Guns, guns, guns…I know you all can’t get enough! So I’ve decided to throw you a bone here and call your attention to a story we’ve just put up over at the Military.com Warfighter’s Forum.
Now, I’ve written about the Magul Masada on these pages before, but our friends over at Soldier of Fortune had an opportunity to test fire one of these innovative rifles out in Colorado. They’ve been kind enough to let us cross-post it here and at Military.com.
A quick note: I actually met the folks from Magpul at the Marine Corps’ Expeditionary Warrior show at Quantico last October. The young guns there are charged up about their new rifle and have launched a grass-roots effort to gather interest in the American-designed-and-built alternative to the M4. With the sandstorm test concluded and the debate on the cusp of heating back up on an M4 alternative, it’s worth giving the Magpul Masada a second look.
Here’s an excerpt of the “Masada Test Shoot” story. For more, check out the entire story at Military.com’s Warfighter’s Forum…
Just when most of us thought we’d seen it all, Magpul Industries Corp., of Boulder, Colorado, brought their new Masada tactical rifle to Orlando and literally stopped the 2007 SHOT Show. Immediately apparent was that this was not just another 5.56mm NATO rifle, not by a long shot. Blending the best materials with state-of-the-art production methods, the Masada also combined new ideas with long-standard operating principles to bring an advanced rifle to the 21st Century table.
The company began with a soft (rubbery) polymer device that resembles a jock strap for a magazine, and Richard Fitzpatrick became an “overnight” success with his Magpul from which his innovative company got its name. Not only does the Magpul make it infinitely easier to get your magazine out of its pouch, but is also protects it when it hits the pavement during a speed reload.
Next came Rich’s first M16 stock. He and I laughed when I recounted introducing him to a huge firearms manufacturer a few SHOT Show’s ago. To my horror, the marketing folks treated Rich like hammered dog s–t, telling him his product would never sell. Not only did it sell well — to the U.S. military ? but Magpul now has a rifle that could leave that other company’s entry howling by the side of the road.
A group effort, the Masada is the creation of Magpul’s founder, Richard Fitzpatrick, Mike Mayberry, Eric and Brian Nakyama and Drake Clark. The Masada is initially produced in 5.56x45mm NATO (.223 Rem.), and is operated by a conventional short-stroke gas piston.
However, the rifle will likely also be produced in several other calibers, to include 7.62x39mm (already produced), 5.45x39mm, 6.8x43mm SPC and 6.5mm Grendel.
Using a now-conventional rotating multilug bolt and carrier, the Masada also has many surprises. As such, it will be exciting news for American law enforcement, not to mention the U.S. military and those of friendly foreign countries. Make no mistake about the latter element, as Richard Fitzpatrick is a former U.S. Marine and damned proud of it. Recently I traveled 300 miles over “the mountain” to Denver for a first look and live fire test of the Masada and of Magpul.
Unless a designer is influenced by “something” other than history, he or she may come up with something that looks like it escaped from a science fiction movie, and firearms are no exception. We’ve all seen them come and go, and come and go again. Not so with the Masada: Oh, your eye will be captivated by the rifle at first glance, but it will be magnetic instead of the all too usual, “What the…?”
Somewhat suggestive of the M16 rifle, the Masada does have some things in common with that rifle. From the gas block forward, the barrel in either light or heavy configuration, is essentially M16, and will accept a SureFire Suppressor mount or those of virtually any other manufacturer.
– Christian
I must admit, this article leaves me a bit confused — I fail to see what’s special about that particular rifle.
Maybe that’s because of the lack of technical knowledge and terminology on my part though… !?
Come on,everybody knows that the M4/M16A4 carbine is the best weapon bar none for our troops,the Pentagon Generals said so,& they wouldn’t lie would they? We need to wait for next new “whiz bang” breakthrough technology like the phaser pistol,along with photon torpedoes,the tractor beam,artificial gravity,warp speed,& the transporter teleportation machine.We should have it all within the next millennium.“Beam me up,Scotty.”
