The XM8 may or may not enter service. It is a slighly modified H&K G36, with greater modularity, and funky space age furniture.

I don't think the XM8 will ever come about. With Congress trying to get rid of 'waste' in procurement, I would expect for the project to get cancelled. What is wrong with the M-4/M-16, anyway? Accurate, rugged, light, etc. Just keep the M16 and add some red-dot scopes

The m-16 still has a bad reputation for reliability problems, inherited from the original Army Ordnance version with overtight tolerances. The modern day M-16A2/A3 /M-4 carbine family has no such difficulties, due to four decades of product improvement. The XM-8 is basically a Heckler & Kock G-36 5.56mm rifle with furniture (the stock, handguard, etc.) derived from the old Worlds of Wonder "Lazer Tag" rifle. (I still have mine, BTW.) The retracting stock even looks like it uses the same basic "Lazer Tag" mechanism, replacing the (notably wobbly) folding plastic stock of the G-36. Plus, the XM-8 has a top-mounted carrying-handle-optical-sight arrangement (again, "Lazer Tag"-inspired) in place of the lighter (but weaker) G-36 handle/sight module. And as a bonus, the XM-8 comes in colors, mostly green, as opposed to the G-36 which only comes in edgy-looking but hard-to-conceal-in-the-real-world black. Is it, or will it be, a better rifle than the M-16? I don't know. Having been part of the 7.62mm NATO generation, I've always been a bit dubious about the 5.56mm round. (Yes, it generates a serious wound channel, but it has to fragment to do it, which skates a bit close to the Geneva Accords.) But if you can live with 5.56mm ballistics, the M-16 seems to get the job done. Only time will tell if XM-8 has what it takes to replace it.

Well, if the the M 8 rifles will enter service little by littls they are even cheaper compared to the M16/M4 rifles. And they ae much more modern. The M16/M4 and the SAW got a wear and rear problem. So the US has to procure new rifles anyway.

I suspect the HK416 may be the next infantry rifle. While its still an M-16-derivate, its supposed to run much cleaner and be much more reliable... It would be close to perfect if chambered for 6.5 Grendel instead of the asthmatic 5.56mm...

Just to be a nitpicky little bugger, I will point out that the Geneva Convention has nothing to do with strictures on ammunition and weapons. That's the Hague Convention. The Geneva Convention is only about treatment of soldiers, civilians, and journalists. buzzard

How about this one: http://www.cryeassociates.com/work/12.htm Part of the Advanced Warfighter Program for the US Army.

The people at Crye do some very cool stuff (Multi-Cam is great, etc.) but I don't know if that weapon mock up is anything anyone is looking at seriously.

It's a H&K G11 with a false mustache and glasses on!

"It's a H&K G11 with a false mustache and glasses on!" Ha ha, good one! No seriously, it looks more like an advanced version of the FN F2000. Maybe the US Army will finally overcome it's peculiar aversion to bull-pup rifle. It always struck me as odd that the US Army (which is supposed to be the worlds hi-tech "Nintendo" army) is so conservative with the layout of their rifles. The Enfield EM-2 was designed a quarter century ago. Even China is designing, building and issuing their own bullpup rifle. About time the US got with the program :-)