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Look at that boy almost fall over after every shot.

      He clearly has to brace and prepare for every joule that beast is putting into his shoulder.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Look at that boy almost fall over after every shot.

      He clearly has to brace and prepare for every joule that beast is putting into his shoulder.

      Imagine being this much of a simp for the XM5 and not knowing that there's a huge different between the brass-cased "training" rounds that everyone has had access to and the actual issue rounds.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Found the butthurt twink. Stick to your .22 toy and let men handle real guns.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >doesn’t deny the training rounds are underpowered
          Wow a watered down round to below .308 power doesn’t recoils much in a 13.5lb gun. Shocking.

  34. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because it's a highly specified rifle, not even an assault rifle.

  35. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    lightweight suppressed ARs with real range seem like a practical advancement, but I would guess these are used for shorter ranges

    lightweight AR design is practical as it reduces carrying weight and changes handling, also allows you to mount more gear like ir lasers and night vision

    overall am just proud of the engineers who designed this and look forward to seeing it available commercially, and I imagine many of them will end up in the hands of police departments

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Nice bait

  36. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's clearly designed for shooting white supremacist domestic terrorists seeing as how goatherders don't have level IV armor, Russians don't have level IV armor, and I'm pretty sure Chinese don't have level IV armor either. It looks too heavy for the modern feminized US military anyway. That being said, I will probably buy one since I'm an unashamed Sigger and it'll go with my M17.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Well good news, the issue round won't pen level IV armor either.

  37. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It looks ugly

  38. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    1st and foremost, it's made by Sig
    Secondly, I think the barrel life will be complete dog shit.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      SIG claims they almost doubled the army requirement for the program (5000 rounds).

      so we'll see how that goes when it starts entering service with units later this year.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >SIG claims they almost doubled the army requirement for the program (5000 rounds).
        Which is absolute bullshit. Rounds with comparable velocities and much lower pressures get half of that barrel life and they are also usually fired slowly through bolt actions. Sigs barrel isn’t a new steel, doesn’t have anything new for coatings, and is the same as other offerings around. But magically the can get great barrel life. Either they are lying or the accuracy is like 5-6 MOA.

        Its honestly
        >oy vey what about the 5000 bullets goyim

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Then it should be dog shit easy to disprove their claim in the coming months.

          Why makeup bullshit now when we can just wait for REAL proof and then shit all over siggers with ACTUAl proof instead of blustering about something that hasn't happened yet.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Because Siggers make me angry and I like to call out bullshit when I see it. But you are right

  39. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >xm5
    It's been adopted, it's the M5

  40. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    even if it gets adopted, what does it mean for America's allies?
    Will they continue using 5.56 nato (or 7.62 in the case of poos or whatever) or will they have to bust their ass and make rifles that take 6.8(.277 sig fury) and not explode in their face due to its stupid high pressure.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The US has no plans to introduce 6.8x51 as a NATO standard.

      They also have no plans to reduce 5.56 and 7.62 production capacity.

  41. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I find most people who shit on the xm5 have good points at first but eventually go down the rabbit hole of obsessing over siggers.

  42. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Once again basement virgins on some cringe weeb webzone know better about everything than the big wigs at the DoD

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      People will unironically tell you that they are in fact way better.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I can assure you most people posting here believe they're smarter than the DoD/army procurement.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Christ I saw a guy posting a vid as a thread saying the vid testing the ballistics of .277 furry and the other big boi round is proof it's bad penning level 4 armor. Yet in the vid they both do extremely well for being standard rounds and not AP.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          > proof it's bad penning level 4 armor
          The only proof you need is the hard numbers behind the CSD and energy of more capable rounds failing to penetrate.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            All I remember from the video was the big boi round (6.8 I think?) Took two round to pen with the first round practically making a bulge bigger than superman's.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Appeal to authority doesn’t work when they’ve proven themselves to have retarded ideas. For the love of everything holy, please read this overmatch presentation and then tell me you sincerely think they are smart.
      >https://www.slideshare.net/James8981/overmatch

  43. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It doesn't look cool and it's not the enormous leap in design philosophy that the AR-15 was. The other, more ambitious programs would have had more staying power, but obviously the Army wasn't seeing the numbers they wanted, and they decided to buy a stopgap for limited issue until we do this shit again in a few years. Until the industry provides a G11 in heat seeking airburst 20mm with 60 round magazines, no perceived recoil, and also it sucks you off, the army is going to continue balking at the price for anything as cool and marginally improved as say textron's offering. Spear won't fail but it will quietly disappear like XM-25 as it fails to deliver on project goals. The ammo fucking sucks and I don't think it will get any better. If there's anything likely to endure it's the new FCS, which is conveniently backwards compatible with the M4.

