What should replace the M-16 and its variants?

[Kenny Stowe 5]

The Army is looking for a suitable solution/replacement for the rifles sporting the 5.56 in the middle east to better match the AK-47.

 

So what caliber/rifle do you think should replace America's rifle?

 

It is a common stance on this forum although not all inclusive, that the M-16 and its variants have their issues when it comes to harsh enviorments and this is where the AK-47 strong points stand out. I took some excerpts from the Army's field report and Major General Robert Scales from a news report.

 

"The U.S. military is re-evaluating the Army's use of the M4 rifle in Afghanistan following concerns that the Taliban's primitive AK-47's are proving more effective. An Army study found that the 5.56mm bullets fired from the M4s don't retain enough velocity past 1,000 feet to kill an enemy. In Afghanistan, forces are often up to 2,500 feet apart. Gen. Robert Scales Jr Scales said the M4 is "unsuitable" for Afghan terrain and "notoriously unreliable" in the first place. The Army Times reported on an Army weapons test three years ago that found the M4 performed worse than three other newer carbines when subjected to an "extreme dust test."Problems with the M4 locking up were also cited in a study last year on a July 2008 firefight that left nine U.S. soldiers dead in eastern Afghanistan. As for what could ultimately replace the M4, the Army's center for small-arms development is trying to find a solution."

Edited May 26, 2010 by Survival by Saiga

[Kenny Stowe 5]

Found an Ipod attachment that includes an application that gives +20 to damage and improves overall reliability. I might sport on of these on my S12!

[PTGT_Neon 1]

I never thought the US military would have the humility to say such a thing! It sounds like they need incendiary .50 cal rifles with strong variable scopes (that would be my vote!) Isn't HK working on a new rifle that operates the same but has a more reliable set of mechanisms?

[Heath_h49008 442]

You're asking two questions.

 

What will replace the M4/M16A2... The H&K 416 piston modification should fit the bill as an interim, until a new platform is required. It solves the issues, and saves massive amounts of cash because the accessories, mags, etc are all interchangeable.

 

What should we get for Afghanistan. The M14 is a wonderful weapon for the job, but we have too few, and they are heavy.

 

A good 7.62x51/.308/7.62 NATO rifle could be easily designed and produced that would be lighter and still function. I'm a huge fan of DRB rifles such as the G3, but the design needs to be updated ergonomically.

 

IMHO

[L5K 162]

Found an Ipod attachment that includes an application that gives +20 to damage and improves overall reliability. I might sport on of these on my S12!

 

Actually I have seen that software, and while I wouldn't want it mounted on the rifle, it could be a very valuable tool for anyone needing to make any long range shots. It apparently can take all sorts of variables such as all of the info on the round you're firing, the length of the barrel on the rifle, wind speed and direction, temperature and almost any other imaginable factor and give you a correct point of aim for hitting the target at extremely long distances. Necessary, no, but I imagine it's much quicker than using a pencil and paper.

[ThirtyAughtSix 101]

Stoner had it with the AR-10 like 50 years ago.

[Paulyski 2,227]

The Army is looking for a suitable solution/replacement for the rifles sporting the 5.56 in the middle east to better match the AK-47.

 

So what caliber/rifle do you think should replace America's rifle?

 

 

I'm saying a full auto 30.06... Or at least .308

 

But I guess this post proves the old AK vs. AR thing...

Sorry AR guys, but piss off.

Army Dude up there just said they're still unreliable & the caliber is officially gay.

 

But seriously... If every solder of ours had a 30.06 or a .308 & the marksmanship of a sharp Marine......

 

 

It's funny.

Think about it.

Chances are... Somewhere in the Kush mountains, some of the "Tally-Ban" are probably sitting around smoking from a hooka and laughing their asses off at us for trying to shoot them with .22s at distance.

 

As for the accuracy argument, if the US feels outgunned, that means they're taking effective fire from the AKs that they can't return... And the Tally-Ban doesn't have shit for optics plus, they're shooting ancient guns.

 

How the hell did the M-16 last so long?

Edited May 26, 2010 by Paulyski

[ChileRelleno 7,071]

They don't need a whole new weapon...

 

They just need to start shipping over new uppers in either 6.5 grendel or 6.8 spc, along with mags-n-ammo.

[Kenny Stowe 5]

The Army is looking for a suitable solution/replacement for the rifles sporting the 5.56 in the middle east to better match the AK-47.

 

So what caliber/rifle do you think should replace America's rifle?

 

 

But seriously... If every solder of ours had a 30.06 or a .308 & the marksmanship of a sharp Marine......

 

Sharp Marine? When you find one let me know-wont hold breath LOL. Just joking about the Marine thing. No really when you find one pm me

 

 

Don't know why the 16 lasted so long but it should have never seen action again after Vietnam---military arms collectors yes. The forward assist should not have been the answer for its poor performance in that harsh environment.

 

We need a rifle that has more punch down the line, durable in extreme conditions, not too heavy and easy to operate.......

Edited May 26, 2010 by Survival by Saiga

[Kenny Stowe 5]

The HK 416 is a good option. Same caliber but with many improvements over the M4.

[Heath_h49008 442]

Come on guys, the .556 isn't horrible for some work. In an urban/CQB world, it packs an effective punch, and doesn't load you down too badly. A large part of it's weakness comes from treaties making us use ball, and not soft or hollow point bullets.

 

It simply isn't a long range knock down round... for prairie dogs maybe...

 

The "308" has identical ballistics to the 30-06 in it's most common form.

 

The AR10 has many of the same shortcomings as the AR15.

 

The FAL had the punch and reliability, but not the accuracy. (1.5 MOA if you are lucky)

 

The G3 had better accuracy, better reliability, and a strong resistance to crud/sand (The Pakistanis and the Iranians still use them.) But, the ergonomics could be better. With modern composites, a LRBHO, and a relocation of the charging handle, it would be very tough to beat the weapon.

 

Nothing will make 7.62 NATO lighter to carry and 10rnd is about a lb...

[SaigaNoobie 66]

a pound is 7000 grains. 10x 150gr bullet, 1500gr. 10x 50gr of powder, 500gr. 10x 150gr of brass, 1500gr. 1500+1500+500= 3500. Or Half a Pound. So 20rds = 1 lb. Give or take a few grains.

 

.223 - 25gr of powder, 90gr of brass, 60gr of bullet. 175gr per shot. 40 rounds of .223 is a pound, give or take.

 

20rds vs 40rds.

Edited May 26, 2010 by SaigaNoobie

[SaigaNoobie 66]

Also. .308 has 2-2.5x the energy at the muzzle of .223 and over 3 times the energy of .223 at 500yrds. Hell, at 500 yards, the .308 has almost as much as .223 at the muzzle.

 

Why can't we just use the .308?

 

Do we need something in between .223 and .308? Say something that weighs about 235 grains for a loaded round (30rds/lb) and uses a caliber between .22 and 30? Something like .270? (6.8).... and has a MV of something between the 1200@.223 and 2700@.308? Something like 1950 ft/lbs?

 

We need a .260-.270 caliber. Weighing approximately 100-120gr. Using 30-40gr of powder with brass about 90-100gr. It needs to have 1800-2000 ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle, and preferably fit in an AR package.

 

6.8 REM SPC.... 115gr@2650 fps for Muzzle Energy of 1800 ft/lbs and overall cartridge weight of approximately 240gr.

 

Fits in ARs. Has almost 2x the energy of .223 at 500yrds (600 vs. 350)... .308 has 1000-1200 ftlbs at 500.

 

ARs don't suck, 14" barreled .223s Suck.

[BpS12 512]

Bullpup S308s with a good full length(muzzle break to receiver) composite stock w/rails and free floating barrel. Oh sorry, that's for me, lol.

 

Honestly, the M4 and it's derivadives are fine for varmit hunting/Law Enforcement(sometimes one and the same) where you don't have to spend hours/days in running fire fights and can clean the things every few hundred rounds.

 

5.56 vs 7.62 - Yes you can carry more 5s, but you have to shoot more of them to take down an attacker, esp at disance. Therefore you have to carry more. And it's not suitable for Afghan fighting where you're often at the upper end of rifle ranges to begin with.

Good for CQB but not for long range engagements.

 

I think it would be faster to ramp up 7.62 ammo production than to try to supply our troops with 6.5s and .8s. At this time. Though these may be the cals to go with in the future.

 

Unfortunately, the US has the mentallity of "Redesigning the Wheel" rather than taking a great design and making it better. IF we'd have picked up the AK design 50yrs ago, can you imagine where it would be today? It wouldn't be just us tinkering around on this forum doing what should have been done then. Our troops would have had great weapons from the get go.

 

Perhaps in the interim, we should start useing captured weapon caches against our enemies, after being checked over by our armorers of course. Issue 7.62/7.54s to troops in the mountians. Leave the 5.56s/AKs for the city patrols.

 

My bet is that the Mil will go with the bigger cal uppers before they fork out for a new rifle. Besides, a new rifle wont hit the troops(as a whole) for a year or so once its tested/approved. Doesn't do those in harms way much good at the momment.

[Lone Star Arms 2,047]

The Army is looking for a suitable solution/replacement for the rifles sporting the 5.56 in the middle east to better match the AK-47.

 

So what caliber/rifle do you think should replace America's rifle?

 

It is a common stance on this forum although not all inclusive, that the M-16 and its variants have their issues when it comes to harsh enviorments and this is where the AK-47 strong points stand out. I took some excerpts from the Army's field report and Major General Robert Scales from a news report.

 

"The U.S. military is re-evaluating the Army's use of the M4 rifle in Afghanistan following concerns that the Taliban's primitive AK-47's are proving more effective. An Army study found that the 5.56mm bullets fired from the M4s don't retain enough velocity past 1,000 feet to kill an enemy. In Afghanistan, forces are often up to 2,500 feet apart. Gen. Robert Scales Jr Scales said the M4 is "unsuitable" for Afghan terrain and "notoriously unreliable" in the first place. The Army Times reported on an Army weapons test three years ago that found the M4 performed worse than three other newer carbines when subjected to an "extreme dust test."Problems with the M4 locking up were also cited in a study last year on a July 2008 firefight that left nine U.S. soldiers dead in eastern Afghanistan. As for what could ultimately replace the M4, the Army's center for small-arms development is trying to find a solution."

 

An AK platform is an obvious choice. I am currenly building a Saiga .223 for a customer who carried an M16 in combat, and will do some of my own testing as the build progresses.

 

Another obvious issue is payload. .223 is not ideal for every situation, I would like to see our troops carrying accurized .308's for longer range engagements.

[volkov 318]

Why don't we just swallow our damn pride and build a fricken AK clone with some "improvements" so we can pat ourselves on the back and pretend it's innovative to save face... Israelis did it.. why won't we? Cheapest way I can think of to get us some good rifles since clearly price is an issue (or we'd be using xm8s by now)

[Nailbomb 10,221]

The Army is looking for a suitable solution/replacement for the rifles sporting the 5.56 in the middle east to better match the AK-47.

 

So what caliber/rifle do you think should replace America's rifle?

 

 

I'm saying a full auto 30.06... Or at least .308

 

But I guess this post proves the old AK vs. AR thing...

Sorry AR guys, but piss off.

Army Dude up there just said they're still unreliable & the caliber is officially gay.

Your too quick to jump(and gloat)

 

At the range they are talking about how do you really think your saiga will do? Let alone with a tali fighter using it? This offers nothing in the AK/AR debate.

 

The 5.56 out of a 20" barrel is good up to about 300 yards. Past that its accurate, but dosn't retain enough muzzle velocity to have the proper lethality rate.

 

Put it in a M-4 and you've effectivly crippled that round at any distance below 50 yards, AND reduced long range accuracy further.

 

The only thing this proves is that we should have never jumped to the lighter and smaller M-4.

[raidersfan_5544 57]

"They just need to start shipping over new uppers in either 6.5 grendel or 6.8 spc, along with mags-n-ammo."

 

^THIS but with piston driven uppers and I would go for the grendel.

 

30-06 and 308 are too heavy to carry along with all the other crap are military packs around.

Edited May 26, 2010 by raidersfan_5544

[superA 289]

It seems that they basically need different rifles for different areas. I really don't think they are going to make the switch to Grendel.

[ChileRelleno 7,071]

Switching out uppers/mags with a already common ammunition makes the most sense in the short term and in costs.

They've been looking at 6.5/6.8 for years, but the politics... Well... We all know how politics affects the military.

