Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

House Armed Services Committee: Army Must Complete Individual Carbine Competition
Guns.com ^ | June 7, 2013 | Max Slowik

Posted on 06/12/2013 5:51:38 PM PDT by re_tail20

The House Armed Services Committee voted unanimously on an amendment to the 2014 National Defense Authorization Act that would require the Army to finish phase III of the Individual Carbine competition. The competition would determine if, and what rifle may replace the M4 in service today.

The Individual Carbine competition began over five years ago and has pitted offerings from top-tier companies against each other to find out if newer carbines perform better than what’s in use currently, including Colt, FNH, Heckler & Koch, KAC and Remington.

In 2012 the Army began phase II of the competition, having narrowed their selections down to the the Adcor Defense BEAR Elite, the Beretta ARX-160, and the Colt Enhanced M4, FN FNAC, the Heckler & Koch HK416A5 and the Remington ACR, to see if they outperformed the M4A1.

Earlier this year, however, the program was audited by the Defense Department, which determined that the costs of the final trials were inconsistent with the existing M4 upgrade Product Improvement Program (PIP) and found that the Army, which is already facing cutbacks, should push the $49 million set aside for phase III back upstream for other uses.

In May, the Army issued a statement that they in consideration of the audit that they would suspend further evaluation of replacement rifles. The program was suspended, not to see further trials.

(Excerpt) Read more at guns.com ...


TOPICS: Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS: armycarbine; banglist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last

1 posted on 06/12/2013 5:51:38 PM PDT by re_tail20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

Pictures are coming.


2 posted on 06/12/2013 5:51:56 PM PDT by re_tail20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

3 posted on 06/12/2013 5:53:02 PM PDT by re_tail20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

IBTP


4 posted on 06/12/2013 5:54:26 PM PDT by bigheadfred (barry your mouth is writing checks your ass cant cash)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

Having trouble with individual pictures.

All five guns can be viewed at this link.

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2013/march/Pages/IndustryShootingforArmy’sFirstNewRifleinHalfCentury.aspx


5 posted on 06/12/2013 5:54:40 PM PDT by re_tail20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

Can the M-14 Compete? /s

(My Favorite Long Gun of all time, then it’s the 1911 45, am I showing my age?)

TT


6 posted on 06/12/2013 5:55:21 PM PDT by TexasTransplant (Idiocracy used to just be a Movie... Live every day as your last...one day you will be right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

Going by pure aesthetics, the Beretta is one odd-looking weapon, but it would be a nice Evil Black Rifle to carry around.


7 posted on 06/12/2013 5:56:25 PM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasTransplant

1911 being the side arm if folks want to be picky

TT


8 posted on 06/12/2013 5:56:49 PM PDT by TexasTransplant (Idiocracy used to just be a Movie... Live every day as your last...one day you will be right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

I’ve been following this for a while. Even though it’s stacked against the contenders, in favor of the M4 or the M4A1, our Soldiers, I think and feel, deserve a carbine, if not a rifle, with a piston, so it would be as resistant as possible to sand, mud, and snow. All five guns fit this criteria, even the upgraded M4 with a piston.


9 posted on 06/12/2013 5:57:22 PM PDT by re_tail20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

In their attempt to stay in compliance with the U.S. Constitution, I expect Barry and his toads at the Pentagon to select the Kentucky Long Rifle.


10 posted on 06/12/2013 5:57:35 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (23,116,441 households on Food Stamps! Now that's what I call HISTORICAL!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

The Army is two thirds done already with this project. Despite the sequester, it should finish it and make the results public, if nothing else.


11 posted on 06/12/2013 5:58:21 PM PDT by re_tail20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

The Army damn sure needs to up the calibre of any future rifle.The 5.56 is just to weak against drugged up thugs.

They should have learned that in Iraq fighting the drugged up terror creeps.


12 posted on 06/12/2013 6:01:22 PM PDT by puppypusher (The World is going to the dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasTransplant

Your favorites are also mine, and I’m old. Carried both in combat. Not the carbine, but the M16. One of these choices is French made.........it looks nice, but Hell No!


13 posted on 06/12/2013 6:02:50 PM PDT by chesty_puller (Viet Nam 1970-71 He who shed blood with me shall forever be my brother. Shak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: puppypusher

The Army insisted on only 5.56 mm for testing purposes. Multiple calibers are an option after selection.


