(US) Military’s gun of choice under fire

[Kornman00]

Source (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24229068/).



No weapon is more important to tens of thousands of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan than the carbine rifle. And for well over a decade, the military has relied on one company, Colt Defense of Hartford, Conn., to make the M4s they trust with their lives.

Now, as Congress considers spending millions more on the guns, this exclusive arrangement is being criticized as a bad deal for American forces as well as taxpayers, according to interviews and research conducted by The Associated Press.

"What we have is a fat contractor in Colt who's gotten very rich off our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan," says Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.

The M4, which can fire at a rate of 700 to 950 bullets a minute, is a shorter and lighter version of the company's M16 rifle first used 40 years ago during the Vietnam War. It normally carries a 30-round magazine. At about $1,500 apiece, the M4 is overpriced, according to Coburn. It jams too often in sandy environments like Iraq, he adds, and requires far more maintenance than more durable carbines.

"And if you tend to have the problem at the wrong time, you're putting your life on the line," says Coburn, who began examining the M4's performance last year after receiving complaints from soldiers. "The fact is, the American GI today doesn't have the best weapon. And they ought to."

Continues (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24229068/).


They must consider it "unpatriotic" to consider buying weapons that are used by other countries (ie Germans). Fucking pathetic military brass...

[rossmum]

Fun fact: the Americans didn't mount the 105mm 17pdr. to their Shermans because they were 'reluctant to mount a foreign weapon in the Sherman tank'. So while US tank crews were getting their asses handed to them the moment a real tank decided to rock up, the Brits were off playing with Tigers.

Anyway, $1,500 for an M4? Definitely overpriced, they were $850US back in the 90s and you can't seriously expect anyone to believe that a few slight tweaks here and there are worth another $650...

[Kornman00]

i knew you'd be the first to reply, <3

brain wased\corrupt brass if you ask me; do they actually expect the soldiers to say the M4 is shitty if they don't have ANYTHING to compare it to (besides the even shittier m-hurf-durf-16) :shakefist:

[rossmum]

G36 get

or the newer AK variants

[cls]

brain wased\corrupt brass if you ask me; do they actually expect the soldiers to say the M4 is shitty if they don't have ANYTHING to compare it to (besides the even shittier m-hurf-durf-16) :shakefist:

It's pretty obvious that their corrupt when the American military gives our own troops obsolete junk compared to other countries. The FN Scar and HK 416 are much better weapons then then Colt's old crap any day. Either weapon jams much less, and don't over heat as much.
Hell they could have gone with the XM8 but the Army's dicking around with contractors has got it put on hold for the time being. Most Special Force's are replacing the M4 with much better weapons, good for them. An AK(AK-74u, Ak-101 series) or a bullpup rifle( Famas , Tavor.etc) out preforms the M16 in every aspect.

In short, using the M4 is like using a computer with Windows ME on it.:XD:

[rossmum]

The XM8 was actually a worthless piece of shit by many accounts.

[cls]

The XM8 was actually a worthless piece of shit by many accounts.

Never knew that, it did seem a bit over-hyped.

[Agamemnon]

Plastic is as plastic does.

[rossmum]

Actually, we use the AUG built at Lithgow under license as the Austeyr F88. It had its teething troubles, but it's turned out to be an excellent little rifle.

The XM8 was pretty horrible, though. No idea why they'd consider it over the G36, which it was designed from anywa- Oh, wait. The G36 wasn't designed and built in the US. :rolleyes:

[Kornman00]

The G36 wasn't designed and built in the US. :rolleyes:
So then, which does it have, a "Made in China" or "Made in Mexico" stamp on it :-3?

[Patrickssj6]

I'll keep myself out of this thread...

oh wait :v:

[SnaFuBAR]

M4's make for nice target rifles but out in combat conditions, it sucks. Sure, accuracy is nice, but what does it matter when the gun won't fire? It has many many advanced features, but reliability in the field is terrible. This gun was intended for airfield patrol and protection, not to be a battle rifle replacement.

[Emmzee]

Why can't America get with the rest of the world and use a Bullpup design?

The M16 is full of jams and fail. It can take one day for a soldier to learn how to fire, clean, and disassemble an AK-47, whereas it takes at least a week to do the same for an M16.

[Zeph]

So are the troops in the Middle East not killing insurgents and taking their weapons to use alongside their issued service weapons when they jam? I know people over there were doing this a couple of years ago when some of my family was over there.

