[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/k/ - Weapons

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


What is a legitimate, cost saving and more effective option that the US Army should have taken rather than this gay fucking gun? Why didnt they even attempt to still use the same AR15 receivers and just switch out barrel or something?
>>
>>53551743
Because the 6.8 bullet they want with the ballistics performance they want won't fit in ar15 receiver
>>
>>53551743
convert the navy's stockpile of m14s
>>
>>53551743
Most of the money to purchase the weapon goes with the training to use it. By reducing the cost of training you can have more weapons.
>>
scar 17
>>
>>53551903
I have some serious doubts that FN could restrain their Jewishness for long enough to not charge over 3000 dollars out of military contracts for an SCAR-17 retooled for this caliber.
>>
>>53551793
6.5 grendel and 6mm arc have similar ballistic coefficients that can still be used on an ar receiver and isnt nearly as unwieldy.
>>53551807
>>53551903
308 will never be standard caliber
>>
>>53551743
The comfy position is when you acknowledge you don't know or care, because even in your wildest fantasies, your use case is entirely different from the US Army's.
>>
>>53551793
Why did it have to specifically be a 6.8 anyway? Why not 6.5 or 6? Wouldn't going with a smaller faster bullet give you better ballistics and penetration anyway? According to some anons here the Sig gun uses some special type of steel that would handle it so why would they go with something that just seems so inefficient?
>>
>>53552062
Yeah but that wouldn't meet the armor penetration requirement they slapped on last minute.
>>
>>53552255
Cause they did a study back in the mid 2010s that basically PROVED 6.8 was the "best" bullet for the "lethality" they wanted/needed
>>
>>53551743
If they don’t buy the whole gun as a replacement, they can’t surplus the old ones
>>
>>53552294
No they switched from 6.5 to 6.8 because 6.5 steel core had lower BC than 6.8 steel core.
>>
>>53552294
Bought and paid for research i presume.
>>
>>53551743
the army just needed to keep the money flowing by constantly saying they’re developing a new weapon system that they likely wont fully adopt to replace the m4
>>
>>53551743
The Zastava M19 has a quick change barrel that allows the gun to be switch between 7.62x39 and 6.5 Grendel on the fly and testing results have been positive from what i heard.
>>
>>53552424
>that allows the gun to be switch between 7.62x39 and 6.5 Grendel on the fly
A feature that will literally never be used by an army.
>>
>>53552105
what if I want to be able to punch through XSAPI plates? for entertainment purposes
>>
>>53552444
It's a spec-ops thing.
>>
>>53552105
>rarely fire
>kill civilians and the occasional soldier when you do
Sounds the same desu
>>
>>53552444
I hate how much this is true.
>>
>>53552444
Yeah and the XM5 can be swapped to 6.5 Creedmoor or 7.62 NATO by removing the front handguard and then like 4 screws to remove the barrel.
>>
6.5 sneedmore in a lightweight setup with AICS mags and a lightweight suppressor with a baller optics setup. Not quite reaching 6.8x51 ballistics but still bretty good.
>>
>>53552526
The M19's barrel can be swapped with the flick of a switch.
>>
>>53552466
Just use a bolt action in some meme magnum rifle cartridge, or .50 BMG. Realistically, worrying about punching plates in a practical sense rather than just shooting around them isn't worth it unless you're fighting soldiers equipped with power armor from the future. I've been expecting rifle plates for groin coverage to stop being extremely rare for the past decade and they still are.
>>
File: 1640197277447.png (2.02 MB, 2899x2010)
2.02 MB
2.02 MB PNG
>>53552560
Yeah but that's realistically never used.

The only real time your average grunt would need to swap barrels is if you're operating in a NATO country and you ran out of your 6.8x51 but they have assloads of 7.62 laying around.

6.5 sneedmoor is for the civilian market, I doubt any military would bother buying 6.5CM barrels for a gun that already has 6.8x51 barrels since the 6.8x51 should have much better performance than 6.5CM
>>
>>53552526
>Yeah and the XM5 can be swapped to 6.5 Creedmoor or 7.62 NATO by removing the front handguard and then like 4 screws to remove the barrel.
A gun capable of an armorer level barrel swap to a caliber that's actually used by NATO and the rest of the US military could see use. Soldier level ability to swap to a caliber with only civilian users because muh speshul forces like that other anon is talking about will never see any use.
>>
>>53552606
Makes me wonder though, is the US just going to remove itself from NATO standard now?
>>
>>53552735
They said the production of ammunition of NATO calibers is staying the same going forward in the foreseeable future.

Long term, maybe? But it would be a slow transition and I'd have to imagine the new adopted calibers would eventually become the new NATO standards.

The US isn't afraid of keeping a few dozen billion rounds of surplus 5.56/7.62 on hand in case of emergencies.
>>
>>53552735
The US Army as a whole isn't even going to move to the new 6.8 Furry cartridge. Only the designated "close combat force".
>>
File: go for the legs.png (1.28 MB, 1978x825)
1.28 MB
1.28 MB PNG
>>53552466
>>
>>53551743
>>53552278
the best move is to swap 556 barrels mags etc for 6mm arc. you can get a 6mm or 6.5 to 3200+ fps with more r&d into the round. they could probably do a steel base primer like they did for the 6.8 assuming they did it for higher BC. 6mm arc has superior velocities at range and can be considered effective at 1000 yds even. all this while keeping same receivers, parts, and even bolt i think.
>>53551903
>>53552294
>>53552370
>>53551793
>>53552606
6.8 and 308 are not capable of being standardized platforms for the average grunt. every video i see of ngsw being shot its tossing the shooter like a rag doll. these calibers need to be on a 10lb+ gun to be manageable.
>>
>>53552591
>I've been expecting rifle plates for groin coverage to stop being extremely rare for the past decade and they still are.
Is anyone else surprised that we haven't seen this despite plates getting lighter and lighter for a given level of protection. Even in the civilian gear queer world where everyone jerks off about CQB and no one plans on carrying heavy loads like soldiers do that would get in the way of carrying more armor, this doesn't seem to have even become a small trend.
>>
>>53552786
So this entire program was just to make gear for a new unit?
>>
>>53552855
>these calibers need to be on a 10lb+ gun to be manageable.
the XM5 is like 14lbs with ammo, suppressor, optics, etc.
>>
>>53552855
So basically you'd prefer a Sig version of the 6x49 Unified? Honestly i'm down for it.
>>
>>53552868
No, it's 107,000 rifles and 13,000 LMGs to be used by the primary front line fighting units.

