Armory Sponsor
MCX Spear (Page 8 of 37)
Video by Task and Purpose US Army M4 replacement Military NGSW Program Explained |
|
Jeez. I hate to complain, but man, those guys need to shoot something other than an AR-15 to figure out their stance and remove the chick lean. They got pushed around by the recoil so much that it was distracting.
|
|
Originally Posted By JAG2955: Jeez. I hate to complain, but man, those guys need to shoot something other than an AR-15 to figure out their stance and remove the chick lean. They got pushed around by the recoil so much that it was distracting. Yeah, I hate to say it, but you are right. It's like none of them have shot anything bigger than .223. |
|
Originally Posted By SpyHawk: Yeah, I hate to say it, but you are right. It's like none of them have shot anything bigger than .223. Originally Posted By SpyHawk: Originally Posted By JAG2955: Jeez. I hate to complain, but man, those guys need to shoot something other than an AR-15 to figure out their stance and remove the chick lean. They got pushed around by the recoil so much that it was distracting. Yeah, I hate to say it, but you are right. It's like none of them have shot anything bigger than .223. Yup, he’s never been behind anything with real recoil, lol. Nor has he had much experience with anything heavier than an M4, looks like. Either that, or fully loaded, the Spear is a heavy beast. And that 6.8 looks like it’s got a good kick to it, even as heavy as it looks. going to be interesting to watch little 120 pound female soldiers try shooting it offhand. |
|
The guy in the blue polo and the chick look like shit. That shouldn't have been approved for video, either by Sig, or out of sheer embarrassment. The guy in the black shirt does just fine with the 5.56 MCX, but it's obvious he's never had to pull anything into his shoulder for recoil mitigation. It's also obvious that he's not strong enough to hold it at the ready, his support hand creeps closer to the magwell, and he starts flinching a bit more and turning more 45deg, instead of square to the target. |
|
Originally Posted By olds442tyguy: Stance or not, looks a bit heavy with a bit too much kick to replace the M4 as stated. ETA: Compare to the video by TFB on the previous page. It obviously has more recoil than an M4, and will require re-training for many, but I think it'll be just fine *if* you've ever shot a large frame AR or similar before. 
|
|
Originally Posted By sdrake100: Sounds like marketing speak for "it's not that great". Originally Posted By sdrake100: Originally Posted By coregon: Recoil is obviously greater than a standard M4-type rifle. It’s sharp, but not unmanageable Sounds like marketing speak for "it's not that great". I dont know your definition of "great" - its an 80k PSI round out of a 13" barrel, it has some recoil. Is it "significant"? No. Is it manageable? Yes. |
On Time. On Target.
|
Originally Posted By JAG2955: Spear trickle down improvement -ambi bolt lock/release. https://www.sigsauer.com/media/catalog/product/cache/a3db8ca85b9f26a85c601248a3f4f74b/p/m/pm400-switchblade-right-web_1.jpg Noticed that in an email this morning. Will be curious to see if Sig pushes the changes over to the Virtus/Rattler or potential "gen 3" MCX setup. Would be awesome if the already made MCX lowers could be modified to accept the lever. |
|
Originally Posted By Zerlak: Noticed that in an email this morning. Will be curious to see if Sig pushes the changes over to the Virtus/Rattler or potential "gen 3" MCX setup. Would be awesome if the already made MCX lowers could be modified to accept the lever. Originally Posted By Zerlak: Originally Posted By JAG2955: Spear trickle down improvement -ambi bolt lock/release. https://www.sigsauer.com/media/catalog/product/cache/a3db8ca85b9f26a85c601248a3f4f74b/p/m/pm400-switchblade-right-web_1.jpg Noticed that in an email this morning. Will be curious to see if Sig pushes the changes over to the Virtus/Rattler or potential "gen 3" MCX setup. Would be awesome if the already made MCX lowers could be modified to accept the lever. Seems like basically a product improved version of the PDQ lever, which has been on the market for years. You can Dremel a regular receiver and add one to any AR compatible lower. |
|
Originally Posted By call_me_ski: It is essentially shooting a .270WSM from a sub 9 pound rifle. Only so much that can be done to make it not feel like it is shooting a .270WSM from a sub 9 pound rifle. Yeah, but with all those accessories and a loaded mag? It's gotta be at least 13-14lbs kitted out. You can tell they are struggling with the weight of the rifle... The Spear is essentially a compact AR-10. |
Please make sure you remember to leave me feedback on the EE!
