06-04-2013, 04:42 PM
Guns and Ammo had a cover article on the new Beretta ARX-100. They refer to it as a Gen III battle rifle.
From the article:
Its been said that there have been three generations of infantry rifles following World War II. The first generation put in place new manufacturing technologies to increase production volume of magazine-fed, select-fire service rifles like the M14. Then the private firearms industry advanced designs that reduced production cost and incorporated materials like impact-resistant polymers and aluminum to lessen weight. The select-fire M16developed around the 5.56 cartridgeoffered improved ergonomics and is an example of that second generation.
Today we are in the midst of the third generation of the modern battle rifle. And Beretta, the oldest active small-arms company, has contributed to each of them. So, we set out to examine that with this Beretta ARX100 review.
Read more: http://www.gunsandammo.com/reviews/citiz...00-review/
Basically the 1st Generation (Gen I) was the M14 and the FN FAL. And, maybe, the AK-47.
Gen II was the M16/M4/AR10/AR15. The HK G3 as well. One might at the bullpups from Enfield and MAS.
Gen III is illustrated by the HK XM-8, the Remington/Bushmaster ACR (Magpul Masada), the Beretta ARX-100, IWI Tavor and the FNH-USA SCAR 16S/17S. To a lesser extent are the rifles being developed by Faxon Firearms (http://www.faxonfirearms.com/) and LMT (http://www.lmtstore.com/complete-weapon-...arrel.html). The concepts are modular rifles with quick change barrels/multi-caliber. Also the use of gas systems. Molded receivers carry a one-piece, continuous top rail.
Couple the Gen III concepts with a new General Purpose Cartridge (GPC, ie 6.5 Grendel) and we might have a decent weapon system.
BTW, frankly had we gone with the FAL instead of the M14 (which was a good idea, for WWII - think of a M1 with a BAR magazine) using the .280 British, we might not have even be having this discussion.
From the article:
Its been said that there have been three generations of infantry rifles following World War II. The first generation put in place new manufacturing technologies to increase production volume of magazine-fed, select-fire service rifles like the M14. Then the private firearms industry advanced designs that reduced production cost and incorporated materials like impact-resistant polymers and aluminum to lessen weight. The select-fire M16developed around the 5.56 cartridgeoffered improved ergonomics and is an example of that second generation.
Today we are in the midst of the third generation of the modern battle rifle. And Beretta, the oldest active small-arms company, has contributed to each of them. So, we set out to examine that with this Beretta ARX100 review.
Read more: http://www.gunsandammo.com/reviews/citiz...00-review/
Basically the 1st Generation (Gen I) was the M14 and the FN FAL. And, maybe, the AK-47.
Gen II was the M16/M4/AR10/AR15. The HK G3 as well. One might at the bullpups from Enfield and MAS.
Gen III is illustrated by the HK XM-8, the Remington/Bushmaster ACR (Magpul Masada), the Beretta ARX-100, IWI Tavor and the FNH-USA SCAR 16S/17S. To a lesser extent are the rifles being developed by Faxon Firearms (http://www.faxonfirearms.com/) and LMT (http://www.lmtstore.com/complete-weapon-...arrel.html). The concepts are modular rifles with quick change barrels/multi-caliber. Also the use of gas systems. Molded receivers carry a one-piece, continuous top rail.
Couple the Gen III concepts with a new General Purpose Cartridge (GPC, ie 6.5 Grendel) and we might have a decent weapon system.
BTW, frankly had we gone with the FAL instead of the M14 (which was a good idea, for WWII - think of a M1 with a BAR magazine) using the .280 British, we might not have even be having this discussion.