User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/21/2022 2:43:43 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's the 6.8 fury not the spc II Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'm a 6.8spc fan, but also think this was a bad move, but who am I to say. Given the choice I'd take any gun in 6.5 Grendel over one in 5.56, although if 6.8 spc II was a choice it'd be a no-brainer for me. The "changing calibers is too expensive" excuse ship sailed decades ago, I never bought it considering the stupid money they have spent on projects over the years. Researching the 6.5 caliber in military history, it doesn't appear they keep them that long even though they prove effective enough. It's the 6.8 fury not the spc II I realize they're talking about the 6.8 Fury, I was stating that if I were given a choice I'd choose 6.8 spc II. But the choice is obviously not an option. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2022 10:16:05 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Rent free. God forbid someone with first hand experience post, it would take away from all the baseless speculation. Not going to like a YouTube video? Nah, mostly indifferent. People are allowed their opinions. Most of the hate on the Spear is cope. The rest is people trying to place the blame anywhere other than where it belongs, on the initial requirements. It’s not Sigs fault the army set forth stupid requirements, nor is it their fault they had the best submission. https://i.imgur.com/nyMQTyl.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: In before Narphenal shits up the thread with over-the-top flexing on poors. Rent free. God forbid someone with first hand experience post, it would take away from all the baseless speculation. Quoted: You can bet he’s not going to like this. At least no one has brought up Taylor Swift yet.  Not going to like a YouTube video? Nah, mostly indifferent. People are allowed their opinions. Most of the hate on the Spear is cope. The rest is people trying to place the blame anywhere other than where it belongs, on the initial requirements. It’s not Sigs fault the army set forth stupid requirements, nor is it their fault they had the best submission. https://i.imgur.com/nyMQTyl.jpg I agree. SIG made a great submission. It's unfortunate that the requirements are retarded. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2022 10:17:30 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: GD/LS/Beretta/TV tried that with the RM277 & it went nowhere. Army will always cling to the AR format under any name, like they did with the M5, which is just a FDE AR chambered in 6.8. Prove me wrong. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: No it doesn't. Barrels are getting shorter partly because suppressors are becoming general issue and partly because long barrels suck balls for modern combat. Ammunition is evolving to perform better in short barrels. At some point, I have a feeling a viable bullpup will emerge and become a serious contender. GD/LS/Beretta/TV tried that with the RM277 & it went nowhere. Army will always cling to the AR format under any name, like they did with the M5, which is just a FDE AR chambered in 6.8. Prove me wrong. The M5 is more AR-18 than AR-15. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2022 10:19:05 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: At the beginning he admits: - Never shot it - No firsthand experience - But he watched some videos on the interwebs. Right or wrong, this is just another gun doofus spouting his ill-informed opinion. He was a SF dude for like 19 years with a bunch of combat experience. His opinion as to what makes an effective fighting rifle is valid. You don't need to have shot the M5 to know that a heavy battle rifle is an ass idea. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2022 10:21:15 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They should have just went with a 6.8 SPC II M4A1 That's incredibly fuckin dumb. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2022 10:24:30 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I agree. SIG made a great submission. It's unfortunate that the requirements are retarded. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: In before Narphenal shits up the thread with over-the-top flexing on poors. Rent free. God forbid someone with first hand experience post, it would take away from all the baseless speculation. Quoted: You can bet he’s not going to like this. At least no one has brought up Taylor Swift yet. Not going to like a YouTube video? Nah, mostly indifferent. People are allowed their opinions. Most of the hate on the Spear is cope. The rest is people trying to place the blame anywhere other than where it belongs, on the initial requirements. It’s not Sigs fault the army set forth stupid requirements, nor is it their fault they had the best submission. https://i.imgur.com/nyMQTyl.jpg I agree. SIG made a great submission. It's unfortunate that the requirements are retarded. The military loves doing that against the advice of SMEs and manufacturers. They did it with KAC when KAC told them the M110 was dumb, they did it