Replace 5.56 and 7.62 NATO Ammunition

November 22, 2004

 

 

Major Robert E. Berg, U.S. Army Ordnance Officer and aerospace engineer

 

You may have heard that the 5.56 NATO ammo, used by our troops in Somalia, Iraq, and Afghanistan, has not been the best man-stopper. The Soldier Weapons Assessment Team Report 6-03 made the following recommendation:

 

Recommendations: A Government Lethality IPT has been stood up to standardize gel block testing and an engineering study will be conducted extensive, soft target terminal effects of COTS and military 5.56mm ammunition. The characteristics of each bullet terminal performance will be determined. Based on requirements and using the engineering information, a new round should be type classified and made available.

 

In the search for more capable ammunition, two contenders worth considering have emerged from the private sector. Both work with existing M16 lower assemblies (the bottom half of the rifle).

 

Contender #1: The 6.8mm SPC by Remington designed in cooperation with members of military Special Operations Command.

 

Contender #2: The 6.5 Grendel by Alexander Arms designed in cooperation with Lapua (ammunition manufacturer) and Arne Brennan (competition shooter), and based on the work of Dr. Lou Palmisano (successful ammunition designer).

 

What are the advantages over current 5.56mm NATO?

 

The first advantage is lethality. The 6.8 SPC has an edge with its current bullet loading over the 6.5 Grendel at short range against unprotected personnel. The 6.5 Grendel has an edge over the 6.8 SPC against light-armor-protected personnel. Both appear to improve upon the 5.56.

 

Lethality at long range has not been tested. As opposed to short-range engagements with 5.56 ammunition, 7.62 is being used for some long range engagements.

 

Using ballistics programs on computers, we can compare bullet energy to estimate killing power at longer range. At 600 meters the 6.5 Grendel with 144gr bullet has 831 ft lbs of energy. The 7.62 NATO with 147gr round has 745 ft lbs of energy. The 6.8 SPC with its 115gr round has 440 ft lbs of energy. Finally, the 5.56mm NATO with 77gr round has 308 ft lbs of energy. Advantage goes overwhelmingly to the Grendel at long range.

 

When confronting an enemy approaching in a car, 7.62mm NATO is effective while 5.56 is less than spectacular. At the Blackwater shoot this year, the 6.5 Grendel was tested against armored glass panels. No testing was done for the 6.8 SPC. The 6.5mm Grendel succeeded in penetrating new 1.575Ó VistaSteel armored glass with non-armor piercing ammunition. The Grendel with actual armor-piercing ammunition should be a great performer for that purpose.

 

Ammunition weight and recoil are slight disadvantages over current 5.56mm ammunition

 

The 5.56 ammunition weighs 9.0 lbs per 300 rounds. These new rounds weigh 28% more than 5.56mm. In comparison, 7.62 weighs 53% to 66% more than 5.56. Recoil, with the competitors, is slightly higher than 5.56 and about half that of 7.62 NATO.

 

 

Advantages compared to 7.62mm NATO ammunition

 

Comparing the weight and recoil disadvantages to 5.56mm something else becomes apparent. The 6.5 Grendel is delivering similar energy to the 7.62mm NATO yet has a significant advantage in weight and recoil. Based on the militaryÕs original move to 5.56 for weight savings, the 6.5 Grendel appears to be an excellent option to 7.62.

 

I have spoken with Blackhawk and Chinook pilots on the subject of door gunners using the M60 with 7.62 ammunition. I have also fired the M60 from the open rear of a Chinook in Iraq. There is noticeable trajectory change in these rounds. You can watch the tracers arc toward the ground. The change in trajectory is partly due to the long range and partly due to wind effect of rotor wash and forward speed. We agreed that a bullet less susceptible to wind drift and having less long-range drop would have an advantage. Long tracer life is also an advantage as the tracers are the only way to target in this situation. The 6.5 Grendel with its long, high-BC bullets offers all the advantages of longer tracer burn distance, less drop, and less wind drift.

 

Overall Impression

 

Overall, the 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel seem like acceptable substitutes for 5.56mm NATO to increase killing power with slight increase in weight and recoil. A surprising find is the 6.5 Grendel has an advantage over 7.62mm NATO in decreased weight and recoil while retaining long-range energy.

 

 

References

Armed Forces Journal, Shoot-out 2004 Article

Ballistics Comparison

Soldier Weapons Assessment Team Report

The Ammo Oracle

Barrett Firearms M468 Review

http://www.65grendel.com

NDIA Small Arms Symposium Presentation

Defense Review - 6.8mm SPC and 6.5 Grendel Article

 

Edited May 26, 2010 by ChileRelleno

[Bean.223 365]

Rob Arms in 6.8.....what more does one need.

 

It'll never happen though.....

[raidersfan_5544 57]

"It seems that they basically need different rifles for different areas. I really don't think they are going to make the switch to Grendel."

 

I dont think they will either. I was just stating my answer to the op's question

[Heath_h49008 442]

a pound is 7000 grains. 10x 150gr bullet, 1500gr. 10x 50gr of powder, 500gr. 10x 150gr of brass, 1500gr. 1500+1500+500= 3500. Or Half a Pound. So 20rds = 1 lb. Give or take a few grains.

 

.223 - 25gr of powder, 90gr of brass, 60gr of bullet. 175gr per shot. 40 rounds of .223 is a pound, give or take.

 

20rds vs 40rds.

 

 

Damn... you're right. I forgot it was one lb per mag not two.

 

My bad. I was trying to remember the "Rule of thumb" and didn't do the math. My bad.

[L5K 162]

Sig 55x series.

 

 

Take the best things about the M16, such as the takedown pins, and modular design being easy to adapt. Drop in an AK styled bolt/carrier system. Call it good and sell it for a ludicrous price. Yes it's a fantastic rifle, yes, it seems to perform incredibly well, no I won't pay that much for it. It's really a win win though. If the US contracts them, then they'll start making them here, then companies will sell to civilians and more of them saturate the market. Price goes down and then I can afford one.

 

Here's the carrier system in from one, does it look familiar to us on this side of the fence?

[superA 289]

"It seems that they basically need different rifles for different areas. I really don't think they are going to make the switch to Grendel."

 

I dont think they will either. I was just stating my answer to the op's question

 

 

 

Oh I wish they would. I think the Grendel could replace both and then maybe the Grendel ammo market would open up a bit and make it easier to get ammo. I have held off from getting a Grendel because of the lack of support. It is one beautiful round.

[superA 289]

Sig 55x series.

 

 

Take the best things about the M16, such as the takedown pins, and modular design being easy to adapt. Drop in an AK styled bolt/carrier system. Call it good and sell it for a ludicrous price. Yes it's a fantastic rifle, yes, it seems to perform incredibly well, no I won't pay that much for it. It's really a win win though. If the US contracts them, then they'll start making them here, then companies will sell to civilians and more of them saturate the market. Price goes down and then I can afford one.

 

Here's the carrier system in from one, does it look familiar to us on this side of the fence?

 

 

 

It's really not out of range price wise from piston AR's. I have handled them and don't like they way they balance but I think the design is pretty neat.

[ChileRelleno 7,071]

6.5 grendel uppers with 18" barrels, mags/ammo and ship'em as fast as they can make'em... 75% of the problem(s) solved, make those uppers piston and 95%+ of the problems are solved.

Do away with the archaic rules against HP ammo and we're just about golden

 

 

 

Of course the easiest most sensible solutions will never be used. Yay politics & bureaucracy!

Edited May 27, 2010 by ChileRelleno

[TR Young 175]

I say we just 'Hiroshima & Nagasaki' the whole Middle East and end the debate all together.

 

 

Ok, ok... I know that wasn't helpful at all, but it sounded good to me.

[superA 289]

6.5 grendel uppers with 18" barrels, mags/ammo and ship'em as fast as they can make'em... 75% of the problem(s) solved, make those uppers piston and 95%+ of the problems are solved.

Do away with the archaic rules against HP ammo and we're just about golden

 

 

 

Of course the easiest most sensible solutions will never be used. Yay politics & bureaucracy!

 

 

 

Grendel even makes a piston upper. I'm still not sure if a piston is needed but beefing the bolt up would be nice.

[ChileRelleno 7,071]

6.5 grendel uppers with 18" barrels, mags/ammo and ship'em as fast as they can make'em... 75% of the problem(s) solved, make those uppers piston and 95%+ of the problems are solved.

Do away with the archaic rules against HP ammo and we're just about golden

 

 

 

Of course the easiest most sensible solutions will never be used. Yay politics & bureaucracy!

 

 

 

Grendel even makes a piston upper. I'm still not sure if a piston is needed but beefing the bolt up would be nice.

Provide a high quality piston upper and there'd be less problems with sustained fire overheating... Granted of course, they need to stop using those USGI profile barrels, go to a midweight profile.

Edited May 27, 2010 by ChileRelleno