i resent to the table the Steyr AUG (specifically the Australian made F88 version)Canid117 said:Things that should be considered when choosing a weapon:
-Portability
-Ergonomics
-Weight
-Stopping Power
-Logistics (weapons using an already established round and magazine would make logistics much friendlier to the Military's gunnery sergeants.)
-Recoil
-Accuracy
-Durability
-Range
-Adaptability & Accessories
-Cost Per Unit
etc
XD I've never played CSSStoic raptor said:Your only saying that because of Counter-Strike.KaosuHamoni said:SIG SG 553, otherwise known as the .552 Commando's big brother, and replacement
![]()
I swear, if someone says "your only saying that because of CoD", I will kill you. =_=
Please dont kill me
Isn't that essentially the Magpull Masada/Bushmaster ACR? The ergonomics kind of suck, it feels cheaply built (which, the Bushmaster at anyrate IS, since they cut corners to be able to lower the cost).ToonLink said:My vote would be for the Remmington ACR.
![]()
They dropped the L, and are just using the Mk.17 now.Sn1P3r M98 said:Well, it's not an official gun, but an AK variant in .223 would be durable and still use the NATO cartridges...
But I've got a soft spot for the ol' AK. The SCAR is probably a great choice, and SOCOM approves, seeing as they adopted the L and H variants back in April 2010.
You're only saying that because of CS:S.KaosuHamoni said:SIG SG 553, otherwise known as the .552 Commando's big brother, and replacement
![]()
I swear, if someone says "your only saying that because of CoD", I will kill you. =_=
Right.ToonLink said:toastmaster2k8 said:CoD...ToonLink said:Meh. Not a gun guy. Just like the ACR.toastmaster2k8 said:Why?ToonLink said:My vote would be for the Remmington ACR.
![]()
Actually no. They showed the ACR on one of those future weapon shows.
Haha High five. I was gonna say that.Numachuka said:You're only saying that because of CS:S.KaosuHamoni said:SIG SG 553, otherwise known as the .552 Commando's big brother, and replacement
![]()
I swear, if someone says "your only saying that because of CoD", I will kill you. =_=
I forgot about that part, sorry. Can't really think of any assault rifles at the moment.Canid117 said:It is called the AK-101Sn1P3r M98 said:Well, it's not an official gun, but an AK variant in .223 would be durable and still use the NATO cartridges...
But I've got a soft spot for the ol' AK. The SCAR is probably a great choice, and SOCOM approves, seeing as they adopted the L and H variants back in April 2010.
So... why would this make a good replacement for the M-16?SteakHeart said:I saw the XM109 on another thread-
![]()
-and frankly, a grenade-firing .50 cal seems pretty awesome. Yeah, I know it's probably heavy, a bit clunky, and probably isn't that cost-efficient, but its concept and appearance are ridiculously cool.
I thought there was already something out there. Thanks for reminding me!Canid117 said:It is called the AK-101Sn1P3r M98 said:Well, it's not an official gun, but an AK variant in .223 would be durable and still use the NATO cartridges...
But I've got a soft spot for the ol' AK. The SCAR is probably a great choice, and SOCOM approves, seeing as they adopted the L and H variants back in April 2010.
Ahh, well that's good seeing as 7.62X51 is a more powerful cartridge.Koeryn said:They dropped the L, and are just using the Mk.17 now.Sn1P3r M98 said:Well, it's not an official gun, but an AK variant in .223 would be durable and still use the NATO cartridges...
But I've got a soft spot for the ol' AK. The SCAR is probably a great choice, and SOCOM approves, seeing as they adopted the L and H variants back in April 2010.
It's also a much heavier cartridge that you mostly only see in the hands of a squad's marksman, not as a standard infantry round.Sn1P3r M98 said:I thought there was already something out there. Thanks for reminding me!Canid117 said:It is called the AK-101Sn1P3r M98 said:Well, it's not an official gun, but an AK variant in .223 would be durable and still use the NATO cartridges...
But I've got a soft spot for the ol' AK. The SCAR is probably a great choice, and SOCOM approves, seeing as they adopted the L and H variants back in April 2010.
Ahh, well that's good seeing as 7.62X51 is a more powerful cartridge.Koeryn said:They dropped the L, and are just using the Mk.17 now.Sn1P3r M98 said:Well, it's not an official gun, but an AK variant in .223 would be durable and still use the NATO cartridges...
But I've got a soft spot for the ol' AK. The SCAR is probably a great choice, and SOCOM approves, seeing as they adopted the L and H variants back in April 2010.
