Army Launches Competition For More Powerful Combat Rifle !
- Thread starter GOYABEAN
- Start date
Cureforcancer
.223 Rem
I guess the 556 ain't cutting it anymore.
oc shooter
.223 Rem
About time!!!!!
Jmac00
.475 A&M Magnum
maybe they should go back to the M1 Garand.
Not a bad gun
maybe make it be able to use a magaizine instead of a clip. Give it a 30rd. Pretty much like the m14 
4excal
.338 Win Mag
More stupidass wasteful government spending. In a day and age when we fight wars 8,000 miles away from a joystick. Complaining about what handguns and rifles the military needs every year is a laugh. So they can clean them and ooo and ahh at them while sitting in the mess hall?? Bah! Spend the money on drones and missle/anti missle development.
GOYABEAN
.950 JDJ
Like thisNot a bad gun
Exonautic
.308 Win
Oh please pick an ar10 variant. Maybe the adoption of it would lead to increased production and lower prices.
Don't hold your breath. The military won't be adopting a new general issue infantry arm till a dramatic leap in ammo tech is achieved. Telescoped, polymer cased ammo is probably the next step.
7.62x51 infantry rifles is a step back. I think what the various services are looking to do is adopt more 7.62x51 DMR types to supplement the M4.
7.62x51 infantry rifles is a step back. I think what the various services are looking to do is adopt more 7.62x51 DMR types to supplement the M4.
Exonautic
.308 Win
I dont think it would be a step back if we can develop a newer rev. Of it. Im thinking 7.62x 51 at 3300+fps. If they can get the 30 cal cartridge past that, that will be the next big leap.
The 7.62x51 is too bulky, too heavy with too much recoil for light, automatic carbines as it is. We switched from it for a good reason. Its adoption in the first place was a mistake, the .280 British was a superior round for the role. The Garand would have been a better rifle if it stuck to the .276 Pederson round. Logistics trumps all, and its the main reason 5.56x45 isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
Jmac00
.475 A&M Magnum
don't forget, a soldier is going to have to carry 210 rounds of ammo. I suspect 210 rounds of 7.62x51 weighs more than 210 rounds of 5.56.
I'm thinking a typical 7.62x51 infantry loadout was more like 140 rounds.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
It's an extra 6 pounds in ammo alone on your chest. That's not counting additional magazines, the added weight of the rifle itself which is about 10 lbs compared to 6 in it's current 5.56mm form. Then as Podmonkey has said, 3 round burst or full auto would be useless with the added recoil. You get no benefit at close range within the normal combat engagements of about 50 to 200 yards other than barrier penetration which could be had with a solid copper bullet in the 5.56mm variety.
You also go from 30 rd magazines to 20 rd magazines. I wouldn't want to carry it.
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
oh lets go 7.62x54R mosin in a AR platform heheheeeee ..
S
stuck in ny
Guest
To long, won't fit the magwell.
S
stuck in ny
Guest
How about issue pencil barrel m16a4s (as opposed to gov. profile which just weighs more in the completely wrong place to add anything beneficial (pressure, cooler rapid fire, etc.)) to every body and issue an ar10 to every squad (like how the SVD was used.)
Exonautic
.308 Win
Pencil barrels in full auto would look like a sine curve after 3 continuous mags.
S
stuck in ny
Guest
The only profiles that should exist are pencil and hbar, fat at the end and skinny at the middle is pointless and just weighs more for the same amount of heat failure resistence.
The Gov't profile on my AR seems to work just fine. Accurate, not affected much by heat and not too heavy. That said I think the best profile are the minimally tapered medium-light profiles such as Noveske's standard LW profile, Ballistic Advantage's Hanson profile and Faxxon's Gunner profile. I'm putting a BA Hanson on the Forum lower/upper build.