The XM8




 
--
 
March 7th, 2004  
diplomatic_means
 

Topic: The XM8


Anyone know anything about H&K's new XM8? I don't know tons about rifles but this thing looks pretty slick. What do you experts think?

(Redleg when is tomorrow? I waited til tomorrow so I would get credit for these new topics I'm posting but it still says I'm past my limit. )
March 7th, 2004  
SHERMAN
 
 

Topic: Looks like


looks like a toy..all these new age guns...where is the metal?
March 7th, 2004  
RnderSafe
 
 
the XM8 is an attempt to salvage something from the horrible OICW program. If we were equipping a force from scratch, it would be a good idea .. but since we aren't .. no reason to dump the existing M-16 series for it.
--
March 8th, 2004  
TheSunsetSniper
 
Personally, i don't mind the weapons the Military is using now, but i would prefer something with a little more firepower. Like an M14 or another 7.62mm weapon. That XM8 looks like some whacked out lazer cannon fomr a video game or something. I don't doubt that it is accurate, but like Sir Sherman said... where's the metal?
March 8th, 2004  
dragon_master_gunner
 
We all dread when the XM8 gets fielded. No one really wants it. I think it's just a matter of all that money burning a hole in someone's pocket. The M16A2 is a good weapon for what it was designed for. Same with the M4. We really wouldn't need anything else for at least 5 years. I really like whatever rifles the British are carrying around here in Iraq. They're pretty sharp.
March 8th, 2004  
SHERMAN
 
 

Topic: this?


master_gunner, you talking about the SA80?

http://www.world.guns.ru/assault/as22-e.htm ?
March 8th, 2004  
dragon_master_gunner
 
These guys have (it looks like) the L85A1 and the L85A2. Not the SA-80 proper.
March 8th, 2004  
SHERMAN
 
 

Topic: Cool


Yes. dident notice your location said Baghdad...Dude, we are like only 650 km from each other...Hows the weather?
March 8th, 2004  
RnderSafe
 
 
The biggest problem, as I see it, is that the Army is looking at replacing the 20" barrelled M-16 AND the 14.5" M-4 with the 12.5" XM-8. Other barrel lengths are available, but are not currently being considered. The conventional 5.56x45 FMJ is very velocity dependent in its wounding mechanism. The immutable laws of physics dictate that no matter how nice or sexy the weapon, a 12.5" barrel is not going to be more lethal than the already problematic 14.5" M-4, and may be less accurate. This would necessitate a better round (not the 6.8 ), a longer barrel, or both.

IMHO, the XM-8 does not provide much value added for the cost. For the amount of money spent, it is my belief that you would find a much better solution to soldiers hitting and killing bad guys in going to the 77 gr. bullet with sufficient quantities for all soldiers to shoot monthly, a good low powered optical sight, new ranges (indoor at BDE/BN level?), and well-qualified marksmanship training at a variety of KD and unknown ranges under varying conditions.

Sadly, politics will most likely overcome necessity.


The SA80 is a POS.
I like the L85A2 as well, and it's much better than the A1. It drinks oil (copious amounts on bearing surfaces), and doesn't fire US rounds very well, though. You have to set the gas parts to extreme fouling to get the rounds to cycle the action reliably.
March 8th, 2004  
Redneck
 
 
In my opinion, I think the Army would benifit from increasing the standard to pass the BRM (currently only 23 of 40 targets). I really don't think that a 58% hit ratio on a range (which would probably drop significantly in a combat situation due to nerves and what have you) is sufficient for soldiers to be combat effective, and switching to a weapon with even less range and inherent accuracy is not going to help this.

(I don't know what the requirements are for you Marines, I imagine with the "every Marine is a rifleman" mentality, your standards are higher, correct?)