  44. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    siggers unironically clinging to the battlerifle justification and just ignoring the fact that a rifle that needs to reach 800 meters doesn't need a 13 inch barrel. that autistic barrel selection is where the circus starts and if it weren't for that, and the copes required to make that chode work, all the FAL, scar, ar-10, and M14 chads would be smug-posting over the return to a higher power infantry rifle doctrine. to say nothing of the cold hard fact that siggers have zero right to claim any benefits from vortex's optics, rifle-integrated LRFs were coming to small arms anyway.

    just give the fucking gun a normal barrel and you can get the exact same ballistics with a NORMAL case that gives you NORMAL wear and tear and NORMAL bolt velocities instead of this hot fucking barel-chewing mess of a borderline blowback turd.

    fuck siggers. for real. dumb fuck welfare-queens, every single one of you.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Then it's a 40" long rifle like the M16 was

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >seething this hard about Sig
      Anon, you do know it's possible to think that Sig had the worst entry for the NGSW program, but still acknowledge that the direction the Army is going with the NGSW is the future.

  45. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't. it is just an update on the M14 called the AR-16. No, I got that right.
    >AR-16

    the US military needs a "multi-caliber" capable, base design that can me modified for future use. I still think they should have chosen a AR-10 style lower, or a HK-33 style lower.

    things I wish for:
    >independent "drop-in" trigger assembly and grip.
    >independent mag well assembly.
    >independent rifle upper and gas system.
    >independent rear buffer/stock assembly.
    >captured pins

    I mean the stoner 63 was on to something, but making something that has both backward and forward compatibility isn't an easy feat. I think the halfway is just to have rifles scaled to:
    >Pistol caliber (.22 LR-FN5.7)
    >Intermediate( 5.56 NATO/ 7.62x39)
    >Battle rifle (7.62 NATO-.450 marlin)
    >Anti-material (.30-06 - .45-70gvt)
    >Man-portable cannon (.50 BMG-20mmx102mm)

    if we could just build a system that fits just intermediate to my definition of anti-material then we could have a lot of interchangeability for common service rifles and a platform to build future development off of.

  46. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The M250 will be successful, but the M5 will have no impact. Troops won't use it and they'll favor the weapons firing 7.62

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >they'll favor the weapons firing 7.62
      Lol what weapons?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >M5

      >If that was true why have we dropped the .30-06 then dropped the 7.62 NATO
      Because you get 90% of the range and effectiveness for a shorter action with less weight, use less powder, and a huge cost savings over the billions and billions of rounds made. I hate the XM5 but the change from .30-06 to .308 made sense

      >XM5

      M7 and XM7
      Get with the times gramps

  47. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    whats the deal with all these new rifles being metallic gold colored?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I believe Barrett started it back in like 2005 with "burnt bronze" and top tier companies have copied them ever since

      Bronze metallic looks dope as fuck in person, I don't care for desert colors especially flat dark earth or coyote tan

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >company ran by garden gnomes
      >surprised when it looks like coin colors
      Gee anon you tell me

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        you're a sorry loser and will live a sad life

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          cry about it noggler

          Blends in to most environments and doesn't get as hot when left in direct sunlight

          i can see the logic in that

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Is Sig not run by the small hat tribe? Also
          >what is a joke
          You are the one living a sad life simping for garden gnomes

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Blends in to most environments and doesn't get as hot when left in direct sunlight

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's not a bad color? Idk I think it's better than an all black rifle. Nothing wrong with all black but you gotta change things up sometimes.

  48. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Not sure it will fail. Don't think it will ever fully replace the m4. I also don't trust 18year olds to not break it or it's fancy optic.

  49. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The gun is bigger than the latest generation of rifleman recruits.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *