RE: http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,181898,00.html

I would say the USMC is not going to change from the basic M-16A4 to some other "KILL-O-ZAP" wonder weapon anytime soon.
Money, the war and plain old stubborness will stop that.
Semper Fi

Why does the Marine Corp want a 5.56 IAR. The saw is a 7.62 Killing weapon! the 5.56 round is a maiming round.That is like taking the rocks out of a sling shot and substituting spit balls!!!. What retired Marine general or Navy Admiral is going to get his pockets full of loot at the expence of the jarheads that will be carring it???.Thats why the Machine gun was invented to kill more at one time not to wound them???.Thats why the .45 cal.Pistol was invented to knock down the moro warrores back in the Philopean insurection. because the .38cal pistol didn't faze them with all the drugs they were hoped up on !!!.Well my friend the drugs are still out there!!!. and some hoped up rag head is going to keep right on comming. are some Idiot Imbecial that is dumb enough to beleave what the clarics say about 16 vistal virgins .And it takes a complete Idiot to do some thing like blow his self up on the say so of a Dress wearing rag headed claric???.

You cannot replace a belt-fed weapon with a magazine-fed one. The SAW is getting old and they are some pretty decent, newer belt-fed weapons out there. The USMC should look to adopt those, not newer M-16's with beefier components.

It didn't take long for someone to bring up the "5.56 round wouldn't kill an ant if it hit it in the head" argument. Tell you what. Anyone who thinks the 5.56mm will "deflect off a piece of grass" or "won't stop a person so we should go back to 30-40 Krag rounds" is welcome to stand 400 meters in front of me, a SAW, and a 100 rd. belt. I guarantee that you will have made your last idiotic statement.

quote:

Originally posted by 9644985:
Why does the Marine Corp want a 5.56 IAR. The saw is a 7.62 Killing weapon! the 5.56 round is a maiming round.That is like taking the rocks out of a sling shot and substituting spit balls!!!. What retired Marine general or Navy Admiral is going to get his pockets full of loot at the expence of the jarheads that will be carring it???.Thats why the Machine gun was invented to kill more at one time not to wound them???.Thats why the .45 cal.Pistol was invented to knock down the moro warrores back in the Philopean insurection. because the .38cal pistol didn't faze them with all the drugs they were hoped up on !!!.Well my friend the drugs are still out there!!!. and some hoped up rag head is going to keep right on comming. are some Idiot Imbecial that is dumb enough to beleave what the clarics say about 16 vistal virgins .And it takes a complete Idiot to do some thing like blow his self up on the say so of a Dress wearing rag headed claric???.

Uh, the SAW IS 5.56...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by foxred03:
You cannot replace a belt-fed weapon with a magazine-fed one. The SAW is getting old and they are some pretty decent, newer belt-fed weapons out there. The USMC should look to adopt those, not newer M-16's with beefier components.

It didn't take long for someone to bring up the "5.56 round wouldn't kill an ant if it hit it in the head" argument. Tell you what. Anyone who thinks the 5.56mm will "deflect off a piece of grass" or "won't stop a person so we should go back to 30-40 Krag rounds" is welcome to stand 400 meters in front of me, a SAW, and a 100 rd. belt. I guarantee that you will have made your last idiotic statement.

Hey, don't knock the 30-40 Krag, the round was a good one for it's day and it is still a fine hunting round...
I prefer the 30-06 or the .308, for most game in the contiguous 48 and for that matter, the 6MM Remington or the .257 Roberts are pretty darned good all around cartridges for most game, up to and including mule deer and if at extremely close range, say fifteen to twenty yards, can give a moose or an elk a real bad time, with a well placed shot...
They are on the light side for moose and elk and would not be my choice for hunting either one...
IMHO...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by 9644985:
Why does the Marine Corp want a 5.56 IAR. The saw is a 7.62 Killing weapon! the 5.56 round is a maiming round.That is like taking the rocks out of a sling shot and substituting spit balls!!!. What retired Marine general or Navy Admiral is going to get his pockets full of loot at the expence of the jarheads that will be carring it???.Thats why the Machine gun was invented to kill more at one time not to wound them???.Thats why the .45 cal.Pistol was invented to knock down the moro warrores back in the Philopean insurection. because the .38cal pistol didn't faze them with all the drugs they were hoped up on !!!.Well my friend the drugs are still out there!!!. and some hoped up rag head is going to keep right on comming. are some Idiot Imbecial that is dumb enough to beleave what the clarics say about 16 vistal virgins .And it takes a complete Idiot to do some thing like blow his self up on the say so of a Dress wearing rag headed claric???.