Bad name for a rifle in my book. Do I need to quote Patton to tell you why?
This is not new, it’s been going on with our armed forces since the revolutionary war. Bean counters vs. the guys in the field doing the job vs. special interest groups who’s only goal is to make money. They don’t care, it’s only statistics.
Any military history buff knows the deal. The North could have probably ended the civil war right away if they had repeating rifles and a General that knew how to fight. The Marines were still using the bolt action Springfield in WWII even though the Garand was available, it was too much money. In WWI we accepted the French light machine POS over our Lewis guns for political reasons and probably could and should have had the BAR.
It’s an old story, nothing ever changes, politics as usual.
Look how long it took to get something like the M32 in the Marines hands, it’s been around for years. Does the Army even use it?
The M4/M16 has some good points and served us well. Could we have had better all these years, maybe, probably.
But now it’s time to make a change. It really gets to me when they talk about one F-22 costing more than what it would take to replace all our battle rifles. All the money Rummy spent on technology that was too far off in the future to be used.
Facts are facts. The M4/M16 has issues that can be solved. The 5.56mm round does not have the killing power of the 7.62mm and something in-between has to be issued. More and more war fighters around the world will be wearing body armor. We need a round with more penetration and the ability to kill or incapacitate with one round. maybe a round with new technology, blended metal, whatever as long as they do it.
When your enemy does not fear you, he will show much more aggression and confidence. An enemy that knows we have a weapon that can kill them with one round will not be so brazen, Iraq and Afghanistan has proved that. Is it any wonder we had to start issuing M-14’s to our troops?
We are using BB guns. Yes you will probably die without medical attention if you get hit with a 5.5mm round. But the chances are more from a 7.62 and there is a physiological effect which is even more important sometimes.
There are a lot of good weapons out there that our DOD does not use and will not procure for our troops even though technically we are in a state of war.
Another mentality is the one size fits all and does all, that has to go. When you have a weapon that does that it usually means it does everything poorly. An infantry unit needs different weapons for different reasons. I was a driver of M-113’s, drivers don’t need and have no use for a full sized rifle. You can’t shoot it, that’s why I was issued an M-3 grease gun in 1981. I was shocked we still had them. But it would have been more useful than a full sized M-16 firing from the hatch if I had to.
We need a new battle rifle and squad automatic in the same caliber, along with a squad sniper rifle. We need a new medium machine gun in a larger caliber with a longer range sniper rifle in that caliber. We also need a larger caliber more powerful side arm and matching caliber submachine gun or machine pistol, they would be issued to drivers and other personnel that do not require a full sized weapon. It can also be used by SOF for certain ops if needed.
We also need an anti material rifle like the XM-109 and matching system like the ATK LW25. So what if we have over lapping weapons systems. Both the 40mm grenade launcher and 25mm round do different things and are better at different things.
Bottom line is lets get the best rifle to our troops and the best body armor. They deserve it and what they have now has outlived its usefulness, there is better. A new light weight body armor and a weapons system using a round like the 6.8mm or 6.5mm in a weapon like the Masada or POF system, HK 416 or SCAR. Just make it simple, make it work and make it deadly.
unless we are on the battlefield with heavy drugged or body armored enemy then I think the 5.56 is fine. While it might not hit like the 7.62 you can carry a lot more of them (Around twice as many).
The problem here is not that there is really anything that wrong with the m16/m4 combo it’s that for decades now we have been told that if it’s not new and hightech it’s not the best and we always need the best for our fighting men and women. We have grown our military budget and the cost of things we ‘need’ for combat operation that are unlikley and even more so when you look at it from a national defence point of view instead of a where can we stick our nose into now kind of mentality.
So I am all for a new rifle for our men and women, but first I want to see them cut a 100 billion or so our of the budget all together. maybe drop the airborn lazer and most of the f-22s (Just fix the f-15 and buy some f-23s), and maybe we can deal with only 1000 nukes. Just cut the money and remember the military is for defence.
