Shriven Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 A titanium GPMG? Why? Link to post Share on other sites
Panoptes Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 A titanium GPMG? Why? Higher re-sale value on eBay. Link to post Share on other sites
Doughguy Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 lol, i suppose its lighter than the current model? sturdier? Link to post Share on other sites
darkchild130 Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 30% lighter. Darkchild Link to post Share on other sites
-Angel- Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Thats a respectable weight saving. Link to post Share on other sites
Doughguy Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 which will be replaced by more ammo Link to post Share on other sites
2dgreengiant Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Classic L85 and LSW imo Link to post Share on other sites
darkchild130 Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Thats the idea (the ammo that is) Darkchild Link to post Share on other sites
Filip von Izabelin Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 BTW, for guys whining about low reliability of the M16/M4 family, check out what Andy McNab and his SAS colleagues have to say about it in "Seven Troop" They describe it "as unjammable, simple, soldier proof" and one the guys never cleans it, and it works. They also do stupid things like shoot 500rds cyclic, and then dip the rifle into a river. And magic, it still works. Link to post Share on other sites
Doughguy Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Andy McKnob... Link to post Share on other sites
Filip von Izabelin Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Sure, call him as he you want, but other ex-SAS guys, like "Soldier-I", etc.. confirm it. But all the armchair generals who never shot an m16, will say it's still unreliable babalablabla. For some reason the SAS used it, instead of other weapons, and said it's good. And for an unknown reason I trust the opinion of the guys who actually walked in the *suitcase* with the M16, instead of the forum-whiners. Link to post Share on other sites
Panoptes Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Sure, call him as he you want, but other ex-SAS guys, like "Soldier-I", etc.. confirm it. But all the armchair generals who never shot an m16, will say it's still unreliable babalablabla. For some reason the SAS used it, instead of other weapons, and said it's good. And for an unknown reason I trust the opinion of the guys who actually walked in the *suitcase* with the M16, instead of the forum-whiners. The M-16 and M4 may have been more reliable than the SA80 system before the advent of the A2 but it is no longer. It is Proven. It is Fact™ The reason M4s etc are preferred by SF is because availability of spares is 'more likely' in various theatres, they are marginally lighter, and that it isn't major-league obvious that they're UKSF if rumbled. I know which weapon system I'd want in a firefight and it sure as hell wouldn't be an M4 / M16 / AK47/74 / Aug / G36 / HK416... All fail vs SA80. . Link to post Share on other sites
Fatal Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Have you even used either weapon? Im talking about weapons, not toys. Link to post Share on other sites
Panoptes Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Have you even used either weapon? Im talking about weapons, not toys. Who is your question to? Link to post Share on other sites
Fatal Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 You, your post makes it sound like you know what your talking about. I just want to know if there is actual weight behind it. Or you are just spurting off at the finger tips. Link to post Share on other sites
L4byr1nth Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Also, SF probably like AR's better because they're not unholy-killitwithfire-butt ugly. And they SA80's are expensive compared to everything else. Ben. Link to post Share on other sites
Panoptes Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 You, your post makes it sound like you know what your talking about. I just want to know if there is actual weight behind it. Or you are just spurting off at the finger tips. Yes, there's weight behind it. The findings/statistics are out there, regardless - go look. Link to post Share on other sites
vowlesy Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 He never said that they submerged it, he said it dosent matter if it gets wet, ie rain. Link to post Share on other sites
Fatal Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Yes, there's weight behind it. The findings/statistics are out there, regardless - go look. So you have used both weapons? I find it hard to believe that all UKSF are naturally right handed shooters. You are also not comparing much on either weapon. Because the AR platform has many more aftermarket parts. Instead of just posting your favorite weapon as being the best. How about you use both and actually post facts about them. Link to post Share on other sites
Panoptes Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 So you have used both weapons? I find it hard to believe that all UKSF are naturally right handed shooters. You are also not comparing much on either weapon. Because the AR platform has many more aftermarket parts. Instead of just posting your favorite weapon as being the best. How about you use both and actually post facts about them. Who mentioned after-market parts? Who mentioned the left-handed? Those concerns certainly wouldn't be a factor in me choosing the most reliable system. Link to post Share on other sites
