Jump to content

The look of XM's?

onidemonXLR

By onidemonXLR,
in General Discussion

Hows the look of the XM8 style rifles compared to Armalites  

209 members have voted

  1. 1. Hows the look of the XM8 style rifles compared to Armalites

    • They look beautiful and are a beacon of the future. I like them
      76
    • BAH! they look like plasticed up weenie versions of the good old American firearm the AR-15!
      55
    • They look like Hamburgers
      28
    • They look like fish and might taste good with chips!
      52

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 272
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Hissing_Sid

Hissing_Sid

Posted
Posted
The nearest contemporary gun available for comparison is the P-08 luger parabellum. I know i like the Colt .45 more :P

Ummm...

 

How about the Walther P38?

 

It's the pistol which is the forerunner of the Beretta 92F.

You might be aware of it cos it's the gun the US Army dumped the archaic 1911 in favour of. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
TjM2147

TjM2147

Posted
Posted

Ok i dont know if anybody else has heard this but recently i have been hearing about the XM8 being cancled because it is unefficient for the U.S. Really they never were sure if they were going to release it and replace armalites, hints the X in XM8(experimental). Dont flame me if im wrong but i dont think this is a quincidince that i have heard this from more than 6 people in the last 4 days.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hissing_Sid

Hissing_Sid

Posted
Posted

This is airsoft. We play with toy guns.

 

A LOT of the comments, above, have nothing to do with airsoft and everything to do with real-steel.

 

Surely, for an airsoft gun, the only thing that matters is the way the gun looks/feels, how strong it is and what sort of mag's it'll take?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Onechance

Onechance

Posted
Posted
Let's see... I don't think 2.2 million enemy casualties to 66k American casualties is losing.  We won most of the "battles" in Vietnam.  It was public opinion at those stupid hippies that didn't want to put forth the extra manpower to win the war. There really was no great military disaster in Vietnam.  Everyone is like "Oh no the Tet Offensive blah blah blah".  Yes... we "won" the tet offensive.  At the end of the day we regained all that was attacked and then some.  The media (they screw everything up) just made it look like it was aweful.

 

In Vietnam, the M16 wasn't a great rifle, but the A2, A3, and A4 are amazing weapon systems.  They are simple, effective, accurate, and lightweight.  And BTW... VERY RELIABLE. 

 

I am not a fan of them, but you can't just say they suck because it is American.  That is just incredible ignorant and arrogant.

 

There is no such thing as winning a war, its just that one side ran out of troops,supplies or you nuked them. In war everyone is a loser. The point behind vietnam is that some the best trained and equiped soliders were being amushed and kicked all over the jungle by kids and women with AKs. Its not the point that the americans may have won, its that the communists were prepared to stand up and speak out in what they believe in. Invading another country. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
TjM2147

TjM2147

Posted
Posted
lol. i would be on the british side if i had to chose, but i would rather chose the side i think is right. and since that is the british anyway....*ahem* :P

 

i think the XM8 is a bit of a toy gun, but then most of the new "state of the art" guns these days are. XM29, AICW, ACR etc are. All this use of plastics. They just dont look lethal anymore.  :(

 

H&K

 

Exactly my thoughts H&K, its just that plastic is way cheaper more efficent and lightweight, everything is about the money.

 

Sorry wouldnt let me edit my last post, please dont flame.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hissing_Sid

Hissing_Sid

Posted
Posted
The point behind vietnam is that some the best trained and equiped soliders were being amushed and kicked all over the jungle by kids and women with AKs.

They were?

 

I didn't know the Brit Army was involved in Vietnam. :P

 

If you're talking about the US army you'd do well to talk to people like Colin Powell, Fred Franks, Norman Schwarzkopf or Tommy Franks. They would all tell you that the USA would NEVER endorse drafting people into the army ever again.

Why?

Cos the one, single, over-riding fact that became apparent is that conscripted troops who do not WANT to be in the army will do more harm than good.

 

THIS was the major downfall of the US Army in Vietnam.

