Why doesn't The Corps go with something like the Canadian C7A2?

This current plan sounds kind of expensive.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

I always liked that configuration for a full length barrel variant.  I'd love a C7 clone.

*ARMY TM 9-1005-319-23&P

The 23&P shows the M16A3 to be a flattop.


Do not however confuse coomercial manufacurers hype with mil nomenclature.

There is no connection.

Just as the current Armalite has no connection with the original Armalite, or if bushamster calls their guns something, it has zero to do with mil nomenclature

I bought one of the A5 stock systems from VLTOR when they first came out in 2010.

It has their EMOD stock with a seven position tube and a special buffer and spring combination
that allows for it to work on anything from an SBR to a rifle length gas system without changing the buffer.

Me too. When I read this thread I thought about how much The Corps would have to shell out to but the mnolithic upper, plus the LMT buis thats a lot of money for shit they already have on hand. Ditch the A2 stock and replace with a 6 pos M4 stock and call it a day. The tax payer side of me is a little pissed over this. I work for a defense contractor and I see some of the dumb shit the military pays for and I think these days the need to be frugal is necessary.


A C7A2 would be a good replacement for the M16A4.


Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Don't argue with me.  I said the A3 morphed into a flat top.  He is the one that said A3 is iron sights only, thus carry handle.

And this little non-relevant history lesson has exactly what to do with this thread?

No one was talking about civilian rifles.



BTW, I had no idea that ArmaLite wasn't the same company as the '60s.

That's how I remember it as well.

It's a shame because Sabre was one of the few companies that marketed ARs over here.

Sabre Defense was not about a few guts stealing small parts...


NASHVILLE, Tenn. —NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) - An Alabama company has bought the assets of a Nashville weapons manufacturer whose former owner and operators face federal charges of illegally exporting weapon parts overseas.

Manroy USA, headquartered in Scottsboro, Ala., finalized the $4.95 million deal this week in a federal bankruptcy court auction for Sabre Defence Industries, LLC, which has current contracts with the military to provide parts for the .50 caliber M2 Browning machine guns and M16 rifles.

An indictment unsealed in February said the British owner of Sabre, Guy Savage, directed his employees in Tennessee to illegally export firearms components to the United Kingdom. Savage was arrested and is facing an extradition hearing in England on March 29.

Manroy outbid major firearms manufacturer Colt Defense, LLC for Sabre's assets. According to bankruptcy files, Sabre had gross revenues of $14.6 million for the last three quarters of 2010.

Manroy President John Owens said the purchase of the Nashville factory will help his small business of just 15 employees expand into the firearms manufacturing market. The company is also looking to take over Sabre's defense contracts, he said.

"Hopefully within a few weeks, we can begin production on the defense contracts," he said.

Owens said they are starting to call back Sabre employees who were laid off, but he said since most of the factory's top officials have been indicted, there will likely be a learning curve to restarting production.

"The entire front line of management is not there to help you understand what you just bought," he said.

Meanwhile, investigators from Scotland Yard and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives are sorting through seized evidence from Savage's home and a factory for Savage's related company, Sabre Defence Industries LTD, based in Northolt, England.

Sabre filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in February after the grand jury returned the indictments against Savage and four employees in Tennessee. Those indicted are Charles Shearon, 55, who was president of the company in Tennessee; Chief Financial Officer Elmer Hill, 64; Director of Sales Michael Curlett, 44; and Arnold See Jr., 54, who was the international shipping and purchasing manager.

Attorneys for the four did not return messages or declined to comment when reached by The Associated Press.

According to the indictment, between 2003 and 2009, Sabre officials were accused of smuggling hundreds of weapons parts, including 5.56 mm rifle assemblies, .223 caliber rifle assemblies, AR-15 bolt catches and A-2 flash hiders, all of which require a license to export.

The indictment says the officials were hiding the weapons parts in false bottoms of containers and maintaining two sets of records to hide their exports. In a 2004 e-mail described in the indictment from Savage to Hill and Shearon, Savage explained there was a big interest in the weapons as the war in Iraq started heating up. But he said he didn't want U.S. bureaucrats telling him how to run his business.

"This Iraq situation has companies banging on our doors for M16s because we are the only supplier outside the US..." he wrote.

ATF officials have been investigating the company since 2009 and searched and seized evidence from the Nashville factory in 2010. Federal officials in the U.S. reached out to Scotland Yard to arrest Savage in February and take evidence from the British factory.