|
https://fb.watch/6_SXTxCvZQ/ SCAR H with 6.8 TVCM It looks more stable than Spear. |
|
Originally Posted By Coalkoy: https://fb.watch/6_SXTxCvZQ/ SCAR H with 6.8 TVCM It looks more stable than Spear. Looks like the brake is doing what it's supposed to and the guy appears to be actually pulling the rifle back into his body. |
|
Originally Posted By OccasionallyShot: Yeah, but with all those accessories and a loaded mag? It's gotta be at least 13-14lbs kitted out. You can tell they are struggling with the weight of the rifle... The Spear is essentially a compact AR-10. I can’t tell they are struggling with anything. That’s your perception. All those accessories and a loaded mag are going to be the same as if they were on another rifle. |
|
Originally Posted By tranzformer: I can't tell they are struggling with anything. That's your perception. All those accessories and a loaded mag are going to be the same as if they were on another rifle. Attached File Attached File Compare it to the dude from TFB on the previous page, it doesn't look nearly as bad. |
|
https://www.sigsauer.com/media/sigsauer/resources/SIG-SAUER-DSG-Catalog-2021.pdf Page 16 for the SPEAR. I don't see anything new on it, but there's some neat stuff throughout the catalog. |
|
Originally Posted By JAG2955: https://www.sigsauer.com/media/sigsauer/resources/SIG-SAUER-DSG-Catalog-2021.pdf Page 16 for the SPEAR. I don't see anything new on it, but there's some neat stuff throughout the catalog. M17E, M18E? What's the E? First time I've seen that |
Please, call me Joe
Follow me on Instagram!
http://instagram.com/tcba_joe/
Follow me on Instagram!
http://instagram.com/tcba_joe/
|
Originally Posted By JAG2955: Jeez. I hate to complain, but man, those guys need to shoot something other than an AR-15 to figure out their stance and remove the chick lean. They got pushed around by the recoil so much that it was distracting. Originally Posted By JAG2955: I almost doubled over laughing at the twitch in the face of the guy with the Kaiser Wilhelm mustache as soon as the YouTube dude started getting kicked around by the recoil and he leaned forward and just eyeballed him from the side. You could feel the judgment radiating from his glasses. "Someone is gonna watch this and say our gun has too much recoil."  I'd love to see that fired by someone who is used to banging out rapid fire .308 Win and semi-auto 12-gauge from a standing stance and actually knows how to take recoil and keep the gun on target. Dude gets bucked around firing 6.8 about as much as I do firing 3" magnum shells out of the M4 Super90. |
|
Originally Posted By Frost7: I'd love to see that fired by someone who is used to banging out rapid fire .308 Win and semi-auto 12-gauge from a standing stance and actually knows how to take recoil and keep the gun on target. Serious questions: What percentage of current combat arms MOS across all services fit that description? How about SOF? If they don't, how much ammo/time will it take to be proficient with the NGSW? Will that take away from the time for training necessary to reach or maintain proficiency in other critical skills? I think the SPEAR is a neat rifle. I'd like to own one. But I wonder if anyone has those answers. |
|
Originally Posted By oldbrowndog: Serious questions: What percentage of current combat arms MOS across all services fit that description? How about SOF? If they don't, how much ammo/time will it take to be proficient with the NGSW? Will that take away from the time for training necessary to reach or maintain proficiency in other critical skills? I think the SPEAR is a neat rifle. I'd like to own one. But I wonder if anyone has those answers. Originally Posted By oldbrowndog: Originally Posted By Frost7: I'd love to see that fired by someone who is used to banging out rapid fire .308 Win and semi-auto 12-gauge from a standing stance and actually knows how to take recoil and keep the gun on target. Serious questions: What percentage of current combat arms MOS across all services fit that description? How about SOF? If they don't, how much ammo/time will it take to be proficient with the NGSW? Will that take away from the time for training necessary to reach or maintain proficiency in other critical skills? I think the SPEAR is a neat rifle. I'd like to own one. But I wonder if anyone has those answers. Honestly, with enough ammo and a student eager to learn and intelligent enough to take instruction on form after each round of fire, I think you could get anyone managing the recoil of both of those pretty well inside a day. It's not rocket science, it's just the extra oomph of the larger round isn't so forgiving of horrible and inconsistent form like 5.56. Address that adequately and you're golden. |
|
Originally Posted By Coalkoy: https://fb.watch/6_SXTxCvZQ/ SCAR H with 6.8 TVCM It looks more stable than Spear. I think that is 7.62x51 TV, not 6.8TVCM. But I could be wrong. I hate to say it, but it seems like the bullpup has the lowest recoil. Due in part to the design of the action, and the lower pressure of the cartridge made possible by the long barrel and TVCM round. |
|
Originally Posted By JAG2955: https://www.sigsauer.com/media/sigsauer/resources/SIG-SAUER-DSG-Catalog-2021.pdf Page 16 for the SPEAR. I don't see anything new on it, but there's some neat stuff throughout the catalog. What does the SIG 716i say "Assembled in U.S.A."? Don't see the label on any of the other offerings except that one. |
|
Originally Posted By Frost7: Honestly, with enough ammo and a student eager to learn and intelligent enough to take instruction on form after each round of fire, I think you could get anyone managing the recoil of both of those pretty well inside a day. It's not rocket science, it's just the extra oomph of the larger round isn't so forgiving of horrible and inconsistent form like 5.56. Address that adequately and you're golden. Originally Posted By Frost7: Originally Posted By oldbrowndog: Originally Posted By Frost7: I'd love to see that fired by someone who is used to banging out rapid fire .308 Win and semi-auto 12-gauge from a standing stance and actually knows how to take recoil and keep the gun on target. Serious questions: What percentage of current combat arms MOS across all services fit that description? How about SOF? If they don't, how much ammo/time will it take to be proficient with the NGSW? Will that take away from the time for training necessary to reach or maintain proficiency in other critical skills? I think the SPEAR is a neat rifle. I'd like to own one. But I wonder if anyone has those answers. Honestly, with enough ammo and a student eager to learn and intelligent enough to take instruction on form after each round of fire, I think you could get anyone managing the recoil of both of those pretty well inside a day. It's not rocket science, it's just the extra oomph of the larger round isn't so forgiving of horrible and inconsistent form like 5.56. Address that adequately and you're golden. Offhand, stature definitely makes a difference. Little dude at 140 pounds will have a much harder time than a big corn-fed 220 mofo. You can compensate for the lesser weight, but a lightweight dude, or worse, the 120-130 chicks the woke tards want in infantry, won’t get the ammo, time, and training to be as proficient with a battle rifle as the bigger dudes. |
|
Originally Posted By rb889: Offhand, stature definitely makes a difference. Little dude at 140 pounds will have a much harder time than a big corn-fed 220 mofo. You can compensate for the lesser weight, but a lightweight dude, or worse, the 120-130 chicks the woke tards want in infantry, won’t get the ammo, time, and training to be as proficient with a battle rifle as the bigger dudes. I don't know, but I bet this sort of thing is documented in WWII regarding the proficiency of different sized soldiers using the M1 Garand. I wonder if there's any documentation of the smaller soldiers gravitating to the M1 carbine vs the M1 Garand, if they had any choice in the matter. |
|
