Gunny (at the time) Bodette is on the right...
Posted on 12/30/2014 5:44:13 AM PST by C19fan
I know that would be a factor. But I’m thinking more of ol’ fud stuff these days. That was a stretch ago.
Beretta ARX-160.
5.56. Chrome lined 1:7 twist. Completely ambidextrous including shell ejection. Quick barrel change. Can swap barrels to accommodate 7.62x39mm. Piston system.
Civilian version is the ARX-100:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHwJUt8YQUo
“It isn’t made to fire in sustained full auto.”
Bingo as they say here at FR. If M4 met the requirements of sustained 400+ round firefights then it would weigh 15-25 pounds like the current inventoried/deployed weapons do that can sustain that volume.
Infantry works as teams. Fire team, squad, platoon, company, battalion, etc...each component has a balanced arsenal of weaponry to meet the missions they are SUPPOSED to be assigned. Sustained fire is the province of a few squad weapons keeping an enemy pinned down while the riflemen maneuver close enough to grenade the bastards. Or for the mortars, arty, or air to respond and end the disagreement in a civilized manner.
For specialty applications like long range (400 meter+?) accurate anti-personnel shots, there also already exists in the US DoD inventory many a fine tool in many fine platforms and calibers.
But what the heck do I know and I don’t feel strongly about it.
One of my ancestors saved up his meager pay and bought a Spencer to be his weapon on Sherman’s march to the sea. His entire unit did the same and it came in handy on one occasion in particular.
Beretta ARX-160.
5.56. Chrome lined 1:7 twist. Completely ambidextrous including shell ejection. Quick barrel change. Can swap barrels to accommodate 7.62x39mm. Piston system.
Civilian version is the ARX-100:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHwJUt8YQUo
Sir, This is truly one of those debates without end. It’s like arguing over the merits of a 63 Corvette and a 2014 model. Yes, I would rather have the 63 but the 2014 is a far superior automobile.
I usually agree with anything Gen Scales writes but I must disagree with this article.
I’ve spent many years carrying the M16 and M4 carbine. I enlisted in 1974 and retired in 2008. Upon retirement, I was asked to go with the Marine Brigade into Afghanistan and spent the next four years as the Training Advisor to the Commanding General, Regional Command South West.
The M16 I carried in 1974 is NOT the M16A4 carried today as the Service Rifle for the USMC. As the Division Gunner, Infantry Weapons Officer, 2nd Marine Division, my job was to advise the Commanding General on training and employment of Infantry Weapons. I can say with complete confidence; I have not seen a single report of a M16A4 Service Rifle failure in Combat! Nor is there ANY evidence that the 5.56 does not meet the requirements of the Ground Combat Forces.
Weapons Systems are replaced when and if deficiencies are uncovered or a superior system capability is developed and a need identified.
Although much talk, amongst gun enthusiast, indicate that the 5.56 does not meet the capabilities required by the Combat Ground Forces, I have seen no evidence this is true. I’m not saying that a larger caliber projectile would not surpass the wounding/killing capability of the 5.56. What I am saying is that neither the US Army or the Marines show any data that indicates the 5.56 is not meeting the requirements of the Ground Combat Element.
There is absolutely no comparison in the M16A4/M4 and the AK series weapons. I’ve spent six years training Iraqi and Afghan Soldiers, armed with all variations of the AK systems. I’ve never met a single Iraqi Solder, Afghan Soldier and certainty no American who would give up their M16A4/M4 for a AK series weapon. Anyone who says they would prefer an AK over the M16A4 has never participated in a comparison shoot-off on a live fire range. My Marines would do this demonstration routinely and the results were laughable. The only area that an AK could even compete is reliability. Yes, the AK is very reliable but no more so than the M16A4.
Ok guys; my 2 Cents!
Terry L Walker
Marine Gunner
CWO5
USMC Retired
Sniping in Iraq evolved away from the old 2-man sniper-spotter team, to a small squad with security elements. The security elements usually carried M-16s with 4X Trijicon scopes. Sometimes such a target-rich opportunity arose that the primary sniper was assisted by the security men with these “designated marksmen rifles.”
They found that with the heavy 77 grain Black Hills ammunition, these M-16s were making many, many kills out past 600 yards. A scoped semi-auto rifle that can shoot under 2 MOA groups is extremely versatile. It can defend you up close, and nail the enemy far away. Try that with an AK-47!
They even evolved the tactic of a “sniper ambush” with multiple rifles waiting for a group of enemy to appear at 400+ yards. Firing at the same time, many enemy could be killed before they could scatter and take cover. Again, try that with an AK-47 at 400+ yards.
Please read #48 and comment if you feel like it.
Travis, you absolutely correct. The 2nd Marine Division used the 5.56 77gr Black hills Ammunition coupled with the SAMR, Squad Advanced Marksman Rifle. This was a heavy barrel M16A4 with a Harris bipod and variable power scope. Our boys wrecked havoc on the Insurgents and could routinely hit targets out to 700 yards.
The ACOG became the most important upgrade to the M16A4/M4 system. Since ROE required a more discriminate shooting profile, the ACOG became the action.
I really don't want to settle anything from any distance by myself. I like a whole bunch of stuff going their way topped off by a grenade, mortor, tank round, bomb or shell. Those I believe are the bestest types of fight. In fact I recomend doing house clearing with a tank round. But I'm not in charge.
With those heavier bullets, don’t they have to change to a barrel with a 1:8 twist?
I’ve got a few boxes of that 77 gr Black Hills ammo but I haven’t fired any. My RRA is chambered for 5.56 mm but my concern is that the bullet may be too long.
Any insight you can share?
Thanks for the input! I don’t feel “outgunned” in my suburbs with my M-4gery, that’s for sure.
That's also using a TA11 ACOG. I just got a Meopta Artemis 2100 (front focal plane) I was going to try out.
Interestingly, this rifle does almost equally well with several types of ammo from 55 to 77gr, even maintaining POI between loads. At least out to around 200m, at which point they diverge a bit. Works as good as I could hope.
Kinda heavy, though!
Not me, I just shoot cheap stuff out of my M-4gery.
Joe has used it though, see above.
There are not many slow-twist barrels out there any more, since longer/heavier bullets have become the norm.
Gunny (at the time) Bodette is on the right...
I’ve got a 16 inch heavy barrel in 5.56 from Rock River. I’ll give the beaver stuff a try. Thanks.
A couple of quibbles, one minor, one major. The minor one is the notion of a Russian soldier putting out 140 rounds of fire (aimed or otherwise) out of an AK in the space of a minute. I'd love to know how Magical Ivan could manage that one. Standard mag for that rifle is 30 rounds, standard drum is 75. Best of luck.
The major one is probably more of article editing than actual knowledge: it's that the author starts off the article arguing for simplicity and robustness and finishes with gear that you have to be an engineer to operate, much less fix in the field. I'm not sure where he got the impression that those computerized sights are in widespread use among hunters. We just don't have that kind of money. Similarly, adding a high-tech suppressor to a battle rifle will cost you range and add complexity and service issues. Are those worth the proposed advantage of making the operator harder to locate?
As for caliber, yes, a new one should certainly be on the table for reasons stated so many times on FR I won't bother to repeat. I haven't any strong opinions on the topic but the 6.5 Grendel sounds intriguing. Got a little range on the 5.56 but not as much as the 7.62. Tools for jobs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.