Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Is it time? AR-15 question
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="uncle money bags" data-source="post: 2823293" data-attributes="member: 8377"><p>Shooter,</p><p> I think we are closer in opinion than it would appear. However, the failures of the M4 in the battles at Shah-i-kot, and more importantly, at Wanat, were not due to problems inherent with the DI system. They were failures to adhere to the firing schedule. Not that they had a choice under the circumstances.</p><p>Like I said before, the HK416 and M4 share the same max sustained rate of fire. The failure point is the barrel, not the gas system. Even the M27 only increases the Max Sustained ROF to 36 rounds per minute, which is about 1/3rd that of the weapon it is replacing; the M249 SAW. A decision I personally think is a mistake, but who am I?</p><p>Now, do we have a relatively close comparison of how the regular length barreled piston, 5.56 weapons have done? Kind of, check out some stories on the feedback for the HK G36 in theater. Once again, the barrel is the stumbling block.</p><p>As to the SCAR FOW...</p><p>It is my first choice for a sub 11.5 gun that will be suppressed. In that role it shines. If I were to use a rifle that had a longer barrel; in 5.56, I would have no problem with a quality DI system. It has everything to do with dwell and unlock time. I believe the 416's used by the Unit are 10.4 in barrels as well.</p><p><u>Yes, SOCOM uses the SCAR system. That program just received a 5 year extension. In the Mk17 configuration with conversion kits for 5.56. There are some Mk16's in inventory, but only at one location that I am aware of and all of them are CQC models. Currently there is one company working with SOCOM to field conversion kits in other calibers as well, including 7.62x39.</u></p><p><u></u></p><p>In short, I think the piston 5.56 platform has it's place, under certain circumstances,( I love me some SIG 552...) but outside of those the differences in reliability are minimal and come at the expense of other potential failure modes.</p><p></p><p>EDIT: to add underlined info.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="uncle money bags, post: 2823293, member: 8377"] Shooter, I think we are closer in opinion than it would appear. However, the failures of the M4 in the battles at Shah-i-kot, and more importantly, at Wanat, were not due to problems inherent with the DI system. They were failures to adhere to the firing schedule. Not that they had a choice under the circumstances. Like I said before, the HK416 and M4 share the same max sustained rate of fire. The failure point is the barrel, not the gas system. Even the M27 only increases the Max Sustained ROF to 36 rounds per minute, which is about 1/3rd that of the weapon it is replacing; the M249 SAW. A decision I personally think is a mistake, but who am I? Now, do we have a relatively close comparison of how the regular length barreled piston, 5.56 weapons have done? Kind of, check out some stories on the feedback for the HK G36 in theater. Once again, the barrel is the stumbling block. As to the SCAR FOW... It is my first choice for a sub 11.5 gun that will be suppressed. In that role it shines. If I were to use a rifle that had a longer barrel; in 5.56, I would have no problem with a quality DI system. It has everything to do with dwell and unlock time. I believe the 416's used by the Unit are 10.4 in barrels as well. [U]Yes, SOCOM uses the SCAR system. That program just received a 5 year extension. In the Mk17 configuration with conversion kits for 5.56. There are some Mk16's in inventory, but only at one location that I am aware of and all of them are CQC models. Currently there is one company working with SOCOM to field conversion kits in other calibers as well, including 7.62x39. [/U] In short, I think the piston 5.56 platform has it's place, under certain circumstances,( I love me some SIG 552...) but outside of those the differences in reliability are minimal and come at the expense of other potential failure modes. EDIT: to add underlined info. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Is it time? AR-15 question
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom