Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 119

Thread: USMC to upgrade to "Deadlier" rifles

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    2,081
    Feedback Score
    5 (86%)
    I have not served, so my perspective is not from first hand experience, but I do have a son in the USMC, and I do like that there are actually people looking at what may be some common sense and relatively easy upgrades to the equipment, so that is encouraging. No gear will ever please everyone, but I do look forward to anything that may help our Marines be more effective and stay alive.
    Owner/CEO
    Light Tac LLC

    Owner
    Mutiny Arms LLC

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    11,706
    Feedback Score
    43 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by USMC_Anglico View Post
    I'm all for M4s over A4s, I've never serviced a target thinking "I wish I had an A4 for this one". Anything outside the SOST engagement envelope is better served with crew served or 7.62 sniper systems.
    I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you are not a 4 Star, a Gunner, or a SgtMaj.
    Why do the loudest do the least?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    9,246
    Feedback Score
    28 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by KingCobra View Post
    There is no issue with the RCO, why replace it with a less accurate SDO?
    They are proposing changing the reticle in the RCO to the horseshoe-dot, not changing the RCO to the SDO.
    That said, pretty much everyone I know that performs at a high level of proficiency/performance prefers the TA-11 (SDO type) over the TA01/TA-31, and while you are certainly welcome to your opinion, to say that "most of us" hate the SDO would be inaccurate regarding SDO users.
    Jack Leuba
    Director, Military and Government Sales
    Knight's Armament Company
    jleuba@knightarmco.com

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    TDY
    Posts
    219
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Eurodriver View Post
    I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you are not a 4 Star, a Gunner, or a SgtMaj.
    Good guess, although to be fair I know a lot of higher that are switched on. The Gunner's today are light years ahead of the days of old. It is still Gov't though and all of the bureaucracy and maneuvering that goes along with it.
    SF

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3,095
    Feedback Score
    7 (89%)
    Wouldn't going to the M4A1 fix most of their wants, aside from the rail.

    Also whats everyone take on comps vs flash hiders?
    Quote Originally Posted by C4IGrant View Post
    Colt builds War Horses, not show ponies.
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    This is 2012. The world is going to end this December and people are still trying to debate the merits of piece of shit, cost cutting crap AR's. Really?

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Az
    Posts
    225
    Feedback Score
    0
    I'm interested to see where this goes. I'm not sure the reticle and comp is paramount, depending on the comp to be used. However, a FF rail and new trigger group sounds promising.
    USMC 2011-Present

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Free State of Nebraska
    Posts
    5,427
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by KingCobra View Post
    Funny...our armory just deadlined every ambi rifle we had...

    and also, most of use hate the SDO... I have carried an SDO for 2.5 years and wish they would put the RCO on my IAR.

    The IAR trigger is fine (and smooth as ****) but the FN m16 and colt m4 triggers suck.

    match barrel..? putting up with our heavy volume of fires? I see that wearing out fast as hell, and armories are to cheap the replace the already worn out FN cold hammer forged barrels.....

    An M16A4 doesn't have a hammer forged barrel.
    "Not every thing on Earth requires an aftermarket upgrade." demigod/markm

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,901
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    I'm just glad to see the Mk318 SOST round, and dumping ball ammo for handguns. The rest is nice if the approval and funding actually happen.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,954
    Feedback Score
    22 (100%)
    Wasnt it the USMC's fault in the first place that the M16A1 went from a light weight combat rifle to the M16A2 KD target musket we see today? Now the USMC wants to turn the M16 into a 3-gun rifle...

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,562
    Feedback Score
    0
    I believe the M16A2 is a "product improved" M16A1.

    The Army originally had a laundry list of things they didn't like about the A2. They didn't like the new rear sights, they thought the M16A2 lacked accuracy compared to the M16A1, they wanted a 1/9 twist instead of the 1/7, they weren't crazy about the lengthened buttstock, and they certainly weren't in favor of the 3-round burst arrangement. Of course, the fact that it was a Marine initiative probably didn't help matters.

Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •