M14 Forum banner

Another new expensive, heavy rifle, the M5

2597 Views 33 Replies 27 Participants Last post by  bandit
The last adventure in rifle replacement, the 6.8, developed by Rem Arms, and the US Army Markmanship unit was a complete waste of money. It never measured up to the requested velocity standards without blowing up.
Now we have another 8-9 lb rifle developed by Sig Sauer in 6.8 caliber that, from what I've read, is a great shooter, with all the fancy sights and stuff, but very expensive to produce. This rifle is to replace the M4, M16, and M14.
I doubt very much that the M5 will ever be standard issue to our troops, if produced at all. I can see the M5 as a replacement for the M14 to select troops, but not all.
I'm confused that an AR10 could have been rechambered and Tuned up to meet the so called steel plate penetration request, without spending $billions.
I realize that I'm not in the chase, but why spend a fortune for something we already have available?

Cmarsh164 CWO4 USCG (ret)
21 - 34 of 34 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
337 Posts
Well I have found that a 5.56 loaded with 45 or 55 grain blitz bullets works wonders on armor plated Crows that destroy our farm food. And with an accurate rifle can be quite effective on these critters a long ways away. But that's totally off the subject of the Government spending our money for a toy that may not last. Easy to spend other people's money when it seems an unending supply. Congress figured that out a looooong time ago.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Well I have found that a 5.56 loaded with 45 or 55 grain blitz bullets works wonders on armor plated Crows that destroy our farm food. And with an accurate rifle can be quite effective on these critters a long ways away. But that's totally off the subject of the Government spending our money for a toy that may not last. Easy to spend other people's money when it seems an unending supply. Congress figured that out a looooong time ago.
Steel plate is not relevant to the discussion I dont think. Military body armor is all synthetics or alloys I believe.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
359 Posts
Without getting into the weeds.... what bothers me is we have seen 20 plus years of back and forth, indecision, and separate approaches regarding procurement with respect to everything from uniforms to weapons without a concerted effort to get it right. Somebody pointed out logistical nightmare ...yeah, no kidding. The money, time, risk of confusion in the face of a real contingency. These aren't issues to be played with unless you are looking to create a problem. Any trained nco or officer could point out these risks. And as far as this special round... I have an issue with that too. It shouldn't be something reserved for a select few. That's all I'm saying.

It used to be with a weapon e.g. m16a2 the branches would collaborate to adopt 1. Now it's like a freak show.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
The last adventure in rifle replacement, the 6.8, developed by Rem Arms, and the US Army Markmanship unit was a complete waste of money. It never measured up to the requested velocity standards without blowing up.
Now we have another 8-9 lb rifle developed by Sig Sauer in 6.8 caliber that, from what I've read, is a great shooter, with all the fancy sights and stuff, but very expensive to produce. This rifle is to replace the M4, M16, and M14.
I doubt very much that the M5 will ever be standard issue to our troops, if produced at all. I can see the M5 as a replacement for the M14 to select troops, but not all.
I'm confused that an AR10 could have been rechambered and Tuned up to meet the so called steel plate penetration request, without spending $billions.
I realize that I'm not in the chase, but why spend a fortune for something we already have available?

Cmarsh164 CWO4 USCG (ret)
8 to 9 pounds? Try 17 pounds with a suppressor and optic fully loaded. A buddy of mine got to shoot it at the Texas DPS range, and he hated it. But the M14 was too heavy at 11 pounds.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
Will let y'all know how the round shoots. Have the brass, and reamer. Just waiting on the barrel.

View attachment 498860 View attachment 498861
Please do! I’d be very curious to see what kind of powder loads you end up and at what velocity nodes. What length and thickness barrel?

I had the impression that saboted or sub-caliber penetrators would be the new sliced bread. Skinny little flechettes making their way through composite armor. A fair amount of recent military sci fi also seems to be leaning that direction, but I digress as that is another discussion.

I’ll be curious to see if AMU sees any merit in the new platform and petitions to have it allowed in service rifle competition. If it happens, I wonder if it would even be affordable for the civilians to get the commercial Sig Spears and compete. Those guys already hot rod their >5.56 loads on the short and especially long yard lines. Thus far, I’ve only seen anecdotal reports on the new cartridge accuracy, but the kind of descriptions I’ve seen seem to point to it slicing through the wind.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,173 Posts
I loved that stuff, HEDP
I’ll take this with its 900m max eff range. Pack your bags we are moving to the weight room.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
337 Posts
I’ll take this with its 900m max eff range. Pack your bags we are moving to the weight room.
The Germans seem to build all the fantastical [not good english] small arms. After all they invented the assault rifle and kalashnikov stole the idea from them.
 
21 - 34 of 34 Posts
Top