[PenGuin1362]

An AK(AK-74u, Ak-101 series) or a bullpup rifle( Famas , Tavor.etc) out preforms the M16 in every aspect.That is completely incorrect. The M16A4/M4 will out perform any weapon from the AK series. Their massive bolt makes for one horribly inaccurate gun, especially on automatic. The M16/M4 lacks the stopping power of say an AK-47 but it's accurate and its grouping is consistent. Not to mention it has a higher rate of fire. Unfortunately it jams far to often and requires to much maintenance.

However that little issue of jamming....>_< does not make for a good combat rifle. To hell with foreign arms being "unpatriotic". The HK-416, hell even the FN SCAR are great replacements. You think we would have learned from ww2 that German engineering = :awesome: Oh wait, this is our government we're talking about, I forgot. These are the same guys who didn't want to purchase the dragon skin armor because it was too expensive....Why on earth would they get us better guns? :rolleyes:

[Emmzee]

So are the troops in the Middle East not killing insurgents and taking their weapons to use alongside their issued service weapons when they jam? I know people over there were doing this a couple of years ago when some of my family was over there.
That's what pisses me off.

Insurgents who don't have anything near the astronomical funding of the United States military have better rifles than we do.

[Bad Waffle]

HMMM....

KTrTrsJu3pk

[TeeKup]

Was that made before or after they realized the Dragon Skin tests were rigged?

wtg Army.

[Boba]

Why can't America get with the rest of the world and use a Bullpup design?

The M16 is full of jams and fail. It can take one day for a soldier to learn how to fire, clean, and disassemble an AK-47, whereas it takes at least a week to do the same for an M16.

Someone watches the military channel. :v:

Also, cocks (http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/12/army_carbine_dusttest_071217/).

Also, America needs more HK416/417. :smithicide:

[Zeph]

That's what pisses me off.

Insurgents who don't have anything near the astronomical funding of the United States military have better rifles than we do.

I dont agree that they're better rifles. They're just friendlier to the untrained and better adapted for their region and people. I haven't read anything you would consider official about them, but aren't they inaccurate at range?

[Emmzee]

I dont agree that they're better rifles. They're just friendlier to the untrained and better adapted for their region and people. I haven't read anything you would consider official about them, but aren't they inaccurate at range?
KvrG4T2K4sE

This should explain pretty much everything.

[rossmum]

I dont agree that they're better rifles. They're just friendlier to the untrained and better adapted for their region and people. I haven't read anything you would consider official about them, but aren't they inaccurate at range?
Only in rigged tests where the guy with the AK jerks on the trigger and the guy with the M16 squeezes it.

It's accurate to 300-odd metres, bit more for the 74 and later. Plus, it's cheap, plentiful, and indestructible. A lot of western European special forces are using them now.

[Emmzee]

It's accurate to 300-odd metres, bit more for the 74 and later. Plus, it's cheap
I can buy the parts for $300 and assemble it myself :awesome:

[CN3089]

The XM8 was actually a worthless piece of shit by many accounts.

Each weapon was fired for 6,000 rounds in an "extreme dust environment." The XM8 scored the best, with only 127 stoppages in 6,000 total rounds, the MK16 SCAR Light had 226 stoppages, while the HK416 had 233 stoppages. The M4 carbine scored "significantly worse" than the rest of the field with 882 stoppages.:ssh:

I mean, the XM8 is basically a disguised G36, right? But with styling from space!


At about $1,500 apiece, the M4 is overpriced, according to Coburn.Uh they cost $3100 maybe mister coburn should play CS:S more since he clearly doesn't know what he's talking about


Also, for anyone talking about the AK variants: Do you seriously think the U.S. Army will buy rifles from Russia?

[cls]

That is completely incorrect. The M16A4/M4 will out perform any weapon from the AK series. Their massive bolt makes for one horribly inaccurate gun, especially on automatic. The M16/M4 lacks the stopping power of say an AK-47 but it's accurate and its grouping is consistent. Not to mention it has a higher rate of fire. Unfortunately it jams far to often and requires to much maintenance.

Then fanboying bullpup rifles it is then.


However that little issue of jamming....>_< does not make for a good combat rifle. To hell with foreign arms being "unpatriotic". The HK-416, hell even the FN SCAR are great replacements.
You think we would have learned from ww2 that German engineering = :awesome: Oh wait, this is our government we're talking about, I forgot. These are the same guys who didn't want to purchase the dragon skin armor because it was too expensive....Why on earth would they get us better guns? :rolleyes:

If Heckler & Koch turned the SA-80 into a good rifle , the Army should just upgrade to a better weapon that currently is in production. FN already manufactures M16's for them.
People that claim things are unpatriotic aren't really patriots at all.
The army really messed up by not investing in the dragon skin.It's pretty much bureaucracy and getting blow jobs(literal and figurative) from Colt contractors.

