Army Picks Its Replacement for the M4 and SAW

Text Drivers are Killers said:
You shooting mulies out west? They are much tamer than the whitetails we have back east even though the two types of deer are physically very similar. To get within 25 yards of a mulie is easy. Maybe 5 years ago i came across a yearling mulie just a few yards off the trail . I could probably have touched it. This was in the mountains not in a city.
Click to expand...

No. Imported Pennsylvania deer in FL. Beautiful creatures, I only really want doe fawns for meat. Tender!

I could take a bear if I wanted to. They do taste mighty good. Bear is better than beef. All organic, baby.

Oh fuck my mouth is watering.
 
RB 60 said:
This is unfortunately true, especially in the cities where there aren't many gun ranges.
Expensive? They are allotted ammo for practice and qualifying (at least they used to be).

My cousin is a retired Phila. cop, he would practice at our range when he came back to visit
and is a good shot. He fired his weapon one time in the 20+ years he was a cop, and that
bullet killed an armed suspect. He was well aware of his surroundings, no one else was compromised.
I would think his military training also contributed to his awareness and accuracy when he fired.

Yes, crime has risen considerably since all the BLM protests and the hatred of law enforcement
promoted by the leftists and the "defund the police" budgets. Stupid is as stupid does...
Click to expand...
no question his military training was a huge benefit.
range training is important but crooks dont always paste themselves to something so they cannot move.
that sort of training is what gets expensive.
 
Guille said:
If they were smart they'd just go with 7.62mm
Click to expand...

When I was in the military, we had 7.62 X 51 round in M-14's and M-60 machine gun, circa 1960's?!!

Why did the US military switch from 7.62 to 5.56 rounds?

Ultimately, the decision to shift from 7.62x51mm ammunition to 5.56x45mm came down to simple arithmetic. The smaller rounds weighed less?!! Less weight, you can carry more ammo!

Even the new 6.8mm round weigh less than a 7.62 X 51 round?!!
 
Last edited:
Celticguy said:
no question his military training was a huge benefit.
range training is important but crooks dont always paste themselves to something so they cannot move.
that sort of training is what gets expensive.
Click to expand...
I'd say so too. But practice is always good and it helps develop the "sight picture."
Hunting is a great way to develop marksmanship skills, game doesn't always just
stand there either, running shots aren't uncommon, especially if you hunt in woods.
The price of bullets, powder and primers wasn't bad years ago compared to factory
ammo (it's much higher now, but still lots cheaper). He, like myself, reload our own ammo.
 
signalmankenneth said:
When I was in the military, we had 7.62 X 51 round in M-14's and M-60 machine gun, circa 1960's?!!

Why did the US military switch from 7.62 to 5.56 rounds?

Ultimately, the decision to shift from 7.62x51mm ammunition to 5.56x45mm came down to simple arithmetic. The smaller rounds weighed less?!! Less weight, you can carry more ammo!

Even the new 6.8mm round weigh less than a 7.62 X 51 round?!!
Click to expand...

Yes, they went from the .30-06 M1 to the .308 M1-A (bullet dia. is the same, cartridge is shorter) then to the 5.56 for lighter weight.
 
signalmankenneth said:
When I was in the military, we had 7.62 X 51 round in M-14's and M-60 machine gun, circa 1960's?!!
!
Click to expand...

First time i heard that. I thought all the m-14s shot the 308 winchester which is pretty much equal to the 30-06.

Why did the US military switch from 7.62 to 5.56 rounds?

Ultimately, the decision to shift from 7.62x51mm ammunition to 5.56x45mm came down to simple arithmetic. The smaller rounds weighed less?!! Less weight, you can carry more ammo!
Click to expand...

There was more to it than that. They wanted a gun that could be shot full auto and still be controlled. The m16/m4 was a good gun.
 
Matt Dillon said:
No. Imported Pennsylvania deer in FL. Beautiful creatures, I only really want doe fawns for meat. Tender!

I could take a bear if I wanted to. They do taste mighty good. Bear is better than beef. All organic, baby.

Oh fuck my mouth is watering.
Click to expand...

Bear is gritty and greasy, one of the reasons I never hunted them. Beef is better IMO.
Deer is very good, Elk is even better. I didn't know we sent you our deer, no wonder
our population decreased for years! Still, my father and I were successful during those years.
 
signalmankenneth said:
When I was in the military, we had 7.62 X 51 round in M-14's and M-60 machine gun, circa 1960's?!!

Why did the US military switch from 7.62 to 5.56 rounds?

Ultimately, the decision to shift from 7.62x51mm ammunition to 5.56x45mm came down to simple arithmetic. The smaller rounds weighed less?!! Less weight, you can carry more ammo!

Even the new 6.8mm round weigh less than a 7.62 X 51 round?!!
Click to expand...

I don't know. The m-60's still use 7.62 but I have no idea why they chose to go with a rifle using 5.56.
 
RB 60 said:
Bear is gritty and greasy, one of the reasons I never hunted them. Beef is better IMO.
Deer is very good, Elk is even better. I didn't know we sent you our deer, no wonder
our population decreased for years! Still, my father and I were successful during those years.
Click to expand...

To each their own. :)
 
RB 60 said:
Depends. But no, nothing wrong with the .270. Me, I have a 700 BDL '06 and a model 70 .220 Swift. I'm covered. Oh, and...
Click to expand...

Meh, I gotta Savage 30-.06 that's dead nuts. My aunt had a top-tier BAR 30-.06 with the fancy gold and all that her husband bought for her. I was talking to her son about how good her chili was, and then he told me she took a deer every

year and that deer was in the chili she made that's my favorite ever. That's why I've been having a hard time replicating it..

BAR in .270 is mighty nice.
 
Last edited:
RB 60 said:
Depends. But no, nothing wrong with the .270. Me, I have a 700 BDL '06 and a model 70 .220 Swift. I'm covered. Oh, and...
Click to expand...

My best friend's uncle had a .220 Swift. It was around, and now it's disappeared, and that ain't cool. He was a gunsmith, it was his favorite gun, and it had one of them custom stocks. I shot a few rounds with it, it was nice, and now it can't be found?

The multi-layer, multi color stocks..yeah it had one of those.

I forget what they're called. Boyd's? Buncha thin layers of wood. I think Boyd's is it. .220 Swift.

Where is uncle ******* .220 Swift?

I have shot the thing myself. How could such a fine rifle like that disappear?

I shot it with custom ammo, too. Dammit, he was the sole heir and executor of his uncle's estate, and that .220 Swift was his uncle's favorite gun. I was privileged to be able to shoot it. Where is it now? His uncle loved me.

Bah, I still have what I have. I'm gonna call him tomorrow, though and ask what happened to that .220 Swift.

How and why would somebody steal that? Yes, it was a fine gun, but who had motive and opportunity?
 
Last edited:
signalmankenneth said:
When I was in the military, we had 7.62 X 51 round in M-14's and M-60 machine gun, circa 1960's?!!

Why did the US military switch from 7.62 to 5.56 rounds?

Ultimately, the decision to shift from 7.62x51mm ammunition to 5.56x45mm came down to simple arithmetic. The smaller rounds weighed less?!! Less weight, you can carry more ammo!

Even the new 6.8mm round weigh less than a 7.62 X 51 round?!!
Click to expand...

Yep, lighter rounds means you can carry more ammo. That was the most significant change, Lighter rifle weight and the pistol grip were a bonus, too.

Now that our military is nearly fully motorized, I guess weight is not as significant as other factors. Are these new weapons designed to go against a specific army, ... that is well armored?

I do wonder if they will phase out the 7.62, ... and what countries will we sell our surplus M16's to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top