14 posted on 06/12/2013 6:08:07 PM PDT by re_tail20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TexasTransplant

Can the M-14 Compete? /s

(My Favorite Long Gun of all time, then it’s the 1911 45, am I showing my age?)

TT

Amen Bro., I was issued an M14 as my first weapon and had it for a short while before they took it away and gave an M16. Man how I loved that weapon, in armed combat I want an M14, I fired it a lot and never had a failure, misfire or jam. It is rugged and reliable, can do the job handily up close and can still reach way out there and touch someone. If you can see that far.
I guess I’m showing my age too but the older one gets the more they appreciate a good weapon to rely on.

GOD BLESS


15 posted on 06/12/2013 6:12:25 PM PDT by RAWGUY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: puppypusher

The problem with the 5.56 in the M4 is that short barrel along with a heavy bullet just doesn’t get enough velocity to be effective.

I think with a 20 inch barrel it has been fine. If you have to go slower, then a larger caliber should do better.


16 posted on 06/12/2013 6:12:47 PM PDT by yarddog (There Are Three Things That Remain--Faith, Hope, and Love--and,the Greatest of These is Love..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

17 posted on 06/12/2013 6:17:57 PM PDT by bigheadfred (barry your mouth is writing checks your ass cant cash)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bigheadfred

My hat is off to you. I have to check my picture posting process.


18 posted on 06/12/2013 6:20:19 PM PDT by re_tail20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

no no no i couldn’t get it either so i stole it and put it in photobucket and uploaded from there ;-)


19 posted on 06/12/2013 6:22:07 PM PDT by bigheadfred (barry your mouth is writing checks your ass cant cash)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: bigheadfred

How about the Tavor? That would PO Obama.


20 posted on 06/12/2013 6:28:16 PM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (The reason we own guns is to protect ourselves from those wanting to take our guns from us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: bigheadfred
No image posting. I think we're having problems again ...

I like that these choices are moving to piston systems. I built my last impingement gun three years ago and haven't built anything but piston guns since. I consider the Osprey to be the best/most reliable, and the Adams Arms to be the most versatile. I've built and tested both extensively, until ammo got cost prohibitive.

21 posted on 06/12/2013 6:32:06 PM PDT by MHGinTN (Being deceived can be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: puppypusher

There is nothing wrong with the 5.56mm cartridge. The problem is the bullet. It’s designed to go through light armor and it does that well. What it sucks at is expanding rapidly and dumping its energy into the target. A 62 soft point is absolutely devastating at all but the most extreme ranges.

Even an open tip projectile would be a huge improvement.


22 posted on 06/12/2013 6:32:17 PM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

The Army also thinks that most combat in the future will be in urban city areas, instead of in vast distance battlefields. So they think the 5.56 is the best choice for urban combat. For any distance or special needs requiring a heavier bullet, they have a sniper version of the M-14 and the M-110 sniper rifle.


23 posted on 06/12/2013 6:37:14 PM PDT by re_tail20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

Even an open tip projectile would be a huge improvement.

The Geneva Convention would not allow the use of open tip or hollow point bullets in warfare.

Hardball only.


24 posted on 06/12/2013 6:39:37 PM PDT by puppypusher (The World is going to the dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; EQAndyBuzz

To be honest I don’t know that much about guns. I only owned a .270, 30.06, several shotguns—pump and single shot, a .22 semi-automatic rifle and a 9mm pistol. Owned. I like reading about them, but couldn’t make any type of knowledgeable statement on the types in this article.


25 posted on 06/12/2013 6:45:03 PM PDT by bigheadfred (barry your mouth is writing checks your ass cant cash)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

The Army needs better ammunition (something with adequately long bullets in the 6.5-6.8 range). And we know that such short weapons (seen in the article) are all the rage without enough analytical, objective regards to ballistics—especially terminal ballistics. Not all battles are fought in urban or thick jungle areas, and 20” barrels aren’t hard to carry or swing. I carried and M-203 most of the time (a 60 at about 23 pounds plus ammo belts, for one year).


