commandercolt Posted January 9, 2005 Report Share Posted January 9, 2005 Wow, alot of misconceptions here about the next battle rifle of the United States armed forces. Is everyone here judging it by looks? It may look futuristic, but thats what people said about the m 16/ar 15, and those have certainly proven themselves. The tests of the gun are going great, and it is slated to be in service with the armed forces in large numbers by 2007. The reason we improved on the g36 is not because we wanted our own US rifle, its that we wanted it to be modular, so that in minutes it could go from an assault rifle to an LMG, with no tools required. Also, the few weak points of the g 36 have been worked out in the xm-8. It will be MUCH better than both the m16 and l85s when it is produced(of course my old daisy bb gun isn't much worse than an l85 ). No reliablility issues, no feed issues, it will be quite a gun. So who cares if you don't like the looks, its the performance that counts. Link to post Share on other sites
Lobo Posted January 9, 2005 Report Share Posted January 9, 2005 i saw on 'mail call' that the gun functions real well and is durable..etc. but i still dont like the look of it...but it is apparently a good gun Link to post Share on other sites
orca Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Wow, alot of misconceptions here about the next battle rifle of the United States armed forces. Is everyone here judging it by looks? It may look futuristic, but thats what people said about the m 16/ar 15, and those have certainly proven themselves. The tests of the gun are going great, and it is slated to be in service with the armed forces in large numbers by 2007. The reason we improved on the g36 is not because we wanted our own US rifle, its that we wanted it to be modular, so that in minutes it could go from an assault rifle to an LMG, with no tools required. Also, the few weak points of the g 36 have been worked out in the xm-8. It will be MUCH better than both the m16 and l85s when it is produced(of course my old daisy bb gun isn't much worse than an l85 ). No reliablility issues, no feed issues, it will be quite a gun. So who cares if you don't like the looks, its the performance that counts. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Good job Colt. Everyone here is hung up on their personal preferences and not the fact this is going through US mil testing to replace the US's next reg issue rifle system. So whether you like the looks or not the XM8 is a viable weapon to create a replica of. I have no idea where people are coming up with the fact of it's performance though. Put up some hard facts if you're going to say things like that. So far the stuff that's been printed looks very favorable for the XM8 on topo o fthe fact the program is still on track and hasn't been scrubbed: XM8 PROTOTYPES SURPASS M16, EXPERTS SAY - Army Times http://www.hkdefense.us/pages/military-le/...8armytimes.html 1 killer weapon, 8 things you'll love about the XM8 - Armed Forces Journal http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/blackwater/xm81.html ATK/HK XM8 Carbine Demonstration Videos from SHOT Show 2004 - DefenseReview.com http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?n...article&sid=515 Link to post Share on other sites
commandercolt Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Thank you very much for putting up some evidence supporting what I was saying. Honestly guys, other than Israel, the US spends the most money per soldier per year, so why would they outfit them with a new rifle that is junk? Link to post Share on other sites
sp00n Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 for the conversion kit it's the g36. In real steel I think they use a salmon... The thing looks retarded <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I dont like the XM8, I think the M16 could be far better, for far cheaper. You wouldnt need to retool all the factorys to make it. Link to post Share on other sites
Antagon Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Darklite, you're hereby banned from discussing anything in this thread, you clod. The XM8 does NOT take G36 mags, you might as well say it takes SIG mags too! Link to post Share on other sites
sp00n Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 The XM8 is NOT an improved G36. NO! NO! NO! A THOUSAND TIMES NO! IF ANYONE SHOULD SAY THAT EVER AGAIN I SHALL BEAT THEM TO DEATH WITH A TROUT! The XM8 is just a G36 put into a gay looking frame. The americans liked the g36 but didn't want to use a non-american gun, thus the XM8. (You can actually see that the XM8 takes G36 mags) However, the XM8 is a real underperformer in real-steel apparently. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It doesnt use G36 magazines, and it does out preform the M16 in its current form. It wouldnt take much to make the M16 just as good or better than the XM8. Link to post Share on other sites
commandercolt Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 I dont like the XM8, I think the M16 could be far better, for far cheaper. You wouldnt need to retool all the factorys to make it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually my friend, you are wrong. Once production is up and running, it will be noticably cheaper than the m-16, and of course as mentioned, far more effective and reliable. Also, when I mentioned that our US troops would have them by 2007, I read in a few places they will have them by mid time of this year Link to post Share on other sites
Catchv22 Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 XM8s are cheaper than M16s. Notice with an XM8, you don't have to buy an Aimpoint/ACOG and an AN/PEQ2 as the sight has those features integrated. They outperform M16s as well and only failed (supposedly) in a cold weather test. No information has been given out yet about what exactly happened, or if it even happened. However, the XM8 may look ugly, but it has these things called features. Features such as ambidextrous charging handle, integrated red dot sight (or 4x scope if wanted), ambidextrous bolt catch/bolt lock (which will never be used in airsoft, but add to the aesthetics), retractable stock (or folding retractable stock), smooth lines so it doesn't get caught on things, and the king of them all: modularity. Edit: About the GRS Version, I'd wait till a larger retailer do them as I'd like some aftermarket integrated sights and parts. The GRS one just comes with a dummy sight. Link to post Share on other sites
