TexasCHLforum.com

locke_n_load wrote:

MechAg94 wrote:The Army already has AR10 variants in use and I imagine the armorers already have training on them. Adopting a more widely issued AR10 rifle should be very cheap and easy to do once the rifle is chosen.

Exactly. Half the parts are interchangeable too. No need to train any soldiers on how to use one if they have been trained on the M16. All optics interchangeable. Seems like a no-brainer.

That would only be true for RDS and magnified optics with milling reticles. ACOGs or any other optic with a BDC wouldn't interchange, as the bullet drop values for M80 ball and M855A1 ball are not identical.

LeonCarr wrote:Since it seems like the military insists on re-inventing the wheel over and over again, how about a 7.62 NATO, 20 round or more box magazine fed, DI or piston, that weighs less than an M14 .

There, problem solved, and there are about a dozen choices that will suffice.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

FN SCAR 17 Heavy. It's already designed, and has already been combat-deployed and has a proven record. It weighs 8 lbs in carbine trim - which compares very favorably to any other 7.62 NATO caliber battle rifle. It is already a gas piston design....no need to Frankenstein an AR10. It already comes with the gas regulator for suppressors. Barrels can be easily swapped out for different applications, such as turning a carbine into a sniper weapon for instance. AND.....it is deadly accurate in base carbine trim without any barrel upgrades. It will eat whatever you feed it, as long as it is either .308 Winchester or 7.62 NATO. They would only have to make two easy changes to make it perfect as a general issue weapon: (1) either redesign the existing polymer lower, or swap it out for something like the Handl Defense lower, so that it can accommodate existing NATO standard .308 magazines; (2) less pressing, but maybe redesign/replace the existing buttstock with one that is a bit more robust.

Yeah, yeah, yeah..... I own one and yes I'm a fan. But I have also owned an M1A and an AR10, and I think my opinion is fairly objective. The M1A is a sweet rifle, but it's a little fragile, and the action is not very well protected from sand and mud. The AR10 can be a good rifle if properly assembled, but it is pretty heavy. But neither of them is as good a rifle as a SCAR 17. The SCAR is as dead-nuts reliable as an AK. The R&D work and prior acceptance has already been done. All that would be necessary would be to place a large order for them.

But all of that said, I honestly don't think that a .308 rifle is the right choice for the common infantry soldier. Weapons chambered in 5.56 NATO, or perhaps some intermediate 6mm class cartridge would be a better choice, with .308s being used as they already are, for squad level designated marksmen and medium to long range sniping.