If you're in any sort of logistics or support role, even at in-theatre frontline bases and shit, you're getting M4s still.
>>
>>53552862
Try running around with a plate slapping your balls every step. A IIIA flap is bad enough if you have a good cock.
>>
>>53552917
Don't the "diaper" setups that secure the flap against lower half eliminate that problem?
>>
>>53551743
>m4a2 with modern steels and a recontoured bolt, straight-wall polycase ammo that stacks 45 rounds in a 30 round mag, lower drag m855a1 at 80k+ psi
>m60e6 with polycase 6.8 as a 7.62 replacement

this is the ideal future
>>
>>53551743
>adapt TV's plastic cartridge but for 5.56
>keep M4s and give them thicker barrel to deal with the increase psi
>make M16A5 for use against armies equipped with body armor, otherwise use the M4s
>????????
>PROFIT
>>
>>53552890
is this confirmed? i didn’t see sig come out with stats yet. I know base rifle was just shy of 9lbs
>>53552896
no, round to big. whole point is to fit in ar15 receiver.
>>53553056
this.
>>
>>53553206
>no, round to big. whole point is to fit in ar15 receiver.
I know, which is why you use the hybrid case instead of the steel case the 6 Unified had.
>>
>>53553056
>>53553074
These.
>>
>>53553056
Ngl pretty based, 45 rounds of m855a1 good lawdy
>>
>>53551743
Take the SCAR-H and convert it into a bull-pup configuration. You get all of the benefits of the objectively best service rifle ever, combined with the benefits of what is the objectively best configuration for a rifle.
Probably work out much cheaper to boot.
>>
>>53552890
>the XM5 is like 14lbs with ammo, suppressor, optics, etc.


nigger why are you lying? its 8lbs with the suppressor, add another pound for the Optic which also has a laser in it, and a rangefinder. its not like an M4 where you needed to add a bunch of shit to it.
>>
>>53553688
That's what General Dynamics/Beretta/LoneStar Armory was, but with lighter ammo.
>>
>>53553688
The scar sucks dick
>>
>>53553729
It's not 8lb... it's like 8lb just the rifle bare with absolutely zero accessories and no ammo/magazine. Once you add the optic, suppressor, magazine, ammo (heavy as shit) yea I can see it being 14 lb.

You also have to realize it's like a 13 inch barrel too... we aren't even talking an SPR or anything.
>>
>>53553074
The TV doest have extra pressure the way they hit the required FPS was because it was a bullpup that had a longer barrel inherently squeezing some extra velocity out
>>
>>53553729
It's 8.38lbs without the suppressor, 9.84lbs with the suppressor, and 11.24lbs with ammo. And this is all before the optics which are likely at least 1.8lbs or more, so that's about 13lbs total before getting into further accessories (lights, grips, etc)
>>
>>53553729
>add another pound for the Optic which also has a laser in it, and a rangefinder.
That thing is going to weigh twice that or more. A Vortex 1-8 LPVO already weighs a little over a pound without a mount.
>>
>>53553850
Yea I was being conservative when I said 1.8lbs here >>53553817, it could well be 2+lbs
>>
>>53552384
I hate the new NGSW, but this is retarded logic. If it really was rigged research, why would they choose ballistic requirements that are so difficult to engineer weapons for? General Dynamics needed a 19" barrel/bullpup and Sig needed an 3-piece case with pissin' hot load.
There is absolutely no reason to believe the 6.8 didn't genuinely perform the best out of those trials.
>>
>>53552868
You're not getting this unless you're a door kicker
>>
>>53553793
How?
>>
>>53553056
>>53553074
Where's that document that used high pressure cartridges for 5.56 again?
>>
>>53553688
Haha the SCAR is by no means the best service rifle ever what a crock of shit
>>
>>53551743
>What is a legitimate, cost saving and more effective option that the US Army should have taken rather than this gay fucking gun?
M4A1
>>
LSAT in steel core 6 mm would have made way more sense. scrap the idea of shooting through rifle plates.
>>
>>53552469
Sounds more like an under-age autism thing.
>>
>>53553729
Do note the the fancy optic they'll pair this with has to be powered through an external battery pack which is going to add god knows how much more weight.
>>
>>53556555
Wouldn't a door kicker be better off with an M4?
>>
>>53555688
They do this sort of shit all the time.
>>
>>53557633
Yes. They should've adopted this gun to consolidate and replace all the 308 DMRs in inventory, and this thing would've been great. And if they wanted to replace the m4, could've adopted an mcx in 556 beefed up to run fine with m855a1. Im not sure what they're trying to do here, but so far it seems retarded as a flat replacement for the m4
>>
>>53553688
this is retarded. scar sucks and so does 308
>>53555688
even if 6.8 did have the best performance hands down it doesnt that it would be the most ideal for soldiers to shoot. marksmanship scores will plummet with ngws. they will have to make drastic changes to it to make it work properly. someone had to know that 6.8 on ngws weapons system is trash and unrealistic
>>53556778
barrel swap for 6.5 or 6mm then.
>>53557711
>>53557323
these
>>
Out of all of this we're more likely to see the caliber replace 7.62x51 but the only contract to actually go through after congress instantly balks at even (((SIGs))) proposed price is more Knight Armory M110s in 6.8 memeout as DMRs.

In the first phase of the trial before they went to the 3 everyone obsessed about, there were a dozen+ applicants and all the rest just submitted an AR10 variant in a cartridge configuration similar to the .277fury
We already have AR10s in inventory, the latest rifles purchased in 6.5sneedmore, so the logical thing is that the whole program is ignored besides the GPM and optics and after getting told they can't replace a $700 FN made M4 with a $3000 Sig Spear they just rebarrel all the AR10s already in inventory and order some more in the 7.62 replacer.

Getting rid of 6.5creedmore as a one weapon boutique round in service is likely the only thing to happen out of the NGSW program.

Or it's all scrapped because the cold war boomerisms that funded this project have been BTFO by the fact our "near peer" enemies have proven they aren't near or peer.
>>
>>53551743
People are going to meme on me about this but unionically a .243 AR10 with a new custom projectile would be a better alternative. Picrel is the Wilson Combat Ranger, a .243 AR that weighs 7lbs empty.
>>
>>53552062
65 Grendel and 6mm ARC require the ar15 bolt face to be machined too thinly. It impacts longevity and robustness of the bolts.
>>
File: temp.jpg (1011 KB, 1163x2285)
1011 KB
1011 KB JPG
>>53551743

>cost savings

Cool it with the anti-Semitic remarks, pal
>>
>>53551743
It's dumb because infantry small arms barely matter. If it barely matters you may as well have a small arm that is light and easy to shoot.
>>
>>53552062
>6.5 grendel and 6mm arc

Those rounds trade velocity for weight. They come out of the muzzle with low FPS. Not good for armor.
>>
>>53553817
The 12lbs hard limit for the rifle includes attachments. Is a scope not an attachment?
>>
>>53558140
Everyone would just carry pistols if your logic had any basis in reality.
>>
>>53557999
>hk mag
>>
>>53558187
Remove ammo from that calculation and it is around 12lbs with attachments.
>>
/k/ is wrong about this one (and most things)
>pierces armor at range
>lmg isn't underpowered
>every rifleman is a marksman
>lpvo is based af, acog is obsolete
>6.8 btfo jihadis
>standard suppressor to conceal position

actual issues:
>forward assist
>charging handle
>safety is still 90 degrees

its a whole new doctrine. if it doesn't work, there's a retarded amount of m4s laying around. we need experimentation if we want the edge
>>
>>53558211
I know, isn't it cool? I winder if some of my 1960s production mags will fit?
>>
>>53558187
M110A (modified HK417) is over 15lbs once it's got all its accessories
The XM5 is only around half a pound lighter, maybe some of the accessories save weight, but you're still gonna be looking at 13lbs+ no matter what, and probably 14lbs.
>>
>>53558012
>>53558173
>6.5 and 6mm are rounds that have barely any development around them and they have proven capable thus far. with more r&d in either caliber you can acquire the velocity desired and robustness needed.
>>53558073
unironically this.
>>
>>53558416
after the r&d it becomes a 6.8
checkmate
>>
>>53558416
Yea but the 6.8 is the result of further R&D and refinement.
>>
>>53558354
no, its all about giving billions to picrel
>>
>>53558380
Bullshit. The XM5 is lighter than a hk417 by 0.9 pounds.
>>
>>53558466
Again I said M110A which is the army and marine modified and lightened HK417.

