[D Rider]

.308... an assault/battle rifle. Pretty cool.

[Who is John Galt?]

"Every day, you could carry it for every single situation."

Always thought that was the kind of weapon they should issue to everyone, not just a 'designated marksman'...

[Bonemaker]

Cuomo would limit it to 7 rounds.

I’m dubious of one-size-fits-all solutions. Got to be compromises which tend to limit capabilities at the margins. At least it’s 7.62 x 51.

[Chainmail]

Looks like a great rifle - like the suppressor: it helps keep the firer better hidden, reduced the dust and flash from the shot and allows the shooter to hear commands better.

Would still prefer the M-14, though..

An oddity in the article: it listed the weights for the M16, M4, and the M110 but didn't describe the weight of the new rifle...?

[dljordan]

They’ll be great for the new People’s Army to use against the few remaining conservatives in the country.

[43north]

They have essentially re-invented the original AR-10 with added features. Eugene Stoner had the right idea a long time ago. McNamara screwed it up by insisting it be downsized to a .223 varmint round instead of a .308 man-killer so the troops could carry more ammo. Personally I’d rather carry less ammo that worked every time than more ammo that was marginally effective.

[The Pack Knight]

I’m glad they’re going back to .308 for the DMR role at least—the prior “SDM-R” was an accurized M16 in 5.56, and arming a “designated marksman” with 5.56 is even more ludicrous than arming the rest of our soldiers with that inadequate caliber. They can tinker with 5.56 all they want, adding steel penetrators or loading a 77 grain Matchking, but it will never be suitable for combat and it really has to go.

Turning to the new SDM-R, it’s an HK G28. Good rifle, but I have to wonder with they would go with a “designated marksman” rifle with a 16.5” barrel. That knocks a good 150 fps off compared to a 20” barrel, which is going to knock a couple hundred yards off its effective range. I hope the Army will at least issue these guys 168- or 173-grain match loads, but I fear they’ll just get regular M80 Ball (which would be completely inadequate for the job).

Overall, a step in the right direction, but we really need to do better rifle-wise. The M16/M4 is a 50-year-old platform that has had two fatal flaws from the beginning: a maintenance-intensive direct impingement system and chambering in a caliber that is wholly inadequate for combat use. We have decades of both military and civilian knowledge built up since then, and can certainly afford to put it to use to design a reliable, effective rifle for our soldiers.

[Retain Mike]

I had a 9mm at the range one time with my son and had a hard time shooting a decent group. Then I tried his .45 and had much better luck. He said the 9mm had a much sharper and narrower graph for plotting the recoil than a .45, which was much more of a push. He called the 9mm snappy. He has gotten used to the difference and shoots verry good. He is an investigator with the Federal Protective Service. Me, I am just an average guy with a CHL, so I’ll stick with the .45.

[Chode]

so back to the original design... what a concept

[Paal Gulli]

Since this was a reprint of an article from Stars and Stripes, why not do a little work and link to the original article S&S wrote, and give them full credit for it, rather than linking to the COPY at American Shooting Jackasses?