Originally Posted By lordhuck: I don't know, but I bet this sort of thing is documented in WWII regarding the proficiency of different sized soldiers using the M1 Garand. I wonder if there's any documentation of the smaller soldiers gravitating to the M1 carbine vs the M1 Garand, if they had any choice in the matter. Originally Posted By lordhuck: Originally Posted By rb889: Offhand, stature definitely makes a difference. Little dude at 140 pounds will have a much harder time than a big corn-fed 220 mofo. You can compensate for the lesser weight, but a lightweight dude, or worse, the 120-130 chicks the woke tards want in infantry, won’t get the ammo, time, and training to be as proficient with a battle rifle as the bigger dudes. I don't know, but I bet this sort of thing is documented in WWII regarding the proficiency of different sized soldiers using the M1 Garand. I wonder if there's any documentation of the smaller soldiers gravitating to the M1 carbine vs the M1 Garand, if they had any choice in the matter. I somehow doubt they had any proper documentation, but I’d wager quite a few liked the smaller, lighter, handier carbine with its detachable magazines. There’s definitely plenty of documentation from Vietnam, when the M16 was replacing the M14, at least from the Air Force. Recoil, bulk, and weight are quite compelling. |
|
Originally Posted By uniquesnd: Interesting that the 516 and piston driven 716 are still in the catalog but not for sale commercially. Not terribly uncommon. A lot of times companies will have contractual obligations to support items to government customers beyond their typical commercial availability. Leupold Mark 4 scopes and the third generation SW automatics are examples of this. |
|
Originally Posted By call_me_ski: Not terribly uncommon. A lot of times companies will have contractual obligations to support items to government customers beyond their typical commercial availability. Leupold Mark 4 scopes and the third generation SW automatics are examples of this. Originally Posted By call_me_ski: Originally Posted By uniquesnd: Interesting that the 516 and piston driven 716 are still in the catalog but not for sale commercially. Not terribly uncommon. A lot of times companies will have contractual obligations to support items to government customers beyond their typical commercial availability. Leupold Mark 4 scopes and the third generation SW automatics are examples of this. But why not offer them commercially as well? |
"I am not an Operator but I play one on AR15.com"
|
Originally Posted By call_me_ski: It could be as simple as commercial distributors were not ordering in large enough quantities to justify offering a commercial SKU but LE and MIL were. Originally Posted By call_me_ski: Originally Posted By uniquesnd: But why not offer them commercially as well? It could be as simple as commercial distributors were not ordering in large enough quantities to justify offering a commercial SKU but LE and MIL were. Sig will make just about anything for a large enough contract. |
|
Task and Purpose videos and reviews are some of the worst bullshit reviews I have ever seen. It’s like a bunch of 42A’s decided they wanted to bitch about everything Infantry (which they know nothing about) and started a website. Just say’N Cp |
U.S. Army Distinguished Pistol 2015
|
Maybe we'll get some more info soon. https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2021/10/7/sweating-to-next-gen-soldier-lethality |
AUSA 21 – SIG SPEAR Update The top gun is 20” in 6.5 CM which will be offered as a commercial version with a shorter barrel. Middle is the NGSW gun in 6.8 x 51. Plans are in the work for a commercial version in .277 SIG FURY. Bottom is the SIG SPEAR MCX 8” which serves as a heavy version of the Rattler. It features a 8” barrel and will initially be offered in .308, followed by 6.5 CM |
Please, call me Joe
Follow me on Instagram!
http://instagram.com/tcba_joe/
Follow me on Instagram!
http://instagram.com/tcba_joe/
|
Originally Posted By TCBA_Joe: AUSA 21 – SIG SPEAR Update https://soldiersystems.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/img_4594-1536x1090.jpg So the .277 sig fury and the 6.8 x 51 are not the same? Or are they? |
|
Originally Posted By TCBA_Joe: AUSA 21 SIG SPEAR Update https://soldiersystems.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/img_4594-1536x1090.jpg |
MCX Spear (Page 8 of 37)
Armory Sponsor