Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
Web Clavin Extraordinaire |
Carl's video over at inRangeTV is also worth watching for more of a shooting look. Shows very clearly that the gun is in no way hard to shoot...if you know how to shoot a gun. Garand Thumb analyzed it best: if you're a shooter, this gun is amazing. If you're not a shooter, it's not the best rifle. ---------------------------- Chuck Norris put the laughter in "manslaughter" Educating the youth of America, one declension at a time. | |||
|
| Member |
Is it safe to assume most regular troops aren't shooters? I know more specialized units take their shooting to a higher level, but does infantry typically train to the level that they would appreciate these rifles, based on Mr. Thumb's assessment? | |||
|
| Freethinker |
I don’t know if I will be around long enough for the rifle to be fully fielded as envisioned, but it will be interesting if I am because I do have my own questions, if not doubts, about how it will play out. In my own limited experience with the Army’s selection and acquisition of new weapons, I more than once got the impression that decisions often came down to what were really just whims of an individual who had the final say. In high school I was involved in an NRA-sponsored and Army-supported small bore marksmanship program, and when I enlisted I had no trouble qualifying as expert with the M14. But later still when introduced to the M16 I was struck by how much easier it was to shoot the gun accurately because of the ammunition’s flatter trajectory and the lighter recoil. The M5 is evidently easy to shoot with lower powered ammunition, probably because of its weight and suppressor, but I really wonder how the average soldier will adapt to it, especially with the full power stuff. I also wonder about the need to defeat body armor with a personal weapon, and, more to the point, what assumptions about “near peer” body armor were made when the specifications for the ammunition were established. In very limited testing I’ve been able to find of ammunition that has similar ballistics to the 277 Fury/6.8×51mm, commercially available level IV plates will stop a single shot. If the clever Chinese develop body armor that’s even more effective, where will that leave the new cartridge? And even if they don’t, will grunts in the future be telling updated tales with the same sorts of claims that were made about Chinese winter clothing stopping 30 Carbine ammunition? ► 6.4/93.6 “Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.” — Plato | |||
|
| Web Clavin Extraordinaire |
I think that was largely his assessment. That for the real trigger pullers in the military, this is a great gun. For the average service member, the weight tradeoff is too high for the gains. ---------------------------- Chuck Norris put the laughter in "manslaughter" Educating the youth of America, one declension at a time. | |||
|
"Member" |
I keep thinking if this doesn't just go away like so many wonderguns before it, how quick before SIG is out of the game? Soon a possible I'd think once the contracts are up and they can farm it out to someone... else. | |||
|
| You have cow? I lift cow! |
Certainly seems like a way more substantial sledgehammer, and less of a general purpose thing. Will these really get handed to every asshole who joins the infantry? Doesn't seem possible. | |||
|
| Member |
A body armor/rifle arms race? Increasingly heavier body armor followed by increasingly more powerful [and heavier] arms. IMO, any State, especially the communist chinese are going to weigh the cost vs. value of the lives of their conscript army and make a cost/benefit analysis. Where do they draw the line? | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
© SIGforum 2024