This reads like pure advertising copy — it’s a bit short on facts. What IS so special here exactly?
As has been commented, if you’re still on 5.56mm it’s not going to be that different from an M4/M16 anyway. To be truly next-generational, we need some sort of next-generation ammo at the least.
I like how they named it “Masada” then write “we are not Jewish or Israeli owned”(paraphrasing)- which to me is mildly offensive. If they are worried about upsetting bigots– well you shouldn’t be selling them assault rifles.
Take pride in your name or change it.
Oh– according to modern historians– the Romans built a siege ramp and tower and took Masada relatively easily. Masada is pretty much a myth– they think Josephus wrote it for a Roman audience since Romans believed in honorable suicide– while ancient Jews did not.
I like how they named it “Masada” then write “we are not Jewish or Israeli owned”(paraphrasing)- which to me is mildly offensive. If they are worried about upsetting bigots– well you shouldn’t be selling them assault rifles.
Take pride in your name or change it.
Oh– according to modern historians– the Romans built a siege ramp and tower and took Masada relatively easily. Masada is pretty much a myth– they think Josephus wrote it for a Roman audience since Romans believed in honorable suicide– while ancient Jews did not.
As much as I admire Magpul, and their rifle concepts, they have zero chance of making it in the DoD acquisition process. Perhaps if their products work well with LE, they could raise their profile, or they could sell themselves to a major rifle company. Otherwise, they will remain just another niche gun maker.
I have read that 70 percent of US enemies in Iraq were killed by US airpower, not rifles. Also 70 percent of US casualties come from IEDs. Looks like a ‘standoff urban battle’(WTF), where both sides are using their only advantage to infict damage on the other. So much for CQB, I guess neither sides wants to play that bloody game. Perhaps, we make too much of the carbine rifle debate.
“As much as I admire Magpul, and their rifle concepts, they have zero chance of making it in the DoD acquisition process. Perhaps if their products work well with LE, they could raise their profile, or they could sell themselves to a major rifle company. Otherwise, they will remain just another niche gun maker.“
Don’t be so sure of that. Armalite never had a small arms contract with Uncle Sam when Eugene Stoner & Co. began to shop around what would become the M16. At first it didn’t fly and the patent was ultimately purchased by Colt. The rest is history. But even with Colt, you had a company who hadn’t manufactured a U.S. military weapon for a couple decades prior to adoption of the M16.
Don’t sell short a dedicated little guy.
Spoken like a true bureaucrat and bean counter BT.
Fact is a lot of soldiers like the M4/M16 and a lot do not. I did not.
Any round will kill you(eventually, maybe), the idea is to make sure the person you shot doesn’t kill you. Is that too difficult for these armchair commandos to understand. I just missed a Mafia hit by a few minutes in one of the neighborhoods in my area. A big guy about 370lbs got hit by about 15 9mm rounds and it didn’t penetrate the body fat. I’m sure they wish they had bigger bullets. True story, it was on Staten Island in Rosebank in the 1980’s. I’m really glad I wasn’t there, believe me.
Case in point the uproar over that video from Iraq of one of our soldiers making sure an enemy was dead with a head shot after he was down. Too many civilians grew up watching John Wayne movies.
Hey, I don’t want to have to carry twice as much ammo. I want to kill what I shoot at, or at least make sure he/she is down and can’t return fire.
Too many people just don’t get it. The idea is to KILL the person who is trying to kill you and kill him/her first. Without them able to return fire, period. Or give your position away to his friends.
End of story, nothing more to add other than I don’t want to have to carry 1000+ rounds of 5.56mm. I want to be able to aim, fire, kill. That’s the way the infantry has always been taught in professional army’s. It’s nice to have auto fire that’s controllable, it has it’s tactical uses.
People, listen up, study infantry tactics and the use of small arms and you’ll understand better.
Yes statistics say blah blah blah, money blah blah blah, it better if blah blah blah, we should blah blah blah.