It's only about half a pound heavier than the XM5

8.73lbs vs 8.38lbs
>>
>>53558466
Standard HK417 yea, but that's cause it's got a steel receiver whereas the M110A1 is using an aluminum receiver
>>
>>53558374
why is it backwards
>>
File: Ranger-243_1375.jpg (229 KB, 1980x1320)
229 KB
229 KB JPG
>>53558543
It's not
>>
>>53557999
>>53558560
anons, does this dangle got an angle or have i been up for 20 hours
>>
>>53558443
>>53558449
pros
>ballistic performance
cons
>terrible recoil
>unusable in full auto
>too heavy
>entirely new platform
>carry less ammunition
>>
>>53557999
And just for any lurkers who may not be aware, the reason I like .243 so much is because it is a .308 case necked for a 6mm bullet. You get good ballistics and there's plenty of room for powder. I regularly push my 95gr ballistic tip BTHP rounds to 3300 fps. Swap the BTHP for a steel or tungsten core and boom you're popping plates.
>>
>>53558598
>I'm guessing on all of this because I've never even seen a 6.8x51 let alone shot it.

But no I'm sure you're an armchair expert armorer/gunsmith that knows better than 5-10 years worth if army/dod research.
>>
>>53558589
>does it make my pp hard?
I can't speak for you, anon. But it certainly does make my pp hard.
>>
>>53558626
>army/dod research has never produced retardation
Come on, anon. Be serious.
>>
>>53558489
Yeah well if the XM5 is over 12lbs with the scope, then that should mean it wouldn't have been allowed to pass selection. Maybe the scope is light as fuck and we're all wrong?
>>
>>53558660
Sure, but how about we wait until it's fielded before shitting on it.

Remember the M16 was a dumb plastic toy until it got actual use in the field then ppl started raving about it.
>>
>>53558673
Nigger are you dumb? See >>53558241

It's very easy to change the calculation to fit under 12lbs.

Show me ANYWHERE that says NGSW must be under 12lbs with All accessories AND loaded with ammo.
>>
>>53558675
Reasonable. Even so, I will reserve judgement until I get to try one, which might be a decade at this point.
>>
File: ARES Olin AIWS drum.jpg (66 KB, 1023x682)
66 KB
66 KB JPG
>>53551743
Stoner offered one in the late 80s. Half-weight ammo and double size mags with less recoil and all-tracer ability.
>>
>>53558598
>ballistic performance
you're understating it
how many licks does it take to get to the center of body armor? 223 will never know

>recoil
>full auto
suppressive fire was never meant to be accurate from a rifle, and it's clearly not a cqb weapon
>weight
name a light platform that pierces armor at range. its necessary now
>new platform
the entire point
>less ammo
needs less ammo

its not iraq 2001 anymore desu
>>
>>53551743
We should've just went with .224 Valkyrie
>>
>>53558736
>has all the same pros and cons of 5.56
Wow, now we're back at square 1. Great work
>>
>>53558736
Pointless, even at 500 yards the ballistic difference is minimal compared to 5.56

Only like 3 inches of drop difference and minimal energy difference

And realistically 500 yards is further than youd engage a target in combat situations. So in reality your ballistics difference is even less.
>>
>>53558673
No you're just including the ammo weight when you shouldn't be. Remove that and your at like 11.8-12lbs
(13.2-13.4lbs with ammo)
>>
>>53558354
That’s a lot of effort you’ve put into this b8 post.
Here is a you.
>>
>>53558609
.308 and 556 can already defeat lvl 4 plates with tungsten.
I’m all for a SCHV cartridge with better external ballistics, a fuddmagnum cartridge that still can’t pierce armor at the ranges specified without tungsten anyway, miss me with that gay shit.
>>
>>53559694
Honestly I think it's more important to reliably punch through lvl 3 and 3+ plates at range.

Yes 556 CAN penatrate level 3 plates at close range, but at extended range its not that great. Whereas 6.8x51 ball should be capable of easily going through level 3 even out to a few hundred meters without issue.

Maybe it can pen level 4 too, maybe it can't. But it's still better than 556 vs level 3/3+
>>
So actual serious question, what exactly makes the gun so expensive? I know that it's chambered for a brand new cartridge and so it is bound to be expensive but what makes it 8k? Does that include the optic that is definitely also expensive? Does the rifle include some space magic for the huge pressures or is it just overbuilt? Is it possible to make significantly cheaper guns for the new cartridge?
>>
>>53559772
I'm guessing low production numbers plus new design plus defense contractor bloat.
>>
>>53559772
It's only $8k for the launch version

Actual MSRP is expected around $3-4k, probably closer to $3k without a suppressor.
>>
>>53551743
Re-barrel an SR25 in 6.8x51
Give it a Nemo Arms recoiling dampening BCG

Congratulations you now have an NGSW rifle that recoils like a 7.62x39 instead of a 300 win mag and doesn’t require new tooling
>>
>>53559862
Retard, the SR25 was replaced 1 for 1 with the M110A which itself was replaced by the M110A1 which itself is a full 1-2lbs heavier than the XM5.

Weve already had plenty of discussion on the HK417/M110A1 compared to the XM5 in this thread.
>>
>>53551743
ACR
>>
>>53559772
If you're fine getting it chambered in 7.62/.308 or 6.5 Creedmoor and without a suppressor, then it should be available soon.

6.8x51 probably won't be super common for civilian sales for awhile, but you might be able to buy a 6.8 barrel swap at some point.
>>
>>53559758
>reliably punch through lvl 3 and 3+ plates at range.
Is this the newest Sigger cope drop?
>>
>>53560106
>whoa whoa whoa, you cant use a reason that actually makes sense
Sucks when you can't just scream about tungsten huh?
>>
>>53559772
The army contract for the rifle isn’t that expensive per individual rifle. It’s just its new and sig will milk as much money from the cloners for as long as possible
>>
>>53560282
Only good thing about army procurement is that they buy the design, so the army could go around and have someone else manufacture this gun after the initial contract is over if they want to.

