Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > >


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-11-2018, 07:02 PM
Ghost Magnum's Avatar
Ghost Magnum Ghost Magnum is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 522
Likes: 1,082
Liked 564 Times in 211 Posts
Default Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army

It's proving difficult to knock the 50 year old rifle off it's pedestal.
The L5 Ribbon Rifle could be the next rifle.
But there others that already been proven in battle.

There is the H&K M27 that is already in use by the USMC.

The IWI Tavor. I believe that would make a great weapon for the Army. I'm not just saying that because I'm a fan of the Tavor.
The Tavor has already being used by some police and sheriff departments here in the US. I heard rumors that some groups in the military has unofficial adopted the Tavor. But I would take that with a grain of salt.
I wouldn't hold my breath on the army using it. I think the army would have used bullpup rifles years ago if they was truly interested in them.

FN SCAR is already in use by the Army Rangers and other branches of USSOCOM.
I would be proud to own one.

H&K G36. I think the army was experimenting with this rifle some years ago. I remember seeing a video of a soldier dip this gun in water and sand a it fired without a single problem.

There is also the XM8. I remember they was testing that rifle. I don't really know what happened to it

The deal is just about every gun I named on this list cost about twice as much then the M16/M4.
__________________
TAHITI, it's a magical place.

Last edited by Ghost Magnum; 10-11-2018 at 07:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #2  
Old 10-11-2018, 07:07 PM
eb07 eb07 is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,659
Likes: 2,028
Liked 3,985 Times in 1,022 Posts
Default

They announced it so it will be another 10 years before it happens.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #3  
Old 10-11-2018, 08:13 PM
Absalom's Avatar
Absalom Absalom is offline
SWCA Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 6,859
Likes: 3,988
Liked 10,568 Times in 3,833 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eb07 View Post
They announced it so it will be another 10 years before it happens.
But in the meantime, it’ll provide ten years of material, from knowledgeable to speculative to simply made up, for magazine writers, gun bloggers, and gun forums. A gift from heaven
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
  #4  
Old 10-11-2018, 08:15 PM
vonn's Avatar
vonn vonn is offline
US Veteran
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: houston,texas
Posts: 5,858
Likes: 91,913
Liked 19,596 Times in 4,667 Posts
Default

The cost of any weapon considered will certainly be a factor in the selection process and may well be the deciding factor. Just quickly thinking about what would be my ideal rifle -it needs to be light with a reasonable basic load of ammunition(weight is a grunts worst enemy) ,it must be almost maintenance free in any enviroment,use a flat shooting cartridge and have a effective range of 600 yards with good battlefield accuracy. Semi and full automatic at a controllable rate of fire that can be maintained with out destroying itself. Having been a milsurp guy I think the present AR platform meets most of these needs but .224 Valkyrie ammo might be an improvement with very little changes required. Going to think on this some more.
__________________
Hue 68 noli me tangere
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #5  
Old 10-11-2018, 08:22 PM
6518John's Avatar
6518John 6518John is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: May 2014
Location: ARTown and Country
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 41,944
Liked 8,245 Times in 2,072 Posts
Default No school like the old school!

It’s been downhill since this was replaced—“the greatest battle implement ever devised".
Attached Thumbnails
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army-efb5a3c0-7481-4305-a3f2-db34cbfedb72-jpeg  
__________________
.44 Special is indeed!

Last edited by 6518John; 10-12-2018 at 05:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Like Post:
  #6  
Old 10-11-2018, 09:01 PM
Farmer17 Farmer17 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edmond, OK
Posts: 2,640
Likes: 83
Liked 1,843 Times in 817 Posts
Default

I always felt the .556 was too small and thought a modern designed rifle in size between the M-14 and a Mini-14 chambered for .243 Win or .250 Savage would be ideal.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #7  
Old 10-11-2018, 09:03 PM
hkcavalier's Avatar
hkcavalier hkcavalier is offline
US Veteran
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 1,440
Likes: 394
Liked 2,109 Times in 679 Posts
Default

I'm a huge fan of the Swedish 6.5CBJ project.

http://www.cbjtech.com/ammunition/6-5x25-cbj/

I think a small PDW + larger carbine family would be phenomenal for most needs. Plus a high quality DMR organic to platoons.

The 6.5CBJ with the subcaliber penetrator is already better than the 5.56 out to normal infantry combat ranges.
__________________
Psalm 27:2
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #8  
Old 10-11-2018, 09:26 PM
LVSteve's Avatar
LVSteve LVSteve is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lost Wages, NV
Posts: 9,305
Likes: 8,025
Liked 9,513 Times in 3,890 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vonn View Post
The cost of any weapon considered will certainly be a factor in the selection process and may well be the deciding factor. Just quickly thinking about what would be my ideal rifle -it needs to be light with a reasonable basic load of ammunition(weight is a grunts worst enemy) ,it must be almost maintenance free in any enviroment,use a flat shooting cartridge and have a effective range of 600 yards with good battlefield accuracy. Semi and full automatic at a controllable rate of fire that can be maintained with out destroying itself. Having been a milsurp guy I think the present AR platform meets most of these needs but .224 Valkyrie ammo might be an improvement with very little changes required. Going to think on this some more.
I think .224 Valkyrie needs barrel length, which makes it a non-starter for most purposes.

The LSAT performed well in tests, proving that case telescoped ammo can work. I would like to see similar technology in 6.5 or 6.8 caliber.
__________________
Release the Kraken
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #9  
Old 10-11-2018, 09:48 PM
BigBill's Avatar
BigBill BigBill is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: north america
Posts: 11,174
Likes: 1,432
Liked 9,855 Times in 4,115 Posts
Default

I think the Swedish 6.5mm caliber is yet to be fully developed. Then we have the flattest shooter of them all the 7 mm Mauser round.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #10  
Old 10-11-2018, 10:00 PM
white cloud white cloud is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Way Down South
Posts: 590
Likes: 709
Liked 613 Times in 270 Posts
Default

I just hope the Defense Department doesn't waste 10 years and untold amounts of money and come up with nothing like they did last time.

The AR platform is highly refined and reliable but it seems that the 5.56 is not up to solving some battlefield problems. My father was career 82nd Airborne. He had fought with M2 carbines, M1s, M14 and finally the M16. I got to talk to him and some of his buddies who served with him in Vietnam. To a man, they were glad to be rid of the M14 and loved the M16.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #11  
Old 10-11-2018, 10:05 PM
Absalom's Avatar
Absalom Absalom is offline
SWCA Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 6,859
Likes: 3,988
Liked 10,568 Times in 3,833 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Farmer17 View Post
I always felt the .556 was too small and ....
I think a .556 would be plenty big

The .223/5.56mm on the other hand ...

(Sorry, couldn't resist, I'm sure it was just a typo.)
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
  #12  
Old 10-11-2018, 10:33 PM
serger's Avatar
serger serger is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 385
Likes: 202
Liked 468 Times in 171 Posts
Default

How about an AR10 in .243. Load it with
95 gr bullets @ 3k fps.
__________________
never get out of the boat
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #13  
Old 10-11-2018, 10:57 PM
smoothshooter smoothshooter is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 354
Likes: 12
Liked 243 Times in 130 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vonn View Post
The cost of any weapon considered will certainly be a factor in the selection process and may well be the deciding factor. Just quickly thinking about what would be my ideal rifle -it needs to be light with a reasonable basic load of ammunition(weight is a grunts worst enemy) ,it must be almost maintenance free in any enviroment,use a flat shooting cartridge and have a effective range of 600 yards with good battlefield accuracy. Semi and full automatic at a controllable rate of fire that can be maintained with out destroying itself. Having been a milsurp guy I think the present AR platform meets most of these needs but .224 Valkyrie ammo might be an improvement with very little changes required. Going to think on this some more.
My vote goes for whatever the latest and best version of the Ak-47 is.

