Go Back > The Forum > Just Guns

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-19-2010, 06:38 PM
Spartan198's Avatar
Spartan198 Spartan198 is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The scorched state of California
Posts: 2,283

Short-stroke piston instead of DI, I think.
"The gun has played a critical role in history. An invention which has been praised and denounced... served hero and villain alike... and carries with it moral responsibility. To understand the gun is to better understand history."

“What is morality in any given time or place? It is what the majority then and there happen to like, and immorality is what they dislike.” - Alfred North Whitehead
Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2010, 03:29 PM
Markost Markost is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Soviet Republic of Argentina
Posts: 621
Send a message via AIM to Markost Send a message via Yahoo to Markost Send a message via Skype™ to Markost

Nopes, long stroke gas piston, like the Ak.
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2010, 09:32 PM
zzang1847 zzang1847 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Shoreline, WA
Posts: 43
Send a message via MSN to zzang1847

1. XM106(aka Colt Automatic Rifle) epik failed with competition with M249 because of its lack of firepower. Army didn't like Rifle-based light machine gun from the beginning (it goes back to M14E2, which was light automatic rifle version of M14, which also failed from the competition with M60)

2. Closed bolt position for automatic rifle will cause overheating with 2 or 3 C-Mag. TBH, automatic weapons that designed to have heavy firepower, they need to have open bolt buy any means. Closed bolt is ideal for accuracy with rifles, but not with machine guns

3. M27 is going to fail. That's for the sure. Although people still complains about M249, it is still the best choice that army can make(i know Mk.48 and this is about special forces, but still everything goes back to M249 design)
Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2010, 02:19 AM
Phoenixent Phoenixent is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: California
Posts: 164

Originally Posted by Yournamehere View Post
I think one of the main reasons they are steering away from the M249 though is because it's fuck heavy. The Mark 46 and 48 are roughly the same weight, so they offer nothing in this area, but the IAR is less than half the M249's weight loaded, which is the most obvious benefit (but to me it's probably the only benefit).
The difference in weight between the M249 and the Mk46 Mod 0 is 5 pounds. I have had both in my hands and I like the Mk46 for several reasons compared to the M249 one is the weight reduction and the other is getting rid of that stupid magazine housing.

One of the reasons the M27 IAR was pick is a Marine Corp doctrine that states you can not use an open bolt weapon to engage the enemy from an ambush position.
Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2010, 02:52 AM
Yournamehere Yournamehere is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 912

Eliminating the magazine housing allows for a simpler design but now you can't use a STANAG mag in a pinch. An Amry buddy of mine shot an M249 with STANAGs on several occasions though and the gun proved to be unreliable with them anyway, so overall this is a benefit.

I know the M249 is 17 pounds and I was under the impression that the Mk. 46 was 15 pounds, but I found some weights that are closer to 13 pounds so I was a bit off there, and that is singificantly lighter, but the IAR is significantly lighter than even that.
Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2010, 02:55 AM
Nyles Nyles is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 920

Speaking from personal experience, I have never seen, or done so myself, a full magazine fired from a C9 without stoppages. It's a reliable weapon using a belt, but yeah, the magazine loading sucks.
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:49 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.