[CN3089]

Then fanboying bullpup rifles it is then.



If Heckler & Koch turned the SA-80 into a good rifle , the Army should just upgrade to a better weapon that currently is in production. FN already manufactures M16's for them.
People that claim things are unpatriotic aren't really patriots at all.
The army really messed up by not investing in the dragon skin.It's pretty much bureaucracy and getting blow jobs(literal and figurative) from Colt contractors.

For all the talk about the XM8 being overhyped in this thread, 'dragon skin' is actually pretty worthless, fyi

[rossmum]

I mean, the XM8 is basically a disguised G36, right? But with styling from space!
I think the main complaints were to do with the overly heat-sensitive 'disguise' and the fact it didn't use M1913 rails as standard. Still beyond me as to why anyone would pick a dressed-up but less effective version of the G36 over the G36 itself. The XM8 doesn't exactly look intimidating either, which may seem like a bit of a stupid complaint, but the psychological effect of having a large, angular, metal rifle pointed your way shouldn't be underestimated.


Also, for anyone talking about the AK variants: Do you seriously think the U.S. Army will buy rifles from Russia?
Unfortunately, no. "HUR WE WERE ENEMIES WITH DEM KOMMIES ONCE, DON'T BUY THEIR KOMMIE RIFLES" http://sa.tweek.us/emots/images/emot-rolleye.gif


For all the talk about the XM8 being overhyped in this thread, 'dragon skin' is actually pretty worthless, fyi
I remember hearing that a fair bit, wasn't it something to do with the scales just falling off?

[Kornman00]

Was that made before or after they realized the Dragon Skin tests were rigged?

wtg Army.
Yeah, if ever faced with a deployment, you can bet your ass I'm sneaking some dragon skin in the sandbox with me. Too bad I can't as easily do the same for my personal weapon which is sadly STILL the M16A2 :/. Fucking Uncle Sam, hes as corrupt as the puppet monkey we have as our president. I fucking loath the military and the "leaders" of it more and more everyday, but I don't let that get in the way of the job I do because...well its my job :|.

[CN3089]

I think the main complaints were to do with the overly heat-sensitive 'disguise' and the fact it didn't use M1913 rails as standard. Still beyond me as to why anyone would pick a dressed-up but less effective version of the G36 over the G36 itself. The XM8 doesn't exactly look intimidating either, which may seem like a bit of a stupid complaint, but the psychological effect of having a large, angular, metal rifle pointed your way shouldn't be underestimated.

Funnily enough, that was one of the criticisms of the M16 when it was introduced. hurf de durf made by mattel



Unfortunately, no. "HUR WE WERE ENEMIES WITH DEM KOMMIES ONCE, DON'T BUY THEIR KOMMIE RIFLES" http://sa.tweek.us/emots/images/emot-rolleye.gifWell, there's that, and the fact that AKs are shit. http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-patriot.gif


I remember hearing that a fair bit, wasn't it something to do with the scales just falling off?'Melting' in extreme heat, if I recall correctly. Particularly ironic given the name! http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-v.gif

[rossmum]

Funnily enough, that was one of the criticisms of the M16 when it was introduced. hurf de durf made by mattel
Yeah, though the M16 didn't tend to melt under constant fire. It jammed instead :downs:

Either way, the standard G36 would've been a better option, beyond me as to why they went ahead with the XM8. Actually, the Bushmaster ACR's looking pretty good at the moment, as well.


Well, there's that, and the fact that AKs are shit. http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-patriot.gif
uh excuse me sir but i do believe that is a fallacy


Melting in extreme heat, if I recall correctly. http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-v.gif
Well that'd be convenient in Iraq wouldn't it

[Kornman00]

Yeah, though the M16 didn't tend to melt under constant fire. It jammed instead :downs:

Dude, while toying with the A4 models at a range, we'd go through a full mag (controlled bursts, over about a minute) then clear the lanes for about two or three minutes, and start another mag. You know how fucking much that BURNED :gonk:? How the hell do you expect me to sustain a firefight if my HAND IS MELTING <:mad:>? Also, needs moar translucent mags so I can see how many shots I have left...that will be the day :|

[rossmum]

The G36 already has those, naturally. :3

[CN3089]

Either way, the standard G36 would've been a better option, beyond me as to why they went ahead with the XM8. Actually, the Bushmaster ACR's looking pretty good at the moment, as well.