Good caliber, superior penetration of obstacles and human tissue, accurate enough for the skill level of the average troop today under combat conditions, unlimited potential for using captured stocks of ammo, and last but not least- all the R & D work is already done.
Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Like Post:
  #14  
Old 10-11-2018, 11:01 PM
white cloud white cloud is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Way Down South
Posts: 590
Likes: 709
Liked 613 Times in 270 Posts
Default

I think an AR10 that was put on a diet and chambered in something with .243 ballistics would be an awesome fighting rifle. I personally wonder why you would equip an army with the 5.56 when it is considered marginal for hunting 125 pound herbivores by most hunters I know.

I will bring up my father's sergeant thinking about rifles. He told me that as paratrooper he wanted a short and light rifle. He had bent the barrels on a number of M14 when jumping. He was always aware that when he was dropped off a helicopter with his team, it might be a while before they got resupplied. The 5.56 really checked a box for him in this regard because he could carry a lot more rounds. I asked him and his buddies about the 5.56's lack of power. They looked at me like I was crazy as they were convinced it was plenty lethal. Of course they were engaging targets in a jungle.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #15  
Old 10-11-2018, 11:03 PM
white cloud white cloud is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Way Down South
Posts: 590
Likes: 709
Liked 613 Times in 270 Posts
Default

Can you imagine a general telling our current president that they wanted to purchase AK-47s?
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
  #16  
Old 10-11-2018, 11:06 PM
Engine49guy's Avatar
Engine49guy Engine49guy is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: May 2009
Location: South Florida
Posts: 6,661
Likes: 1,429
Liked 6,333 Times in 2,163 Posts
Default

IMO the M-14 was probably the high water mark in US Infantry rifle design when wars were fought at greater distances in larger battlefields.

No doubt the M16 was much better suited for Jungle warfare in Vietnam once they got the bugs ironed out.
Since its early M16 inception and M16A1 improvements the design has had enough time in service to address its shortcomings (BTW the old M14 was brought back out of mothballs with an added scope for use in Iraq and Afghanistan where the 5.56 lacked range, penetration and power ).

There is a big difference from the early M16's 55-grain 5.56 mm M193 cartridge mated to a 1 in 12 twist barrel to the current M16A4 with 62 gr. lead core NATO SS109/M855 with steel penetrator spitzer bullet mated to the faster 1 in 9 twist barrel.
(BTW Read an article a few months back there is a new improved cartridge coming out that outperforms the SS109)

While I still prefer the 20" barrel full fixed stock M16A2 the smaller M4 carbine seems to have eclipsed it and no surprise as the trend for many of our NATO allies has been toward shorter Bullpup designs which perhaps have an advantage in modern battle and urban warfare.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #17  
Old 10-11-2018, 11:21 PM
white cloud white cloud is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Way Down South
Posts: 590
Likes: 709
Liked 613 Times in 270 Posts
Default

I agree about the 20" barrel. I have never been combat but a 14.5" barrel makes no sense to me especially with the 5.56 which needs all the velocity it can get.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #18  
Old 10-11-2018, 11:35 PM
AJ AJ is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Central East Coast of Flo
Posts: 932
Likes: 185
Liked 945 Times in 416 Posts
Default

I would like to see either the AR or Mini-14 platforms in .243. But remember that when talking 5.56/.223 as far as be lethal, animals are harder to bring down than people.
__________________
USMC 69-93
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #19  
Old 10-12-2018, 11:10 AM
vonn's Avatar
vonn vonn is offline
US Veteran
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: houston,texas
Posts: 5,858
Likes: 91,913
Liked 19,596 Times in 4,667 Posts
Default