Give me a weapon that doesn’t need a lot of maintenance, works in all conditions and kills what I hit, also gives me more of a chance to hit my target by having superior optics and accuracy. Make sure it doesn’t weight too much but if it has those other things and is ergonomic and practical, weight won’t be as much an issue. I’m the guy going door to door or in those firefights getting shot at. Oh and while your doing that how about some light weight armor that can defeat their small arm rounds so I can come home alive.
I guess my comments do read that way. The funny thing is, I am a ‘beancounter’. Sorry, that is way my brain works.
the weapons are fine, the lubrication sucks…CLP does not work…this MD, Congressman who is pushing this should have stayed a shanker mechanic..just use MILITEC…
People like to talk, talking is good, communication is good. That’s how you learn, that’s how new doors open to increase your intellect and knowledge to become a wiser, smarter person with a broader understanding of the world around us.
But you must keep an open mind.
I think my comments were dead on.
Put yourself in a war zone, there’s rounds flying over your head all over the place, your tired and scared. Do you really care if your weapon was designed by some geek in japan or Europe or Israel or the good Ole USA? NOPE.…
You get the enemy in your sight and squeeze the trigger. BANG!!! Do you want him to die? I would think so, how would you feel if he turned around after you hit him center mass and started firing at you pointing to his friend with an RPG say over there, meaning your position?
I think when you think in those terms, which to me is the reality of our troops under fire it becomes crystal clear what we need.
A light weight rifle that is reliable and has some new technology not in it’s construction but possibly the round itself. Something that would insure penetration yet have better wounding ability and not just pass through the enemy. Something light weight that would knock him on his butt and have him go into shock quickly and die.
The original M-16 did that, but was a short range weapon and unreliable. The better we made it the worse it got at other jobs. We made it more accurate and the wounds were not as bad. we gave it more range but at long ranges the energy of the round s very low. I thought the M-16 wasn’t too bad if backed up in a squad by other larger caliber more accurate weapons. Certainly not the M-60. But mixed squads of M-14’s, M-16’s, M-203, some type of 45cal sub machine gun, M-60 or M-240, shotgun, M-32 and a SAW isn’t too bad. Of course the bean counter would have none of that, too many weapons in the inventory.
I was not a very good shot, so give me the sub gun and an M-79 type weapon or shotgun.
One size does not fit all and with every war we rush to get special weapons into or soldiers hands. It becomes obvious that there are many different situation that require different tools to get the job done.
BT: You have men constantly employing their rifle in Iraq and Afghanistan to kill. I would hardly call it a ‘standoff urban battle’ because the casualty rations are tilted slightly.
Anyway, they should do a decent testing of all the weapons currently on the market and upgrade to the best.
Love to own this carbine & equip.
Placeit with the M1 carbine, M2 from Korean War, AR15, M16.
Nice.
Anything IDF is involved with Im for.
Test gun in Iraq & US Mex border.
Add Drum magazine cap & 50 rd capmag.
Great for movie use.
I don’t think it will matter what kind of rifle you come up with, The power’s that be are not going to let colt industries go broke. This is all about supply and demand. Can masada supply eniugh rifle’s and spare part’s or will it take two or three year’s to reach production. I wish colt would change to a piston type recoil system and produce a rifle in .264,280 or 308 Caliber
why is no one talking bullpup our governmet must be behind major militarys of the present need a weapon that can be effective at range and be small enough to use in tight spaces the m16 and m4 could be nearly replaced with a weapon that has the barrel length of a full m16 rifle and the overall shortend to be the same size as an m4 steyr AUG is a weapon that we should look to develop off of change so features like m203 can be added still the say they want to look ahead and they are to stubborn to see the future they would rather make 4–6 different weapons than one that can be adapted to do each job with simple changes
Hmm i could be wrong, but if i remember right from watching Future Weapons this rifle is convertable from our NATO round to the 7.62 round fired by AKs
The weapon problem is what it is because those in charge does not have a “Clue” onhow to fix that which is wrong with the weapon the Soldier needs that will be dependable in “Combat”. I was the data processing Non-commission Officer in 1965–67 during “Two” <ajor experiments that was conducted to determine the weapon of the Future,these two experiments was code named (SAWS) which stands for “Small arms weapon system” the other experiment was (IRUS) which stood for the “Infantry rifle unit study” these two experiments was conducted to determine the weapon that was most.Durable,accurate and simple to operate on the Battlefield.The M-16 Rifle was adopted because of Heavy Lobbying by retired senior Officers sadly enough the M-16 Failed Miserabely in all the tests conducted during “Both” experiments. The Weapon that we tested along with all other Weapons of the “World” was the AK-47 this weapon proved to be not only effective but Maintinance Free and simple to operate in all the conditions during the tests conducted. So the point i want to make is. why can’t we as America re-tool the AK-47 in other words maintain the ballastics of the Weapon but put it in a Different stock? We did this with the “German” Lugar because the side Arm 9mm the soldier carries today is the “German Lugar” Redesigned but in a different housing.I hope that the Senior Officers will see the need to get our Small Arms weapon System under contol so thatm our Soldiers will have with them a Weapon that will provide them with the ability to engage the Enemy knowing that they have a Superior Weapon.I am a Weapons Expert and i have been involved in all Classes of Weapons testing during my (20)Yrs. in the Army.
Don’t ever forget, the weapon we’ve got is made by the lowest bidder.
Holy run-on sentence, micah!!!
Actually, I agree with your points. I would prefer a weapon systems with modularity of the Magpul Masada, in a bullpup with forward ejection like the FN F2000 and fires 6.5mm Grendel rounds. I’m not a weapons designer or an engineer, but I would like to think it’s possible!
You would still need a seperate weapon system as a SAW (FN Minimi, H&K MG4 or Ultimax 100 Mk4), but in the same calibre as the assault rifle.
I guess I said in another comment thread:
The Masada is a collection of M-16 parts in an injection-molded/aluminum shell. M-16 bolt, M-16 trigger group, even a piston system designed for M-16’s. Even the *looks* are borrowed, a combination of the SCAR and the G-36. This might turn out to be a great rifle, but it’s not going to be any better than the sum of its parts.
“This reads like pure advertising copy — it’s a bit short on facts. What IS so special here exactly?
Posted by: Wembley at December 28, 2007 10:35 AM“
^^Yeah, pretty much. Plus, this IS a lousy name for a rifle, if the U.S. were ever to adopt it.
This talk of new ammo is silly, it is shot placement, shot placement, shot placement. As for the 5.56,the ball ammo you have is VERY deadly due to it’s speed and light weight, it tumbles and breaks when it hits something, ie; causing more damage. The wound ballistics on Ball Ammo are great, now, how to improve them? Go to Frangible ammo that breaks apart, the Police have the TAP round, we have Frangible in the system but it is not widely dispersed, that needs to change. As for a new weapon, I share most folks low opinion of those at the pentagon and I know that we will get whatever they choose with little or no real input from operators.
Oompah,
H&K makes a mp-5 in 10mm, but like you said barely anyone has heard of it and the ammo is hard to come by.
Sorry folks but the ball ammo can’t be made to expand..too hard of a casing. Only two places to hit for an instant kill, the brain or the spine. heart, lung etc.shots will kill you but there will still be time to pull the trigger and kill you. Someone intent on killing you needs 22 feet to reach you, OR you need 22 feet min. to stop him and one brain or spine shot! Lighter bullets will probably not penetrate to the spine if they are wearing heavy clothes. Take it or leave it. Semper fi.
Oompah wrote. “It might be more lethal if it was hollow-points, but that’s prohibited by the Geneva Convention.“
I presume you are referring to the Declaration III of the Hague Convention of 1899.
