The XM8, why??

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT

oldtiredguy RE:the xm8 why?? 4/24/2004 6:25:05 PM

because the wiz kids want a new bank-bang, the xm-29 is an expensive joke, and the xm-8 (a subsystem of the land warrior system) looks cool.

Quote Reply

Clausewitz RE:the xm8 why?? Because it will be the soldiers/marines dream! 4/25/2004 10:37:13 AM

The M 8 will have less weight and slightly different optics and ballistics. Basic mechanics derived from the Armalite 18 (and the M 16). The M 8 will be the the slightly more we will call it the soldiers/marines dream. Maybe the last rifle of old fashioned design. Afterwards we will see direct energy weapons or electromagnetic rifles.

Quote Reply

oldtiredguy RE:the xm8 why?? Because it will be the soldiers/marines dream! 4/25/2004 12:02:34 PM

i have always liked a well balanced 8 lb. rifle. lighter, all else being equal, would be better. the xm-8 will be an excellent shooter, if any early bugs are quickly ironed out; properly selected optics are a plus, but is the xm-8 really an advance? overall combat performance is the issue here.

Quote Reply

towgunner1960 RE:the xm8 why?? 4/25/2004 1:37:56 PM

Another case of government waste. If you compare the xm-8 to the basic m-16, then of course the xm-8 is the better weapon even if we stay with 5.56mm. But in my opinion the government is going about it the wrong way. I think it is a tremendous waste of tax-payer money to switch over to this new rifle when the minor faults with the m-16 can easily be corrected. The same company that came out with the g-36/xm-8, also makes an upper receiver that will bolt directly to an m-16 lower. It's called the H&K M-4. As anyone who knows anything about the m-16 can tell you the main cause of malfunctions are that gases are blown directly into the receiver, which jams up the works with crud and is the main cause of malfunctions. H&ks new receiver uses a gas piston design that sets on top of the barrel, therefore you don't have gases going directly into the receiver. It is as reliable as the xm-8 and the main cause of jams are eliminated. This would make the m-16 as reliable as anything else in the world. So you can outfit the millions of m-16s we have in inventory for less than half the cost of a totally new rifle. You also don't have to retrain the thousands of armorers on a totally new system and retrain millions of troops on this new rifle. Another option to improve the system if they just have to change the rifle is to make the lower and new h&k upper out of carbon fiber. For those of you who haven't seen a carbon 15 rifle, you need to check this thing out. It weighs aprox. 3.9 pounds unloaded! Plus carbon fiber is stonger than steel or aluminum and is self lubricating to boot. Go to Bushmasters web site for further. The money we would save on this more common sense approach could be used to upgrade to 6.8mm instead of having to pay for a totally new rifle and upgrade to 6.8mm. For further on Hk's new upper and the xm-8 check out this months soldier of fortune magazine. We are in the middle of a shooting war and the money saved can definetly be used for other more important things our troops need.......

Quote Reply

oldtiredguy RE:the xm8 why?? 4/25/2004 8:46:06 PM

sounds right to me, towgunner.

Quote Reply

wagner95696 RE:the xm8 why?? 4/28/2004 1:24:58 AM

I am hesitant about carbon fiber because of past, non-gun related, experiences with it. What, exactly, is meant by "stronger"; greater tensile strength; stiffer; greater shear strength; greater impact resistance?. I want to seen someone give a carbob receiver a good hard rap against a sharp edge of a large rock or boulder. My own experience is that carbon is strong as long as it is intact and undamaged but susceptible to impact and notch weakness when damaged.

Quote Reply

RE:the xm8 why?? 4/28/2004 8:34:41 PM

Government waste? I'll say it one more time, the M-8 is cheaper, per unit, than the M16 similarly equipped. Teack on the costs of "upgrades" for the 16 and the financial disparity only grows. Is it (the XM-8) a revolutionary new design? No, but assault rifle technology has largely plateued (Sp?). The future is in the catridge, not the rifle (new propellants, bullets, etc). DEWs and EMGs, of course, are not a viable alternative - the power requirements make man portable versions of these systems a sci fi dream for the relative future..

Quote Reply

Horsesoldier RE:the xm8 why?? 4/28/2004 9:01:02 PM

>>Government waste? I'll say it one more time, the M-8 is cheaper, per unit, than the M16 similarly equipped.<< Does not compute. The G36K I fired had been purchased for law enforcement use at a cost of about (if memory serves correctly) $8-900 more than an M4A1. That was for a baseline weapon, no optics. Optics add equally to price. I recognize that the military version HK is pushing has optics built in, but I still don't see the savings. Especially when you factor in buying all new spares, tools, etc. for the new rifle.

Quote Reply

mudshark RE:the xm8 why?? 5/5/2004 12:17:51 PM

link can this thing take harder knocks than the g36.is that what its about?

Quote Reply

mudshark RE:the xm8 why?? 5/5/2004 12:17:55 PM

link can this thing take harder knocks than the g36.is that what its about?

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT