Yeah I shouldn't have said "terrible" weapon. I mean it kills people just as good as any rifle.

But the one complaint that I have seen, and my fellow Marines say: "It sucks at long range"

As for the XM-8 that is a huge weapon, and I'm not to crazy about the 20mm launcher above the barrel. My issue with that is... "I have only been in 2 firefights in my Marine Corps career. One when I used 3 rounds of 9mm ammo, and one were I used 17 M-16 rounds. I just do not see the need for such a huge caliber weapon on the standard infantry weapon. Personally I didn't like the 37mm launcher on the M-16.

Has anyone ever had the need to use the 37mm launcher on the M-16?? I shot it a couple of times, and it has a nice explosion to it

Originally Posted by USMC Johnny

As for the XM-8 that is a huge weapon, and I'm not to crazy about the 20mm launcher above the barrel.

Actually, LCpl, the XM-8 is the salvaged portion of the OICW project (the monstrosity you are referring to , with the 20mm proximity superman grenade launcher). Not trying to defend it at all, it's killing what little range we have left with its 12.5" barrel. However one plus is the XM-330 40mm grenade launcher attachment (replacement to the M-203), which I think is a great improvement, it's breech swings open to the side, allowing much quicker and easier access than the M-203 (which I ran into problems with getting the breech closed once a round was in place, although it was the first and last time I used it, so maybe it was more an experience issue).

I personally like the M16/M4. I don't know why people whine about jamming; I've never had my own CAR 15 jam on me. ever. I keep all of my weapons well maintained, and in turn I've never had a malfunction.

But the one complaint that I have seen, and my fellow Marines say: "It sucks at long range"

Um, the M16 itself or the round? I assume you meant the latter.

The M203, is a 40mm grenade launcher, not 37. once you get used to it it is a great weapon. The XM8 does not have a 20mm on top of it. You are thinking of of the OICW. Which is a huge ****ing weapon. The XM8 is the 5.56 component of the future OICW, which the Army rejected because it was too big. http://www.hk-usa.com/pages/military...bines/xm8.html

This should answer any questions you might have.

The Military needs to Deep-6 the 5.56 round and go to a larger caliber assault rifle round.

The Military needs to Deep-6 the 5.56 round and go to a larger caliber assault rifle round.

No-go on that for the next several years. It would put too many lives at risk. They should continue working on improvements with the 5.56, IMO.

The age old question of what is best.

If you ask this of anybody, you are at best, opening a can of worms.
If you go into a gun club and shout at the top of your lungs that automatics are better than revolvers, chances are someone's gonna verbally tackle you.

Me? I like a lot of weapons, G3, AK/MK, AR, it don't matter to me much. My requirements for a weapon is that when I put the sights on my target and pull the trigger, the bullet will leave the barrel and travel into the target where I put my sights. Repeat as necessary.

My dream weapon would fire around corners, be recoil-free, assure first-round kills, identify friend-foe (for me), clean itself, have caseless ammo that weighed nothing, cook me dinner, get me a beer and have sex with me until I passed out.

But it probably won't happen. We will probably never see the 1911 back in service again. We will most assuredly be forced to deal with a plastic piece of Buck-Rodgers bullsh@#!. We will probably never get exactly what we need at the exact moment we need it.

It's just how it goes.

Um .. ooookay.

Me? I like a lot of weapons, G3, AK/MK, AR, it don't matter to me much. My requirements for a weapon is that when I put the sights on my target and pull the trigger, the bullet will leave the barrel and travel into the target where I put my sights. Repeat as necessary.

This sounds like a comment from someone without very much operational experience. But, since you didn't read the forum rules and give us an intro - who's to know.

I can't speak for the worst weapon, I haven't fired all of the worst weapons. I am usually given pretty well maintained weapons. If they aren't up to my personal standards, I try to work on it until it's going to provide me with the reliability that I need.

I am not allowed to emplace my own inner workings for the M4 I have to use, but the outside components are pretty much fair game.

The worst weapon that I was ever issued was my first M16 in basic training. After that I vowed that I would keep my weapon in the best condition possible. I try to maintain the best standards I can as an example to those I lead, this especially shows in how I emphasize weapons maintenance, marksmanship training and tactical employment of our varied weapon systems.

I don't have an opinion of the worst weapons, I don't use any of them, of that much I am sure.

By the way, I have posted an introduction.

The one major thing that I forgot to mention is. No matter how bad your weapon maybe.

A dirty weapon will not work, despite the fact that I hated the M-16, I keep that bitch as clean as I could, because I knew that my life depended on that weapon firing.

That is the one thing that we can all agree on, weapons must be clean to work.