Carl Gustav 84mm recoiless rifle

[Trooper]

There has been some debate over this weapon. Some hate it. But I see it as a better weapon system than the AT-4 that the Army uses. The Rangers and Special Ops people use it. Mostly for its flexibility.

What I like is that is light (about 23 lbs, 10kg) with several options for rounds. One per squad would put some fire power at the front of battle.

I also think that the CG 844mm RR would match, and exceed, the RPG-7 which the opposition uses.

[KentuckyBuddha]

Haven't the discriminating opfor headed on up to the MANPADs over the RPG-7s?

[Trooper]

Well the AT-4 has a range of 500 meters while the RPG-7 has a range of 900 meters. So more and more units are going to the CG 84mm RR. The dual use HEAT round (either ignites on contact or with a delay) is very popular. Also the older anti tank rounds do well on buildings and bunkers.

[WildBill3/75]

It shines in its versatility...it can be an anti vehicle weapon and in an instant an anti troop weapon and unlike most shoulder fired weapons it does both of these rolls pretty well.

[Trooper]

It shines in its versatility...it can be an anti vehicle weapon and in an instant an anti troop weapon and unlike most shoulder fired weapons it does both of these rolls pretty well.

the CG 84mm does direct fire like the RPG-7 does. Yet it can do indirect fire as well. Plus you have the weapon with you instead needing to call for mortar fire or artillery.

[Michael]

Wouldn't a better comparason to the CG84 be the MK 153 SMAW as opposed to the AT-4?

[Klem]

Wouldn't a better comparason to the CG84 be the MK 153 SMAW as opposed to the AT-4?

He's right, they are two different weapon systems.

The AT4 is a single-person, single-use AT weapon. 7kg all-up, slung over the shoulder.

The 'Charlie-guts-ache' is a two-person 9kg monster, plus 3kg per round. So, max 2 rds per person, and they are big! The older version was even heavier. Not something you lug around on patrol.

[Trooper]

The M3 (CG 84mm) is light weight compared to some of the older weapons. AT 10 kg with rounds at 5 kg each it is not the monster that some would like to make it. I believe that the RPG-7 has similar weight but lacks the indirect fire option.

[Michael]

The CG 84 is the most capable of the three comparable systems (the other two being MK 153 and RPG 7). The sights are more intuitive and there are more options for types of rounds. The RPG-7 may not have the IDF capability, but that doesn't keep the bad guys from trying to use it like a mortar - usually resulting in an airburst. The thermobaric round for the MK-153 is an awesome projectile, and the only reason I would consider using a MK-153 over a CG 84 is in dealing with cave dwellers.

[Trooper]

The CG 84 is the most capable of the three comparable systems (the other two being MK 153 and RPG 7). The sights are more intuitive and there are more options for types of rounds. The RPG-7 may not have the IDF capability, but that doesn't keep the bad guys from trying to use it like a mortar - usually resulting in an airburst. The thermobaric round for the MK-153 is an awesome projectile, and the only reason I would consider using a MK-153 over a CG 84 is in dealing with cave dwellers.

The other problem with the MK-153 SMAW is range. It has an effective range of 500 meters, the RPG-7 about 700 m. The CG 84mm (M3) has a range of 900m!

[Guardsman26]

This debate is somewhat redundant as SAAB is working on a new system that will offer comparable benefits but with a lower system weight. UK is using NLAW which already has a 600-700 metre range. Great weapon.

http://www.saabgroup.com/en/Land/Weapon-...nk-Weapon/