The Magpul Masada 5.56x45mm NATO(.223 Rem.)
Follow the link below too read briefly about the Magpul Masada.
http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,158193,00.html?ESRC=recruiting.nl
Posted in Military Rifles
Why Weapons Aren't Enough to Keep Your Family Safe? Read More...
Which is the most effective home defense weapon for a home invasion:
Click Here
to learn about the pro's and con's of each as well as the biggest mistake all the "heavy artillery" guys make when choosing "terminator ammo"!
(Hint: It has nothing to do with "stopping power" but it's nearly as important to your family that you get this right! Not doing so could cost you a lifetime of grieving that no law-abiding family should suffer...EVER!) Read More...
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
Unfortunately no. The FN SCAR L/H is the only rifle that is currently being tested that has the multi-caliber capabilities like the Masada. The SCAR is availiable to special forces and will be in limited numbers in other units. The HK416 (Gas-Piston AR) has been in use now with special forces since 04, but didn’t do well in the tests.
The extreme dust conditions test just became available to the public in December. The rifles tested and the results were:
The M4 Carbine, the Army’s existing weapon, 882 jams, 1 jam every 68 rounds, again using heavy lubrication. In addition all 10 of the M4 barrels needed to be replaced, and a number of their parts were replaced during the test. None of the cold hammer forged HK416 and XM-8 barrels needed replacement.
The HK416 is a modified M4 carbine, which can be and has been converted from existing rifles. Used by US Special Forces.
233 jams, 1 jam every 257 rounds, 3.77x more reliable than the M4.
FN SCAR is US special Forces’ new weapon, designed by SOSOCM. It just went into production in late 2007.
226 jams, 1 jam every 265 rounds, 3.85x more reliable than the M4
XM-8 is a developmental rifle. It’s an advanced version of HK’s G36, a rifle in wide use by many NATO armies. The US Army cancelled the XM-8 weapons family 2 years ago.
127 jams, 1 jam every 472 rounds, 6.95x more reliable than the M4.
*Those are not my opinions, just the test results copy and pasted from, but it is an excellent artical for those interested.
We who have used the M4 know the story, once it gets hot the lube burns off, once the lube burns off it starts failing.The Gas-Piston is the future of the AR, so are more lethal rounds. That is where the SCAR-H variant and Masada’s come in handy. If it were up to me I’d give every soldier a Gas-Piston AR in 6.8 SPC, or 6.5 grendel.
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
if it works better they will!
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
probably not.
If you research the way the Army has implemented thier field rifles over the past century, you will se that by the time its considered, it will be completely outdated.
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
I doubt it. The United States Army Special Forces are already using the HK .416 assault riffle.
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
Probably not, If they change, it will probably be to a heckler&koch assault rifle
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
Not likely at this time.
My father was part of the US Army’s investigations into M-16 successor small arms in the 70s and 80s, and frankly, very few of the various alternatives were superior. There’s a LOT of money to be made in selling small arms to the Army, and many different sources will be/are pushing *their* pet weapon at the DoA. In the end of their various investigations and design tests, the M-16A4 was the result, despite testing arms from around the world.
Will there be a replacement small arm in the next decade? I frankly think not. In the next two decades? Probably. Almost certainly, it’ll be a US design, and probably an Army design – the DoA has a HUGE historical problem with "Not Invented Here," and likes the flavor of it’s own work better than that of any other.
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
The army just completed testing, again, on the M4 and was very comfortable with the final results. Now, if you ask the average “joe” in the field about the M4, you will probably get mixed results. The everyday service member doesn’t understand budget, procurement process, contracts and office politics from the top down. So, I do not believe this weapon will be sold to the military in the near future, not the army anyway. It may hit the roads for testing, experiments and possibly some special units but not to the bulk of the inventory in the next year or so. I read the article and it was very interesting plus it sounds like a good weapon.
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
If you cannot do close order drill with it, then the Marines will not be interested, I can tell you that much.
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
No, It will not meet military specs. For one it has no back up iron sights. And from the looks of it, it is more complicated than the M16/M4 that we are using now. Just because something looks cooler does not mean the military will adopt it. Look at the XM-8. It was supposed to be the greatest thing since sliced bread, but when it came down to it, it could not outperform current weapons systems. So it was scrapped.
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
This looks like a very good rifle, and The US Military is very much interested in the rifle. It’ll take
a while, but I think the M-16/M4 should be replaced.
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
The 16 needs to go due to its problems in the sand. I’m not sold on the Masada yet but I do think it’s a contender. There are several models the military is looking at right now… possibly even moving up to a 7.62X51 round.
Personally, if we’re going to stick with the 5.56mm round, I’d go with the HK416.
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
To be honest, I’ve been reading a lot of different articles on the Military Times and Marine Times on replacement testing, and it although many other rifles out there performed a heck of a lot better than the M16/M4/AR Vt rifle, the results were always somehow obscured…and it would somehow lead to the M16/M4 maintaining a strong consistent performance…even though other rifles such as the new offering from HK and FN performed better.
Personally, I think as long as Colt and FN continue to keep the lowest contract price for the M16/M4, they will continue to receive the winning bid from the US Gov’t.
I can confidently say that the US Army will not replace their current issue battle rifle with the MASADA. It would be kind of cool if they did, though.
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
Cool weapon, but I don’t neccessarily think we need to think "new bullet launcher" and think "new bullet."
I’m a proponent of the switch to the 6.8mm round!
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 am
I was one of the 5 people who designed and built the Masada at Magpul.
It was built partly as a response to the Military spending 21 million tax payers dollars on the scrapped XM8 and millions before that on the OICWS which the XM8 was born from. We were tired of seeing our tax dollars flowing overseas and our Marines doing CQB with 20 inch M16s.
Like everyone else we thought we could do better and rather than just bitching we put up our own money and built what we would want to be issued.
In the end the Masada may just influence what the Army eventually replaces the M16 with and if that is the Masada’s legacy then so be it.
There is a Masada chambered for the 6.8 and yes it does have back up iron sights (integral front and bolt on rear like the flattop M16s) It also has a fixed stock option which will allow it to be used in close order drill (I pounded the ground at Parris Island too).