with G when G said the bendy rail was dumb, and they’re doing it here on a much larger scale. They’ll make whatever you tell them you want to buy, but that doesn’t make it a good idea to want/buy it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2022 10:26:17 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well said and accurate Sir Really should look at the 6mm ARC as a caliber upgrade for the M4 perhaps. No they should not, because that's still a logistical nightmare. PIP the M4 with a free float rail, and a 12.5" barrel, issue silencers, authorize aftermarket plate carriers and shit as official Army policy, so dudes can get better lighter shit on their own, and focus on replacing the M249, M240B, and M110A1 in the form of the M250 and M5. Maybe integrate lightweight mortar systems into platoons like the French did, work on polymer cased 5.56mm to reduce ammunition weight, and we'd be in a way better place. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2022 10:30:35 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The military loves doing that against the advice of SMEs and manufacturers. They did it with KAC when KAC told them the M110 was dumb, they did it with G when G said the bendy rail was dumb, and they’re doing it here on a much larger scale. They’ll make whatever you tell them you want to buy, but that doesn’t make it a good idea to want/buy it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: In before Narphenal shits up the thread with over-the-top flexing on poors. Rent free. God forbid someone with first hand experience post, it would take away from all the baseless speculation. Quoted: You can bet he’s not going to like this. At least no one has brought up Taylor Swift yet. Not going to like a YouTube video? Nah, mostly indifferent. People are allowed their opinions. Most of the hate on the Spear is cope. The rest is people trying to place the blame anywhere other than where it belongs, on the initial requirements. It’s not Sigs fault the army set forth stupid requirements, nor is it their fault they had the best submission. https://i.imgur.com/nyMQTyl.jpg I agree. SIG made a great submission. It's unfortunate that the requirements are retarded. The military loves doing that against the advice of SMEs and manufacturers. They did it with KAC when KAC told them the M110 was dumb, they did it with G when G said the bendy rail was dumb, and they’re doing it here on a much larger scale. They’ll make whatever you tell them you want to buy, but that doesn’t make it a good idea to want/buy it. The M110 is awesome, and I'm unaware of KAC saying it was dumb. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2022 10:33:38 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The M110 is awesome, and I'm unaware of KAC saying it was dumb. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: In before Narphenal shits up the thread with over-the-top flexing on poors. Rent free. God forbid someone with first hand experience post, it would take away from all the baseless speculation. Quoted: You can bet he’s not going to like this. At least no one has brought up Taylor Swift yet. Not going to like a YouTube video? Nah, mostly indifferent. People are allowed their opinions. Most of the hate on the Spear is cope. The rest is people trying to place the blame anywhere other than where it belongs, on the initial requirements. It’s not Sigs fault the army set forth stupid requirements, nor is it their fault they had the best submission. https://i.imgur.com/nyMQTyl.jpg I agree. SIG made a great submission. It's unfortunate that the requirements are retarded. The military loves doing that against the advice of SMEs and manufacturers. They did it with KAC when KAC told them the M110 was dumb, they did it with G when G said the bendy rail was dumb, and they’re doing it here on a much larger scale. They’ll make whatever you tell them you want to buy, but that doesn’t make it a good idea to want/buy it. The M110 is awesome, and I'm unaware of KAC saying it was dumb. I actually thought the M110 was awesome as well, but I recall an interview saying KAC recommended several changes that would have markedly improved the design requirements and they were told to eat a dick. I’ll have to dig up the source as I can’t recall offhand (Forgotten Weapons maybe? I don’t know.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2022 10:38:07 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah so the armchair flannel dude with the hat knows more about how to arm our army than the army... /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/Jennifer-Lawrence-ok-thumbs-up_zps5c0357b9_GIF-103.gif Surely this is sarcasm. If not, you may wanna look up who Stukas (the armchair flannel dude with the hat) is. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2022 11:27:16 AM EDT
[#11]
Excellent video and Analysis. I'm just gonna post a link to the Rumble version.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2022 11:34:20 AM EDT
[#12]
