Thread: Xm - 8
View Single Post
Old 04-04-2004, 11:36   #20
ktek01
Suffering from SF TDY Envy
 
ktek01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: null
Posts: 228
Quote:
Originally posted by DanUCSB
What I'm worried about is making sure our boys have what's needed to deliver sufficient foot-pounds past, say, 200m, accurately. That's where I'm hearing the most bitching, in RL and on this board, about the M4.

--Dan
That is why I would like to see the HK with a 20" barrel, and M193(?, CRS) ammo. IMHO the biggest problem is training, or rather the lack of training, and using M855 in a weapon it wasn't designed for. IIRC M855 was developed for the M249, and does not appear to work well with the short barrel M4. The only reason I can think of why they switched was to simplify the supply chain, with no consideration for performance. The M4 is a fine weapon when used for the application it was designed for and with ammo designed for it. The M16 is also a fine weapon, and is what I think most soldiers should be carrying, with the 20" barrel and the proper ammo. I would like to see an HK version as the new issue rifle. Hack is still an idiot, most of what he claims the XM8 can do that makes it so much better can also be done with the M16/M4 especially with the picatinny rail system. To sum up, M16/M4 with HK's gas piston system, weapons matched to the ammo, and increased live fire training, and when you have a system that works buy new weapons when they wear out instead of lookng for something new, that would get us where we need to be IMO.
ktek01 is offline   Reply With Quote