It sure is nice to have an expert on the SAW here.

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by foxred03:
You cannot replace a belt-fed weapon with a magazine-fed one. The SAW is getting old and they are some pretty decent, newer belt-fed weapons out there. The USMC should look to adopt those, not newer M-16's with beefier components.

It didn't take long for someone to bring up the "5.56 round wouldn't kill an ant if it hit it in the head" argument. Tell you what. Anyone who thinks the 5.56mm will "deflect off a piece of grass" or "won't stop a person so we should go back to 30-40 Krag rounds" is welcome to stand 400 meters in front of me, a SAW, and a 100 rd. belt. I guarantee that you will have made your last idiotic statement.

Hey, don't knock the 30-40 Krag, the round was a good one for it's day and it is still a fine hunting round...
I prefer the 30-06 or the .308, for most game in the contiguous 48 and for that matter, the 6MM Remington or the .257 Roberts are pretty darned good all around cartridges for most game, up to and including mule deer and if at extremely close range, say fifteen to twenty yards, can give a moose or an elk a real bad time, with a well placed shot...
They are on the light side for moose and elk and would not be my choice for hunting either one...
IMHO...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Stonewall Jackson preferred a .58 caliber muzzle-loading rifle...

As far as deer go, I like a .270. But calibers are like cars; pretty much anything will get you from here to there.

quote:

Originally posted by foxred03:

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by foxred03:
You cannot replace a belt-fed weapon with a magazine-fed one. The SAW is getting old and they are some pretty decent, newer belt-fed weapons out there. The USMC should look to adopt those, not newer M-16's with beefier components.

It didn't take long for someone to bring up the "5.56 round wouldn't kill an ant if it hit it in the head" argument. Tell you what. Anyone who thinks the 5.56mm will "deflect off a piece of grass" or "won't stop a person so we should go back to 30-40 Krag rounds" is welcome to stand 400 meters in front of me, a SAW, and a 100 rd. belt. I guarantee that you will have made your last idiotic statement.

Hey, don't knock the 30-40 Krag, the round was a good one for it's day and it is still a fine hunting round...
I prefer the 30-06 or the .308, for most game in the contiguous 48 and for that matter, the 6MM Remington or the .257 Roberts are pretty darned good all around cartridges for most game, up to and including mule deer and if at extremely close range, say fifteen to twenty yards, can give a moose or an elk a real bad time, with a well placed shot...
They are on the light side for moose and elk and would not be my choice for hunting either one...
IMHO...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Stonewall Jackson preferred a .58 caliber muzzle-loading rifle...

As far as deer go, I like a .270. But calibers are like cars; pretty much anything will get you from here to there.

True enough and I like the .270 also, good cartridge, I should have mentioned it but, I don't have a rifle in that caliber at the present time but, hope to soon...
Didn't know about ole Stonewall Jackson's preference but, interesting factoid, thanks...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 9644985:
Why does the Marine Corp want a 5.56 IAR. The saw is a 7.62 Killing weapon! the 5.56 round is a maiming round.

actually dude the SAW is a 5.56

It's not the choice of calibre I mind so much. It's the fact that we already have a magazine fed, gas operated, shoulder fired weapon that lays down 750 rounds/min and it weighs less than 10 lbs. w/30rd clip. It's called the M-16. I put 10rds chest and throat @ 500yds with open sights with an A-1. (Paris Island) I say this to emphasize the ability of the 5.56 to be accurate and we all know that it's only the round that hits that can kill.

What we need is (in my opinion) a weapon that can bridge the gap between the M-16 and the SAW. No belt feed. As that requires an A-gunner. 5.56mm in order to standardize the ammo. Recoil operated (or electronically operated) for dependability. And a higher rate of fire. Otherwise "just bring back the damn M-60" How many complaints have there been about it? Hardly any huh?

It comes down to "on the cheap". The Government can get two 5.56 round for the price/material of one 7.62 round. What they DON'T take into consideration is that YOU might have to fire 2-5 of those 5.56 rounds to do what one 7.62 round would do. A FMJ 7.62 or .30-06 round will go through a wall or tree to get the guy behind it. Try that with yer M-16/M-4, because he sure will against you with his AK-47/50. Why ALWAYS give that advantage to every enemy you'll face!?!?

While the cost per round parsimony of the Guvment might have some validity, the reality most likely is that pound for pound I can hump a whole lotta' 5.56 ball into the fight, an urban fight most likely, where my logtrain will be problematic. Couple this with MOLLE kit, water, a couple of LAAWs or the like, grenades, chow, and whatever else is in the kitchen, just how much 7.62 can round out this nice ensemble..? To me it's more a doctrine issue than anything. There boatloads of neat, Iraq-tested (primarily by doggies) AR-10 clones, basically an M-16 on steroids that fires NATO .308(King Arms, Bushmaster, cobbed together custom jobs). For the most part, these are point - i.e. sniper or fixed-position type weapons, and modified M-14s with newer rail and polymer stocks seem to be the patrol sniping weapon of choice. Why can't the Corps develop similar tactics and/TOE to support BOTH calibres in theatre with these types of COTS weapons? Then there's the whole 6.45 argument, so this is still a cluster. Hell, you could use the grand-daddy of assault rounds, the 7.92 X 33 Kurz, but modify so it was simply 7.62 X 39 (gee, ring a bell?) with a caseless configuration. Given the quantum leaps over the last 20 years in powder, caseless ammo, polymer stocks and battle optics, it is simply inexcuseable that the Corps is settling for this rubbish. Whatever happened to innovation, acumen and competence before expediency.

Now if we can only get them to get rid of the Harrier and V-22...

I don't think we need to leave the 7.62 for the 5.56 but they need to talk to an American company and get some patriotism involved not just the almighty dollar.That is the whole problem with our country now.Everything we use is made in a foreign country that could care less about the fighting person who is using or wearing it.Why not put Americans to work building defense things for the U.S. not some person who two years from now we will be fighting.There is a deffinite lack of patriotism in this country.Congressman and Senators would rather sell us for a dollar then to some foreign country then strand us in a war and decide to hold us hostage by cutting funding while they fill their pockets and give themselves raises.We have some of the greatest engineers and the best soldiers.They need to take Marines and put them with American engineers and come up with a better beltfed 7.62 weapon.Not a senator who took a bribe from some other country to build a weapon that won't work and jam it down our throats and say deal with it.It happened with the Humvee, the first generation 9mms that broke and so many other great inventions that didn't work when they came out and killed Marines.Semper Fi ,Do Or Die,Oooohhrahhh,Carry On America

What bothers me is the fact that they are willing to pay a foreign company 28 mil, and our own Colt only 24 mil. Lets pay other countrys more money than we pay our own people. And for those of you who don't remember, the SAW is Belt AND Mag fed. The magazine is completely useless when the weapon is used to lay down surpressing fire, hence the belt feed option.

FYI the SAW is a 5.56 belt fed weapon. The m-60 was the last belt fed 7.62

Let me start by setting some facts out. The SAW is a 5.56 weapon not a 7.62 (how else would a clip from an M16 fit into its reciever?)The M60 or 240's are 7.62 and used by machinegunners. SAWs are part of a rifle platoon. Though I agree that is becomming an older weapon, I think that replacing it with a box clip weapon is stupid. If the rate of fire is important replacing a 200 round belt weapon with a 30 round clip weapon is well, dumb. As a machinegunner I often rdiculed the SAWgunners for being wannabes. But in truth having a light machinegun (let's call it what it is) in a fireteam is a great help. This allowed the riflemen to have a decent base of fire while allowing the machineguns to be used more effectivly to protect the company from bigger problems. Adding another rifle would dimminish that abbility. And though the SAW comes with way to many parts to clean, one feature I have found quite usefull is that when the SAWgunner runs out of belts he can always borrow a couple of his buddies clips. And as for the awarding of contracts to outside companies: all three cantidates are U.S. subsidiary companies and are manufactured in the U.S. Both FN and HK make outstanding weapons that the U.S. has many of in its arsennal(SAWs, USP, MP5-must I continue). If Colt really wants to be in the game, they must step up their design work. And if anyone feels that a 5.56 round is to light, stop watching movies with ignorant actors or T.V. shows with hosts that can barely find the safety switch. The 5.56 is the NATO round of choice for basic weapons, I have fired that round from the M16A2 and the FN/FAL and my targets are not around to tell you what a "mickey mouse" caliber it is. And instead of wondering if the round will maim (which coincidentaly is illegal in combat) or kill, put the round where it is supposed to go-center mass. Semper Fi, consummate proffesionals.

Yea I remember a weapon we had in the 60,s called a stoner ! best thing I ever used! trow it in mud dirt rice paddy still fired belt or mag we had 7 of them took them away and issued matty matel piece of (----)! got a lot of good people killed sweepy under carpet. so there playing that game again who has to die to get it right?????

I think it's been proven time & time again, 5.56 is not a large enough round.
It just does not have the penetrating power.

"Center Mass" doesn't do much good if it's covered by Body Armor.