I just don’t understand why you wouldn’t use a necked down 308 derivative for lighter recoil and ability to defeat armor.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2022 11:37:05 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Surely this is sarcasm. If not, you may wanna look up who Stukas (the armchair flannel dude with the hat) is. I'm sure he's a cool dude. Im not so sure he's basing his assessment on current TS threat and requirement reports. Therefore I put much less stock in his opinion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2022 11:46:28 AM EDT
[#14]
Wait so Sig made something that sounds great but doesn’t work…..Shocked
I’ve read a lot of this thread so forgive me if it’s been covered but why is the XM5 13 pounds? With the technology we have developed since it was in (my rifle in BT was a A1) how in the hell is Sig presenting a 13 pound rifle. I get that the rifle itself is not 13 but if you are building a platform you would think they would take in to consideration all the BS the military is putting on their rifles these days. Secondly, why would anyone in their right mind think less rounds is better? 20 round magazines is idiotic for a general issue weapon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2022 11:46:51 AM EDT
[#15]
I handled one at AUSA. It’s as heavy as you’d expect. Let’s not forget that upper body strength has taken a nosedive for decades.
An 800 meter weapon for an Army with 25 yard ranges in an era of HIMARS and highly nimble and lethal drones is just stupid. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2022 12:35:53 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The stated goal, if I understand correctly, has always been to defeat armor. 1) You need an enemy wearing armor first. 2) We're giving up a lot of capacity by going to the new 6.8 cartridge. 3) It relies on marksmanship, and while I'm not military, my understanding is that we generally don't train this, opting for sharp and similar instead. The problem is often what the Army (Infantry Combat Developments) asks for doesn't necessarily make sense -- nor is it coordinated with everybody in the Army. SAPI and Kevlar helmet penetration was the first consideration after crew-served weapon (PKM) overmatch. Chinese steel plates and Mao MICHs are all over the planet (let alone what we gave to Iraq and Afghanistan). Could we have met some of the objectives (at least in the interim) with 77s and M995 AP through our M16s, M4, and SAW? Probably, since at least 2003. Can we push the M855A1, 77, or M995 AP bullets even faster using the new hybrid-technology case? Again, probably, yeah. Imagine that 62-grain copper and steel bullet, the MatchKing, or the tungsten-core projo going out of an M4 at 3500 feet per second. Here are some very real unintended consequences of shit planning: There isn't any 7.62mm Long Range budgeted or acquired for HK M110A1 DM rifles that have been delivered and are in infantry troops' hands today. There are no required DM qualification tables for those guns. Several active duty and National Guard ranges don't have adequate down-range safety accommodation to ensure 7.62 rounds don't travel outside the impact area -- let alone .277 Fury. Restricted to infantry, cav scouts, and sappers, there still aren't any proposed-required M5-specific body armor-killing rifle qualification tables. Nobody has stated what distance that is. The faster, heavier bullet has even further downrange safety hazard distance considerations and consequences. TRADOC hasn't even started considering changing basic rifle qualification to exploit any advantage gained by a new rifle and electro-optics. The easy answer is to continue what we've been doing on the standard 300-Meter pop-up range since 1957. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2022 9:55:15 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: SIG is giving the Army exactly what they asked for -- no more, no less. The problem is often what the Army (Infantry Combat Developments) asks for doesn't necessarily make sense -- nor is it coordinated with everybody in the Army. SAPI and Kevlar helmet penetration was the first consideration after crew-served weapon (PKM) overmatch. Chinese steel plates and Mao MICHs are all over the planet (let alone what we gave to Iraq and Afghanistan). Could we have met some of the objectives (at least in the interim) with 77s and M995 AP through our M16s, M4, and SAW? Probably, since at least 2003. Can we push the M855A1, 77, or M995 AP bullets even faster using the new hybrid-technology case? Again, probably, yeah. Imagine that 62-grain copper and steel bullet, the MatchKing, or the tungsten-core projo going out of an M4 at 3500 feet per second. Here are some very real unintended consequences of shit planning: There isn't any 7.62mm Long Range budgeted or acquired for HK M110A1 DM rifles that have been delivered and are in infantry troops' hands today. There are no required DM qualification tables for those guns. Several active duty and National Guard ranges don't have adequate down-range safety accommodation to ensure 7.62 rounds don't travel outside the impact area -- let alone .277 Fury. Restricted to infantry, cav scouts, and sappers, there still aren't any proposed-required M5-specific body armor-killing rifle qualification tables. Nobody has stated