The army didn't buy the rights to use the gun, they bought the gun itself.
>>
>>53560282
They're also paying for the production lines to be established, that's how the contract attracts less established/mainstream designers like GD and Textron.
The downside to that is that Sig came in able to design and produce the weapon in-house which basically guarantees smoother and easier contracting.
>>
>>53551743
AR10 in 300 winmag would have been more fun.
>>
>>53552606
>6.5 sneedmoor is for the civilian market
Tell it to USSOCOM, which plans to replace all of their 7.62 weapons with 6.5 Creed. Yes, even the machine guns, not just DMRs and sniper weapons
>>
>>53560423
Lmao you have no source for that and you're delusional

They have been dicking around with a 6.5 Creedmoor sniper since ~2017 (FN Mk 20 SSR) but that's it. Nothing else.
>>
>>53560462
>>53560423
They WERE looking to develop a 6.5CM carbine/AR, but with the NGSW program finishing up, I don't see why they wouldn't just swap to the XM5 instead of going forward with the MRGG (Mid-Range Gas Gun) program which hasn't actually developed into a weapon yet. Just stop the program and buy XM5 if you want something bigger than 5.56 in an AR style gun.
>>
>>53560539
lies
>>
File: 1632401539792.png (694 KB, 799x491)
694 KB
694 KB PNG
>>53560550
>>53560539
Actually FN JUST showed off their MRGG guns a couple days ago I think. Basically just a modified SCAR.

pic related, they have two versions, a 14.5" barrel and 20". 7.62 or 6.5CM barrels

Again, don't really see the point when the XM5 exists, but hey whatever.
>>
>>53560423
LMT and KAC produced a DMR in creed as they were requesting it. Now the new round shits all over it.
>>
File: fn-mrgg-3-1.jpg (350 KB, 800x600)
350 KB
350 KB JPG
>>53560600
>Sig has 2 charging handles?
>Well, we have 3!
>>
>>53560600
>Again, don't really see the point when the XM5 exists, but hey whatever.
Yeah that really doesn't make much sense

Cool you can get a SCAR in 6.5/7.62
OR you could get the SIG XM5 in 6.5/6.8/7.62

Not really a hard choice unless the FN has something special about it.
>>
>>53552255
Why not go full K98 and have 8mm?
>>
>>53560771
>something special

Costing a lot less would count as special.
>>
>>53560823
Considering SCAR pricing, I don't see how they'd manage that.
>>
>>53558609
>Swap the BTHP for a steel or tungsten core and boom you're popping plates
>>53558609
Why not depleted uranium? Make every trigger pull a war crime!
>>
>>53560836
You don't think they can keep it to the less than 8k?
>>
>>53560926
...do you think that's what the army is paying lmao?
>>
File: 1628596718530.png (225 KB, 1560x420)
225 KB
225 KB PNG
>>53560926
Bruh the $8k pricing is early adopter tax on the civilian version, that price has ZERO bearing on what the gun actually costs.

It's just an upszied MCX Virtus which is like $2-2.5k. MSRP should be around $3-4k.
>>
>>53551743
>What is a legitimate, cost saving and more effective option that the US Army should have taken rather than this gay fucking gun?
the bullpup that met the ballistic requirements at sane chamber pressures.
>Why didnt they even attempt to still use the same AR15 receivers and just switch out barrel or something?
this gun is sorta what that solution looks like, the meme piston shit is just siggers being siggers. btw it's more like an AR-10 than an AR-15, but for some reason they wanted the rifle to cosplay as the latter so the barrel got shortened and to meet the performance desires they came up with this nuclear hot clown cartridge.
>>
>>53560973
>btw it's more like an AR-10 than an AR-15
AR-12 not AR-10

Both AR-12 and AR-10 are 7.62/.308 but the AR-10 is direct impingement AR-12 is a short-stroke gas piston.
Since the XM5 is also a short-stroke gas piston cycle, then it's closer to the AR-12, not the AR-10.
>>
>>53560973
>the bullpup
Then we wouldn't have an LMG.
>>
>>53558203
nah
>>
>>53561000
>AR-12 is a short-stroke gas piston.

Isn't that what an AR-18 is?
>>
>53558354
trying way too hard
>>
>>53561049
AR-12 became the AR-18 eventually.

Only one AR-12 ever existed.
>>
>>53558626
nigger those are self evident observations. please go back.
>>
>>53559772
>So actual serious question, what exactly makes the gun so expensive?
>>53558073
>>
>>53555688
>why would they choose ballistic requirements that are so difficult to engineer weapons for
In order to get more profit for their general glownamics/lockshill benefactors
>>
>>53560948
>MSRP should be around $3-4k.
yeah thats definitely 'should' as in 'most likely'. what it really 'should' cost is about 1200. same for the MCX.
>>
>>53561140
Yeah and i bet that's what the army is paying $1000-1500 per gun. MAYBE as high as $2-2.5k with the suppressor.

The rest of the contract money goes towards spare parts, engineering services, and manufacturing capacity.
>>
File: lol.png (536 KB, 1334x1500)
536 KB
536 KB PNG
no refunds, goyim
>>
>>53561034
that's the army's fuckup.
>>
See you faggots in five years when this piece of shit goes the same way as the scar
>>
>>53561316
It's GD's fault.
>>
File: Sad pillow apu.jpg (38 KB, 720x762)
38 KB
38 KB JPG
>>53561049
>>53557999
>>53558609
>>53561053
>ywn own an AR-14
ITS NOT FAIR
>>
>>53561612
AR-14 did exist, just as a prototype only and never entered production, like the AR-12.
>>
>>53551743
Why are you autists so obsessed about this? You have never shot it nor will you, who cares?
>>
>>53561635
It's the closest thing we've gotten to a new primary weapon in years, give them a few months to settle down.

Though really I doubt these threads will stop until the XM5 becomes the M5 or gets cancelled.
>>
>>53558626
you’re a blind faggot. kys
>>53558725
im not supporting 556 nigger. 6mm is a way better round than both 556 and 6.8.
>that’s the whole point
no there is no point unless the goal was to have a marginally better rifle if you can even call it that. the only redeeming quality is the capability of the round other than that the ngsw suck
>>53561388
based and truthpilled
>>
>>53561630
I know, I'm just saying I will never own one. And it tears me up inside. You think those .243 VEPRs will ever come down in price? Idk if those guns are worth $3k
>>
>>53561723
Why is 6mm better?

Because you like it?
>>
>>53561828
no 6mm was simply a suggestion bc 6.8 clearly fucking blows and 556 is lacking
>>
>>53561891
Meh, 6.8 doesn't "clearly fucking blow" you're just seeing it through the eyes of 5.56 doctrine

Obviously, if you treat it like you treat the M4, it's not going to work great. But you simply wont be training the same way on this gun, it just doesn't fit the role.

The new doctrine might be dog shit, but since we don't know how they plan to implement it or the actual details on what they want from it, it's not something you can viably judge based on the existing doctrine around 5.56
>>
>>53561943
we know they plan on replacing the standard issue service rifle aka give it to everyone.
the doctrine for m4 replacement is simple
>lightweight (sub 8 lbs)
>low recoil
>accurate beyond 800 yds
>can it work on current superior design m4 receivers for cost saving and limited retraining?
ngsw
>no
>no
>yes
>no, uses heavily influenced ar15 type receivers but not compatible with it
6mm or 6.5
>yes
>yes
>yes
>yes, simple barrel, bolt and magazine swap. everything else is compatible with ar15
answer is simple the army just has to pay (((sig)))
>>
>>53562164
lmao what the fuck are you talking about?

The doctrine is not the gun, the doctrine is your tactics and training.

What you're giving is your own personal wishlist with your limited knowledge of doctrine/tactics/training.

Like I said, you're simply seeing things through the eyes of 5.56 and going NOOOOO IT'S TOO BIG AND HAS TOO MUCH RECOIL SO I CAN'T GO FULL AUTO ANYMORE
>>
>>53562164
>we know they plan on replacing the standard issue service rifle aka give it to everyone.
No we don't. Front line infantry troops are getting the initial batch of guns for full squad testing, M4s are slated to be retained for POGs and vehicle crews and any plans for wider adoption/squad replacement will be pending the initial squad-level testing. Stop spewing uninformed horseshit.
>>
>>53562197
>doctrine is not the gun
>eyes of 556 doctrine
>personal wish list?
>lightweight
>low recoil
>accurate
you’re a fucking retarded nogunz. have fun fantasizing about your $8k jew rifle. please go back.
>>53562232
>initial front line troops
>replacement will be pending
>plan to replace current service rifle
you are even more retarded than >>53562197
>>
>>53562197
The doctrine and the gun directly influence each other.
>>
>>53562430
Yes, and pretending we'll keep doing 5.56 doctrine with a 6.8 gun is fucking retarded, but half the people in this thread think that's exactly what we're doing.
>>
>>53562539
I'm questioning whether or not the 6.8 doctrine will actually work. It seem to rely heavily on the assumption that you're always going to have favorable conditions.
>>
>>53562539
> Meh, 6.8 doesn't "clearly fucking blow" you're just seeing it through the eyes of 5.56 doctrine
> The doctrine is not the gun, the doctrine is your tactics and training.
stfu nogunz. go back and circle jerk about the ngsw on reddit
>>
>>53562659
Godda love all these complete morons that suddenly turned into expert the moment the NGSW winner was announces and started spouting shit that does completely against everything we learned over the last 70 years because "the technology is different now"
>>
>>53562738
>>53562659
Ah yes, instead we have gunz retards that have only ever shot 5.56 and only know 5.56 doctrine and training pretending we're gonna do the same thing with 6.8 or we're going back to 1950's doctrine with zero changes for the modern era and technology.

Both sides in these threads are filled with morons.
>>
>>53562776
>reddit spacing
Opinion discarded.
>>
File: 1641135454207.png (143 KB, 1010x1272)
143 KB
143 KB PNG
>>53562806
I've been doing it for 15+ years, you're not stopping me now.
>>
it looks kinda thicc tho so i'm inclined to be fond of it
>>
>>53562835
If only it were still legal to beat the gay out of people we could've saved you from 15+ years of being a faggot.
>>
>>53560166
Nigger III+ isn't a real designation and no military is going under IV-rated plates for frontline combat. You have no idea what you're talking about.
>>
>>53551743
This thing is like the gun equivalent of a fat manlet.
>>
>>53559758
pretty sure level 3+ is just level 4
>>
>>53560774
Exactly.
>>
>>53552105
This. In all likelihood I'll be shooting unarmored nigs and other assorted prison trash.
Anyone wearing anything resembling a pc is going to get shot in the gut/pelvis anyway because I've been training for those shots for years now
>>
>>53559758
We are not replacing an entire rifle production and logistics line, along with squad doctrine, just so we can puncture some level III plates. Do you have any idea how retarded that is? Do you not know that armor penetration wasn't even considered in the program?
>>
>>53562891
Nah, 3+ just means it's beyond 3 standards but not quite at 4 level.
>>
>>53552294
>>53555688
The DoD is run by a bunch of noguns, none of the decision makers have ever shot a gun much less actually know what's practical on the battlefield. If the research concluded that everyone would have to use multi-shot 20mm missile launchers to deal with plates barely any of these lizards would've questioned it.
>>
>>53562984
then that's still just level 3
>>
>>53562891
3+ is basically just "it can stop all 5.56" tier
>>
>>53563016
Yes, it is.

It's still sold as 3+ by many companies though because it reliably beats everything included in the 3 rating AND then some, just wont do all of the level 4 requirements (probably just not capable of doing the 30-06 AP round)
>>
>>53559758
Then just use 7.62 instead of wasting money you dumbass.
>>
>>53563018
It can't tho, M855A1 zips right through it.
>>
>>53563037
No the fuck it does not, at 25 yards, maybe. Put it out to 150 yards then tell me it goes right through.
>>
>>53563043
Well then by your logic III+ stops 30-06AP, since when you go out far enough it will have bled enough energy to not penetrate. Got any stats on only 25 yards? Because tests show it goes out quite a bit further.
>>
So can someone tell me exactly why you need the extra range and a computerized scope when the 6.8 isn't even supposed to penetrate the scary totally not fictional gook plates beyond 200 yards?
>>
Anyone else noticed how NGSW shills just sound a lot like fact checkers?
>>
>>53563083
why do we need super expensive jets and a massive navy?
>>
>>53563083
It won't penetrate period. Rounds with better ballistics can't, so this shitheap round won't. 3000fps at the muzzle of a 16" barrel, when the XM5 is 13"? Lolno, IV plates will eat that up.
>>
>>53563075
Nah it'll do level 3 and 3+ even at 100 yards, but 150-200 is usually where it can't pen anymore.

Depends on the specific plates and the barrel length of the gun you're using though.
>>
>>53562806
This shit is retarded. 4chan had that spacing before Reddit even fucking existed.
>>
>>53563103
BAE level 4 plates can take 200 grain projectiles moving at 3200 fps and we're supposed to believe that the 6.8 can penetrate Chinese plates that are supposedly of similar quality.
>>
>>53562864
Chink “level 4” wish plates. Just like their “level 3” plates only stop pistol calibers.
>>
Ngsw is a shitty gun and the 6.8 is a shitty round for the weapon system. Idk why all of the ngsw shills are out and about defending it like this. It will go the way of the scar
>>
>>53562948
Armor penetration was literally a NGSW program requirement.
>>
>>53563174
Cope. Seethe. Mald.
>>
>>53563187
what do you think their $20 bullet is for >>53561307
>>
>>53563200
SCAR was only ever for SOCOM units, they ordered 15000 and canned it after like 1400 were delivered.

XM5 is 107,000 to be ordered, with over 10,000 next year alone.

If they're going the way of the SCAR they need to cancel it FAST
>>
>>53563221
Unless it's a miniature APDS or HEAT round i don't think it's going to change much.
>>
>>53563204
Only person seething is you, you stupid nigger. People have been using the fucking return key for spacing since the god damn internet became mainstream in the early 2000’s including 4chan. “Reddit spacing” is just nigger cope when you get called out for being a retard here.
>>
>>53563100
So what the 6.8 is just to scare the gooks off?
>>
>>53563244
"I'm not mad" he says while screaming slurs at the top of his lungs.
>>
>>53563221
To spend money.
>>
>>53563269
It's also lighter than 7.62 while being more ballistically efficient for a flatter trajectory and more energy on target
>>
>>53563244
Oh he's REEEing now lmao
>>
>>53563043
M855A1 has 3500fps at the muzzle of an M16, you bet your fucking ass that shit is swisscheesing IV plates well beyond 25y.
>>
>>53563103
Didn't they drastically scale back the velocity requirements along the way? I seem to remember a couple of the early contenders were somewhat bigger guns and cartridges that actually managed to meet the 3200+ fps or whatever unrealistic specs they originally had. But I guess they wound up being to heavy and unwieldy(big surprise).
>>
>>53563360
III plates*
>>
>>53563360
It's not swiss cheesing any level 4 plate, you're delusional

Level IV plates are rated for 3 shots of tungsten tipped 5.56 (M995).
>>
>>53563383
It was a typo.
>>53563377
>>
>>53563360
>>53563377
See >>53563173
It'll comfortably do 100 yards, but by 200 yards it wont pen.

Exactly where that cutoff point is depends on the gun you're using and the specific 3/3+ plates you're shooting at.
>>
>>53563366
Which means they'll have to lengthen the barrel to get decent velocities, what a shitshow
>>
>>53563410
Yeah and the initial claim was that 25y was the limit of what could be expected. That's bullshit.
>>
>>53563420
They still haven't confirmed what the muzzle velocity for the 13" XM5 will be. We know they're still "refining" the propellant load in the 6.8x51 round, so who knows what the final performance will be. Speculating now is just dumb.
>>
>>53563440
That was not the claim, the claim was it would do it at 25 yards, it was NEVER claimed that was it's limit to penetrate.

just read it
> at 25 yards, maybe. Put it out to 150 yards then tell me it goes right through.

He never said 25 is where it stop penning, he just said it wouldn't at 150 yards, and from an M4 with a 14.5" barrel, he's right it most likely would not penetrate level 3 plates at 150 yards.
>>
Why is the army obsessed with short barrels now?
>>
File: 1652153703085.png (3.28 MB, 2478x1308)
3.28 MB
3.28 MB PNG
>>53563500
They want to be able to fit in a vehicle comfortably with your gun.

It's likely why SIG put a folding stock on this gun, and likely a reason why it was preferred over the bullpup even if the bullpup was slightly shorter overall length, the folding stock makes the XM5 much easier to get in and out of vehicle with it.
>>
>>53551743
Just adopt AR-10s in with full auto capacity to use along side M4s and M16s also select fire and hand 7.62mm SAWs to certain units and have them be able to use the M240 at the squad level if needed.
>>
>>53563471
You are being hilariously disingenuous or your reading comprehension is lamentably underdeveloped.
>>
>>53563566
And you're being pedantic about word usage in an off-the-cuff online argument.

It's pretty clear he wasn't saying it can ONLY penetrate at 25 yards.
>>
>>53563471
>III+ stops all 5.56
>No, M855A1 will defeat it
>At 25, maybe
>M A Y B E
fucking idiot.
>>
>>53563536
Why not just put an exterior rack for the gun at the back, it's not like they are using it inside
>>
>>53563576
Correct
>>53563588
Yes because i'm not gonna go testing personally, I never meant to imply it could only penetrate at 25 yards, I was simply saying yea, maybe it'll do 25 yards, but it wont do 150 yards.
>>
>>53552855
>>308 not capable of being standardized platforms
If it could be standardized to 5'5 central american spic conscripts it can be standardized for american troops. Get outta here.
>>
>>53563576
>pedantic
I'm not sure who is more stupid, the original anon, or you for chastising me for interpreting
>M855A1 does not zip through III+ plates (false), it MAYBE [sic] could at 25y
as someone incorrectly stating III+ would stand a decent chance at stopping M855A1 at 25y. You're a faggot.
>>
>>53563609
cause shit happens, you wont always get to choose your vehicle choice, and sometimes you want to open your door and start shooting.
>>
>>53555688
The "study" was some retarded gay shit about shooting fantasy modern chinese armor plates and ridiculous scenarios where taliban machinegunners were firing PKMs at 1km rangers hitting next to nobody if at all but bothering american troops. It was worthless. This shit is because of the "overmatch" meme from years ago.
>>
>>53563536
The fire control optic this is intended to come with needs the gun to have a powered rail and and external battery pack mounted on the stock that is connected at all times meaning they aren't going to be able to fold the stock.
>>
>>53563655
Got any proof of that?

We've only ever seen the powered rail on the LMG
>>
>>53563644
This.
>>
>>53552105
Yes, my use cases don't involve grotesque levels of lobbying and corporate welfare for gun companies and burning excessive budget money.
>>
>>53563677
I'm not going to bother looking up the document but the idea was to have it on both, Sig was planning on adding it to their rifle but haven't been able to figure that part out yet while both GD and Textron were able to do it early on.
>>
>>53563706
lol sig is making cash hand over fist with their optics line, p365, and p320 series

they just win anon. are you unfamiliar with that feeling?
>>
>>53563743
I have to believe they wouldn't put a folding stock on a gun that can't fold the stock
>>
>>53563623
Magnetic racks that take zero time to place or grab are the solution
Guy at the back can bring his gun in, a shield should swing out to provide cover to troops exiting the APC
>>
>>53563761
I don't give a fuck if they're "winning", negro. Unless the money goes into my pocket its irrelevant and also irrelevant to the shitty design of these wannabe XM8s.
>>
>>53563763
That sentence doesn't make any sense.
>>
>>53563812
well just read >>53563536
>>53563655
> they aren't going to be able to fold the stock.

Why would they put a folding stock on a gun if they're not able to fold it?
>>
File: sig patent.png (147 KB, 800x917)
147 KB
147 KB PNG
>So shouldn't we put some kind of mechanism to reduce recoil in our lightweight supermagnum battle rifle?
>Nah bro, we'll just put a 25 cent rubber washer in the lower. Trust me.
>>
>>53563808
Reminder, XM8 never officially got an XM designation.