Stealthbomber Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 So you have used both weapons? I find it hard to believe that all UKSF are naturally right handed shooters. You are also not comparing much on either weapon. Because the AR platform has many more aftermarket parts. Instead of just posting your favorite weapon as being the best. How about you use both and actually post facts about them. FWIW, most of the MOD trials I've read about always show the M4 as being one of the least reliable weapons tested. That's not to say they're "unreliable". It just means you need to clean em when you're supposed to and pray that you're given decent ammo. Course, that does only focus on reliability and doesn't consider stuff like being leftie-friendly or modularity. In other news, I'm handing out warning points and suspensions for blatant trolling so everybody play nice. Link to post Share on other sites
Fatal Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 The reason M4s etc are preferred by SF is because availability of spares is 'more likely' in various theatres, they are marginally lighter, and that it isn't major-league obvious that they're UKSF if rumbled. Who mentioned after-market parts? Who mentioned the left-handed? Those concerns certainly wouldn't be a factor in me choosing the most reliable system. FWIW, most of the MOD trials I've read about always show the M4 as being one of the least reliable weapons tested. That's not to say they're "unreliable". It just means you need to clean em when you're supposed to. Course, that does only focus on reliability and doesn't consider stuff like being leftie-friendly or modularity. In other news, I'm handing out warning points and suspensions for blatant trolling so everybody play nice. All I am saying is you are making claims to what SF is using and why, when I think we should leave it to them to make these claims. Saying that they use a weapon because its more likely to have spares is a low point on a list of highlights. Where are you getting this information, please post your sources. Because I am having a hard time believing some of the things you are posting. I never said the m4 is the most or least reliable weapon, but you are. I think you need to post your credentials on at least using the weapon. Considering you said it's better then at least 5 other weapons. I'm not trolling at all, I am looking for the facts. I am the one who talked about after market parts and being left handed. Because you mentioned the reasons why UKSF prefers that weapon. When I think those 2 things are much higher on the reasons then it being easier to get "spares" I never said the SA80 wasn't reliable, I can't comment on that because I have never used it. Again, I don't see anyone trolling. I am trying to find the facts here and see if there is actual 1st hand knowledge in the weapon system. Or if someone is just talking about what their favorite weapon is thats all. Link to post Share on other sites
Parsley Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 this seems to be more of a british versus american, with both sides sticking up for thier respective assault rifles. i watched a documentary on Sky a few days ago with reports of US marines saying how unreliable the M4 was in the sand and heat. now i have never used the weapon system so i am going off those marines account. an L85 has only jammed on me with blank rounds, i have never had a live jam, including in the sand. and i blame the blanks down to the fact that the blank ammo we get issued is *suitcase*. this isnt me saying which is better this is me giving an account. my betting is darckchild has used both weapon systems in varying climates due to the nature of his work (recce plattoon) etc. cheers Link to post Share on other sites
Shardik Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 I once read an artice in 'soldier' magazine, for those of you who dont know, its basically the magazine of the british army. (or so im lead to believe) anyway, in said issue, they did a number of trails on the SA80A1, AUG, M4A1, AK47 and the FAMAS weapons systems, they tested the number of rounds you can put through it before it jams, which works better after being thrown out a window, after having a tank rumble over it, dipped in sand ect. And guess what, the SA80 came out top in every test. Now my point being, that this was cleary a propagander article, as this was during the times that every man and his auntie knew how bad the system was. So i echo what Fatal is basically saying, unless you have trials both weapons systems yourself, on a regular and thorough basis, you cant say for sure which is the 'best' weapons system. As what your reading may be aload of *suitcase* written by a bias individual. EDIT: Yes i know im talking about the A1, but im trying to put a point accross regarding variious sources. Link to post Share on other sites
Panoptes Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 All I am saying is you are making claims to what SF is using and why I know what they use but why they use it is conjecture in my part. At no point did I say 'they use this system because... and this is a fact'. I think you need to post your credentials on at least using the weapon. Lol, what?! Considering you said it's better then at least 5 other weapons. I'm not trolling at all, I am looking for the facts. There is scant technical info on the web these days (there was a great deal years ago when it was topical) but you may find some info if you look for ITDU trials Oman. the only weapon system which came close in terms of reliability was the HK416. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.