Comments on: Operators Test New Commando Rifle

By: Rhyno327/lrsd

Rhyno327/lrsd — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 14:18:47 +0000

The SCAR needs to be field tested. After a few Spec. Ops teams use them, you will get a real opinion. I would rather see the military change to a 6.8mm round, but it has not gotten much backing. In an urban environment, the 6.8 has the punch to blow a hole in a door and hit the guy on the other side. Or through that thin mud hut wall and into the guy behind it. The regular forces need an assault rifle that uses a piston system. There are so many companies making assault rifles now, the services can pick whatever they want.

By: richard yarborugh

richard yarborugh — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 02:01:10 +0000

everybody seems to be hung up on how fat the man was firing the weapon or who made it and which is this better or that . I would like to know what the kockdown power it has. I trained with and fired the m14 and it would take a man down quikly. and the m109 sp now the palledin would take a bunch out . someone tell me how powerful the weapon is ok.

By: P.J. Busche

P.J. Busche — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 12:55:59 +0000

Excellent weapon. But stick with the Mk-17; the Mk-16 would only be marginally effective with its 5.56 NATO caliber.

By: Sven Ortmann

Sven Ortmann — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 06:49:37 +0000

“Sven, Sven, Sven
“I saw and felt it at the Eurosatory and wasn’t impressed. Its virtues must be well-hidden.” Dude have you ever fired a weapon? All the Eurotrash weapons suck and I would rather carry an M1 Rifle than a G36, British Enfield,Steyr Aug or a FAMAS bullpup I have fired them all at one point or another and they major flaws!! Your killing me!!“
See? We Europeans don’t even need rifles to kill you.
Seriously, I know rifles and served for a awhile in the Luftwaffe. Your appreciation of European rifles seems to be ideological instead of factual.
And you don’t seem to know how shitty the M1’s loading clip really was.
The AR-15 series and other American designs have major flaws as well, but I don’t feel the need to rant about it like you did about European rifles.

By: GIZhou

GIZhou — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 21:07:48 +0000

We seem to be getting off the track but I can talk about small arms for hours. The 7.62 x 51mm SCAR looks so like a reworked FN-FAL and given its from FN, I have no doubt from its lineage it will be a great weapon. But for all the cost a reworked FN-FAL would probably do just as well. Grab a heavy barrel version, take four inches of the barrel, rethread the flash supressor on, a dedcent optic sight and you have a ball terarer. It is a bit hard on the gas return rod but hey titanium and DU would work well here too.
I assume Odenwald you are talking about the Gewehr 41 from WW2 as the H&K G41 in 5.56mm NATO from the early 1980s conistently gave head shots at 300m with the forestock in a rudimentary rest. Shermans with the 17pdr and 76mm made the Panthers and Tigers wary and remember the Sherman could go for hundreds of kilometres on its own tracks without breaking down. Very few Tigers or Panthers could boast that. The HSSS M4E8 Sherman with its 76mm tore T-34-85s to shreds and later with 105mm guns tore T34s, T54s and T55s to shreds. Not too bad for an old warhorse.

By: Al Boosh

Al Boosh — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:10:10 +0000

I’ve got a problem with any new plastic gun firing 5.56. I’ve got a problem with any 5.56 weapon period. If I was forced to use 5.56 I’d arm my squads/fireteams with the CETME Ameli. It’s described as an assault machine gun, not just a SAW. Why would I want to carry a plastic gun with rails just to hang extra junk on it and have it weighing as much as a SAW? You’re still limited by the 5.56. It takes more than a few shots to bring an insurgent down as everyone has by now experienced! So much for one shot one kill.
We’re in the new millennium, our kit should be lighter. Look at the MOLLE system. What a piece of marketing crap that is. Like any of us need an extra piece of webbing to hang another piece of junk off of. A military pack that weighs more than 6 lbs empty should be burned. Commercial packs by TNF, Marmot, Black Diamond, etc. all sell superior equipment that weigh less than 5 lbs. At least Arc’teryx now markets their LEAF line specifically to military and LAW Enforcement.

By: Orbital

Orbital — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:24:44 +0000

@ GIZhou
Good answer! Really, I thought it was the Oberndorf Mauser werke that turned into H&K. But I can be mistaken.
Really, I know the Panther was a bitch, typical Teutonic over-engineering, but really, the only advantage of the Sherman was in its numbers. German gunners used to laugh at those Americans with their silly little tanks. And for the Merc, well, I’ve been so privileged to test drive a new (German built) AMG C63 (*very* carefully) and my dad used to have a Chrysler. Believe me, you can –smell– the difference. Granted, the SL is a tad more expensive.
My point is simply that European guns do not suck. German, Swiss and Austrian weapons especially run like clockwork. The US builds good guns as well (Thompson!) but OK, compare a M-60 to a MG42 (or MG3) and a FN-MAG. That isn’t apples and oranges, is it?
I do think Europeans tend to build things more durably (is that even a word?) whereas the US tends to focus on rapid consumption.
Oh, by the way — the SMLE is still used in active duty, just like the K98. The latter was designed in 1898, as you probably know, but it can still kill a man as well as it ever could. The quality is in the soldier, not in the weapon.

By: GIZhou

GIZhou — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:40:06 +0000

Orbital,
The Heckler & Koch factory was built around the old Hsc factory not the Mauser factory. A lot of SWAT units /Special Forces use MP5 sub-machine guns and sniping rifles, the latter less so. The discussion is about assault rifles and I wouldn’t use an old Lee-Enfield in close quarter combat as it is too long, small magazine bolt action. I have a prefermce for the FN-FAL but there is no issue that the G36 is a good rifle but I don’t like 5.56mm. You can burn the AUG — Steyr’s answer to the Ford Edsel.
Now for the throw away society. The Panther was unreliable and a bitch to produce being mostly hand finished. Spare parts were a huge problem as many would only work on an individual vehicle. The Sherman for all its faults has stood the test of time and which flags flew over Berlin in 1945. Timber or stone/brick construction is based on the prevailing material and type of housing. U.S. Houses are detached whereas in europe hey are mainly apartments. Theer isn’t a lot of difference between a chrylser 300c and Mercedes SUV is construction qulaity as many think as both are built in the USA!.
Colt developed a short piston to replace the M16/M4 gas system but according to Colt, the department of Defense declined the modification.
Beware of people offering simple answers as they often compare apples and oranges.

By: Alexander

Alexander — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 07:08:51 +0000

I do believe that everything needs constant updating, R&D should be building new ideas all the time. Stop for a bit and that time is lost and slowly you fall behind in technology. Saying the things we have now a good enough shouldn’t matter. It may be good now, but not forever. Better prepare for the future.
This SCAR looks like a pretty solid weapon, I have heard a lot about how well it performs. It should be built and implemented to test out what we have done, see success and failures of the weapon and then start again and build another one. Dumping a weapon design wastes all the hard work that went into it.
Listen to the pros on the fronts lines. If they like it, use it and build it and listen to what they say. I hate it when the engineers and companies try to come up with all the latest gizmos that don’t matter and leave off the ones that the soldiers like.
huhhh, the best rifle is the one you like. Doesn’t matter if someone else doesn’t like it, if it works for you than use it.

By: Orbital

Orbital — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 06:54:28 +0000

Paul, Paul, Paul…
‘All the Eurotrash weapons suck