Sgt. Nathan Coutts, from the International Assistance Unit of Scotland Yard, described the Sabre case as one of the largest international weapons trafficking cases his office has worked on.

"This is without a doubt the biggest one we've ever done," Coutts said. "We probably had upward of 100 police officers deployed on the day in addition to the ATF agents that have come over as well."

ATF Special Agent in Charge Glenn "Andy" Anderson praised the work of his agents and investigators overseas in working together on the case.

"In all of these types of cases, our main objective is to protect the public," Anderson said. "Anytime there are times when guns are being manufactured, imported or trafficked, it can get into the stream of the public, get out into the streets. In this particular case, I think there were opportunities where that could have happened."

Anderson declined to comment on where investigators think the gun parts were going after being exported.

Coutts has traveled to Tennessee with the seized evidence, which has to be sorted through and analyzed.

"We've got a huge amount of data to go through," Coutts said. "Because the ATF has put so many resources into this and I've got my team coming out as well, we hope to get this knocked out in about a week or two."

Coutts said Savage has been released on bail and his passport has been seized, but he said the process could take a while because Savage can appeal if he is ordered to be extradited to Tennessee to face the federal charges.


Read more: http://www.vcstar.com/news/2011/mar/22/company-buys-tenn-gun-maker-under-investigation/#ixzz2IcZWBz26
- vcstar.com

That'd be nice.
 

An M16A5 just as Colt releases a civilian version of the M16A4 at SHOT, that's that shit I don't like

Combat Hunter?

The corps jumped the shark here

Its better then before but probably should have just gone with the M27.

You have issues.

It's a shame that Sabre closed and nobody bought their equipment or re-opened their Nashville plant.

Their barrels were very accurate.

Did they just give up on the "civilian" market?



 

A 600 dollar upper? Damn.

Really?  You quoted me.  You said what I said, but sounded like you were correcting me.

None of the M16A3s I was ever issued was a flattop. Carry handle only.

LarryG, thanks for the update, I hadn't known that.

The auto trigger group should be in everything that doesn't have a match trigger.

Like you said earlier, get both with the SSF.

The cost would be significant, even more so than the SSA or S2S.  I don't see that kind of advance in procurement outside of SOCOM.

No, I was agreeing with you.  That's sure what it looks like to me.

Pat_Rogers was not arguing with you either, but just look at how you responded to his post.

Cost too much and H&K does not have the production capability to make the guns in a reasonable time.

Sorry.

However, my response to him was about the bullshit he threw in that was irrelevant to this thread.

I'm kind of surprised they didn't go for a piston upper to match their M27.

I think I found a picture of the real deal here....

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8351/8404271480_d0ff575a8a_b.jpg

At the SHOT Show, Vltor had the KeyMod "KMA5" VIS upper on display. I think this is what MARCORSYSCOM is going after:

I don't believe the info is 100 percent accurate; all the previous prototypes of the M16A4 and M4 PIPs have used the same free floating handguards

Not even close...



That looks delicious.

We borrowed weapons from a Marine battery last week, and all they had was M4s.



Is there a formula for what kind of unit get what weapon?



 

The RIS2 would be a much better choice, though it could stand to have its own PIP already.

At the rate they're going a twelve man rifle squad will be equipped with thirteen different weapons platforms.

The standard issue rifle for the US Marine is an M16A4 MWS, people who use to rate M9s (officers, SNCOS and crew served weapons crews) now rate an M4 carbine instead of a pistol.  Units were allowed to keep pistols as required weapons, so now most SNCOs and Officers are dual armed.  

That battery has both M4s and A4s.  I signed for them years ago when they were new weapons.  

Thank you.

To the military, it makes more sense to upgrade a gun for $1200 or more each than to buy a new purpose built gun for less.

See this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mk_14_Enhanced_Battle_Rifle

Edit: I thought the stocks were much more costly. i found a site that has them for less than $800. I could have swore they cost a lot more than that when I first read about the EBR procurement.

The problem is the purpose built gun will end up costing more, and since it is a new procurement it will have to go through the acquisitions cycle. Meaning all kinds of shenanigans can and will happen,

It may not necessarily end up costing more, but the procurement issue is the problem with the military that I mentioned. They will spend more money and get less bang for the buck because it's the path of least resistance.

The Marine Corps did look at fielding new guns, and purpose built guns would cost a little under 3x more than the upgrades