rastamanila 313 Posted September 30, 2015 Report Share Posted September 30, 2015 I was hoping to find a more mainstream media source but I heard about this. FN is a great company isn't it?What are your thoughts on this? http://www.govconwire.com/2015/09/army-buys-m4-carbines-from-colt-defense-fn-america-for-212m/ -rastamanila Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DLT 1,646 Posted September 30, 2015 Report Share Posted September 30, 2015 Guess the AR platform ain't going anywhere. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChileRelleno 7,071 Posted September 30, 2015 Report Share Posted September 30, 2015 Timing is just a convinient coincidence, no federal bailout of a private company. Nothing to see here, move along. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
storm6490 2,768 Posted September 30, 2015 Report Share Posted September 30, 2015 FN and Colt made the best battle rifles that we were issued to me. I'm glad they got the contract. The weapons are solid. The M4 had a few problems in the sand box but that was easily fixed and can be changed in new production. Only wish they would get away from the 5.56mm Nato round. http://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/Contract-View/Article/620608 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sim_Player 1,939 Posted September 30, 2015 Report Share Posted September 30, 2015 When shooting the M-16, in bootcamp, I thought that it was just a "training caliber". 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
storm6490 2,768 Posted September 30, 2015 Report Share Posted September 30, 2015 LOL! When do we get the good stuff?! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DLT 1,646 Posted September 30, 2015 Report Share Posted September 30, 2015 Forgive my ignorance, but how difficult would it be to make an 80 grain 5.56 round? I know that's just part of it, and the whole twist rate issue would have to re-explored. But other than adding mass, is there any other solution to that round? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mancat 2,368 Posted September 30, 2015 Report Share Posted September 30, 2015 Not difficult, there are 75gr loads common now. Main problems are that the small pills are sensitive to twist rate and each change on weight seems to require a different rate to stabilize. Also the larger bullets begin to barely fit into issued magazines and there is no room to set them any further back in the case. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
james lambert 3,059 Posted September 30, 2015 Report Share Posted September 30, 2015 90 gr loads are common but require about a one in six twist, 7 works ok but six is better and from what I have seen in wounds both in LE data and animals I have hunted, the caliber works just fine. We also engage steel targets out to six hundred and beyond with the caliber and platform all day long. sure some firearms fill a specific role better than the M4 but for weight, versatility and load out ...it tough to beat having owned and fired about every battle rifle from WW1 to present, I choose this rifle over any other. Im glad they got the contract 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LuPiN8oR 333 Posted September 30, 2015 Report Share Posted September 30, 2015 FN is a major source of parts for civilian sales. PSA gets alot of their parts from them as well as many others. With the current glut in the market it will be interesting to see what this contract does to the currently super low prices. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
HB of CJ 1,263 Posted September 30, 2015 Report Share Posted September 30, 2015 Could the platform be safety updated (perhaps wrong word) to the 6.5 Grendel? Specifically the bolt head rim thickness issue. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
6500rpm 670 Posted October 1, 2015 Report Share Posted October 1, 2015 Oddly enough, ADCOR Defense had a horse in the running for that contract but fell short. They've manufactured receivers for Colt for quite a few years, and their Elite series uses a FN hammer forged barrel. I'm not sure what they submitted but they have both a unique piston design and a DI. Makes me wonder what Colt/FN submitted that won out. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ktcm7271 999 Posted October 1, 2015 Report Share Posted October 1, 2015 I wonder why they haven't switched to .243. It's the same brass as the 7.62x51 NATO. One brass for 2 calibers and improved ballistics. A huge logistical improvement. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Heartbreaker 1,085 Posted October 1, 2015 Report Share Posted October 1, 2015 Makes me wonder what Colt/FN submitted that won out. A low bid? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mancat 2,368 Posted October 1, 2015 Report Share Posted October 1, 2015 I wonder why they haven't switched to .243. It's the same brass as the 7.62x51 NATO. One brass for 2 calibers and improved ballistics. A huge logistical improvement. requires change back to the 7.62 NATO mags & everything that works with them, and the .243 Win is a notorious barrel burner. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gunfun 3,931 Posted October 1, 2015 Report Share Posted October 1, 2015 FN and Colt made the best battle rifles that we were issued to me. I'm glad they got the contract. The weapons are solid. The M4 had a few problems in the sand box but that was easily fixed and can be changed in new production. Only wish they would get away from the 5.56mm Nato round. http://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/Contract-View/Article/620608 And most of those were due to using old beat up magazines and not cycling them out of service. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gunfun 3,931 Posted October 1, 2015 Report Share Posted October 1, 2015 I wonder why they haven't switched to .243. It's the same brass as the 7.62x51 NATO. One brass for 2 calibers and improved ballistics. A huge logistical improvement. requires change back to the 7.62 NATO mags & everything that works with them, and the .243 Win is a notorious barrel burner. Also negates the ammo capacity per individual advantage of an intermediate round. How is using a ~ third more brass per round and more powder a logistical improvement? or more heat in an air cooled firearm? The data of modern warfare has shown that more rounds on each person is the main thing, then chance of hitting. Power of hitting is way behind opportunities to hit. Recoil skewing the second shot matters more than ballistic coefficient and flat trajectory. The weak point is the soldier. The guns they've been issuing ask less of the operator to make a hit. Therefore they hit more often. A bit of ballistic performance improvement is not really worth making the gun harder to shoot quickly or carry a lot of ammo. Maybe a .243 semi auto would be a good fit for a DMR though. In that role, it could be a step up. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
james lambert 3,059 Posted October 1, 2015 Report Share Posted October 1, 2015 Could the platform be safety updated (perhaps wrong word) to the 6.5 Grendel? Specifically the bolt head rim thickness issue. You can chamber an AR or M4 in a bunch of calibers including 6.5, from 17, 204, or up to 50 That ability has never been seen in any battle rifle EVER by the way Grendle and Beowolf were designed for the AR/M4 platform heavy calibers 308 and up can be found in the AR10 platform versatility is unmatched with this weapon system 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sccritterkiller 473 Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 Never understood why the 6.8 spc didn't get adapted. It doesn't preform as well past 300 yards but being able to push 110 grs @ 2500 fps is very effective from 0-300 yds....I have almost quit huntin with my 30-06....almost. I have used PSA parts on a lot of my AR builds because a lot of them come from across town. FN makes good stuff. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mancat 2,368 Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 Never understood why the 6.8 spc didn't get adapted. It doesn't preform as well past 300 yards but being able to push 110 grs @ 2500 fps is very effective from 0-300 yds....I have almost quit huntin with my 30-06....almost. I have used PSA parts on a lot of my AR builds because a lot of them come from across town. FN makes good stuff. it has been rumored for quite some time that just about every part in the PSA Premium line was overrun FN parts Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.