public service announcement: Sig MCX Gen 3 announced

[Bret]

Probably not. The changes are evolutionary vs revolutionary and ultimately it is just another 5.56 rifle. It has increased parts life components vs an AR-15, piston if that is your jam, factory supplied with a free float handguard and is a much more elegant solution for a folding stock than something like a law folder. I personally like the MCX rifles a lot and have a rattler but still use a Colt LE6945 as my principle carbine. The Gen 3 looks like it could presuade me a little more to get an 11.5in MCX. We shall see.

Thanks for the explanation. I'm just not seeing the appeal. Then again, I have not shot one. I'd love to see a comparison versus an equivalent barrel length Primary Weapons Systems rifle.

[VIP3R 237]

And still no ambi bolt release/catch…

[MadAngler1]

1. I still don’t trust Sig USA

2. If POI shift was an issue with their earlier handguards, why not make a platform with a monolithic upper like the SCAR or LMT MWS? M lok would save weight and give you the rigidity for the expensive night fighting stuff poor people like me can’t afford.

3. I fail to see the true total advantage of .277 Fury over a more common round like 7.62 NATO, 6.5 Grendel or 6.5 Creedmoor in what essentially is a piston driven AR-10 style rifle. I realize the ballistic performance, but this Tru-velocity composite case or Sig’s hybrid ammo is not cheap. Mk 262, M118LR are far cheaper to produce and supply than these hybrid rounds from the prices I have seen. Moreover, as people have pointed out, the pressures are super high with this round. Will the MCX Spear’s barrel last 10-15k rounds? Will this truly be better than the G28/HK 417 or LMT MWS? More cost effective? We are facing a major budget crisis and a short fall of new expensive assets like airplanes, navy warships etc. Bad timing IMHO when one thinks of the costs.

4. I would like to see FN’s new belt fed, the EVOLYS, go head to head against the Sig.

5. I still don’t trust US made Sigs.

[WickedWillis]

The MCX Gen 3 also has a reinforced handguard with two additional bolts holding it on. Likely to address complaints of massive zero swing with lasers. The Gen 3 has been seen in the background of other Sig announcements for some time and I have been waiting for it. Seems like meaningful improvements. The MCX-SPEAR is a whole other thing and I am waiting to see if I am interested in that as well.

I see what you mean. My legacy MCX has a midwest industries rail that is pretty sloppy, but still better than the factory keymod one. I thought the virtus rail lockup was better overall?

Didn't realize a few tweaks were happening this soon after the Virtus line came out. Glad they finally brought out 7.62x39 after teasing it with the 556xi line, prior to the legacy MCX promise of conversion kits that never happened.

[call_me_ski]

1. I still don’t trust Sig USA

2. If POI shift was an issue with their earlier handguards, why not make a platform with a monolithic upper like the SCAR or LMT MWS? M lok would save weight and give you the rigidity for the expensive night fighting stuff poor people like me can’t afford.

3. I fail to see the true total advantage of .277 Fury over a more common round like 7.62 NATO, 6.5 Grendel or 6.5 Creedmoor in what essentially is a piston driven AR-10 style rifle. I realize the ballistic performance, but this Tru-velocity composite case or Sig’s hybrid ammo is not cheap. Mk 262, M118LR are far cheaper to produce and supply than these hybrid rounds from the prices I have seen. Moreover, as people have pointed out, the pressures are super high with this round. Will the MCX Spear’s barrel last 10-15k rounds? Will this truly be better than the G28/HK 417 or LMT MWS? More cost effective? We are facing a major budget crisis and a short fall of new expensive assets like airplanes, navy warships etc. Bad timing IMHO when one thinks of the costs.

4. I would like to see FN’s new belt fed, the EVOLYS, go head to head against the Sig.

5. I still don’t trust US made Sigs.

1. The MCX line and maybe the Cross (to be determined) are the two product lines that I believe have been managed well.

2. The monolithic handguard would limit some things Sig is doing with the design in regards to modularity. Regardless it would be interesting if they could make a monolithic upper for the system like they did for the MPX with the copperhead.

3. I see the value of the hybrid case but I think the Army asked for the wrong product. A hotrodded 5.56 class case would have been better.

4. Throw the KAC LMG in there and deal.

5. See point 1.

[Aries144]

IIRC, the .277 is all about defeating modern body armor plates and delivers enough back face deformation to kill or cause severe injury when hitting a target wearing a level 4 or ESAPI type plate. It also has high muzzle velocity and a flat trajectory from short barrels.

I don't know how the barrel life could be more than 3-4000 rounds, unless maybe they're making them with Stellite liners or something. Would be very expensive.

[MadAngler1]

IIRC, the .277 is all about defeating modern body armor plates and delivers enough back face deformation to kill or cause severe injury when hitting a target wearing a level 4 or ESAPI type plate. It also has high muzzle velocity and a flat trajectory from short barrels.

I don't know how the barrel life could be more than 3-4000 rounds, unless maybe they're making them with Stellite liners or something. Would be very expensive.

Sounds great but what army is fielding class IV body armor in large quantities to their front line troops? China? Definitely not ISIS or the Taliban.

Agree about the barrel life. It is the issue with 6.5 Creedmoor. I am definitely impressed by the .277 Fury’s ballistics, but I see this platform as a specialized weapon for SOCOM not for general army use if it requires frequent barrel changes. Guys in PRS who shoot a variety of 6-6.5 mm cartridges are not getting 10-15k rounds a barrel (yes I know they’re stainless steel). 6 mm ARC has the same issue.

I’m just thinking about the economics. Someone can’t design a better bullet out of a 7.62 NATO platform?

[Aries144]

Sounds great but what army is fielding class IV body armor in large quantities to their front line troops? China? Definitely not ISIS or the Taliban.

That's just it. We are now primarily concerned with facing peer threats again. Russia and China are both issuing level 4/ESAPI type plates in large quantities.

There's already a manufacturer here in the US advertising a sub 7lb plate that can safely stop .277.

[call_me_ski]

That's just it. We are now primarily concerned with facing peer threats again. Russia and China are both issuing level 4/ESAPI type plates in large quantities.

There's already a manufacturer here in the US advertising a sub 7lb plate that can safely stop .277.

That is the part that makes no sense to me. Plates that could stop this can come online faster than this gets fielded so we are back at square one, with more weight, more recoil, less parts life, reduced interoperability with Allie’s and billions spent that would have been much more useful spent elsewhere.

[Aries144]

That is the part that makes no sense to me. Plates that could stop this can come online faster than this gets fielded so we are back at square one, with more weight, more recoil, less parts life, reduced interoperability with Allie’s and billions spent that would have been much more useful spent elsewhere.

Cohen is a man who knows how to pinch a penny, how to spin a product, and how to schmooze with decision makers.