quote:

"constant recoil system"

I remember that from the Atchisson Assault 12 drum fed shotgun.

So, what we are to get is M240 conversions to 6.8 and a new .338 also convertible to 6.8. And no doubt a .338 sniper rifle in there somewhere.

quote:

Originally posted by SgtGold:
Truth be known I was in my late teens through early 20's when I 'enjoyed' humping the Pig. Later in my career I was happy to either have it vehicle mounted or be assigned a different weapon.

Weren’t we all in our late teens through early 20’s when we were humping them around.

I got lucky, I had a choice when I got to my first Unit. M-60 or the M-203. I picked the -203. Then I realized that I had to carry all the rounds too.

Man, being “young and dumb” was fun! I’d do it all over again in a heartbeat. Wouldn’t change a thing.

As a somewhat related point, I was talking to a former Special Forces sergeant friend who is very knowledgeable about German army activities in World War II and I raised the issue of rifle marksmanship. I had seen a claim that it was generally very poor, partially because of the Mauser K98 rifle’s nasty recoil. I’ve also read that despite the “riflemen” myth about the US Army, poor marksmanship was often true of our soldiers as well. One book I read (probably by Rick Atkinson) stated that some US soldiers were so poorly trained before being sent to the European Theater that they hadn’t even fired a rifle before getting there. The limited times my father who was a competitive marksman and who served in the ETO mentioned the subject, his comments supported that claim.

My friend said that most small arms casualties on both sides during WWII were inflicted by belt fed weapons. It’s an interesting subject that I may try to research.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
I raised the issue of rifle marksmanship. I had seen a claim that it was generally very poor, partially because of the Mauser K98 rifle’s nasty recoil.

No. A K98k in 8mm Mauser doesn't have noticeably more recoil than other contemporary military bolt rifles, such as a M1903 in .30-06, a No. 1/No. 4 Enfield in .303, a Mosin-Nagant in 7.62x54R, etc.

German rifle marksmanship suffered in general as the war went on due to their rapidly depleting manpower, resulting in them having to rely on increasing numbers of less well-trained and well-suited infantry soldiers, including repurposed support troops and police given rudimentary infantry training, reluctant foreign conscripts/half-hearted "volunteers", and eventually old men and children.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
My friend said that most small arms casualties on both sides during WWII were inflicted by belt fed weapons. It’s an interesting subject that I may try to research.

That's likely true for casualties inflicted by German small arms, as the WW2-era Wehrmacht's small unit tactics centered around utilizing and supporting each squad's belt-fed GPMG(s), initially the MG34 and later the MG42. Some types of German infantry squads - like Panzergrenadiers - had as many as three organic MG34s/MG42s, though just 1 was more typical of standard infantry squads.

But I don't know that's the case for the others.

Most other militaries of the time didn't have belt-fed MGs organic to their small infantry units - with a few exceptions like US parachute infantry rifle squads - and instead relied on magazine-fed (or occasionally clip-fed) light MGs/automatic rifles at the platoon/squad level, while having smaller numbers of belt-fed medium and heavy MGs available to be assigned in support by higher echelons as needed.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: RogueJSK,

quote:

Originally posted by Expert308:
I can see wanting to convert the M240s to use the new 6.8mm ammunition.

But don't they already have a well proven "longer reach" machine gun in the M2?

The 240 can't be converted to fire the 6.8x51. The hybrid cartridge is much higher pressure.
The M2 is significantly heavier than the MG338.

quote:

Originally posted by rscalzo:
The 240 can't be converted to fire the 6.8x51. The hybrid cartridge is much higher pressure.

Apparently the Army disagrees with your assertion that they can't be converted.

From the OP:

quote:

The Army’s Contracting Command-New Jersey at Picatinny Arsenal recently issued two separate contracting notices seeking information about potential options for... M240B/L 6.8x51mm conversion kits

And from the contract linked in the OP's article:

quote:

[The U.S. Army] is conducting a market survey / sources sought notice on behalf of the [PMSL] for a 6.8mm conversion kit for M240B and M240L. Presently, the M240B and M240L machine guns are 7.62mm weapons. The durability, reliability, and function of the M240 weapon platform cannot be significantly compromised with a change in ammunition. The conversion kit should include all hardware and instructions needed to modify a standard M240B and M240L to fire the 6.8mm XM1186 general purpose cartridge. This will include a new barrel assembly and may include changes to the weapon powering through updates to the gas regulator, drive spring, or other means.

However, you are correct that 6.8x51mm has about 33% greater chamber pressure than 7.62x51mm, which is something that would have to be addressed in these conversion kits (using something like new springs and gas regulators as suggested in the contract).

Just because it's not as simple as slapping a 6.8mm barrel on a M240 doesn't mean conversion is impossible.

What’s the difference between .338 Norma and the good old .338 Winchester?

quote:

Originally posted by FrankMoses:
What’s the difference between .338 Norma and the good old .338 Winchester?

Other than the diameter of their projectiles both being .338/8.6mm, .338 Winchester Magnum and .338 Norma Magnum are not related. Though .338 Norma Magnum and .338 Lapua Magnum are.

.338 Win Mag is based on .375 H&H Magnum, has a longer case, and uses lighter bullets with less energy.

.338 Norma is based on .416 Rigby via .338 Lapua, has a shorter case but with a greater case volume, and propels a heavier and longer bullet at higher velocity compared to .338 Win Mag, so has better ballistics, more energy, and a much longer effective range than .338 Win Mag. (Basically double.)

In short, .338 Norma is roughly comparable to .338 Lapua, with both being a big step up from the old .338 Win Mag.