Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: M110 contract for Knight's

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    5,082
    Feedback Score
    0
    Well, Stoner seemed more wedded to the .308 than the 5.56mm.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    11,856
    Feedback Score
    0
    Any feedback or input regarding the DD .308 line of weapons?
    11C2P '83-'87
    Airborne Infantry
    F**k China!

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    OUTPOST 31
    Posts
    10,518
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by okie View Post
    Am I the only one who feels like they could build an AR10 with off the shelf commercial parts that would outperform the M110 for a fraction of the price?
    Hahahahaahah

    but yes you are.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    967
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    In Iraq in 2008 no one in my platoon was a fan of the 110. I was one of the train the trainer SME class representatives for the whole KEYHOLE system rollout before we deployed. Most of us opted to put 6-10x optics on M4’s(HERESY!) or we took M24’s if the mission called for a dedicated platform. We found the 110’s didn’t hold zero well coming in and out of vehicles non-stop and they didn’t react predictably from the bipod. I’m sure others had different experiences and your PRS and gun range mates feel differently, but my AD Infantry unit did not take to it. I’m also a sample size of one, so keep that in mind when the urge to autistically screech a response onto the internet strikes.

    They were great for shooting feral dogs when we released MWD’s to search large fields and such and the local dogs tried to go after them, but other than that they stayed on our FOB more than they left it.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

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
  •