Not the Machinegun the military deserves, but the one it needs.

[Podmonkey]

So much better than the overweight, overpriced H&K monstrosity:
Belt fed, QD barrel, open bolt. In other words a real machine gun, and light enough to fill the needs of the modern soldier.

Discuss.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I'm not a fan of belt feds for assaults or patrols. The belts themselves are cumbersome even when put in an attached box. The box itself is heavy. It snags on obstacles that an assault squad has to traverse. I think the Marines got it right with the M27. It serves dual roles. You can actually suppress the enemy better with more accurate fire compared to rate of fire. They learned in Afghanistan that the Saw at distance over 500 yards was useless when trying to close in with the enemy.

 

[gun_slinger_boy]

Look at the recoil on the KAK Stoner.

 

[Dinkus the Stinkus]

Just give everyone a gau-8 avenger.

 

[Podmonkey]

I'm not a fan of belt feds for assaults or patrols. The belts themselves are cumbersome even when put in an attached box. The box itself is heavy. It snags on obstacles that an assault squad has to traverse. I think the Marines got it right with the M27. It serves dual roles. You can actually suppress the enemy better with more accurate fire compared to rate of fire. They learned in Afghanistan that the Saw at distance over 500 yards was useless when trying to close in with the enemy.

Balderdash.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Balderdash.

Testing and actual field usage has proved otherwise.

 

[Podmonkey]

Testing and actual field usage has proved otherwise.

Thhbbbbbbbbbttttt.

 

[Eddie Gunks]

Look at the recoil on the KAK Stoner.

[/MEDIA]

I did not realize it was a stoner design.

Now i like it even more!

I want one!

 

[Podmonkey]

I did not realize it was a atoner design.

Now i like it even more!

I want one!

Its an updated derivative of the older Stoner design actually. If you get one I wanna drop in and shoot it!

 

[96coal449]

I've seen this somewhere on the net about a month ago. My thoughts were, I'd like to see it chambered for 6.8 spc.

 

[Podmonkey]

I've seen this somewhere on the net about a month ago. My thoughts were, I'd like to see it chambered for 6.8 spc.

Why? The 5.56 and 7.62 versions cover all needs.

 

[96coal449]

Because the 6.8 is throwing weights in the 115gr range and the total weight is less then the 7.62.
I've always had a liking for 6.8 and wish it was a little more popular. Designed by special forces if I remember correctly. Parent case was a .35 Rem.

Edit: I feel it could fill both rolls equally.

 

[libertysnake]

I did not realize it was a atoner design.

Now i like it even more!

I want one!

I like the carrier and bolt disassembly. Anytime something is smooth and simple to take apart, means maintenance will be done more regularly and under stress with better results.

 

[gun_slinger_boy]

Eh. At the end of the day though this thing may as well be top secret because we will never be able to own one no matter how free your state is.

 

[libertysnake]

Why? The 5.56 and 7.62 versions cover all needs.

Yeah, but if you're going to use a versatile weapon, you would naturally want a versatile round to go along with it. If it's more purpose built, then yeah -- one or the other.

 

[96coal449]

If I also remember correctly the 6.8 didn't make a huge hit only because of the legality of the pencil pushers. Our own @Robin is a fan of this round. He'll probably have some better insight then I.

Night fellas. Been up since 5am and gotta get up at least by 5:30 .....

 

[Podmonkey]

If I also remember correctly the 6.8 didn't make a huge hit only because of the legality of the pencil pushers. Our own @Robin is a fan of this round. He'll probably have some better insight then I.

Night fellas. Been up since 5am and gotta get up at least by 5:30 .....

No, the 77gr Mk262 came along and proved effective enough to render the 6.8 as redundant.

 

[MikeyCNY]

Look at the recoil on the KAK Stoner.

Wowsers. Obviously that short of a video doesn't equate to full field testing, but dat recoil... (or lack there-of)

 

[Robin]

No, the 77gr Mk262 came along and proved effective enough to render the 6.8 as redundant.

Statistics and data mean nothing when the commie in chief cancels all new weapon procurements. No way does the .223 compare with the 6.8 in any weight category.
Robin

 

[Podmonkey]

Statistics and data mean nothing when the commie in chief cancels all new weapon procurements. No way does the .223 compare with the 6.8 in any weight category.
Robin

The Mk262 has been reported by its users to be capable of one shot dropping human targets at 600 meters when shot out of the Mk 12 SPRs.
The 5.56 is good enough to not make it worth the switch to the 6.8 SPC. The 6.8 can't replace the 7.62x51 so there is little point in spending all the money and time switching to it. The M855 was certainly a less than ideal round but at short range the M193 was adequate wasn't it? The Mk 262 gets the job done at long range and it looks like the new M855A1 round is very effective.
The 6.8 is ballistically superior, but not enough so.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Statistics and data mean nothing when the commie in chief cancels all new weapon procurements. No way does the .223 compare with the 6.8 in any weight category.
Robin

Of course not but with the right ammo, it makes the differences come a lot closer together to the point where it may not be worth the change.

