05-25-2011, 08:57 PM
Tony,
It makes sense to me that the caliber requirement would still be in 5.56 NATO, since this seems to be an interim solution until some other calibers and technologies have matured, especially in the middle of several wars.
None of the carbines I have seen that were suggested or introduced to compete against the M4 come even close to being superior to it currently. That includes the HK416 (major fail), SCAR-L (major fail), & XM8 (major fail). They can wave all the MTBF and MTBS comparisons that were rigged to make newer guns look better, while not lubing the M4, but this cat isn't falling for that trick.
The HK416 has proven less-reliable, heavier, is imbalanced forward, and is 3 times the price. I've already heard unexpected negative reports from end-users with the 416, and they preferred the M4 after experiencing things with it they never had with an M4. (Kabooms, magazine compatibility issues, secretive deficiencies covered with damage control by HK reps, and such)
The SCAR-L has one of the worst line-of-sight above bore offsets I think I have ever seen, and has major issues with heat transfer to the bottom rail of the handguard, which is too short and offers no room for upgrade as with the AR.
The XM8 (re-packaged G36 really) used a barrel trunnion mounted in a polymer receiver. Can we say, "heat transfer" That killed that gun really quick.
Soldiers I know who use the G36 hate it for sight above bore height issues, high-volume anemia, and the size of the magazines, in addition to the awkwardness of using the charge handle with gloves under stress.
When I run high-volume carbine courses, they are often in conditions most people would stay indoors during. I was surprised to see several Kalashnikov variants experiencing numerous failures during the last course, while the AR's ran like champs. This was in -18 to -20 C temps, heavy snow, and heavy wind conditions. The only AK variant that ran well was a Sako Rk92, but by the middle of each day, the 6'4"/240lb officer who was using it could barely let it dangle in a nose-down position due to its excessive weight and imbalance. Mag changes take much longer with the AK's as well, especially when running from vests over winter gear and using slings.
Over the years, I have seen plenty of AK's suffer from malfunctions as much or more often than military M4's and M16's. I think a lot of the "100% reliability" myth of the AK is directly attributed to successful propaganda, because I just don't see it in practice.
What I'm saying is that finding a markedly-superior carbine to the M4 will be no easy task, despite what many of the gun rags and articles are promoting. After looking over and evaluating all of the submissions over the past 10 years, nothing comes close in my mind from a long-term, end-user perspective. It will be a hard nut to crack, especially when you figure in the higher-volume shooting schedules that many units are adopting.
Whatever does end up replacing it will have to fill some very big shoes in terms of performance if it is truly superior and not some politically-driven award to an unholy alliance between government and industry.
LRRPF52
It makes sense to me that the caliber requirement would still be in 5.56 NATO, since this seems to be an interim solution until some other calibers and technologies have matured, especially in the middle of several wars.
None of the carbines I have seen that were suggested or introduced to compete against the M4 come even close to being superior to it currently. That includes the HK416 (major fail), SCAR-L (major fail), & XM8 (major fail). They can wave all the MTBF and MTBS comparisons that were rigged to make newer guns look better, while not lubing the M4, but this cat isn't falling for that trick.
The HK416 has proven less-reliable, heavier, is imbalanced forward, and is 3 times the price. I've already heard unexpected negative reports from end-users with the 416, and they preferred the M4 after experiencing things with it they never had with an M4. (Kabooms, magazine compatibility issues, secretive deficiencies covered with damage control by HK reps, and such)
The SCAR-L has one of the worst line-of-sight above bore offsets I think I have ever seen, and has major issues with heat transfer to the bottom rail of the handguard, which is too short and offers no room for upgrade as with the AR.
The XM8 (re-packaged G36 really) used a barrel trunnion mounted in a polymer receiver. Can we say, "heat transfer" That killed that gun really quick.
Soldiers I know who use the G36 hate it for sight above bore height issues, high-volume anemia, and the size of the magazines, in addition to the awkwardness of using the charge handle with gloves under stress.
When I run high-volume carbine courses, they are often in conditions most people would stay indoors during. I was surprised to see several Kalashnikov variants experiencing numerous failures during the last course, while the AR's ran like champs. This was in -18 to -20 C temps, heavy snow, and heavy wind conditions. The only AK variant that ran well was a Sako Rk92, but by the middle of each day, the 6'4"/240lb officer who was using it could barely let it dangle in a nose-down position due to its excessive weight and imbalance. Mag changes take much longer with the AK's as well, especially when running from vests over winter gear and using slings.
Over the years, I have seen plenty of AK's suffer from malfunctions as much or more often than military M4's and M16's. I think a lot of the "100% reliability" myth of the AK is directly attributed to successful propaganda, because I just don't see it in practice.
What I'm saying is that finding a markedly-superior carbine to the M4 will be no easy task, despite what many of the gun rags and articles are promoting. After looking over and evaluating all of the submissions over the past 10 years, nothing comes close in my mind from a long-term, end-user perspective. It will be a hard nut to crack, especially when you figure in the higher-volume shooting schedules that many units are adopting.
Whatever does end up replacing it will have to fill some very big shoes in terms of performance if it is truly superior and not some politically-driven award to an unholy alliance between government and industry.
LRRPF52