If the US military chooses to replace the M-16 what rifle or rifles should the US military adopt and why?

7 Responses

1. yariamapirate

   November 21st, 2009 at 5:58 am

   The H&K 416/417 is a decent weapon and I would take it before an AK, especially in CQB. There are so many different needs though… there is no single rifle that is going to make everyone happy.

   And Checksix below has it right.

   Little info that’s interesting though:

   In July 2007, the US Army announced a limited competition between the M4 carbine, FN SCAR, HK416, and the previously-shelved HK XM8. Ten examples of each of the four competitors were involved. Each weapon was fired for 6,000 rounds in an "extreme dust environment." The purpose of the shootoff was for assessing future needs, not to select a replacement for the M4.[2][3] The XM8 scored the best, with only 127 stoppages in 60,000 total rounds, the MK16 SCAR Light had 226 stoppages, while the HK416 had 233 stoppages. The M4 carbine scored "significantly worse" than the rest of the field with 882 stoppages. The results have been thrown into question due to the M4 scoring 307 jams in a previous dust chamber test conducted only a few months before with the same conditions and lubrication. This difference of 575 jams in an "identical" test indicates that the conditions may not be reproducible and therefore illegitimate as a scientific basis for evaluation.[4]

2. Mike

   November 21st, 2009 at 5:58 am

   It’s called the XM-8 , but once testing phase is complete and they start using it. It will be called simply the M-8 . I will put a link to an article about it at the bottom. If you want pictures and more info just google it and you will find a lot more.
   Mike

3. Joe W

   November 21st, 2009 at 5:58 am

   From everything I’ve read the GIs think the AK74 is the better weapon. It is more reliable.
   Many GI’s are already using heavier caliber weapons than the standard M16 which uses a light fast projectile but easily jams in desert conditions..
   A lot of guys like the M14 Mod which takes a .308 round ( Nato 7.62.54) which is a far more powerful weapon with a far greater reach.
   Some of our guys are actually using 12 gauge autoloading shotguns for close in fighting.

4. CHECKSIXX

   November 21st, 2009 at 5:58 am

   The M-16 has already been replaced with most mainline units with the M-4. The US Military has already decided to NOT replace or field a new weapon with exception only to Special Forces units. Some of those are fielding the new HK rifles. XM8 project is DEAD.

5. doinkaunddinka

   November 21st, 2009 at 5:58 am

   Note that the M-16 problems were brought on by idiot DOD DDDs under MacNamara, who formulated BALL POWDER ammo, when guncotton of the time would serve, better.

   The ball ammo pitted barrels; cleaning had to be ultra, or in jungle or desert, deadly trouble could and did occur.

   All that, for illegal wars, of the past, present, and future, for Jim Nabors and cast to satirize. GOMER PYLE, USMC was a fantastic foreshadowing device, regardless of who survived, etc. The shoots were great. Casting was awesome. Get out of my E-room and join the Navy, eh?

   President Carter brought on Reagan, which begat Middle East wars, which will end all funding, SO MARINES HAVE TO FINALLY DO THE MATH, and join the Nay-vee, really.

   By the time the M-8 gets into service, generally, folks will see that the Steve Martin issue of SGT. BILKO pokes fun at the Funny Gunny, R. Lee Ermey and his PAC-man websites, which like ALL U.S. MILITARY WEBSITES like to harass any notice that the fat power deals of 2001 doomed the Corps. The M-8 will get here; the Marines get to join the Navy, the Air Force gets to join the Army, and the USAFA gets to become the AIR GUARD ACADEMY. Or shut up!!

   The M-4 dink is here, fersure! But THEN, the obsolete DOD will have to rethink every last issue. The M-8 modular idea will be for somebody who REALLY NEEDS to deploy. Cowboy Andy dingdongs and hohos of the Bush forces get to shoot M-4s and like them, until ALL OF YOU GET DE-COMMISSIONED.

   You Bushwicks let the fat power deals and interest run and run! Why do you think YOU get anything modular? You let fat costs into everything, so you could shoot up the Middle East with your old ammo, so USE AN OLD GUN. You should have let UBL take out Saddam, instead of chasing UBL.

   The twin towers would be up, still, and the M-8 would be in service. But NOOOOOO! All kinds of Bushwicks and hob-goblins of the future are in service, with the fat, dergulated, seditious power deals, which serve up hidden overhead, every year, so New Jersey has declared bankruptcy (battleship row!) and California is about to go under (aircraft superiority is doomed).

6. sureshot649

   November 21st, 2009 at 5:58 am

   "Should" and "Probably will" are two different things when it comes to the US military. The military will continue to rely on the M4 firing heavier grain 5.56mm ammunition until they finally realize a new weapon is needed. Special Forces will use the HK416 until that time. The next weapon the military will adopt will be something similar to the scrapped XM-8 (AR-18 gas piston system, modular, new/better magazines, integral optics, etc.). The military SHOULD scrap the whole M4/M16 line of weapons and adopt the XM-8. It’s light, it’s got integral optics, it’s modular, and it’s had millions of dollars poured into it. There were a few technical problems with it, just like there is with every weapon, but they could have been easily fixed. The problem is that Colt and FN didn’t want H&K taking over their monopoly on manufacturing US military weapons.
   US weapons procurement is one of the most corrupt and stupidity-laced processes in the ENTIRETY of human history. The military always goes for the lowest bidder and never for the highest possible quality product. Like the AR-15 and Beretta 92. Are they good weapons? Sure. Are there better weapons? Hell yes. Will the military pay $50-100 more per weapon for far better quality? I wouldn’t hold my breath.
   The last thing to remember is that the very concept of an assault rifle, made for actual combat instead of a rifle range, is STILL a very controversial idea within the military. If a grunt wants a light assault rifle to clear houses and patrol jungles with, the military will give him an 11lb target rifle and lecture him about accuracy and "one-stop-drops"…
   And for a history lesson: The military almost didn’t even want to adopt the M1 Garand (the Marines were totally against it) because it would "Encourage spray-fire and waste ammunition" and was called an "unreliable fair-weather rifle, good for the range but not combat." Shows you just how much the retards at Ft. Benning and Quantico want to live in the past…

7. Aka Santana

   November 21st, 2009 at 5:58 am

   they will probably start using the M4 carbine the m16′s younger brother because it can be modded multiple ways but most parts in the military that are mostly use the m4 are the SpecOps teams

Leave a Comment