I think that 5.56 kills game but not quick enough to prevent hunters from being unable to find what they shot. The 224 Valkyrie in shorter 18 to 20 inch barrels won't be super long range but would be be a signicant increase in bullet weight which should increase effectiveness on the target. Lots of people seem to be working with short 224 barrels judging by videos out there.
__________________
Hue 68 noli me tangere
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #20  
Old 10-12-2018, 01:52 PM
hkcavalier's Avatar
hkcavalier hkcavalier is offline
US Veteran
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 1,440
Likes: 394
Liked 2,109 Times in 679 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by white cloud View Post
I agree about the 20" barrel. I have never been combat but a 14.5" barrel makes no sense to me especially with the 5.56 which needs all the velocity it can get.
For 5.56mm it makes the most sense. But we're not going back to 20" rifles (remember when that was considered a 'carbine'?), so the goal is to find a new chambering that's most effective out of a 12-14" barrel and meets all the penetration and lethality requirements.

Right now, as I posted about, the 6.5CBJ does that. Another somewhat sci-fi possibility would be a large caliber round that was essentially a micro-grenade.
__________________
Psalm 27:2
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #21  
Old 10-12-2018, 04:55 PM
DWalt's Avatar
DWalt DWalt is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: South Texas
Posts: 22,957
Likes: 2
Liked 13,840 Times in 7,656 Posts
Default

Other than for special operations purposes (as SpecOps troops can often get whatever weapons they want) it will be a very long time indeed that the 5.56mm M16/M4 platform will be replaced within Big Army. You can bet on it. Believe me, been there, done that.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #22  
Old 10-12-2018, 05:26 PM
hkcavalier's Avatar
hkcavalier hkcavalier is offline
US Veteran
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 1,440
Likes: 394
Liked 2,109 Times in 679 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DWalt View Post
Other than for special operations purposes (as SpecOps troops can often get whatever weapons they want) it will be a very long time indeed that the 5.56mm M16/M4 platform will be replaced within Big Army. You can bet on it. Believe me, been there, done that.
Yeah, I fear the next "big war" will involve something like, say, drones that deliver self-guided flying "bug" munitions to each enemy soldier's head and detonate a few grams of RDX. After that, it won't matter if we carry Brown Besses or plasma rifles in the 40 watt range.
__________________
Psalm 27:2
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #23  
Old 10-12-2018, 05:38 PM
amazingflapjack amazingflapjack is offline
US Veteran
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: May 2010
Location: North Central Florida
Posts: 5,110
Likes: 19,198
Liked 4,661 Times in 2,031 Posts
Default

I like what Vonn shared, and anyone who has had to go into the field with a direct impingement M-16 variant. In my little detachment we were able to carry pretty much what we wanted, so there were some other choices. The M-16 was not highly thought of, to say the least. From my own experience, I would hope that there would be, in addition to a standardized battle rife, a pistol caliber (compatible with side arm ammo) carbine weapon, that was compact and possibly in the blow back operating system for certain troop segments, not necessarily with selective rates of fire. I would hope that what ever battle rifle is selected, that it would not be a .223 caliber, and that it would not be a direct impingement operating system. The 7.62X39 round is a tough one to beat in a light infantry contest, especially as someone above suggested-in a much lighter platform, but politics may have a strong influence on that, and any decision. I'll say it again: ask the Vets and the troops.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #24  
Old 10-12-2018, 07:43 PM
Ivan the Butcher Ivan the Butcher is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Harlem, Ohio
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 5,366
Liked 6,734 Times in 2,766 Posts
Default

Sometime before 9/11/01, my son's company was slated to test a bull-pup design with a snap on grenade launcher. He walked into the squad room on Monday morning and there were 20 prototypes laying on a table. "What's up First Sargent?", "You get to test this abortion!" My son picked up and carried it back to the 1st Sargent. It weighed 29 pounds (empty!) (a M-60 weighs 26 pounds) My son said "We have to get out of this!!" They were due to rotate to Haiti in a few months, so they went to see the CO. The 1st Sgt. walks in and asks the Captain if he'd seen this pile of XXXX, and threw the weapon on the desk with an enormous thump! They then conspired to get B Co, 315 AIR to "evaluate" the platform.

A service weapon munt not require a HUMVEE to tote it around!

Ivan
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #25  
Old 10-12-2018, 07:56 PM
Flattop5 Flattop5 is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 258
Likes: 16
Liked 317 Times in 121 Posts
Default

Quote:
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army

Here's a novel idea: let America stop fighting wars all over the world every 10 years for no good reason, and the Army wouldn't need another rifle. Yeah, that's a radical idea, I know...

But if they really need a new one, they can contract for good-quality AK47s in caliber .223/5.56. Very rugged, nearly jam-proof, and they can use all the current 5.56 ammo.




--------------
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #26  
Old 10-12-2018, 08:17 PM
Telecaster Telecaster is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 545
Likes: 131
Liked 754 Times in 288 Posts
Default

I went along with internet lore on M14 vs M16, .308 vs 5.56, etc. till I saw this video from SmallArmsSolutions, Why I despise the M14. I thought Pfft, this clickbait otta be good for a laugh. But the guy seems to know what hes talking about and convinced me.

YouTube

As for the armys next rifle, Im sure itll be something made obsolete by the next generation of warfare before its ever fielded.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #27  
Old 10-12-2018, 08:31 PM
Ghost Magnum's Avatar
Ghost Magnum Ghost Magnum is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 522
Likes: 1,082
Liked 564 Times in 211 Posts
Default

Going through all the post on this thread shows the biggest problem when it comes to weapons. Everyone has different preference, different personalities, soldier with different body sizes and types.
Soldiers serving in different environments.
I'm a bullpup guy through and through. That's what I would rather use.
I know a marine that would rather use his own AK and carry a 44 Magnum. He was not a fan of what the military gave him to use.
__________________
TAHITI, it's a magical place.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #28  
Old 10-14-2018, 11:57 AM
Absalom's Avatar
Absalom Absalom is offline
SWCA Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 6,859
Likes: 3,988
Liked 10,568 Times in 3,833 Posts
Default

In related actual news, the German army is looking for a replacement for the HK G 36, which is set to be phased out beginning in 2020.

It was announced today that ALL initial submissions failed preliminary testing.

For legal reasons, the Ministry of Defense apparently cant publish participants and details at this point of the process.

But scuttlebutt seems to agree that besides HK with the HK 433, Steyr and SIG were initially bidders; no word on others. SIG reportedly dropped out amid complaints that the process was rigged toward HK.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #29  
Old 10-14-2018, 11:26 PM
bushmaster1313's Avatar
bushmaster1313 bushmaster1313 is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: PRNJ
Posts: 4,842
Likes: 457
Liked 9,802 Times in 2,074 Posts
Default

It is published that the Tavor with a 16.5" barrel is a bit shorter than an M4 with a 10.5" barrel and a collapsed stock.

The short overall length of the Tavor is an advantage when riding in an armoured personnel carrier and in clearing a room.
__________________
Buy American
Vote Responsibly
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #30  
Old 10-14-2018, 11:53 PM
smoothshooter smoothshooter is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 354
Likes: 12
Liked 243 Times in 130 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by white cloud View Post
Can you imagine a general telling our current president that they wanted to purchase AK-47s?
If they were American made he might go for it.
Especially if the price was right.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #31  
Old Yesterday, 12:13 AM
3S16 3S16 is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 447
Likes: 683
Liked 1,075 Times in 213 Posts
Default

M-14. Finest battle rifle ever made.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #32  
Old Yesterday, 01:07 AM
LVSteve's Avatar
LVSteve LVSteve is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lost Wages, NV
Posts: 9,305
Likes: 8,025
Liked 9,513 Times in 3,890 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3S16 View Post
M-14. Finest battle rifle ever made.
Yep...for a type of battle we don't fight any more.
__________________
Release the Kraken
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #33  
Old Yesterday, 01:11 AM
LVSteve's Avatar
LVSteve LVSteve is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lost Wages, NV
Posts: 9,305
Likes: 8,025
Liked 9,513 Times in 3,890 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Absalom View Post
In related actual news, the German army is looking for a replacement for the HK G 36, which is set to be phased out beginning in 2020.

It was announced today that ALL initial submissions failed preliminary testing.

For legal reasons, the Ministry of Defense apparently cant publish participants and details at this point of the process.

But scuttlebutt seems to agree that besides HK with the HK 433, Steyr and SIG were initially bidders; no word on others. SIG reportedly dropped out amid complaints that the process was rigged toward HK.
Makes you wonder how demanding the Bundeswehr specification must be and how the manufacturers have screwed up not meeting it.
__________________
Release the Kraken
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #34  
Old Yesterday, 03:36 AM
JayFramer's Avatar
JayFramer JayFramer is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 2,558
Likes: 3,388
Liked 4,162 Times in 1,483 Posts
Default

Probably something like an AR/M15 in Creedmore.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old Yesterday, 07:10 AM
stansdds stansdds is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 673
Likes: 63
Liked 579 Times in 339 Posts
Default

I do not see the U.S. military changing calibers. We just went through this whole debate with replacing the Beretta M9. The Army considered other calibers, but 9x19mm is a NATO standard and that is what the U.S. military will continue to use. Even MEU SOC and MARSOC units that had gone back to the M1911-A1 platform are now going back to the 9x19mm. So with 5.56x45mm being a NATO standard caliber, I find it highly unlikely that the U.S. is going to go a non-NATO caliber. If the Army wants more knockdown power, then they would likely have a rifle chambered in 7.62x51mm.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #36  
Old Yesterday, 07:38 AM
steelslaver's Avatar
steelslaver steelslaver is offline
US Veteran
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Central Montana
Posts: 5,125
Likes: 2,205
Liked 9,755 Times in 3,146 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LVSteve View Post
Yep...for a type of battle we don't fight any more.
Idea. Quit fighting the types of battles we have been fighting. The results have not been positive, though the rifle being used is not necessarily the problem. The round count per KIA has rose to the point of the totally absurd. Being able to carry and fire more ammo is not a solution when the projectiles have no impact value. The current rate is around 250,000 rounds per KIA. That is about a ton of bullets per KIA. Factor in the rate of about 1.5 per KIA by snipers and you HAVE to scratch your head and wonder.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old Yesterday, 07:48 AM
CajunBass's Avatar
CajunBass CajunBass is offline
Member
Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army Thoughts on possible rifles for the Army  
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North Chesterfield, Va.
Posts: 4,512
Likes: 3,833
Liked 7,178 Times in 1,962 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steelslaver View Post
The current rate is around 250,000 rounds per KIA. That is about a ton of bullets per KIA.
Nothing new there. I've read that it took a man's weight in bullets to kill him. During the Civil War.

Considering the difference between single shot muzzle loaders, and full auto weapons, I'd say that's about even.
__________________
John 3:16 .
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Continental Army/ U.S.Army, is another year older today. the ringo kid The Lounge 12 06-18-2017 11:50 PM
U.S. Army 1917.....your thoughts since........ moralem S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961 29 02-21-2016 04:22 PM
US Army Seal for Army Military Status legelegel FORUM OFFICE 0 01-25-2015 05:32 PM
IMPORTANT NOTICE TO OWNERS OF S&W M&P15-22 RIFLES AND M&P15 CENTERFIRE RIFLES Evile Smith & Wesson M&P15 Rifles 0 03-18-2010 08:29 PM
Thoughts On The M&P Rifles torrejon224 Smith & Wesson Semi-Auto Pistols 12 12-21-2008 05:29 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:35 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.42 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
S-W Forum, LLC 2000-2018
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)