The XM5 has.
>>
>>53563761
Is any of it drop safe though?
>>
>>53563808
>they're receiving corporate welfare!!1!
>i don't care about the money!
make up your mind traitor

oh and here's a pill: xm8 was shit
>>
>>53563858
p365s first gen wasnt, got recalled 2 months after first release
but youre still crying about it basedboy
>>
>>53563830
The LMG originally had a folding stock as well and they changed it after they added the powered rail.
>>
>>53560751
>>53560600
>>2 charging handles
>>3 charging handles
Whats with these colossally RETARD FUCKING designs? Its like they're being made by 3D Printing Sci Fi guns from websites.
>>
>>53563841
If this was actually included i would have less problems with the XM5 but they didn't.
>>
>>53563613
>comparing retarded irrelevant spics to most white civilization who adopted 556.
Exactly my point. It’s not that 308 can’t be adopted. It shouldn’t be for a reason
>>
>>53563878
I was joking you absolute tool, calm down.
>>
>>53562164
>it needs to be light and have low recoil!
>and be accurate beyond 800 yards!
>and pierce armor!
>and fit m4 receivers!!!!!!

absolutely destitute
>>
>>53563959
we're cunts to eachother out of love bb
>>
>>53563971
He didn't say it had to pierce armor.
>>
>>53563761
I'll be real though i don't like either of those, i prefer my P226.
>>
>>53564003
lol but it does
>>
>>53558626
If you had any actual knowledge or experience with the US Army or the DoD you'd know their research and procurament processes aren't worth jack shit.
>>
>>53564048
Where?
>>
>>53564199
in the ceramic plate
>>
>>53558626
All the failed army projects completely disprove your point.
>>
>>53564210
Wait what the hell are you talking about?
>>
>>53563888
Yeah, but that's why I asked for a source, because AFAIK only the LMG would have the powered rail and shit. The anon I was talking to was saying the XM5 wouldn't be able to fold it's stock because of the powered rail and shit. To which I asked, why then would they put a folding stock on it.
>>
File: Sig P226 threaded.jpg (25 KB, 600x366)
25 KB
25 KB JPG
>>53561388
When is Swiss SIG Sauer coming back?
>>
>>53564246
thats where it needs to penetrate armor
you cant into words?
>>
>>53564247
They put a folding stock on it because that's what Sig had laying around. As for a source, no. I am not digging through 3 years worth of news articles for the one line where that was discussed, i'm not a fucking masochist.
>>
>>53564349
Yeah, why design some buffer tube to reduce recoil further when you can put a folding stock you have laying around on it and then not be able to fold it cause lol wouldn't that be funny
>>
>>53563097
The siggers sound like the fucking russia shills that showed up here after the february invasion.
>>
>>53564048
>>53564048
>>53564267
So, let me reiterate. Where does it say in >>53562164 that his ideal round needed to pierce armor?
>>
>>53563200
The SCAR 7.62 still gets use by SOCOM units today. This wouldn't even get that far. Its gonna be the XM8 again.

>>53563236
Those rifles are officially only for testing by troops.
>>
>>53564392
Kind of but not really, i think they sound more like fact checkers because they have that "believe the science!" vibe going on with them.
>>
>>53564427
lmao yeah, 107,000 testing rifles

kill yourself
>>
>>53564439
They did state that between now an 5 year when they guns will actually be finished adoption will be an extended testing phase to iron out any issues it might have left.
>>
>>53558173
>They come out of the muzzle with low FPS
6.8 SIGGER has a muzzle velocity is like 3000fps....from a 16" barrel. That's three inches longer than the XM5 barrel. If armor penetration was actually a big part of the program, they wouldn't have chosen the entrant with an utter chode barrel.
>>
>>53563846
The XM25 also got one and it didn't last even 5 years.

>>53563861
>>traitor
lmao what
>>xm8 was shit
It was yes, just like this, the machine gun and the P320 and sigger nigger's gay optics.

>>53563878
>>basedboy
Is SIG outsourcing their shills from India?
>>
>>53564439
Read the fucking announcement when it was "adopted", retard. Read it yourself and I'm not linking it for you, nobody here is your fucking mother.
>>
>>53558073
>says the plebbit tourist
>>
>>53563443
There is only so much you can do to tweak a load. We're already at sub-3000fps at the muzzle with 80k psi. Either the barrel gets longer, we find a subterranean mountain of tungsten in Arizona or some something, or the load is jacked up to an even more laughable pressure that STILL likely won't produce the same ballistics of previously established rounds in the same magnum family that operate at markedly lower pressures.
>>
I'm extremely skeptical about the optic too. It sounds like a whole lot of pie in the sky bullshit and Vortex sure as hell wouldn't be my first choice to build some bleeding edge computerized scope.
>>
>>53564401
it needs to
>>53564584
>gay optics
>muh bad
baseless
>calling me pajeet
xenophobic opinion discarded
>>
>>53564617
>we find a subterranean mountain of tungsten in Arizona or some something
we already have 2 tungsten deposits greater than 150,000 metric tons

It would just be stupid expensive because US labor costs.
>>
>>53564584
>Is SIG outsourcing their shills from India?
They outsource the parts for their optics from China so i wouldn't put it past them.
>>
File: img_9702.jpg (106 KB, 960x621)
106 KB
106 KB JPG
>>53564628
What gets me about the optic is that they insist that it's under 2 pounds. A 1-8x LPVO with a range finder, ballistic calculator, and laser designator. For reference, 1-8x LPVOs tend to be around 1.5lbs BY THEMSELVES, not counting mount. If that shit manages that weight while still being durable enough to withstand knuckledragger grunt abuse, I want to know when Vortex got their hands on the meteorite made up magic spehs metals that made them capable of that feat.
>>
>>53564673
>it needs to
That still doesn't answer my question.
>>
>>53560948
I think all government contracts have a clause stating they cannot sell to customers for less than they do the government. Therefore 8k makes a lot of sense when uncle sam is a locked in buyer.
>>
>>53563971
never said pierce armor, nigger. ngsw is a 13” barrel but it’s only 3000 fps out a 16” barrel. Do the math on that for armor piercing retard.
>>53564558
This.
>>53564673
>calling someone a xenophobe
confirmed poc or white ally. please kys
>>
>>53564732
>Make it out of titanium and carbon fiber
>Charge the government $5000 funbucks per unit
Not hard.

>3 years later
>These are too light and are all broken
>Offer to make an A1 update package where it actually uses durable materials at the cost of 3.5 pounds of weight
>Army pissed
>Congress refuses to authorize a new scope, so you are stuck with broken lightweight optics, or heavy kinda working optics +100 million dollar contract.
>>
>>53564776
Nah, the $8k price is purely because they only made like 40 of them or some shit
>>
>>53564867
If it sells out immediately, market forces would indicate that price is too low.
>>
>>53564863
$100m?

The contract they already have is for up to ~$2.7B
>>
>>53564863
I think they're actually charging the government $10-12k per unit.
>>
>>53564900
holy nigger fuck, I put $5k as a fucking joke. I hate this country so much it's unreal.
>>
>>53564900
No they're not. That's the total cost of the contract divided by the number of units they're ordering.

The contract however pays for manufacturing lines, engineer services for weapon integration on other platforms, spare parts and repair services, etc.

