Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockwolf66
Not for it's intended purpose. I know of units that standard issue the 12.5" barreled G3KA4 because of where they will be fighting. The rounds they fire are full power 7.62X51mm NATO. Frankly the rate of fire doesn't matter as much as some people think. Those aformentioned M14E2s fire at about 700~800 rounds a minute and they are used in Full Auto competitions.
As far as the FAL in the origional post it's one ment for jungle and urban fighting so it needs a shorter barrel.
|
I guess its okay as long as they aren't completely replacing the long barreled FAL. What happens in a competition dosen't pertain to a battlefield. There is a reason why you don't see M14E2's anymore because they were ineffective weapons as machine guns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyles
I do think the 5.56mm is a better military round, but the reason is not full-auto fire. You can carry more ammo for less weight, the weapon itself is lighter, and most importantly it's alot easier to use in semi-auto. Remember, most soldiers in this day and age go to basic training never having shot a rifle before. And even infanteers don't get to go to the range and practice nearly as much as they should, because there are so many other skills required of a modern soldier that need to be learned and refreshed. We don't have the time or the budget, and neither does almost any other army.
|
It's not entirely better otherwise we wouldin't be supplementing 5.56x45 weapons with 7.62x51 weapons. You could argue that with a 5.56x45 you carry more bullets, but with less effect compared to a .308. In Afghanstan, soldiers have to use more bullets to kill the enemy because of the 5.56x45's poor lethality.