WAVE OF THE FUTURE: The XM-8 Battle Rifle (What the Germans want to replace the M-16 with.)

Military.Com ^

[Fudd]

That was my reaction when I first watched it.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

There are only so many manufacturers in the world capable of designing and producing military small arms in army-sized quantities. What American companies competed with HK on this contract and lost?

HK is a German company, but the weapons will be made in Georgia. The Germans outsourced to America.

[GingisK]

Similar to my "Johnny-7 OMA" of many years ago.

[BadAndy]

I want one. I would want it more if it wasn't shaped like a fish.

[nerdwithamachinegun]

I'll give you the FAMAS to avoid arguing. I fired a semi-auto one and the only thing I didn't like was the short sight radius. Like an AK, it's hard to hit with because of that.

I claim igorance on the AAT-52 and FR-F2 until I can get some reference material. If they're closely derived from a Browning or Mauser action then I say it's not a french design. In the case of the FR-F2 I would ask what quantities they are produced in. It's a lot easier to keep quality up on small quantities.

From the pictures I saw of the MAT-49 I thought it would be pretty fun to shoot, given the magwell/grip arrangement and general layout like an MP-40. In reality it had an inconsistant rate of fire with good ammo, tended to jam at the beginning and end of the magazine and didn't appear to be very well made. The MP40, UZI, M1A1 Thompson and even the Sten generally shoot to the point of aim with proper spec ammo. Either the French regulated their sights for some crazy stuff or crazy distances or they just didn't bother because none of us who were shooting that thing could hit anything except by walking rounds (when it ran) onto the various cans and other berm flotsam. You wouldn't expect an open bolt submachinegun to have a decent trigger pull, after all, what would be the point? You would expect it to not require the finger strength of an orangutang and in the case of the MAT-49 I fired you would be disappointed. One gun does not represent them all but I've read where others have encountered this.

[R. Scott]

WOW!!!!

[dts32041]

How come you didn't post the stuff about the stryker and the molle equipment?

[Cannoneer No. 4]

12 Pdr. Napoleon Model 1857

12 - Pounder Field Howitzer Model 1841

The Napoleon is not a true howitzer. It lacks a chamber.

The French made good guns. Napoleon was a gunner.

[MassExodus]

That was my reaction when I first watched it.

Should have seen the reaction one of the screaming libs in the office here in Boston.

Played the clip for him, thought his head would explode.

He's off raving about it just now.

*snark

[dts32041]

The French 75, much like the john browning designs, became the standard all other artilley was judge by.

[Atlantic Friend]

Could well be that way, for I never fired a MAT-49. It once was the standard SMG in the French Army and police, but now the H&K models are more common in police duty, and the "Bugle" (the French nickname for the FA-MAS) has totally replaced the SMG and semi-automatic rifles.

The AAT-52 is a good general-purpose MG, but has the draw back of jamming easily if the cartridge bands are not greased - something every soldier usually learns quickly enough not to be too much of a problem. Only problem I see there is it used a 7.5mm caliber that's no longer the standard for French forces.

As for the FR-F2, it really seems to be a good sniper rifle - I can't say whether its designs has been inspired by another weapon, but I suppose it must be the case since most weapons are enhanced ripoffs of some older model, like the M-60 and the MG-42.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Light 12-pounder, M1857 -- Familiarly known as the "Napoleon". It was also referred to as a "gun-howitzer", because it was capable of firing at a relatively high angle, like a howitzer, but this term is not strictly apt because it has no chamber.

[mad_as_he$$]

I agree "it looks like a well desiigned weapon". Looks can be deceiving in the engineering world. I have beeen exposed to many do it all solutions over the years. Most fail in one or more modes.

I believe an M-4 will do most of these tasks today with a proven basic platform that is familiar to the troops.

Changing over to Steiner's M-16 forty years ago was a monumental cluster; that cost many American soldiers their lives. I for one do not want to see that mess happen again.

FWIW H&K is a very competent company and I hold nothing against them.

I also find it interesting that the article notes the prototype was based upon Remington .223, for all of you couch soldiers a .223 IS NOT the same thing as a 5.56mm. They are interchangable in function BUT have different SPECS!

Just dance with them that brung ya.

[MindBender26]

Works for me.

[WideGlide]

It's swell that the minimum waged parts assemblers in Georgia will be spending some of the $$ in Walmart, but the real Ching Ching goes back to Beer and Bratwurst Land.

[B4Ranch]

>>The company rep barely flinched while one handedly hosing down the range with 100 rounds.<<

Bring the females up to the front line! We've got a weapon they can handle. Oh What advances we are making in this new world. Just remarkable, aren't we?

Annie Oakley

[af_vet_rr]

This is interesting (to me) :

Whether the user is a sniper or part of an attack team, the XM-8 can accommodate all uses. It uses four different interchangeable barrels (a 9" compact, a 12.5" assault, a 20" match grade sharpshooter, or a 20" heavy barrel for sustained high ROF applications), each of which can be swapped out at the unit level in less than 2 minutes.

...In addition to incorporating the three sights into one system, the sight is zeroed at the factory and can be removed and reinstalled by the operator without specialized tools, or the loss of zero.

Can they really maintain accuracy on such a modular weapon?

There's no reason why we can't have this kind of accuracy/reliability in today's weapons, however sometimes in the acquisition process, weapons/weapons systems start to grow or become "do-it-all" systems, and become a jack of all trades and master of none.

[nerdwithamachinegun]

[ANECDOTAL "PROOF"]
I talked with a couple of Aussie protective services dudes at lunch one day while I was in Baghdad at the CPA palace a few months ago. I asked them about a supposed email from an Aussie infantry guy complaing about the AUG. The complaints were about mags weakening in the extreme heat, frequency of accidental (negligent?) discharges due to the exposed trigger, difficulty clearing malfunctions and dirt sensitivity. In their opinion the email was probably genuine. It got batted around on AR15.com about a year or so ago.

Their only substantial complaint was that the mags wear out more quickly in the heat and malfunction when extremely hot. The accidental discharges are a problem but they chalked it up to human error. According to them, if an AUG is exposed to constant desert temperatures and sun they do tend to jam due to the magazine getting too hot and slightly weakening. They also said that the AUG, without the heavy barrel, tends to walk around a lot on auto. I have experienced that myself with an AUG.

[/ANECDOTAL "PROOF"]

The point I was trying to make about the AUG is that, like most europlastic firearms, it doesn't live up to the hype. It's just another pea shooter with it's own problems and isn't really and better or much worse than an M16, AK or other mass produced infantry weapons. Like the M16, the AUG's weakness is it's magazines. I'll bet that G36/XM8 mags will have similar problems in desert environments.

[jscd3]

If you add up all the M-16's flaws -- its poorly designed gas operating system, its need for constant maintenance and cleaning, its lack of interchangeable parts - it becomes clear that the XM-8 is superior to the M-16/M-4 family in all respects.

Actually, the AR-18, designed by Stoner 30 years ago, shows every one of these same advantages over the M-16, plus it uses M-16 magazines

Another 30 year old Stoner design - the Stoner System - also offers all of the advantages above, as well as supporting an entire family of small arms.

I agree with the poster that mentioned the down side of a 9 inch barrel and a 223 class round - why not just pass out 45 pistols? They'd be more lethal...

Just my uninformed 2 cents, but if the US were to introduce a new upgraded round, they aught to use the .243 - it's just a necked down .308, so there are already numerous high quality firearms (rifles and machine guns) that can be easily adapted to it - m-60, ar-10, etc. Plus, it's a low recoil round (compared to 308) that has some of the flattest trajectories and lowest winddrift numbers around, making it an easy round to build very accurate, easy to use, easy to train on firearms around.