Well, the XM8 is supposed to be an improved G36. I don't really think H&K would dumb down their rifle for the U.S. Unless... http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-hitler.gif


Well that'd be convenient in Iraq wouldn't itI believe one of the people responsible for testing it recommended it to insurgents http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-laugh.gif

e: oh hey cool thanks wikipedia (fyi he's apparently a product manager for the competitor so uh take this with a grain of salt)


I will, however, offer an enlightened and informed recommendation to anyone considering purchasing an SOV-3000 Dragon Skin - don't. I do not recommend this design for use in an AOR with a 7.62x54R (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62x54R) AP threat and an ambient temperature that could range to 120 F. I do, however, highly recommend this system for use by insurgents...

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-nyd.gif

[Kornman00]

whats great is that we're supporting a german range for three days this week...we get to shoot with da germans and :saddowns:http://sa.tweek.us/emots/images/emot-fh.gifto dreams of having real gear...

[CN3089]

The G36 already has those, naturally. :3

Well, it's not like AR15s couldn't use translucent mags, it's just the US Army doesn't buy them.


whats great is that we're supporting a german range for three days this week...we get to shoot with da germans and :saddowns:http://sa.tweek.us/emots/images/emot-fh.gifto dreams of having real gear...

Well at least the US Army gets to actually use its stuff http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/374927153_4aae9e7e97_o.gif

[rossmum]

Well, the XM8 is supposed to be an improved G36. I don't really think H&K would dumb down their rifle for the U.S. Unless... http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-hitler.gif

I believe one of the people responsible for testing it recommended it to insurgents http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-laugh.gif

e: oh hey cool thanks wikipedia (fyi he's apparently a product manager for the competitor so uh take this with a grain of salt)

I will, however, offer an enlightened and informed recommendation to anyone considering purchasing an SOV-3000 Dragon Skin - don't. I do not recommend this design for use in an AOR with a 7.62x54R (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62x54R) AP threat and an ambient temperature that could range to 120 F. I do, however, highly recommend this system for use by insurgents... http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-nyd.gif
hahahah oh dear

Also, the whole new attachment system and melting components thing strikes me as more of an inconvenience than in improvement, there's really not much on the G36 that needs any work.

e:


Well, it's not like AR15s couldn't use translucent mags, it's just the US Army doesn't buy them.
I don't think anyone who uses the AR15 family does, never seen one with a translucent mag. Ever. :raise:

[Emmzee]

I don't think anyone who uses the AR15 family does, never seen one with a translucent mag. Ever. :raise:
My uncle uses translucent mags with his M4.

[rossmum]

I meant military, though even amongst civs I haven't seen any.

[Warsaw]

G36 get

or the newer AK variants

AK-108. For you people who don't know what it is, here's the short version:

It's an Alexandrov Kalashnikova weapon (not Avtomat, purely because it was a joint effort, and they wanted to keep the AK name). It fires the standard NATO 5.56x45mm ammunition in semi-automatic, three-shot burst, or full automatic modes. It has a folding polyamide stock to reduce overall length. It also has an auto-balancing system that counters the recoil, making it very controllable on automatic fire.

Advantages:
-5.56x45mm, don't need new ammo
-Cheap (AK, duh, and Izhmash REALLY needs the money)
-BAR (Balanced Automatic Recoil) system
-Folding stock for CQC
-Reliability

Disadvantages:
-5.56x45mm (not too good for urban combat, but I suspect a 6.5mm Grendel could have an AK-10x variant made for it without much trouble, considering it is 6.5x39mm, and the AK-107 (5.45x39mm version of AK-108) has similar dimmensions).
-Magazines are not STANAG.
-Americans would never use something they didn't design (unless it is made by H&K), and certainly not something the Russians made :downs:.

[Phopojijo]

-Americans would never use something they didn't design (unless it is made by H&K), and certainly not something the Russians made :downs:.I would like to hope that the whole US versus Russia crap is over.

Oh God would I like to... <sigh>

[Warsaw]

Unfortunately it isn't, and won't be for a very long time.

[Flyboy]

'Melting' in extreme heat, if I recall correctly. Particularly ironic given the name! http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-v.gif
I don't really have an amazing background on the subject of weaponry, I know a bit but from an engineering standpoint it would have to be pretty fucking hot for those to melt. The temperatures for something like that to melt would have to be in the upper hundreds, and if it ever got 120 degrees + in Iraq, I'd be more worried about heat stroke than the bullets honestly.

From what I understand the XM8 had a problem with the fact that it was constructed out of plastic, and as such it couldn't take the heat from constant fire.

Normally I would say that there is a political motive for handing our soldiers expensive pieces of crap compared to other foreign weaponry, but I really can't see one other than business ties. Paying more money for a inferior weapon is just idiotic.


Russia thing
I wouldn't buy their weapons either, effective or not it's stupid to invest your military supply in foreign trade, particularly foreign trade with a country that you don't trust and vise versa.

[Pooky]

Since when does the united states not trust Russia? I think you're a little behind on your history

[PenGuin1362]

Since when was the last time we purchased a Russian firearm for use in the U.S. Military...oh wait in the future of NEVER, in the history of EVER. Basically it's never going to happen. For some stupid reasons too. However I still would not use the AK as a replacement for the M16.

[Pooky]

When have we purchased a firearm for use in the US military from most other countries? That doesn't mean we distrust Russia

[CN3089]

I don't really have an amazing background on the subject of weaponry, I know a bit but from an engineering standpoint it would have to be pretty fucking hot for those to melt. The temperatures for something like that to melt would have to be in the upper hundreds, and if it ever got 120 degrees + in Iraq, I'd be more worried about heat stroke than the bullets honestly.

Figure of speech. Ceramics don't melt anywhere near that temperature (more like >2500K).


From what I understand the XM8 had a problem with the fact that it was constructed out of plastic, and as such it couldn't take the heat from constant fire. Composites. Which are used on most modern weapons (including the new AKs a lot of people are fawning over in this thread). And the barrel is still steel, of course.

[Phopojijo]

Normally I would say that there is a political motive for handing our soldiers expensive pieces of crap compared to other foreign weaponry, but I really can't see one other than business ties. Paying more money for a inferior weapon is just idiotic.Unfortunately that's how the Government works... the more money you spend, the more you get in the next Fiscal year.

If you can keep bleeding money, especially into friendly corporations (most of which do nothing except "handle the orders"), you'll get more and more money to bleed into your friends at a later time.

In fact I know a couple of consultants who have perfectly non-destructive methods of saving money for -- in this case the Canadian government. They get almost all of their ideas shot down, because it'll screw with the budgets the next year. Which is ridiculous since it's money that was just getting wasted away by doing things in old, inefficient ways. {{Don't ask specifics -- they did not say, of course}}


When have we purchased a firearm for use in the US military from most other countries? That doesn't mean we distrust Russia
Not *Firearms* -- but a LOT of military equipment is developed and purchased from Canada. Though I suppose you're not really counting Canada :p

[PenGuin1362]

When have we purchased a firearm for use in the US military from most other countries? That doesn't mean we distrust Russia

I never said anything about distrust, it's all about politics. And the standard issue sidearm in the military is the M9, aka the Beretta 92 (Italian) and a very common CQC weapon in the US is the MP5 (HK/German)

[Pooky]

I never said anything about distrust, it's all about politics. And the standard issue sidearm in the military is the M9, aka the Beretta 92 (Italian) and a very common CQC weapon in the US is the MP5 (HK/German)

most covers a lot of countries peng ;)

[Emmzee]

(including the new AKs a lot of people are fawning over in this thread)
Hey, you try finding a good assault rifle for less than $1000 USD that isn't a Kalashnikov.

[CN3089]

Not *Firearms* -- but a LOT of military equipment is developed and purchased from Canada. Though I suppose you're not really counting Canada :p

The only thing I can think of is the Stryker, which was based on the LAVIII. Although I think the LAV was made by an American corporation and based on a Swiss vehicle, so it doesn't really count.

[Classicthunder]

Hey, you try finding a good assault rifle for less than $1000 USD that isn't a Kalashnikov.

If you pay 1000$ for an AK your getting ripped off. There sold around the world in black markets for amounts less than 500$. Sometimes even around 300$.

Anyways I have heard about the M-4 being a piece of shit especially in desert environments. I've also heard the M-16 has been holding up pretty well. Admittedly the G36 is one of the most reliable guns in the world and can still shoot what your aiming at unlike the AK-47.