The actual cost per optic is not $10-12k
>>
>>53557999
no memes i agree
>>
>>53551743
dont cry over this boondoggle, theyll realize its the zoomers M14 and get something better.
>>
>>53564750
>muh question
your question diverts with reality, in which it needs to pierce armor
>>53564784
>do the math
no need, sneed. sig did
also, the suppressor adds velocity
>white ally
youve been triggered lulz
>>
>>53563841
I saw a merchant rubbing his hands together from the thumbnail.
>>
>>53564584
>>53564702
>Is SIG outsourcing their shills from India?
SIRS!!
>>
>>53564892
They got bought up by scalpers
>>
>>53565108
Okay so, the original post didn't say it needs to pierce armor, you just started ranting about how it should, got it.
Man it's really clear to me now that English is a third language for you at best. That or you're just a schizo.
>>
>>53565442
You're Jewish?
>>
>>53565478
It's that goddamn MAC, up to his old tricks again.
>>
>>53565574
What?
>>
>>53565646
military arms channel svd
>>
>>53565108
kek youre a nigger clearly you dont understand the math part or even english too much. Let me help you:
>16"=3000fps
>13"=less than 3000fps
>but muh suppressor velocity
additional 10 fps? please go back you retarded faggot nogunz
>>
>>53551966
>sig’s ceo is a literal Jew
>charging $36k per gun
>FN is going to outjew that
Anon…
>>
>>53552278
Well the 6.8 doesn’t either
>>
>>53565791
>if I just divide the contract cost by the number of guns that means each gun costs that much

lmao fuck off nigger
>>
>>53552062
>.308 will never be a standard cartridge
You mean, never again? Because it literally was one already
>>
>>53552255
>Better ballistics
No
>better penetration
Maybe. Depends more on the specific bullet construction than the diameter itself. A .22 caliber bullet going 4000 fps isn't going to pen better than a .30 caliber projectile going 2800 fps if the .22 projectile is like 14 grains and 5mm long.
>>
>>53565791
FN is Belgian. theyre evil.
>>
>>53565803
I know and i agree with you but that their reasoning.
>>
>>53565946
>>
>>53566064
no they get off on dismembering people and raping children like the Detroux Affair
>>
>>53553729
Nigger why are you lying. It’s 8.38 empty with no mag. A mag is 1.4, so its 9.78 loaded with no optic or suppressor. With a suppressor it’s 11.24lbs. A basic bitch LPVO with mount gets close to 2lbs. It’s well over 13lbs with a scope, especially one with all the extras it has.
>>
>>53553850
>A Vortex 1-8 LPVO already weighs a little over a pound without a mount.
Try 23.9oz without a mount
>>
>>53557999
I’ve thought this also but go with .260 Rem. Same idea but 6.5mm over 6mm purely for a heavier bullet for use in LMGs and degrading cover.
>>
>>53558173
>Not good for armor.
When are you siggers going to realize even at 80k psi the standard round isn’t going through plates either. Level IV plates can take multiple shots from M2 loaded into a .300 win mag at 3200fps.
>>
>>53558354
>pierces armor at range
No it doesn’t. Prove it.
>lmg isn't underpowered
It’s better than 7.62x51. But that isn’t underpowered.
>every rifleman is a marksman
Lol
>>
>>53558626
>But no I'm sure you're an armchair expert armorer/gunsmith that knows better than 5-10 years worth if army/dod research
Unironically yes. Army brass is retarded.
>>
>>53558725
>how many licks does it take to get to the center of body armor? 223 will never know
How many will it take for 6.8? It’ll never know either.
>name a light platform that pierces armor at range. its necessary now
An AR10 with tungsten core ammo.
>needs less ammo
>t army leadership issuing krags instead of mausers
>t army leadership pushing the M14
When has a soldier having less ammo been a benefit?
>>
>>53559758
>Honestly I think it's more important to reliably punch through lvl 3 and 3+ plates at range
Do you have any evidence this can happen with standard ball ammo? What are you considering “at range”
>>
>>53559772
>o actual serious question, what exactly makes the gun so expensive?
cool it with the anti semitic remarks
>>
>>53565738
it's not all about fps, it's energy and ballistic coefficient
it pierces armor. tell me otherwise
>>
>>53566989
prove it doesn't retard
>>53567069
>doesn't penetrate armor
prove it
>muh ar10 tungsten ap
[citation needed]
>when has a soldier benefitted from less ammo?
now. because it pierces armor
>>
What else do you do when level 4 is becoming cheap, common, and light?

The Sig won't defeat it, but it will defeat it with multiple hits quicker, and it will defeat level III in other areas.

I think the idea was also that the IVAS, drone recon, and optic would all work together to help engage targets at greater distance. This plays to America's technological strength.

Is it too soon to switch? Probably. We'll see how good IVAS actually goes. I could see how it will be game changing once the technology works as intended, but I have my doubts it it will.

Israel has their version out but I haven't heard much yet.

Level 4 becoming common and future Level 5 armor is going to require new weapons. I don't think this is the solution.

I think you may want to mix squads up, with riflemen running a higher caliber weapon with better penetration, while the new SAW also offers better penetration. The grenadier can use an updated M4 to save on weight, and the squad leader can run a mix depending on the most likely use.

The US managed logistic for the M1, Springfield 1903, Thompson, BAR, and M3 through WW2 without any of the modern aids, we can have two carts for weapons.

This still might leave a problem with armor though. Barring some sort of revolutionary sabot development, there is not a good solution.

A paper I read on this suggested that the solution might be just to rely more on other weaponry. Better grenade launchers with proximity detonation and "smart scope" assistance could be an answer if deployed on more weapons. It also mentioned smaller grenades to help with capacity.

Better indirect fire use also solves the problem, as do drones and optionally manned vehicles.

The XM157 already had a range finder, ballistics computer, etc. IVAS interconnectivity is supposed to eventually route targeting data out for fire support.

If this gets good enough, you should be able to call in a 155mm guided shell, a UAV, a loitering munition, your ground drone, or your IFV.
>>
>>53567846
Basically:

Aim
Button press
Unmanned IFV or ground drone blasts the target with 20-30mm, or part of a drone swarm peels off and hits the target, or a shell gets fired off, etc.

If the response time was quick enough (which it won't be now) tailing ground drones just stacked with mortars could respond to a squads signals and send firepower capable of negating armor rapidly on target.
>>
>>53567069
Tungsten is not a viable material for ammunition outside of small special forces uses. Even then it might become too scarce.
>>
>>53566075
As someone who is Belgium i am very much disappointed the death penalty isn't a thing here.
>>
>>53567695
We've known for a very long time now that velocity is what has the easiest time killinh armor, sure you can do it using raw energy and high BC but that would mean stuff like .338 tungsten core or .50 BMG. Or you could take it in another direction and make 15mm explosive penetrator rounds.
>>
>>53567754
What if you're fighting an enemy that isn't wearing armor?
>>
>>53568040
infinite m4 stockpile
>>53568020
it has similar ballistics to .338
tungsten isn't out of the question. it's factored into the decision, because the army needs a gun against armor
>>
>>53567846
You gotta be pulling some real strong bait with this shit
>>
Shoot the faggots with armor more with your rifles lmao. If they're still standing keep shooting, that goes for people with armor or without it. If that's not enough hand 7.62 to the troops to supplement the 5.56.
>>
>>53569170
Well according to some of the NGSW shills shooting around the armor isn't physically possible and when you do the bullet just bounces off the guy's skin or some shit.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.