![]() | |
![]() | #21 | |
Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Decatur, Al
Posts: 2,624
| Quote:
![]() And 500 to 600 yard shots are pretty much the purview of OUR snipers, aren't they? I can't imagine anyone thinking they could make consistent hits on a six hundred yard target with an M4 and an Aimpoint or ACOG or any other optic issued to the average combat soldier. | |
![]() |
![]() | #22 | |
Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Show Low AZ
Posts: 1,103
| From What I've Read... Quote:
Sadly, when the M16 was adopted, it ought to have been slotted - at most - as a replacement for the M1/M2 Carbine, not as a battle rifle. (Then there's the issue of the SCHV project but that's a whole 'nother story.) | |
![]() |
![]() | #23 | |
Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Birmingham AL
Posts: 2,168
| Quote:
This is part of the call for a new rifle cartridge that, while lighter than the 7.62x51 will have better long-range performance. | |
![]() |
| |
![]() | #24 |
Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,540
|
About royalties.......IIRC, during one of Colts trips into Chapter 11, the DOD bought the rights to the weapon and the TDP. I've got no recollection of what that cost us, but that seemed to have cut Colt out of the monetary loop except where they got contracts. If it wasn't for political pull Colt would be a fond memory of fusty old guys like many of us. That story does seem to be a rehash of old news. SOFIK, the SOCOM folks are very happy with the HK416 (at least those who get it). The gas system on that is essentially a copy of that on the G36, so reliability should be the same. Just dropping an HK upper onto whatever lower is available would work. They also admitted that while the SCAR is nice, they don't have the budget to buy all new toys. Actually, that last is slightly wrong, FN admitted it for them. I won't say that there was never anything wrong with the design. However, the DOD has been guilty of dragging their feet about product improvements. When the M4 was under developement, Colt told them it needed a different extractor spring and rubber insert. DOD allegedly refused to buy and stock different parts for several years, then finally caved and use the M4 spring & post on everything. |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
![]() | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Something interesting! | 280 Ank | M1 Garand | 2 | 10-18-2006 07:11 PM |
Interesting To See..... | M1 Carbine | 3 | 01-05-2005 11:00 PM | |
Interesting | hired_gun | M1 Carbine | 5 | 09-26-2004 07:44 PM |
Interesting CZ-75 Pre-B... | Stephen A. Camp | Handguns | 0 | 07-17-2003 09:59 AM |