what distance that is. The faster, heavier bullet has even further downrange safety hazard distance considerations and consequences. TRADOC hasn't even started considering changing basic rifle qualification to exploit any advantage gained by a new rifle and electro-optics. The easy answer is to continue what we've been doing on the standard 300-Meter pop-up range since 1957. When you put it like that it looks like another OICW or AN-94 for that matter |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 4:56:23 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Japan is an island roughly the size of Montana with almost no natural resources. China is the third-largest nation in the world and has 14,000 miles of land borders, mostly with nations that are friendly or at least neutral. Those nations include Russia, which is the largest nation in the world with incredible natural resources and is now a sworn enemy of the US. They also include Pakistan, which is right on the Persian Gulf and represents easy access to Middle Eastern oil. Blockading China would destroy their export-based civilian economy, but it wouldn't come close to slowing down their military potential, let alone starve them out. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: "We" wouldn't be likely to see combat in those places, because we don't need to be there. We can close China off from the world and starve them out. The great unlearned lesson from WWII was that Japan succumbed not to brute force but to our submarine and aerial mining campaign. At the end of the war they have factories, but no raw materials. Apply that to China and it means that need the ability to control enough land to put their supplies under interdiction. That's it. Japan is an island roughly the size of Montana with almost no natural resources. China is the third-largest nation in the world and has 14,000 miles of land borders, mostly with nations that are friendly or at least neutral. Those nations include Russia, which is the largest nation in the world with incredible natural resources and is now a sworn enemy of the US. They also include Pakistan, which is right on the Persian Gulf and represents easy access to Middle Eastern oil. Blockading China would destroy their export-based civilian economy, but it wouldn't come close to slowing down their military potential, let alone starve them out. Obama's pivot to the Pacific and containment of China is why the Chicoms are building the Eurasian land portions of Belt&Road. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 5:04:20 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I know me too Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 30 seconds in and I want to chain his arm to the desk. I know me too @Stukas87 In the video, regarding the comment about rifles being defacto PDWs - over on the Small Wars Journal forum some years ago there was a thread about a RUSI study on the efficacy of PDWs compared to SCHV assault rifles. Unfortunately I no longer have a link and my googlefu failed to find said thread or the study on RUSI's site. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 7:49:36 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: @Stukas87 In the video, regarding the comment about rifles being defacto PDWs - over on the Small Wars Journal forum some years ago there was a thread about a RUSI study on the efficacy of PDWs compared to SCHV assault rifles. Unfortunately I no longer have a link and my googlefu failed to find said thread or the study on RUSI's site. I think outside of Afghanistan and maybe a few other places, firefights take place much closer...Look at SF Team that was over run in Nigeria. Yes our future bullet needs to defeat enemy body armor, but we could do that with a much smaller bullet less recoil and allow for 30rd mags if we wanted to. The weight of the XM5 with Vortex scope and a suppressor is ludicrous by all metrics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 8:01:43 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: @Stukas87 In the video, regarding the comment about rifles being defacto PDWs - over on the Small Wars Journal forum some years ago there was a thread about a RUSI study on the efficacy of PDWs compared to SCHV assault rifles. Unfortunately I no longer have a link and my googlefu failed to find said thread or the study on RUSI's site. Did Wilf Owen write it? He was talking about the P90 for general issue 15 years ago. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 8:04:58 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wondered that as well. It'd be interesting but it's not enough to punch lvl plates at 400m. Another member here sent me a link to an article on the Chinese DBP-10 round. 71 grain 5.8mm bullet at 3000 FPS. G7 BC is .193. Transonic at 925 meters from an assault rifle barrel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 9:20:30 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Another member here sent me a link to an article on the Chinese DBP-10 round. 71 grain 5.8mm bullet at 3000 FPS. G7 BC is .193. Transonic at 925 meters from an assault rifle barrel. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I wondered that as well. It'd be interesting but it's not enough to punch lvl plates at 400m. Another member here sent me a link to an article on the Chinese DBP-10 round. 71 grain 5.8mm bullet at 3000 FPS. G7 BC is .193. Transonic at 925 meters from an assault rifle barrel. Seems like they saw the benefits of MK 262 and getting it going even faster. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 9:23:52 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think outside of Afghanistan and maybe a few other places, firefights take place much closer...Look at SF Team that was over run in Nigeria. Yes our future bullet needs to defeat enemy body armor, but we could do that with a much smaller bullet less recoil and allow for 30rd mags if we wanted to. The weight of the XM5 with Vortex scope and a suppressor is ludicrous by all metrics. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: @Stukas87 In the video, regarding the comment about rifles being defacto PDWs - over on the Small Wars Journal forum some years ago there was a thread about a RUSI study on the efficacy of PDWs compared to SCHV assault rifles. Unfortunately I no longer have a link and my googlefu failed to find said thread or the study on RUSI's site. I think outside of Afghanistan and maybe a few other places, firefights take place much closer...Look at SF Team that was over run in Nigeria. Yes our future bullet needs to defeat enemy body armor, but we could do that with a much smaller bullet less recoil and allow for 30rd mags if we wanted to. The weight of the XM5 with Vortex scope and a suppressor is ludicrous by all metrics. Speaking of chunky, I'd like to hear about your experience with the VCOG over the Elcan and how the Short Dot fell out of favor in a future video. Your insight on the subject is priceless compared to guntoobers shilling for clicks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 9:25:40 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I just don’t understand why you wouldn’t use a necked down 308 derivative for lighter recoil and ability to defeat armor. There is no tooth fairy, there is no Easter bunny and there is no ability to defeat armor. Level IV stops .30-06 M2 AP at the muzzle. If tungsten core ammunition was practical for mass use, they'd already use M993. It's not and they don't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 9:29:31 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Just a layman here, but my take away is: - Why not just start fielding the M250 in 7.62x51 right now? Like by the dozens when they come in? Give a guy a M250 in 7.62 and take away his M249? - Was there any effort put into replacing the M249 and M240 with something better before this? Not just the MK48 or a lightened M240, but something legitimately modern and well thought out? The M249 and the M240 both seem like gun modernized out of WW1. - Was there any effort put into bringing the M4 up to the standards the military needed? Like fielding a better bullet or maybe backtracking on 14.5" barrels? Maybe its okay to have a 20" barrel and shoot MK262? - From what I've seen the M4, M240, and M249 have only gotten shorter, and less effective at range, over the years. Is maintaining that direction the right thing to do? - Is defeating body armor really a profound concern to the military? How long is that advantage in Sig's new round going to last? - If explosives produce the majority of battlefield casualties, what efforts have been put into that front? It kind of seems like no one gave a shit before, and now someone figured there was a lot of money to be made on the whole thing. There is no consequential body armor defeating advantage with 7.62x51 or 6.8x51. Level IV is the standard any anyone wearing Level III is just behind the times. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 9:32:38 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I've been wondering, if the goal is to penetrate armor at longer range why aren't we using a 224 Valkyrie with a heavier AP round? Because that won't penetrate armor. Level IV is the new standard. Tungsten core ammo isn't practical, so there's practically no difference between 6.8x51 and 5.56 with regards to armor penetration. If it was practical, they'd already be issuing M993 en masse. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 9:39:06 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Seems like they saw the benefits of MK 262 and getting it going even faster. Kind of. Their bullet has a hardened steel penetrator. It’s more like… some combination of 855 and A1 but with better ballistics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 9:40:44 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There is no tooth fairy, there is no Easter bunny and there is no ability to defeat armor. Level IV stops .30-06 M2 AP at the muzzle. If tungsten core ammunition was practical for mass use, they'd already use M993. It's not and they don't. Armor will just get a little heavier to defeat the threat. We’ve reached the point where anything a man car shoot upright on semi is going to have a hard time getting through body armor. But HE and machineguns