The handle melted after repeated firing which will get you killed in a combat scenario. If I was a US marine I would much rather perform s.p.o.r.t.s two or three times during a battle than have to carry around four extra handles and have to swap the damn things out.Jabberwock xeno said:XM8.
It outperformed ever other weapon in the dust test, with 700 less jams the the M4.
Too bad we fucking canceled the program, how come we always do this shit?
Yes, the hand guard melted a bit, but that can easily be fixed, and with the grenade launcher in place, the hand guard isn't even there to melt.
True, although I think SOCOM could use a bit more punch to their guns.Koeryn said:It's also a much heavier cartridge that you mostly only see in the hands of a squad's marksman, not as a standard infantry round.Sn1P3r M98 said:I thought there was already something out there. Thanks for reminding me!Canid117 said:It is called the AK-101Sn1P3r M98 said:Well, it's not an official gun, but an AK variant in .223 would be durable and still use the NATO cartridges...
But I've got a soft spot for the ol' AK. The SCAR is probably a great choice, and SOCOM approves, seeing as they adopted the L and H variants back in April 2010.
Ahh, well that's good seeing as 7.62X51 is a more powerful cartridge.Koeryn said:They dropped the L, and are just using the Mk.17 now.Sn1P3r M98 said:Well, it's not an official gun, but an AK variant in .223 would be durable and still use the NATO cartridges...
But I've got a soft spot for the ol' AK. The SCAR is probably a great choice, and SOCOM approves, seeing as they adopted the L and H variants back in April 2010.
Ahem.Canid117 said:The handle melted after repeated firing which will get you killed in a combat scenario. If I was a US marine I would much rather perform s.p.o.r.t.s two or three times during a battle than have to carry around four extra handles and have to swap the damn things out.Jabberwock xeno said:XM8.
It outperformed ever other weapon in the dust test, with 700 less jams the the M4.
Too bad we fucking canceled the program, how come we always do this shit?
Yes, the hand guard melted a bit, but that can easily be fixed, and with the grenade launcher in place, the hand guard isn't even there to melt.
It was the polymer that was melting and use of other materials would dramatically increase the weight on the from of the weapon which causes a whole host of other problems. Who do you think is better to judge? The United States military who would actually have to use the weapon? Or you the guy who likes it just because it looks cool?Jabberwock xeno said:Ahem.Canid117 said:The handle melted after repeated firing which will get you killed in a combat scenario. If I was a US marine I would much rather perform s.p.o.r.t.s two or three times during a battle than have to carry around four extra handles and have to swap the damn things out.Jabberwock xeno said:XM8.
It outperformed ever other weapon in the dust test, with 700 less jams the the M4.
Too bad we fucking canceled the program, how come we always do this shit?
Yes, the hand guard melted a bit, but that can easily be fixed, and with the grenade launcher in place, the hand guard isn't even there to melt.
It wasn't the handle that was melting, it was the hand guard.
It would be simple to just make that part out of better heat resistant materials, or just make it out of polymer like the rest of the gun worst case scenario.
Besides, if you have the grenade launcher attached, then you use that as a hand guard instead anyways.
No, it was the hand guard melting, not the whole gun:Canid117 said:It was the polymer that was melting and use of other materials would dramatically increase the weight on the from of the weapon which causes a whole host of other problems. Who do you think is better to judge? The United States military who would actually have to use the weapon? Or you the guy who likes it just because it looks cool?Jabberwock xeno said:Ahem.Canid117 said:The handle melted after repeated firing which will get you killed in a combat scenario. If I was a US marine I would much rather perform s.p.o.r.t.s two or three times during a battle than have to carry around four extra handles and have to swap the damn things out.Jabberwock xeno said:XM8.
It outperformed ever other weapon in the dust test, with 700 less jams the the M4.
Too bad we fucking canceled the program, how come we always do this shit?
Yes, the hand guard melted a bit, but that can easily be fixed, and with the grenade launcher in place, the hand guard isn't even there to melt.
It wasn't the handle that was melting, it was the hand guard.
It would be simple to just make that part out of better heat resistant materials, or just make it out of polymer like the rest of the gun worst case scenario.
Besides, if you have the grenade launcher attached, then you use that as a hand guard instead anyways.
the HK416 is basically an expensive M4 Carbine, we still need a full-sized rifleAmrasCalmacil said:I'm surprised no-one's suggested the H&K 416 yet, it has an immediately recognisable design, it's remarkably durable and has already been adopted by America's 1st SFOD-D.
![]()