Link to post
Share on other sites
FUmiYAsu

FUmiYAsu

Posted
Posted

Surely there are lots of other US guns tht haven't been mentioned...

ie, Barrett .50s, M14, 2011s, S&W revolvers, Para Ords, macs, cheytac, M134, remington shotguns and rifles...etc

They are all great guns...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Forze

Forze

Posted
Posted
They were?

 

I didn't know the Brit Army was involved in Vietnam. :P

 

Actually British SAS troops where helping US special forces with laying contacts with Montagnard tribes,

 

Oh & about the weapon debate :

 

2 words:

 

Fabrique Nationale

 

the end :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve Pearson

Steve Pearson

Posted
Posted

The views everyone has regarding the XM8 is very similar to the views the British Military had when they decided to switch from SLR to SA80.

 

The SLR had been the mainstay of the British Army since the sixties (or was it late fifties?) as it was based on the old principles of markmanship, which is what made the British Army the most feared in the world-ie one shot one kill, we can kill you before you kill us.

 

Henry Martini's, then Enfields, then SLR's ect. The SA80 is the very first proper assault rifle that the British Army adopted but still maintains the traditional principles of markmanship as in its previous counterparts such as Martini's, Enfields ect.

 

It was originally designed, along with a few prototypes being made and tested, to still be a single shot weapon but with the added function of full auto for when the situation required a bit of "extreme outbursts of temper."

 

The reasons why the powers that be did not introduce it back then was due to the fact of cost and because they did not like the idea of their soldiers getting trigger happy by constantly switching to fully auto (or "happy mode" as it was once quoted as being), which in turn would cost the military in terms of replacing the ammo that had been "wasted" on full auto and add to the logistics problems.

They also didn't like the look of it as it didn't look like what a weapon should look like and still believed they could hold back an advancing Soviet Army by sticking to the old single shot routine. A modern army stuck in the early 19th century.

 

So to cut a long story short it was put on the back burner because the Army High Command simply did not like the idea of change and could not see the point in issueing it as the Army already had a fully automatic weapon in the form of the Bren ect. They still don't. Hence why the British Army were then issued the SLR as a replacement to the ageing Enfield. And so it remained that way until the mid eighties when it was eventually replaced by the now famous SA80.

 

And then warfare suddenly became "urbanised."

 

They realised that due to involvement in Northern Ireland a weapon was required that could be used easily within built up urban areas whilst still delivering devasting accuracy and firepower to match. The British Army ruled the open plains and fields in NI but in the towns and cities in was a different ball game, and the IRA knew. The SLR was too long and cumbersome to be used as an urban warfare weapon. Whereas the SA80 was ideal for the job.

 

Fast forward to the present and it then becomes apparent that the XM8 is going through the same sceanrios'. Its devastatingly accurate with firepower to match and comes with grenade launcher as standard add on. But it just doesn't look like a weapon should. But thats probably because the American powers that be are thinking ahead in terms of future conflicts and eventually the XM8 will become something like the Aliens Pulse rifle with factory fitted grenade launcher ect. Maybe they've looked at situations like Mogadishu and Fallujah and come to the decision that their soldiers are going to need something a bit more "hardcore."

 

Who knows, by then they'll have plasma rifles and we'll be given their old Armalite designs to replace the SA80! :D

 

Steve.

Link to post
Share on other sites
TjM2147

TjM2147

Posted
Posted
SEAL

 

=

 

SEA, AIR, LAND

 

Yes and....oohh you thought some of us didnt know that. I thought you were pointing out the obvious, which you were but didnt know you where. Thats going to make you think :P

 

Oh and Steve thanks for th whole clear up on the XM8,i appreciate the time you put in to type that long post to help us out. +1 for you! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sledge

Sledge

Posted
Posted

Yeah, we know what SEAL stands for, but the point stands. Britain didn't name it's spec ops unit Observation Tactical Termination Exfiltration Recon Squad and then think, "Ooh, hang on, that acronym sounds really poo."

 

And on topic, you all seem to be overlooking the best case yet for the XM8:

I'm Heman i will buy an MX8 to save the universe!!

 

:zorro:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the use of session cookies.

  I accept