Kind of like the difference between the 9mm and the .40 or the .308 and the 30.06. The bigger calibers are obviously better on paper but in all reality, they'll both get the job done. One a little better than the other but not worth the time, effort, logistics, and cost to make the change.

Than you have other factors like capacity loss and resupply from allies to consider as well.

 

[Robin]

Compare the 77gr .223 with 6.8 in 80gr. 6.8 is far superior. Is it the ideal infantry round, probably not, but what it? it is far superior to the .223.
Robin

 

[gun_slinger_boy]

556 rounds with projectiles on the lighter end are about 26 pounds per 1000. 27 for heavier projectiles. 6.8 is 37 pounds per 1000 with lighter projectiles and 38 with heavier projectiles. That right there is enough to not switch over. That's 11 to almost 12 pounds lighter per case. Now think of that in terms of thousands and thousands of cases. That's before you even start talking about how many shots you can get in a loadout, cost, recoil etc. If this wasn't the case then everyone would just use the 308 and totally eliminate everything else that wasn't at least ballistic comparable. If conflicts were fought with everyone in static positions then fine, the slight edge 6.8 gives may be worth it. But again why not just use 308 at that point? Nothing against 6.8 but just realizing why there is no big hurry to switch over.

 

[Podmonkey]

Military isn't switching calibers till something dramatically better comes along. I would guess that if the Army actually is close to finishing development of a new round it will be something along the lines of a 6-6.5mm projectile telescoped into a polymer case. I wonder if such is planned to replace the 7.62x51 as well?

@Robin, not for nothing but after my postive experience with the Galil Ace in my recent class I am giving strong consideration to adopting it and the 308/7.62x51 cartridge as the go to SHTF rig. I'm working off the assumption that as a lone civilian I will be avoiding firefights at all costs and when I do need to take a shot it needs to be as effective as possible.

 

[Robin]

I believe the rifleman and, squad, platoon, company machine gunner should be using the same cartridge, for a number of reasons. I believe the cartridge should be at minimum .25, and with the new powders and polymers used in cartridge manufacture that it is completely doable. Maybe the .223 as it exists is fine for the wide open spaces of the mideast but that in not the only environment where war is fought, and will be fought. Thoughtful research must be done without political prejudice for the best possible cartridge. weight is a factor but confidence in your weapon is too and the average grunt will be more than willing to hump a few extra pounds and truthfully, won't realize any difference, if he has supreme confidence in his rifle and round.
Robin

 

[BDinPutnam]

The weight issue is interesting in that beyond the individual soldier/squad/etc., think about supply chain and logistics.

 

[gun_slinger_boy]

weight is a factor but confidence in your weapon is too and the average grunt will be more than willing to hump a few extra pounds and truthfully, won't realize any difference, if he has supreme confidence in his rifle and round.
Robin

IDK about that. When humping gear around all day shedding just a mag will make a noticeable difference. I've never done a ruck run but have done activities that tire you out and shedding even just a small amount of weight makes a difference. I've had more than one soldier tell me about how on especially hard ruck runs they will shed anything they can get away with and then just buy the stuff back at the PX.

 

[Marine Cpl]

@Robin

Nowadays grunts carry at least 50 pounds more gear than soldiers in the past. Batteries, armor, optics, commo equipment, nvgs, lasers, extra ammo, ect. Weight matters.

The Overweight Infantryman - Modern War Institute

 

[gun_slinger_boy]

"Ellen Haring wrote an opinion piece for the Marine Corps Times in which she was critical of the requirement for Marine Corps infantry officers to carry a load of up to 152 pounds for more than nine miles, at a twenty-minute-per-mile pace—a standard that Haring argues is unrealistic and prevents women from successfully completing the Marine Corps Infantry Officer Course. "

Let them eat cake. You can't complain you want equality but then not want equality. There's a reason things are the way they are in the armed forces. I found this cringey and funny at the same time.

 

[96coal449]

Sorry I haven't been around in a few days ..... Been working my ass off.
Sorry I dragged you into this @Robin
Sorry I even brought this up ..... Never again

Now about 45acp vs 9mm .....