Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 83

Thread: public service announcement: Sig MCX Gen 3 announced

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    8,431
    Feedback Score
    9 (100%)
    Of all the AR's I own, I don't own a Sig despite owning so many other SIG handguns etc. I should grab a MCX at some point. I'll let the program run a while and maybe one day Ill buy one. Pretty cool they are trying to up the gun our boys goto battle with our flag on their shoulder.

    PB
    "Air Force / Policeman / Fireman / Man of God / Friend of mine / R.I.P. Steve Lamy"

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,705
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by mig1nc View Post
    But one thing he said was that for urban fighting he'd rather have an M4.

    Question for you vets: would the significantly better barrier penetration of 6.8x51 be more of an advantage in an urban fight vs the lighter weight of the M4A1?

    Would the trade be with it?
    For this vet: I'd take a Mk 18 or similar for strict urban warfare (meaning constant room clearing, counter-insurgency Iraq-style), but a 6.8x51 or 7.62 gun for a general-purpose carbine. If we're talking about WWII, or Ukraine-style urban warfare, with more "destroy everything and fight from the rubble" I'd take the battle rifle options. Penetration is helpful, especially when trying to fight it out against an enemy in a fortified position, and the increase in recoil (assuming we're talking bout .308 level of recoil and not much more) in an urban setting isn't that big of a handicap.

    For both, I'd much rather have a full-power cartridge in the fireteam's AR/LMG than 5.56. Not the question asked, and not the subject of GT's video, but important to note.

    But, I'm an admitted battle rifle fanboy, and the above has been my opinion since well before 6.8x51 was a thing.
    It's f*****g great, putting holes in people, all the time, and it just puts 'em down mate, they drop like sacks of s**t when they go down with this.
    --British veteran of the Ukraine War, discussing the FN SCAR H.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Lowcountry, SC.
    Posts
    6,173
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by mig1nc View Post

    Question for you vets: would the significantly better barrier penetration of 6.8x51 be more of an advantage in an urban fight vs the lighter weight of the M4A1?
    No. if i need to shoot through brick walls, a Bradley or similar can do that. The lighter weight is speed, and speed is security.

    Quote Originally Posted by MadAngler1 View Post
    I would be interested to hear from Spec Ops guys and SNIP on this.
    Thats my history.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,300
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Thank you for the replies.

    I appreciate the insight.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    68
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Pappabear View Post
    Of all the AR's I own, I don't own a Sig despite owning so many other SIG handguns etc. I should grab a MCX at some point. I'll let the program run a while and maybe one day Ill buy one. Pretty cool they are trying to up the gun our boys goto battle with our flag on their shoulder.

    PB
    PB, the problem with waiting is that by the time it’s sorted out, Sig moves on to the next big thing. At least with rifles, they never stick with anything long enough for it to mature…
    Last edited by dlrflyer; 05-23-22 at 14:14.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    814
    Feedback Score
    0
    https://youtu.be/hO4IKxECNzI

    This is a relatively positive review. It is interesting how the op rod locks into a groove in the bolt carrier. It is not all one piece. I wonder how well that will hold up with time and use.

    They both say at the end that they don’t see this replacing the M4 due to ammo load restrictions and weight.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Not in a gun friendly state
    Posts
    3,807
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MadAngler1 View Post
    https://youtu.be/hO4IKxECNzI

    This is a relatively positive review. It is interesting how the op rod locks into a groove in the bolt carrier. It is not all one piece. I wonder how well that will hold up with time and use.
    It looks like it's necessary to remove the op rod in order to remove the bolt. I do like that and the recoil spring setup are greatly simplified compared to the other MCX models. I find it interesting that it's in a circular groove and that the rod can pivot. I wonder why they did it like that.

    They both say at the end that they don’t see this replacing the M4 due to ammo load restrictions and weight.
    That seems to be the consensus among most of the people who have reviewed this rifle. What has been interesting is that most of the guys who have reviewed this rifle seem to have been pleasantly surprised at the quality of it. Like they said, I could see it taking the DMR role, and possibly replacing the 7.62 weapons.

    It seems like, even if this rifle isn't adopted as the standard issue service rifle, it's laying the groundwork for improvements in rifle technology.
    Last edited by BoringGuy45; 05-27-22 at 22:35.
    Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who do not.-Ben Franklin

    there’s some good in this world, Mr. Frodo. And it’s worth fighting for.-Samwise Gamgee

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,705
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by MadAngler1 View Post
    https://youtu.be/hO4IKxECNzI

    This is a relatively positive review. It is interesting how the op rod locks into a groove in the bolt carrier. It is not all one piece. I wonder how well that will hold up with time and use.

    They both say at the end that they don’t see this replacing the M4 due to ammo load restrictions and weight.
    Thanks for posting. I'll have to check that out. Normally steer clear of In Range videos because I find Karl to be insufferable, even before I heard about his personal life.
    It's f*****g great, putting holes in people, all the time, and it just puts 'em down mate, they drop like sacks of s**t when they go down with this.
    --British veteran of the Ukraine War, discussing the FN SCAR H.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    814
    Feedback Score
    0
    Even better than Karl’s video. Ian completely breaks the rifle down:

    https://youtu.be/MTZRCEh1Czg

    1. 13-14 lbs is too heavy for a normal infantryman, unless they’re using Halo armor or an exoskeleton

    2. Ian points out that big Army will probably be using lower pressure rounds most of the time

    3. I don’t buy Ian’s point that these rifles in war time will be disposable. Look how many beat to shit M9s, 1911s, M4/M16 lowers were kept in service for decades. Costs are and will continue to be a huge issue

    4. I find the torque clamp for the barrel extension to be interesting. Hope
    it holds up with barrel changes. Maybe it is meant only for the life of one barrel

    5. Still not sure how the op rod to bolt connection will hold up over the life of the rifle compared to how the SCAR or an AK bolt carrier is designed.

    6. I see zero reasons to buy one as a civilian unless the ammo costs come down to 5.56 or 7.62 levels.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,705
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by MadAngler1 View Post

    3. I don’t buy Ian’s point that these rifles in war time will be disposable. Look how many beat to shit M9s, 1911s, M4/M16 lowers were kept in service for decades. Costs are and will continue to be a huge issue
    He was talking in reference to a WWI/WWII/Ukraine style war of attrition, not service life in a largely peacetime military, with a few colonial wars or counter insurgencies to contend with.

    Overall, I thought Ian did a much better job of showcasing the rifle than Karl did, but that's pretty standard. Also interested about the two piece bolt/op rod connection, and surprised at how small it looks vs the SCAR. Guess time will tell on that one.

    Still interested on the weight figures being tossed around. Rifle is supposed to be 8lbs, even if you add 2lbs for the mag (shouldn't be that much) that leaves 4lbs for the optic and suppressor. Unless the optic is heavier than expected, that seems a bit excessive.

    Personally, I'm very interested in the rifle IF it can be swapped from .308 to 6.8 relatively easily. That would allow it to be useful with existing stocks of .308 while occasionally using it in the new 6.8 if ammo availability/price allow. Heavy start up cost, certainly, but flexibility over time.

    Part two of his video, with him running the gun in a 2 gun match:
    It's f*****g great, putting holes in people, all the time, and it just puts 'em down mate, they drop like sacks of s**t when they go down with this.
    --British veteran of the Ukraine War, discussing the FN SCAR H.

Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... 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
  •