Page 1 of 3
M 16 fan here
Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2023 7:23 pm
by Gene L
No way is the US going to replace the M 16 M4 with a 14 pound rifle. It won't happen, regardless of the rumors and regardless of the "improvements" over the lowly M 16 platform. Taking the improvements individually you can see some gain, but collectively, they don't add up to a 14 pound whole.
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2023 2:40 pm
by Varmintmist
Its kind of trying to find a problem where there isnt one. Is the AR platform in .224 the absolute best in every situation? Nope. In slightly different configurations which it can be easily modded into it aint bad across the board.
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2023 2:47 pm
by GrapeApe
Being one of the easiest platforms to modify, I don't see it going anywhere any time soon. New calibers/cartridges? Maybe, but I suspect, due to NATO, it'll stay in widespread military service in 5.56 for the rest of my lifetime.
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2023 5:01 pm
by shotgunshooter3
The M4 platform likely isn't going anywhere in our lifetimes, though it may ultimately find itself in a more REMF type role similar to the M1 Carbine.
The new rifle has its place, and the 14# statistic that you're so fixated on is with all the gizmos added. It's designed to defeat modern body armor, and sacrifices had to be made somewhere. I say that as someone that will likely never have to huff it up Sand Hill, of course.
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2023 12:46 am
by Gene L
The civilian version is something like 8 pounds, but the military version has a thicker barrel, a silencer/suppressor, an optic and I believe a larger magazine. I think the rifle talk is largely influenced by folks who don't have any sympathy for the poor foot soldier forced to hump a 14 pound rifle, the new rifle will flourish. Or when the military gets an unlimited budget. I feel someone needs to get input from the infantry soldier.
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2023 5:51 am
by Bigslug
I'm thinking we're not too far from the soldier only having to "hump" a laser designator about the size of a banana that calls down a particle beam from orbit, and that this effort to generate "The Next Great Infantry Rifle" is just a grand spinning of wheels.
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2023 5:17 pm
by Japhy
Bigslug wrote: ↑Wed Nov 01, 2023 5:51 am
I'm thinking we're not too far from the soldier only having to "hump" a laser designator about the size of a banana that calls down a particle beam from orbit, and that this effort to generate "The Next Great Infantry Rifle" is just a grand spinning of wheels.
Either that or the designator is on a remotely operated drone. That way the operator can keep his/her/its coffee mug at hand and keep tabs on social media
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2023 11:43 pm
by Freezer
Hevi max may finially be getting his wish! A bigger, heavier weapon for manly men.
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2023 1:33 am
by Japhy
Having fired an M1 Garand a few times I remember thinking this thing is stupid heavy at just under 10lbs. 14lbs? Yikes
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2023 1:51 am
by PFD45
I have a 14 lb .22-250.
I carry it from the tailgate to the bench.
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2023 2:44 am
by Diver43
If If I remember right a M-16A2 was around 8 1/2 pounds. 14 /2 pounds with full ruck and ammo would be a lot to hump in comparison
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2023 8:37 pm
by Centermass
The new rifle is coming.
It will provide us modern armor defeat capability.
I personally know a handful of the people who tested it. Weight was discussed - at length.
It will first be fielded to combat soldiers in select units. The initial order was 250K, for all five components.
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2023 9:40 pm
by CPJ 2.0
So dumb question time, is it “legal” to shoot someone on the face in a war time setting?
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2023 9:49 pm
by Zee
Yes
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2023 10:30 pm
by Diver43
CPJ 2.0 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 02, 2023 9:40 pm
So dumb question time, is it “legal” to shoot someone on the face in a war time setting?
Not dumb. YES, however the average Soldier is trained to shoot center mass
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 2:21 pm
by Bigslug
Centermass wrote: ↑Thu Nov 02, 2023 8:37 pm
The new rifle is coming.
It will provide us modern armor defeat capability.
I personally know a handful of the people who tested it. Weight was discussed - at length.
It will first be fielded to combat soldiers in select units. The initial order was 250K, for all five components.
So next dumb question: Are we finally going to accept that select-fire capability in an individual infantry weapon - at any level above pistol ammo - is just uncontrollable silliness?
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 4:15 pm
by Centermass
CPJ 2.0 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 02, 2023 9:40 pm
So dumb question time, is it “legal” to shoot someone on the face in a war time setting?
In certain units it is highly encouraged.
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 4:18 pm
by Centermass
Bigslug wrote: ↑Fri Nov 03, 2023 2:21 pm
Centermass wrote: ↑Thu Nov 02, 2023 8:37 pm
The new rifle is coming.
It will provide us modern armor defeat capability.
I personally know a handful of the people who tested it. Weight was discussed - at length.
It will first be fielded to combat soldiers in select units. The initial order was 250K, for all five components.
So next dumb question: Are we finally going to accept that select-fire capability in an individual infantry weapon - at any level above pistol ammo - is just uncontrollable silliness?
So, it’s not silliness. If you’re training properly, like the army used to do and some units still do, you use select fire capability to continue suppression or continue rounds on target for the duration. It varies the fire rates so not everyone is reloading within seconds of each other.
Having fire team A on semi, and fire team B on three round produces great effects for maneuvering onto the enemy.
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 5:21 pm
by Diver43
Centermass wrote: ↑Fri Nov 03, 2023 4:18 pm
Bigslug wrote: ↑Fri Nov 03, 2023 2:21 pm
Centermass wrote: ↑Thu Nov 02, 2023 8:37 pm
So next dumb question: Are we finally going to accept that select-fire capability in an individual infantry weapon - at any level above pistol ammo - is just uncontrollable silliness?
So, it’s not silliness. If you’re training properly, like the army used to do and some units still do, you use select fire capability to continue suppression or continue rounds on target for the duration. It varies the fire rates so not everyone is reloading within seconds of each other.
Having fire team A on semi, and fire team B on three round produces great effects for maneuvering onto the enemy.
Wait, they don't teach that anymore?
We were taught that tactic for offensive and defensive scenarios
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2023 11:41 pm
by Waipapa13
Centermass wrote: ↑Thu Nov 02, 2023 8:37 pm
The new rifle is coming.
It will provide us modern armor defeat capability.
I personally know a handful of the people who tested it. Weight was discussed - at length.
It will first be fielded to combat soldiers in select units. The initial order was 250K, for all five components.
I guess that any army has the institutional memory of its latest war when it makes its decisions going forward, but I can't help but think that a 14 pound rifle plus gear is going to pretty detrimental to effectiveness in combat in the jungle, bush, or any sustained dismounted operations.
To what degree are the Russians or the Chinese using armour?
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2023 1:34 am
by Centermass
To the degree that M855A1 is not as effective as it once was
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2023 3:55 am
by Waipapa13
Centermass wrote: ↑Sun Nov 05, 2023 1:34 am
To the degree that M855A1 is not as effective as it once was
Damn, I'm honestly surprised, I would not have thought that bodyarmour would be considered that widely available to them in the future scenarios, Ukraine is probably skewing my perceptions, as it's not as though Russia's best and brightest are being put forward.
I'm not against a bigger calibre per se, but it is interesting to see that the battle pack is looking like 170 rounds vs 210 in 5.56,
200 rounds of 7.62 was standard load for the SLR everywhere.
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2023 6:05 pm
by Centermass
Here’s an update -
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/new-arm ... Dera%20gun.
I don’t know where folks are getting the extreme weight at. It’s not a heavy rifle.
The NGSW - replacing the M249 - has some heft. But, so does the M249
The 6.8 round was tested - a lot.
Of the many modernization efforts the Army is running after, this one had the best working group and decision makers.
As we look at conducting Large Scale Combat Operations, we have to take a look at lessons learned, what’s currently going on, and what we think may happen. It’s not a wicked problem, but it is a problem of risk acceptance and risk avoidance.
Having a heavier rifle, that improves lethality and accuracy, falls into the risk acceptance bucket. We do not anticipate Joe carrying this rifle through the jungles of south east Asia for weeks at a time. we do anticipate island hoping in the indo-pacom theater. But, still not bushwhacking or even having to hump everything from Normandy to Paris…
Ukraine is killing Russian ADA assets with paper and balsa wood drones laden with TNT. No one, in the history of Arial warfare anticipated anything like that happening.
So, if having a rifle that is two pounds heavier and shoots a bigger bullet helps defeat the unanticipated advancement in armor, when we see it.. I am all for it
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2023 7:40 pm
by Diver43
Centermass wrote: ↑Wed Nov 08, 2023 6:05 pm
Here’s an update -
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/new-arm ... Dera%20gun.
I don’t know where folks are getting the extreme weight at. It’s not a heavy rifle.
The NGSW - replacing the M249 - has some heft. But, so does the M249
The 6.8 round was tested - a lot.
Of the many modernization efforts the Army is running after, this one had the best working group and decision makers.
As we look at conducting Large Scale Combat Operations, we have to take a look at lessons learned, what’s currently going on, and what we think may happen. It’s not a wicked problem, but it is a problem of risk acceptance and risk avoidance.
Having a heavier rifle, that improves lethality and accuracy, falls into the risk acceptance bucket. We do not anticipate Joe carrying this rifle through the jungles of south east Asia for weeks at a time. we do anticipate island hoping in the indo-pacom theater. But, still not bushwhacking or even having to hump everything from Normandy to Paris…
Ukraine is killing Russian ADA assets with paper and balsa wood drones laden with TNT. No one, in the history of Arial warfare anticipated anything like that happening.
So, if having a rifle that is two pounds heavier and shoots a bigger bullet helps defeat the unanticipated advancement in armor, when we see it.. I am all for it
Very Good Info. Is the new 6.8 round similar to the 6.8 SPC?
Re: M 16 fan here
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2023 9:16 pm
by Centermass
the Army round is also called the .277 Fury. It is 6.8 x51
If I remember, the 6.8spc is 6.8 x 43
The difference is about 500Fps, in favor of the furry. So, essentially, we figured out a way to throw a 6.8mm round at the same velocity of the 5.56…