don’t care… |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 9:41:52 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There is no consequential body armor defeating advantage with 7.62x51 or 6.8x51. Level IV is the standard any anyone wearing Level III is just behind the times. Disagree. It’s still dependent on the enemy and the type of operation. Many places don’t have a PKM/SVD threat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 9:42:10 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Armor will just get a little heavier to defeat the threat. We’ve reached the point where anything a man car shoot upright on semi is going to have a hard time getting through body armor. But HE and machineguns don’t care… Or you could always aim your rifle at an uncovered body part. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 9:43:17 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Disagree. It’s still dependent on the enemy and the type of operation. Many places don’t have a PKM/SVD threat. What enemy? American militia types and the PLA are buying Level IV by the truckload. Russia can't even handle Ukraine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 9:43:49 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Or you could always aim your rifle at an uncovered body part. Right, that’s where I was going with the hint at beaten zones. Instead of carrying a heavy gun yourself, carry an M4, a belt of link and a LAW. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 9:47:00 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What enemy? American militia types and the PLA are buying Level IV by the truckload. Russia can't even handle Ukraine. Urban cops, unlikely to face anything but intermediate calibers. Same for a lot of special operations outside of regular conflict zones. Even rural police are most likely fine with Level III. Militia types shouldn’t be bothering with Level IV unless it stops M80A1 as you’re not likely to get shot with steel core AP, it’s not widely issued in the west. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 9:57:20 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Speaking of chunky, I'd like to hear about your experience with the VCOG over the Elcan and how the Short Dot fell out of favor in a future video. Your insight on the subject is priceless compared to guntoobers shilling for clicks. The VCOG is heavy thats for sure, it was worth the extra weight for that period (2015) with 6-power over the Elcan's 4. The Short dot while popular with Tier 1 units of the period mid-2000s I know the Elcan was being looked at as early as 2005 for SOPMOD II I think that was a year or 2 before the Short Dot really became popular with Tier 1 units. So I think perhaps just timing and bad luck for the short dot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 10:13:32 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Kind of. Their bullet has a hardened steel penetrator. It’s more like… some combination of 855 and A1 but with better ballistics. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Seems like they saw the benefits of MK 262 and getting it going even faster. Kind of. Their bullet has a hardened steel penetrator. It’s more like… some combination of 855 and A1 but with better ballistics. Even better, so long as you can keep the accuracy up like you can with an OTM compared to a traditional cup and core projectile. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 10:40:25 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Even better, so long as you can keep the accuracy up like you can with an OTM compared to a traditional cup and core projectile. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Seems like they saw the benefits of MK 262 and getting it going even faster. Kind of. Their bullet has a hardened steel penetrator. It’s more like… some combination of 855 and A1 but with better ballistics. Even better, so long as you can keep the accuracy up like you can with an OTM compared to a traditional cup and core projectile. For what they are doing they don’t need excellent accuracy, but they have a round for that too, with a brass case and an 84gr cup and core bullet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 10:51:54 PM EDT
[#38]
Excellent video and I think he makes some valid points.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 10:58:32 PM EDT
[#39]
I wonder if that ultra lightweight mortar from a few years ago would have been a better investment for the average infantry squad.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2022 11:16:03 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wonder if that ultra lightweight mortar from a few years ago would have been a better investment for the average infantry squad. Those are really cool for sure. I just have no clue why the USMC would replace a belt fed with a Hk416. We are supposed to add capability.... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2022 12:09:20 AM EDT
[#41]
After reading this it sounds like most posters also feel the F35 was a waste of money since our 4th Gen fighters would wax the floor with their Russian and Chinese counterparts.
"USAF should have bought more A10s! Brrrrp Moar! CAS!!!" |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2022 5:14:57 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: After reading this it sounds like most posters also feel the F35 was a waste of money since our 4th Gen fighters would wax the floor with their Russian and Chinese counterparts. "USAF should have bought more A10s! Brrrrp Moar! CAS!!!" Except the XM5 does almost everything worse than an M4a1, the one thing it does better, doesn't actually matter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2022 5:25:10 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Urban cops, unlikely to face anything but intermediate calibers. Same for a lot of special operations outside of regular conflict zones. Even rural police are most likely fine with Level III. Militia types shouldn’t be bothering with Level IV unless it stops M80A1 as you’re not likely to get shot with steel core AP, it’s not widely issued in the west. All Level IV stops M80A1. Level IV is rated for .30-06 M2 AP |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2022 5:55:26 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: All Level IV stops M80A1. Level IV is rated for .30-06 M2 AP I would hope it does, but the new round is going 250fps faster so I’m not going to guess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2022 6:13:18 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I would hope it does, but the new round is going 250fps faster so I’m not going to guess. Any good brand of Level IV armor can easily eat the M2AP projectile loaded in .300 WM. That's a significantly greater increase with a heavier penetrator. It's also worth noting that .277 Fury only gets 3000 fps from a 16" barrel. The XM5 has a 13" barrel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2022 7:12:23 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There is no tooth fairy, there is no Easter bunny and there is no ability to defeat armor. Level IV stops .30-06 M2 AP at the muzzle. If tungsten core ammunition was practical for mass use, they'd already use M993. It's not and they don't. You keep referring to WW2 Era and 30 year old rounds. The Army has invested heavily in the 7.62 M1158 round and is currently in full production, and the XM1184 program will follow. You pretend all the army decision makers are using 50 year open source documents, because that is what you have to go off of. https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2021/army/2021m1158.pdf |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2022 7:52:05 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Did Wilf Owen write it? He was talking about the P90 for general issue 15 years ago. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: @Stukas87 In the video, regarding the comment about rifles being defacto PDWs - over on the Small Wars Journal forum some years ago there was a thread about a RUSI study on the efficacy of PDWs compared to SCHV assault rifles. Unfortunately I no longer have a link and my googlefu failed to find said thread or the study on RUSI's site. Did Wilf Owen write it? He was talking about the P90 for general issue 15 years ago. @HIMARS13A Yes, I believe it was Wilf. The name certainly rings a bell. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2022 8:06:50 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You keep referring to WW2 Era and 30 year old rounds. The Army has invested heavily in the 7.62 M1158 round and is currently in full production, and the XM1184 program will follow. You pretend all the army decision makers are using 50 year open source documents, because that is what you have to go off of. https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2021/army/2021m1158.pdf The same army that is trying to adopt the 80 year old concept of a battle rifle? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2022 8:33:21 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hey, maybe they're developing it to use on American citizens. Then it won't be a waste! American citizens likely have more and better armor that Russia or China so you have a point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2022 9:13:21 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Another member here sent me a link to an article on the Chinese DBP-10 round. 71 grain 5.8mm bullet at 3000 FPS. G7 BC is .193. Transonic at 925 meters from an assault rifle barrel. Think of the 5.8 Chinese round as a .23-caliber shooting a 77-grain M855A1-style bullet at around 3000 fps. Really a pretty decent round. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