[legionaire45]

hey nubs, we shud use the xm-29 since it looks relly cool lol
http://world.guns.ru/assault/oicw1.jpg
mind the weight :D

I have another suggestion - considering the Army has been bitching about stopping power with the 5.6mm round, how about they switch over to something like the H&K417, which uses the 7.62mm NATO round and has a familiar form factor that most soldiers should be able to figure out:
http://world.guns.ru/assault/hk417_16-1.jpg
I have no idea what the cost of each of those weapons are, but if it's too expensive then why not go with something proven like a G36 or a Steyr AUG? Hell, if neither of those work how about the military actually lets a new weapon design be tested without all this bureaucratic bullshit that stops every new weapon from having a chance at replacing the M16.

[Zeph]

Hey, you try finding a good assault rifle for less than $1000 USD that isn't a Kalashnikov.

AR-15?

[Kornman00]

I have another suggestion - considering the Army has been bitching about stopping power with the 5.6mm round, how about they switch over to something like the H&K417, which uses the 7.62mm NATO round and has a familiar form factor that most soldiers should be able to figure out:
http://world.guns.ru/assault/hk417_16-1.jpg
I have no idea what the cost of each of those weapons are, but if it's too expensive then why not go with something proven like a G36 or a Steyr AUG? Hell, if neither of those work how about the military actually lets a new weapon design be tested without all this bureaucratic bullshit that stops every new weapon from having a chance at replacing the M16.
looks hawt :o

also, you must not realize that bureaucratics are the way of the future :eng101:! It, not war, will lead to society's demise :-3

[Emmzee]

If you pay 1000$ for an AK your getting ripped off. There sold around the world in black markets for amounts less than 500$. Sometimes even around 300$.
That's why I said less than. Please stop skimming over my posts.

I can buy an AK-74 for $400 from just about any gun store in my area.

[nooBBooze]

I heard a n AK-74 is 12 bucks in iraq. :/

[rossmum]

Composites. Which are used on most modern weapons (including the new AKs a lot of people are fawning over in this thread). And the barrel is still steel, of course.
Indeed, but it's all in the composition (no shitty pun intended); the SA80 debacle and the early AUGs spring to mind.


I have another suggestion - considering the Army has been bitching about stopping power with the 5.6mm round, how about they switch over to something like the H&K417, which uses the 7.62mm NATO round and has a familiar form factor that most soldiers should be able to figure out:
http://world.guns.ru/assault/hk417_16-1.jpg
How novel. They introduced 5.56x45 NATO for use in assault rifles which were lighter, more versatile, more compact, and actually somewhat controllable on automatic, and now they're whining about it being too weak and want their 7.62x51 NATO battle rifles back. :v:

[Flyboy]

Figure of speech. Ceramics don't melt anywhere near that temperature (more like >2500K).

Composites. Which are used on most modern weapons (including the new AKs a lot of people are fawning over in this thread). And the barrel is still steel, of course.
I don't know much about it so I rounded the number low to be safe (well more like idioticily safe :eyesroll:) but it even further emphesizes the point that the armor is completely effective in the temperatures our troops are faced with/ It's simply been rejected out of the military not wishing to invest even more money.

[Warsaw]

Figure of speech. Ceramics don't melt anywhere near that temperature (more like >2500K).

Composites. Which are used on most modern weapons (including the new AKs a lot of people are fawning over in this thread). And the barrel is still steel, of course.

The composites are mostly placed in areas where heat from the gun does not matter. The worst part is the forward grip, because that WILL melt under prolonged sustained fire. However, it will not melt if you are shooting like any American soldier ought to be...on semi auto/small bursts. Plastic receivers are, in my book, a big don't.

[Phopojijo]

The only thing I can think of is the Stryker, which was based on the LAVIII. Although I think the LAV was made by an American corporation and based on a Swiss vehicle, so it doesn't really count.Nah, a lot of stuff gets researched in Ottawa, Val Cartier and other centers. New chaffs/flares for aircraft, laser guided bombs, radar, chemical warfare, etc. A good portion of the "American" research, is actually Canadian.

[Atty]

AR-15?I should really get the pictures of me shooting my Uncles AR-15, that gun is hilarious fun.


I heard a n AK-74 is 12 bucks in iraq. :/Actually, its the same amount as a trip over to Iraq. Why? Because all you've got to do is follow some US Soldiers around and then walk to where they were shooting, then just pick up an AK. Its quite easy.

[rossmum]

Assuming they don't nick it first, which does happen from time to time