sp00n Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 XM8s are cheaper than M16s. Notice with an XM8, you don't have to buy an Aimpoint/ACOG and an AN/PEQ2 as the sight has those features integrated. They outperform M16s as well and only failed (supposedly) in a cold weather test. No information has been given out yet about what exactly happened, or if it even happened. However, the XM8 may look ugly, but it has these things called features. Features such as ambidextrous charging handle, integrated red dot sight (or 4x scope if wanted), ambidextrous bolt catch/bolt lock (which will never be used in airsoft, but add to the aesthetics), retractable stock (or folding retractable stock), smooth lines so it doesn't get caught on things, and the king of them all: modularity. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The M16 has an ambi charging handle, if your left handed and cannot operate the charging handle, you probably cant open a soda or a door either. The M4 also has a retractable stock (and there are aftermarket folding stocks aswell) and is extremely modular. Personally dont like integrated scopes, I hope the XM8 has regular old iorn sights in there somewhere, scopes are just to easy to break for you to go out with no backups. Link to post Share on other sites
Catchv22 Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 XM8 has back up iron sights already. Also, The M16 ambidextrous charging handle cannot be operated while sighted. Link to post Share on other sites
arizonabay Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Okay, everyone pointing out performance is just way off. Not because they are wrong... but because...... IT DOESN'T MATTER FOR AIRSOFT All I was saying in the first place was that the thing is fugly and as far as airsoft is concerned that is all that matters If the US military adopts it that's fine because they have to worry about performance Personally, I have always thought that armalites are fairly ugly as well in case anyone would like to know. Link to post Share on other sites
Catchv22 Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Some people like to have guns that replicate reliable guns in real life. I like how you can speak for all of the airsoft community. Link to post Share on other sites
Antagon Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Personally, I have always thought that armalites are fairly ugly as well in case anyone would like to know. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Nah, I don't think anyone did. Link to post Share on other sites
Tripod Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Great one Antagon. The military DOES look at the appeal to soldiers while adopting new gear. If a vast majority of soldiers refuse to use the gun because it looks goofy, then the gun's looks will prbably be changed around a bit. I wouldn't buy this kit because the gun in realsteel is still so new. At first you only saw it in the OD version, now you see it in black. Think about what it will look like in 2 years, or even in 20 years if all things go right. Look at the first AR10s and then look at what they are today. Looks change. Link to post Share on other sites
Hissing_Sid Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Great one Antagon. The military DOES look at the appeal to soldiers while adopting new gear. If a vast majority of soldiers refuse to use the gun because it looks goofy, then the gun's looks will prbably be changed around a bit. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Dunno whether it's relavent or not but that's one thing I've often read about the M16. American soldiers often said how awesome they thought the M16 looked when it was first issued. After being used to M1s, M14s or Thompsons a lot of GIs were stunned by the sexy looks of the M16. It was love at first sight. Even when they started jamming and failing people still loved the way the gun looked and so were prepared to overlook the "hiccups". You're right, I think, that people being willing to accept the gun is a key point. If the soldiers think it looks weird to start with then they will be quicker to condemn any faults and find excuses to revert back to a different gun. Given that HK built the MP10 specifically because the FBI asked for it, I would imagine that they'd be happy to rework the XM8 if they can sell one to every soldier in the USA. Link to post Share on other sites
Megalomaniac Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 the XM8's looks have changed, they've become more angular and they added the P-CAPs. Link to post Share on other sites
unimatrix001 Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 This discussion about the XM8 is too funny to see. Nobody knows anything specific, but everybody want's to be the one with the best informations. "project is dead", "wouldn't be adopted", "failed a test", "melting" "blabla". And of course all these comments of "the m16/m4 is so much better and metal and reliable and american and americans made the best weapons in the world and it looking badass" ... gentlemen please. Look is the latest thing a soldier is worried about in combat. The discussion metal/plastic is the same as in the 80's as Glock started business. Today the Glock is by far one of the best pistols in the world and yes it have a polymer frame, but the working components are (still) made of steel. Same as the XM8 (or the G36, AUG, P90, F2000 etc.). So what's the problem? Let's wait and see what the US Army will do. And for Airsoft it's even more simple: If you don't like it: don't buy it ! Same as with every other Airsoft weapon. Come down please. Link to post Share on other sites
Doug Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 The military DOES look at the appeal to soldiers while adopting new gear. If a vast majority of soldiers refuse to use the gun because it looks goofy, then the gun's looks will prbably be changed around a bit. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes, I can picture it now ... disobedience, mutinies, men deserting in droves, all because their highly sensitive aesthetic senses are offended by the colour scheme ... I think if the American army failed to rebel when they weren't getting enough body armour in Iraq, they'd probably be happy enough to put up with a gun that looks like a prop out of Dr Who. Link to post Share on other sites
