Replies

This POS cost 60 million to develop not 5 million. The XM8 is a rework HK G36 and it was stuck onto the OICW POS. That program wasted 60 million dollars and this bait and switch is an attempt to salvage something from 60 million dollars of development costs. The bottom line is that 5.56 fired from the proposed 10.5 inch barrel of this POS is less than lethal at the muzzle due to insufficient muzzle velocity. Please freep mail anyone you know that has contacts on the House and Senate Armed Services Committee and tell them that the XM8 is not a better rifle than the M16/M4 because it fires the same damn bullet that is not sufficiently lethal now.

decreased barrel length(the 20 inches of the M16A2 down to the 14.5 of the M4)=reduced wounding effectiveness at ranges beyound150-200m.This is because both the M855(SS109)62gr.ball and the old M19355grainersrequire a threshold muzzle velocity(3000 to 3200FPS)to be optimimum(penetration balanced by yaw or fragmentation in soft tyissue).This is whyweve had many failures to stop;theyve invariably been M4s at ranges beyond 150 meters.(Case in point ;fatally wounded "skinny's"in Mogadishu that managed to operate with effectiveness after though and through torso hits).
I'd also prefer that we went back to a 7.62Nato(.308)weapom;although the 6.8Rem SPC and the 6.5 Grendel both show some interesting potential).If one MUST keep the old poodle shooter,they shouldn't hobble the effectiveness by reducing barrel length below 18-20 inches.If this is cramped in a vehicle you'll not be safer having to wait for the bad guys to get closer before you can engage with confidence.CQB,like sh#t,happens,butfire discipline,well trained riflemen(women?)and willingness to close with&destroy the enemy have always been our strengths;stepping down to a .223 /submachinegun sized packages only plays to the other guy's strengths.Properly trained and equipped riflemen using full sized calibers transform "cover"into "concealment".The 5.56 and 5.45 stuff is effective within a closer to mid range envelope but requires other than standard loadings to effectively deal with barrier material beyond the CQB envelope.

The bottom line is that 5.56 fired from the proposed 10.5 inch barrel of this POS is less than lethal at the muzzle due to insufficient muzzle velocity.

Actually, the 5.56 round in a 10" contender barrel will run something close to 2400 fps, quite lethal at the muzzle (around 700 ft pounds energy). At 200 yards, down to around 1700 and about as much energy as a .380 at the muzzle, hardly impressive as a military round. The little 10.5 barrel would seem to be a house to house and room entry weapon, not even close to a real battle rifle.