XM-8: New U.S. Service Rifle?

Modern Firearms and Ammunition website ^ | unknown | Unknown

[Long Cut]

Caliber: 5.56x45 mm NATO
Action: Gas operated, rotating bolt
Overall length: no data
Barrel length: no data
Weight: 2.67 kg empty
Rate of fire: no data
Magazine capacity: 30 rounds (STANAG)

The development of the XM8 Lightweight Assault Rifle was initiated by US Army in the 2002, when contract was issued to the Alliant Techsystems Co of USA to study possibilities of development of kinetic energy part of the XM29 OICW weapon into separate lightweight assault rifle, which could, in the case of success, replace the aging M16A2 rifles and M4A1 carbines in US military service. According to the present plans, the XM8 should enter full production circa 2005, if not earlier, several years before the XM-29 OICW. The XM8 (M8 after its official adoption) should become a standard next generation US forces assault rifle. It will fire all standard 5.56mm NATO ammunition, and, to further decrease the load on the future infantrymen, a new type of 5.56mm ammunition is now being developed. This new ammunition will have composite cases, with brass bases and polymer walls, which will reduce weight of the complete ammunition, while maintaining compatibility with all 5.56mm NATO weapons. Along with 20% weight reduction in the XM8 (compared to the current issue M4A1 carbine), this will be a welcome move for any infantryman, already overloaded by protective, communications and other battle equipment.

The XM8 will be quite similar to the "KE" (kinetic energy) part of the XM-29 OICW system, being different mostly in having a telescoped plastic buttstock of adjustable length, and a detachable carrying handle with the Picatinny rail.

Technical description. The XM8 is a derivative of the Heckler-Koch G36 assault rifle, and thus it is almost similar to that rifle in design and functioning. The key differences are the NATO-standard magazine housing that will accept M16-type magazines, the set of Picatinny rails on the forend, telescoped buttstock of adjustable length and a different scope, mounted on the Picatinny rail, built into the detachable carrying handle.

[Shooter 2.5]

I've been using 69's since I started High Power. I noticed on a Sierra Mat that they had a 70 listed so I thought I would bump it up a notch. It's #1505.

[Soaring Feather]

Thank Sam for the ping.

Awesome LC

[fatima]

Bump.

[Soaring Feather]

Thanks for the ping Tonkin.

Some shooter LC.

And bump

[supercat]

Personal opinion only, on my part. I find them the UGLIEST firearms ever designed.

Fair enough, but something that works well can have a beauty all its own, no matter how butt-ugly it looks.

That, and the ejection pattern problems have never been satisfactorily adressed, and the balance of them feels...odd to me.

The only bull-pup I've handled was a Bushmaster pistol, and it indeed seemed very odd. That having been said, I would think there would be a lot of room to improve things.

One thing I was thinking would be cool as an operational concept if it could be made to work effectively would be a firearm which stripped rounds backward from a magazine located in front of the trigger group, shifted the rounds rearward through a secondary magazine. Rounds would eject out the top of the back, just behind the shooter's cheek.

[Long Cut]

Sound like WAY too many parts and odd movements. Remembe, Murphy's Law ALWAYS applies.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the heads up!

[ExSoldier]

Give me an M14 anyday...if they wanna jump with the critter, or use it in tanks or SpecOps, shorten the barrel a bit, and hang on the folding stock. Attach an Aimpoint or ACOG sight and PRESTO! That's be my idea. Why spend an unGodly amount of $$$ that could be better spent on training when the piece is already on hand, and is already a known quantity. Why give the money for an American battle rifle to a foreign entity. Wouldn't inspire a lot of confidence in me as a company commander or before my troops...

[supercat]

Sound like WAY too many parts and odd movements.

Yeah, yeah. Though after having seen the OICW, I thought the military bigwigs liked needless complexity.

Actually, the two-stage feeding could have an advantage if there were a good way to prime/reprime it: if the firearm itself held a few rounds between the primary magazine and the chamber, that would suggest that in a tactical reload situation there would be a few rounds available even after the primary magazine was removed.

Otherwise, though, I'm curious: all the designs I've seen have the magazine located a fair ways forward from the back of the firearm. What would be the practical minimum "rear length" required if a firearm placed the recoil spring forward of the bolt (as it is on nearly all handguns, e.g.)? Would it be practical to have the action located far enough back to eject rounds between the soldier's cheek and shoulder?

[PhilDragoo]

The sun never sets on fools:

[SAMWolf]

I see Al Bore hasn't learned a thing about handling a weapon.

[Squantos]

The "only" one that will hold true zero after removal is the brookfield mount which is not being made anymore. Alledgedly the Smith Enterprises version is the old brookfield mount for the M1A.

If the rig is duty I'd highly suggest ya search and seek a brookfield. Check with creedmore to see if they have any on the back of a shelf but I doubt it.......

2.5 or TP may have a source but be ready to drop at least Three (3) "C" notes on it minimum if ya find one. I have seen GI versions "modified with some additional set screws and such that did well but "brookfield" is what you seek for near perfect return to zero IMO.

Stay Safe Doooood !

[RLK]

The day may come when we want a cartrige that is suitable for distance and is not easily deflected.

[Mortimer Snavely]

If I had to choose one single rifle, I would choose the Ruger Mini-14. Lighter ammo means lighter magazines and more of them.

As for sidearms, I've been able to field strip a 1911 since before I was ten years old. Why confuse all that muscle memory? The service Beretta has caught my attention, though, as has the Glock.

[Mortimer Snavely]

Please see post #194.

[Shooter 2.5]

The Mini's would have to be adapted to solve the drifting point of aim.

When a Mini heats up, the point of aim changes drastically. It was a reason a lot of people call it an expensive plinker.

Actually, it has two problems. The designer used those 10-32 screws to hold the gas block. They are factory set but an unknowing person can tighten the screws so far as to choke the barrel. That leads to the legendary problem of a Mini having an eight inch group at 50 yards.

I have seen people who love the Mini, stand and blast away at cans with a full 30 round magazine and they think the world of Bill's little gun. The other group tried to bench rest their Mini with a ten round magazine and they can't wait to sell it at the next gunshow.

I still own mine and after working on and off for two years to solve the problem, I still haven't given up.

[Centurion2000]

The other problem on the mini is that the last few inches of the barrel are actually .227 instead of remaining uniform. Really throws accuracy off.

[LibKill]

Part of the problem with the Mini-14 is the rear sight. I bought one with an after-market plastic stock. The rear sight rattled and I got 4-5" groups off the bench at 100 yards.

I had it replaced with a precision micrometer sight (I forget the brand right now) and it now groups 2-3".

It's not a sniper rifle, but it is rugged and reliable.

[Shooter 2.5]

Really?????

Is that the problem I've been having?

I did everything to the gas system and the barrel support in order to stabilize the barrel and I still haven't had any luck.

Can you tell me more as to why the barrel is so poorly made to have a different land measurement?

[Shooter 2.5]

I'm using a 20x varmint scope to eliminate my shooting deficiancies from the equation.

It's the problem of the drifting point of aim that remains the problem.

I have to go and I'll be back. I still have to figure out why the barrel is so unstable even after I locked it down with a simple design of my own. My barrel is supported at the gas block and the receiver unlike the factory rifles that are only supported at the receiver.