dirty mao Posted January 11, 2005 Report Share Posted January 11, 2005 tripod, what i meant by that is i prefer the G36 over the XM8. the G36 has been proven to be a good gun, while the M8 is still in its testing phase (i think?). plus i have hear not-so-favorable things about the M8. plus, i think it looks crappy. Link to post Share on other sites
Longhairedhippy Posted January 11, 2005 Report Share Posted January 11, 2005 the XM8 is basically a G36 in a new wrapper. that said, I do love the G36 more. Link to post Share on other sites
Banzai Posted January 11, 2005 Report Share Posted January 11, 2005 yeah i have to agree, the xm8 looks like *albatross* imo, trendy but not something longterm Link to post Share on other sites
arizonabay Posted January 11, 2005 Report Share Posted January 11, 2005 Some people like to have guns that replicate reliable guns in real life. I like how you can speak for all of the airsoft community. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oh, get off of it. I wasn't trying to hurt any feelings for christ's sake. I stated that I didn't like the way the gun looks, someone took it to the step of talking about real steel performance. I was merely pointing out that when it comes right down to it, that doesn't matter in airsoft. Guess what, when you want an aeg that LOOKS like a real steel that is a good performer... That is asthetic Your aeg isn't going to be the end all just because it's real steel counterpart performs well, so yes that's right, I am speaking for the entire airsoft community. IT'S 100% LOOKS in relation to real steel and you agreed with me by saying that people would buy aeg's because they LOOK like reliable real steel. Thank you Link to post Share on other sites
Catchv22 Posted January 11, 2005 Report Share Posted January 11, 2005 Wow, you completely missed the point that some people buy AEGs for different reasons. Some people buy it only for looks. Other people buy AEGs based on their usage and performance in the real world. Other people are more into reenactments and will buy AEGs that fit certain uniforms and impressions, so the ability in the real steel world does have something to do with buying things in airsoft. If you had opened your mind a little, you would've realized that people buy AEGs for different reasons. I'm not here to change your mind about the XM8, only to refute the wide ignorant assertions you make for others. Keep in mind, I made a long list about ergonomic features of the real steel XM8 which do relate to the ergonomic features of the airsoft XM8. Also, I was here to refute claims that the XM8 failed because passing bad information around on the internet isn't good. I wasn't here to change your mind about anything, but obviously, that didn't stop your hostility. Link to post Share on other sites
arizonabay Posted January 11, 2005 Report Share Posted January 11, 2005 Wow, you completely missed the point that some people buy AEGs for different reasons. Some people buy it only for looks. Other people buy AEGs based on their usage and performance in the real world. Other people are more into reenactments and will buy AEGs that fit certain uniforms and impressions, so the ability in the real steel world does have something to do with buying things in airsoft. If you had opened your mind a little, you would've realized that people buy AEGs for different reasons. I'm not here to change your mind about the XM8, only to refute the wide ignorant assertions you make for others. Keep in mind, I made a long list about ergonomic features of the real steel XM8 which do relate to the ergonomic features of the airsoft XM8. Also, I was here to refute claims that the XM8 failed because passing bad information around on the internet isn't good. I wasn't here to change your mind about anything, but obviously, that didn't stop your hostility. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Everything you just mentioned is related to the way the aeg's look. I am not being hostile. I am sorry if I came across that way. I was a little irritated by your statement which probably lead me to sound more confrontational than I should have But my statement was not ignorant or off-base. So, I will make one more statement, since you felt the need to call me ignorant and I really can't justify letting that go unchecked, and then I will allow the thread to go back on the course it should be on. "Based on their usage performance in the real world"-Looks "Reenactments and will buy aegs that fit certain uniforms and impressions"-Looks I am not being ignorant. All I said in the first place was that I didn't like the way it looked. Then when it was misinterpreted as though I was talking about the kit, I pointed out that I was talking about the actual gun itself. If you buy a xm8 aeg because you like the performance of the real steel xm8. Guess what, you are making that purchase based solely on how the gun Looks. I am fully aware of the fact that people buy aeg's based on the ergonomics of the guns, that's something that is going to be different for each person and guess what... ergonomics come down to how the gun looks Until the actual ballistics performance of each AEG is directly connected to the performance of it's real steel counterpart then, in relation to real steel, the choice is based solely on looks one way or the other. I am not being hostile. As I said, I don't like the way the real steel xm8 looks and the absolute only reference I made to real steel performance in any way was in the form of a question. Then I said "it doesn't matter what the real steel performance is for airsoft purposes" and accusingly say "I like how you can speak for all of the airsoft community." which for some reason irritated me more than it probably should. And now you're calling me ignorant while pointing out things that only back the statement Am I allowed to not like how the xm8 looks in a way that has no relation whatsoever to the performance of the real steel version? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.