26 posted on 06/12/2013 6:50:29 PM PDT by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of rotten politics smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: puppypusher

Unless we’re talking in-Country then DHS has set a new standard with their top of line HPs.


27 posted on 06/12/2013 6:51:03 PM PDT by mcshot (God bless the USA! THE GUN DEBATE WAS SETTLED IN 1791!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: puppypusher

“The Geneva Convention would not allow the use of open tip or hollow point bullets in warfare.”

Incorrect. The USMC has been issued open tip ammo for the last couple of years.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2544535/posts

L


28 posted on 06/12/2013 6:53:06 PM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: familyop

I think back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, several nations determined the best compromise of bullet size, power, recoil etc. was the 6.5mm.

Sweden, Greece, Italy, Japan and others all went to the 6.5. My first high powered rifle was a 6.5mm Swedish Mauser, which I ordered through the mail around 1963. I also bought some of the old military surplus with the long, parallel sided round nosed fmj bullets. They weighed 160 grains and would penetrate to an unbelievable degree.

I think the 6.5 is still the best compromise but with lighter, pointed bullets. I bet a 140 grain fmj pointed boat tail bullet would perform great at long and short range.


29 posted on 06/12/2013 6:58:52 PM PDT by yarddog (There Are Three Things That Remain--Faith, Hope, and Love--and,the Greatest of These is Love..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

For the sake of myself, and others who do not know, can you please explain the difference between a rifle and a carbine?


30 posted on 06/12/2013 7:02:45 PM PDT by ops33 (Senior Master Sergeant, USAF (Retired))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ops33

Generally speaking, a carbine has a short barrel and a rifle has a long barrel.


31 posted on 06/12/2013 7:06:35 PM PDT by re_tail20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

Incorrect. The USMC has been issued open tip ammo for the last couple of years.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2544535/posts

Thanks for the Info.Still I doubt that if this were a war against a signatory of the Geneva Convention that the U.S. military would be legally allowed to use that round.

In this case though it does look very good.


32 posted on 06/12/2013 7:07:51 PM PDT by puppypusher (The World is going to the dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ops33

I don’t know what the dictionary definition is but carbine is usually used to denote a shorter and handier rifle as opposed to a full sized one.

It is getting to where just about everyone is using shorter and handier standard battle rifles. So I guess they are both a carbine and maybe still considered a standard rifle.


33 posted on 06/12/2013 7:09:20 PM PDT by yarddog (There Are Three Things That Remain--Faith, Hope, and Love--and,the Greatest of These is Love..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

I didn’t realize the difference was that basic. Can the fire the same rounds?


34 posted on 06/12/2013 7:09:39 PM PDT by ops33 (Senior Master Sergeant, USAF (Retired))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

$49 million just for phase III? Sounds like bureaucracy to me...


35 posted on 06/12/2013 7:12:26 PM PDT by Trteamer ( (Eat Meat, Wear Fur, Own Guns, FReep Leftists, Drive an SUV, Drill A.N.W.R., Drill the Gulf, Vote)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yarddog
"I think the 6.5 is still the best compromise but with lighter, pointed bullets. I bet a 140 grain fmj pointed boat tail bullet would perform great at long and short range."

Agreed. Those will bring down some big game with enough push behind them. 123 gr., 6.5 match bullets are interesting with a little less push, too. ;-)


36 posted on 06/12/2013 7:17:14 PM PDT by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of rotten politics smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ops33

They sometimes fire the same round and sometimes they don’t.

The U.S. M1 Carbine fires a much weaker round than the M1 Garand.

On the other hand, during WWI the Germans standard battle rifle had a 29 inch barrel. They produced a shorter version with a 24 inch barrel (98K with the K being short for Karabiner). They were close to identical except for length. Now a 24 inch rifle would be considered pretty long.

The Spanish issued a carbine which was chambered for the 9mm Largo which is a pistol round. It was called the Destroyer and typically issued to police.


37 posted on 06/12/2013 7:25:09 PM PDT by yarddog (There Are Three Things That Remain--Faith, Hope, and Love--and,the Greatest of These is Love..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: yarddog

Sent you a Freepmail in regards to 6.5 (link to a thread with pictures about what can be done with less than a European load behind it).