SPEC OPNS Units will probably LOVE this Masada in 7.62 round configuration. Then all you 5.56mm detractors bent on heart & head shots for the classic “one shot > one kill” doctrine can smoke ‘em if you’ve got ‘em. Intelligent use of the venerable M-14 PROVES that semi-auto rounds of 7.62mm still are needed on the 21st Century battlefield. If you can make a MUCH better version of the M4 that fires a larger caliber round, and the Army STILL doesn’t have the good sense to pick up this weapon and protect our troops against the tried and true AK-47/74, then its time for Rangers, LRRPS, Pathfinders & Berets to do “private
procurement” for a superior weapon.
i was using the aug as an example beause it is so adaptable. the weapon can be used in multiple barrel lengths. This elimantes the problem of many weapons platforms it can with the twist and pull of the current barrel be removed and a shorter or longer put in its place. with the longest barrel at 24 inches it is only slightly longer than a fully extended m4 and several shorter than a m16. with the same barrel length as an m16 now a little shorter that a m4 extended and there a more configuartions even a 9mm variant witch could be adapted for .45 and we could design and have colt build our own new rifle from the features of many rifles
Uh, Roy? are you living in todays world? since when does the honesty of the pentagon be considered true? WAR=MONEY.…. the goverments expected loss ratio is 3 deaths out of 4 american soldiers? they havent brough out a new weapon because our losses are considerable low to them and they dontwant to spend the money. Get real and immerse your self in the real world.
sounds just like the wwII admirals wanting their battleships, when carriers were needed!
why not caseless rounds? they have been perfected.
definitely a bullpup weapon, with caseless rounds, cartridge ejections IS NOT A PROBLEM.
So much said about the 5.56 or the 7.62„„will never change„„yet the M4 has options that the M16 does not have„,CHANGE in operational requirements„„the 40mm is attached with one pin,quick disconnect„,the rifle can be fully submerged „,water crossings„,swamps„,and still drain faster than the M16„,the gas system tube does NOT retain water„the M16 does„,only in movies does one come out of subserface and fire„„yet with the M4„a simple up,tip down„,and your on the go„,more stable recoil„less barrel movement as well„„,mission ops are very flexable„and with all the attachments that the M4 has gives the rifleman many more options„makes him more effective„„,force multiplyer„,
The M4 will stow easier/smaller for drivers„crews„etc,( including air crews„,)„giving them a faster responce„„
Blended with war fighter equipment„,as the M4 has high and low attachement bars„,allowing more equipment to be attached faster„and inter changed and sight system„,
Forget the past„,this is a way for the future„,more effective rifleman,with more force multpylers per man,per squad„,
Be it in any enviorment„,built up„jungle,swamp,snow,desert„,rapid enviorment out weigh the current M16 and M14„,besides the M4 can use a barrel change system as well„,it has one avaible„
The more firepower,the more effective the rifleman„the better chance in reducing loss of men„„M4 is for the future„,
Semper fi
Any body that has ever humped the m-14 in the jungle will love the m-16,I remember the first m-16 I was issued(1968) it felt like a toy and even sounde like one.In a firefight you could tell the differrence between the m-16 and an AK just by the sound. You can carry a lot more ammo and in jungle combat that is EXACTLY what you want. only enough food(C-rats)to get you byplenty of water and purification tabs and most but not least LOTS OF AMMO, screw the body armour too heavy,carry ammo. Any weapon that improves my or ANY GI’s kill ratio I am for…
The M16 series is better than the M1 carbine it was due to replace by the Air Force but is not, in my mind a combat rifle. I am very familiar the double feeds which cost me points on the qualification range. Need something more reliable. The system dates back from the 60’s. Lets replace it already!
As for its ammo the M16A2’s 62 grain 5.56 round is simply not up the job of offering a clean kill. A wounded jihadist can still kill you in the time it takes for him to die after being shot in the gut with 5.56. 6.8 or 6.5 would be better.
People, have you all lost sight of the real deal. It doesn’t matter what is good for the service, only who gets the money! This weapon above, like many others before it, might be exactly what is needed. However, the congress will not allow it simply because the money is not in it for them. The congress knows nothing of warfare, only back pocket issues. What is actually good for the country is of no concern to them.
The M-16A1 was my original weapon of issue. As a hunter, I was not fond of the .223 for my own personal defense. As mentioned above though, the ability to carry more ammo has a definite advantage. The lightweight characteristics of the 5.56mm round were described to me as such, when the round enters the body, it travels through out the body causing more damage than a typical straight through type of round. However, the aspect of having to treat an entry and exit wound over one does provide advantages due to the time spent on the bf treating the casualties. More man-hours needed to assist casualties, less man-hours fighting. If the issue 5.56mm could be beefed up, such as the addition of HP or higher grained bullets, it would provide a more destructive round.
According to the vid’s pertaining to the Magpul Masada, this weapon is something many of us veterans could only dream of. Issues of reliability do come to the front however. Once a contract is approved, will the weapon still perform as above, or will congress have their way and destroy the capabilities to render us ineffective as many times before.
Men, it’s time to do a simple “taste test”. Let’s gather reps from all the insurgent groups around the world. Have them examine a table full of all the automatic/semi-automatic rifles produced by all weapons mfgs globally. Since they have no affiliation with any established nation it would follow they’d pick the most effective weapon for their application. No politics, no kickbacks just pure effectiveness. Then we will see what rifle is best for a given theater.
The Military has several better carbines that they could upgrade to. It’s not the question of quality and duribility it’s all politics and money. They should at least upgrade our special forces with new carbines.
m16 ar15 series junk from the word go we need a piston rifle,the only folks able to pull off a pistonless design were the cetme hk folks,smaller caliber with high velocity is the trend and mainstay objective 1 is put enemy outta comission wounded or dead no diff in a fire fight,smaller caliber = more rounds to the pound,im thinking hk or fn will be service choice shortly.
The beauty of the 5.56 x 45 mm is that once you have bumped into an enemy and shot him or one of his buddies the wounded man’s blood trail will lead you right back where he came from then you use something bigger to kill “them” with.
A dead enemy soldier simply lies around stinkin’ up the place.
A wounded enemy soldier bleeds all over the place till he gets back, screams a lot and dies a slow gory death.
I might be interested in the Masada when it comes out chambered for the 7.62 NATO. In 5.56 it’s just well-engineered turd polish. Probably make a fortune on ‘em, though..
If the Hk 416 is already being used, by certain groups, that is telling. Wat is needed is a weapon that is meant for regular Army and Marine Corps formations. Is the Masada the one? It sounds good, but I bet Hk and FN can mass produce weapons quicker and it will be cheaper. The M-8 was said to have problems when heating up due to firing on full auto, the handles got very hot, and one guy said the barrel [polymer covering] almost melted. We need an upgrade, but, why don’t we look to the past? The M-14 is being used more and more, its called the EBR, when modified. You want mobile firepower? How about all those M-60’s laying around? The SEALS used a “chop M-60″..well, get the armorers on it. Watever happened to the Stoner 63? Light, uses 5.56, spits out almost 700 per minute. They may be just stop gaps, but it will put firepower in our boys hands. Still love the M-14…
If you just wound a terriorist he is most likley just going to walk around the corner prime a grenade and wait to take you with him. Kill em with the first shot. Over killing is the best kind of killing and the most effective. 50. cals for all!!!
Alot of talk about a new rifle for our troops. The key is a cartridge that hits harder than the 223 at further distances. 2nd the harder hitting round must be light enough for troops to carry hundreds of rounds. Its no good for troops to carry a 7.62mm rifle into battle(hump 50 miles)if they cant take enough ammo w/ them to win the fight. Flat shooting (1000 yrd)6mm-6.8mm ammo is the future. Casings that are smaller in diameter than the 7.62 are needed to inable troops to carry hundreds of rounds into battle. Once you have the perfect balance of firepower and weight, build the rifle to fit the cartridge.
One thing is for sure the 223 is too light of a bullet for extended open area(middle eastern)battle.
“Big Daddy“
If only such a weapon as you described at the end of your article existed…