Posted by big dave I think the size and the weight of the gun and ammo are why many countries dont use it. Its on my wishlist, but i live in CA. |
Posted by etchleon Heavy, brutal recoil, physically too big for some people, piss poor accuracy when fired rapidly cause the muzzle climbs like hell and heavy cartridges that limit the tolerable load out of ammunition, lack of modularity in design, absence of ability to mount grenade launcher, illumination or other accessories. |
Need I point out that conditions in A-stan and Iraq have already caused the US military to break out a number of the old .308 (7.62x51) systems, because the piss ant .223 (5.56x45) cartridge just won't get the job done at long range or through heavy cover? |
Posted by Livingstone Something other than M40's? |
Posted by Jonsered Heavy is a matter of perspective. Brutal recoil? A Hell of a lot less than my .30-06 deer rifle. Piss poor accuracy is a result of piss poor training. ANY weapon can be fired accurately in full auto if the operator is properly trained in its use. I seem to remember a Sgt. Major Snoxall of the British Army who put 20 rounds in a 10" circle on full auto at 300 yards during testing. How does modularity in design mean anything in its effectiveness? And as for the last, any competent weapons designer could put a picatinny rail system on the FN. Someone probably already has. Need I point out that conditions in A-stan and Iraq have already caused the US military to break out a number of the old .308 (7.62x51) systems, because the piss ant .223 (5.56x45) cartridge just won't get the job done at long range or through heavy cover? |
This thread is in a public category, and can't be made private. |