38 posted on 06/12/2013 7:29:44 PM PDT by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of rotten politics smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ops33

In the case of the M4 carbine and M16 rifle they both chamber and fire the same 5.56 NATO cartridge. That was not the case with the M1 Garand and the M1 carbine.


39 posted on 06/12/2013 7:55:00 PM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

7.62 over 5.56 all day every day.


40 posted on 06/12/2013 8:02:27 PM PDT by superfries
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: re_tail20

Oh, for crying out loud. The Army should replace the colt uppers with their new gas piston system and a roller cam option from POF, and that would be it, no more controversies about the M16.

The German Belgian stuff is overengineered and expensive.


41 posted on 06/12/2013 8:03:07 PM PDT by JudgemAll (Democrats Fed. job-security Whorocracy & hate:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: superfries

Indeed. SIG 716 for the Army, one can only dream.

That being said, I am sure we could tweak the 223 to go 100 grains and high pressure. It would be very close in performance to regular 7.62


42 posted on 06/12/2013 8:05:34 PM PDT by JudgemAll (Democrats Fed. job-security Whorocracy & hate:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: superfries

I’m a fan of the 7.62 cartridge, too. But the US military ain’t going back to it for a standard weapon. Ain’t gonna happen, no way, no how. It would require the retooling of the entire logistical train and that would cost billions and billions of dollars.

But with the proper projectile the 5.56 can be quite effective out to 500 yards or so. An “open tip” 62 grain bullet with a solid base of some kind is a proven, effective man stopper. I’d prefer it we said screw the GC and started issuing soft point ammo, but that ain’t gonna happen either.

Fortunately us civilian types aren’t bound by the GC’s, so it’s soft point and hollow point projectiles for Clan Luker’s M4geries.


43 posted on 06/12/2013 8:10:20 PM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: JudgemAll

“That being said, I am sure we could tweak the 223 to go 100 grains and high pressure”

While you might be able to load a 100 grain projectile into a 5.56 mm case there wold be so little room for propellant you’d never achieve enough velocity to make a effective cartridge. I load 55 grain soft points into 5.56 brass and 24 grains of powder darn near fills the entire case. That give me about 2900 fps or so if memory serves.

The only way to “tweak” that case for a 100 grain bullet would be to lengthen it. Then you’d have to redesign the entire gun.


44 posted on 06/12/2013 8:26:11 PM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

I did not think of that.

I thought that if burn time was reduced and higher pressure used, we might squeeze out more energy out of the powder burn and more efficiency during the bullet travel time through the barrel. Thus short barrels would require higher pressure but to detriment in handling. Loading a 50Cal can be done dangerously this way if not enough powder is in the chamber because the powder lays flat with a huge surface exposed to the primer spark, making for extremely quick but low energy high power/pressure burns.


45 posted on 06/12/2013 10:06:56 PM PDT by JudgemAll (Democrats Fed. job-security Whorocracy & hate:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

I think the Swedes had it close to figured out long ago with the 6.5mm x 55 Swedish Mauser.


46 posted on 06/12/2013 10:53:38 PM PDT by M1911A1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: JudgemAll

I had heard about a 5.56 blackout? round that had the same ballistic footprint as a 7.62 but have not been able to find any for sale.


47 posted on 06/12/2013 11:15:30 PM PDT by superfries
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: superfries

It’s .300 Blackout.


48 posted on 06/12/2013 11:18:09 PM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: RAWGUY
Amen Bro., I was issued an M14 as my first weapon and had it for a short while before they took it away and gave an M16. Man how I loved that weapon, in armed combat I want an M14, I fired it a lot and never had a failure, misfire or jam. It is rugged and reliable, can do the job handily up close and can still reach way out there and touch someone. If you can see that far.

Maximum effective range with the naked eye is 300 meters. I really liked the M14E2. It had a bipod and a pistol grip. I recall it had a maximum effective range with the naked eye of 720 meters. Put a scope on it and you can shoot effectively beyond a half mile.

49 posted on 06/12/2013 11:26:05 PM PDT by LoneRangerMassachusetts (The meek shall not inherit the Earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

That is it 300 blackout.....have you been able to try this round out...do the claims ring true.....gotta be way more expensive than a 7.62 X 39


50 posted on 06/12/2013 11:37:20 PM PDT by superfries
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson