Posted on 08/09/2004 9:25:13 PM PDT by Stoat
Edited on 08/09/2004 9:30:46 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
NEW YORK — U.S. soldiers have been waiting for a long time for weapons to replace current ones that rely on Vietnam-era technology. And the new weapons are right around the corner.
If you all would read Soldier of Fortune you would know already that not only is this weapon better than the M16 but that they have a 6.8mm top end that will drop right on top of the present M16 and the mags fit the magwell on the lower also. It will save the Feds mass money to drop these on the existing m16s 'til they have to change over.
Wave of the Future: The XM-8 Battle Rifle
It doesn't say anything about the 6.8mm cartridge or anything about Chinese manufacture of the weapon.
Personally, I'd be more than a little nervous having the Chicoms supply the primary shoulder weapon for the U.S. military. And I don't care how cheap the price is.
Stream line the shape.
There is a bulky issue here. Light weight don't mean squat if the weapon has an bad feel.
And the DoD press folks have not talked about the folks who HAVE complained about that.
Note how that left foot is turned sideways. That thing will walk left like crazy. What a POS!
===================================================
BTW, the H&K XM-8 uses a Kalashnikov-style gas system, instead of the horrible direct gas impingment system used in the M-16. For that alone I would love to actually see this weapon system adopted. But I will believe it when I see it.
".... showing heavy machine gun versions of this weapons system."
Ahhh, no. Heavy machine guns shoot heavy rounds like the .50 BMG round, not little bitty 5.56mm NATO rounds (or even 6.8mm SPC rounds). What you are speaking of is a *light* machine gun version of the H&K XM-8 infantry weapons system, probably for use on Hummers and such.
Wow. Does that take .50 BMG belt-fed rounds? How is the barrel cooled? Light enough to carry?
"This is an HK weapon? Nothing on it looks like it's interchangeable with anything but brand spanking new HK parts."
This is mostly true. No internal M-16 parts interchange with the XM-8 that I am aware of.
----------
"No light rail, new, different magazines, no way to mount anything but that fancy new HK dot scope. Looks like HK has gotten themselves a smashing new government contract to design stuff so that no one else can contribute any add-ons."
Not so. I beleive the XM-8 uses standard M-16 mags and has an add-on standard Picatinny rail.
----------
"Doesn't look like there's a rate selector switch on this one, but surely it's standard on the real deal."
By 'rate selector', I assume you mean the 3-round burst setting that is found on the most recent versions of the M-16/M-4. I hope they do not unnecessarily increase the complexity of the weapon with such a device. That is a hardware solution to a training problem. Troops should be taught proper fire discipline and trigger control, and then no burst setting is needed.
----------
"All that's going to make the first civilian versions very expensive. That sucks."
Have you *ever* seen an inexpensive civilian version of any H&K firearm ??? I guess surplus G3 'parts guns' ("demilled" surplus parts kits built onto American receivers by outfits like Century Arms, as per Sec. 922r) are as close as we have ever gotten to that.
This is another item of interest (c/p above into url box)
Another contender from US manufacturers.
Also, the XM is an HK product, very nice looking though.
Big deal. I had one of those when I was 5. It had a nice red light and made loud noises when fired!
LMG. Gotcha.
Stoat:
".... showing heavy machine gun versions of this weapons system."
Ahhh, no. Heavy machine guns shoot heavy rounds like the .50 BMG round, not little bitty 5.56mm NATO rounds (or even 6.8mm SPC rounds). What you are speaking of is a *light* machine gun version of the H&K XM-8 infantry weapons system, probably for use on Hummers and such."
I was indeed referring to the versions shown in the video, which are tripod mounted and shown mounted on a Hummer as well. They appear to have substantially heavier barrels and are chambered for a larger caliber than the shoulder weapon version.
Why they are all lumped into the XM-8 weapons system category is unclear, as they seem to be completely different from the shoulder versions.
I would rather have the Beowulf or the Grendel.
http://www.alexanderarms.com/
http://www.impactguns.com/store/AL-R-BEOOM.html
http://www.competitionshootingsports.com/catalogue/category33/product45
http://www.competitionshootingsports.com/catalogue/category367/product600
I know that the old Stoner M63A modular system made a decent LMG, but that weapon weighed almost nine pounds in infantry rifle trim, which is waaaay heavy for a 5.56mm NATO rifle. The H&K is much lighter. A SAW is meant for sustained full-auto fire, and I am doubtful the XM-8 receiver can stand up to it, even with a heavy barrel stuck in the front end. I guess our troops will be the ones to find out one way or the other.
That is damned odd, and the source of my confusion. Perhaps Fox News made a mistake?
Excerpt from the Fox News article:
The XM-8 is designed to be lighter and more user-friendly than current weapons. It is part of a new family of weapons, including machine-gun type weapons like the XM-307 and XM-312 that are lethal at more than a mile away.If you watch the video closely, they show both a .50 BMG heavy machine gun and what appears to be a 40mm auto grenade laucher (like the Mk. 19), both on a tripod. I assume these are the XM-307 and XM-312.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.