Intreasting article about how Marines really feel about their gear.

trogdor1289 · 01-25-2007, 01:04 PM

http://www.military.com/forums/0,152...RC=marine-a.nl

Tells you how they really feel about their stuff.

[R-CON]Clypp · 01-25-2007, 01:12 PM

Sounds like the M16/M4 series needs to be replaced sooner rather than later. OICWs for everyone I say. Who cares about a few extra pounds when you have a repeater flatline grenade launcher?

Why did they ever adopt the 5.56 round over the 7.62 round? I never understood that.

$kelet0r · 01-25-2007, 01:15 PM

firepower over hitting power is the answer

oh and cost/money was probably an important factor

Thunder · 01-25-2007, 01:15 PM

i think little has changed, they still prefer the 7.62 over the 5.56.

i notice that the M-14 are useing acog's and other low power scopes, that mean we get to see them in PR? (m14 with acog's)

Quote:

8 ) The M-14: Thumbs up. They are being re-issued in bulk, mostly in a modified version to special ops guys. Modifications include lightweight Kevlar stocks and low power red dot or ACOG sights. Very reliable in the sandy environment, and grunts love the 7.62 round

$kelet0r · 01-25-2007, 01:19 PM

interesting about the dislike for the M249 - I've rarely before heard a thing said against it

Downtown_two · 01-25-2007, 01:27 PM

Yep same, thats the first time I've heard anything bad said about the M249, never heard anything good mind you. Good read.

JellyBelly · 01-25-2007, 03:27 PM

Sounds like the Marines are, by in large, taking a step back with their equipment and just updating alot of it. M14, .45, M2 .50. All quite old weapons. One thing that im confused about is, why is the M24 in there? Thought the Marines used the M40?

El_Vikingo · 01-25-2007, 03:45 PM

they chose the 5.56 round over the 7.62 round becuase of the weight of a full magazine.

SiN|ScarFace · 01-25-2007, 03:47 PM

Range, optics and big holes seem to be the ish.

Rambo Hunter · 01-25-2007, 04:06 PM

yep, they just like big calibers! That's why the M240 was a thumbs up and th M249 was down. M2 .50 ftw

01-25-2007, 01:04 PM	#1
trogdor1289 Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Classified. Posts: 5,230	Intreasting article about how Marines really feel about their gear. http://www.military.com/forums/0,152...RC=marine-a.nl Tells you how they really feel about their stuff.

01-25-2007, 01:12 PM	#2
[R-CON]Clypp PR Contributor Join Date: Jul 2006 Canada Location: Ontario Posts: 2,111	Sounds like the M16/M4 series needs to be replaced sooner rather than later. OICWs for everyone I say. Who cares about a few extra pounds when you have a repeater flatline grenade launcher? Why did they ever adopt the 5.56 round over the 7.62 round? I never understood that.
	Ongoing PR Projects: Canadian Forces RG-31 Nyala Armored Patrol Vehicle - Status: Importing Topographical minimaps - Status: Restarted![7/18]

01-25-2007, 01:27 PM	#6
Downtown_two Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Scotland Posts: 1,291	Yep same, thats the first time I've heard anything bad said about the M249, never heard anything good mind you. Good read.
	http://www.darkside-film.com/ "Cover me, I'm eating Pasta"

01-25-2007, 03:27 PM	#7
JellyBelly Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: The United States of England Posts: 1,310	Sounds like the Marines are, by in large, taking a step back with their equipment and just updating alot of it. M14, .45, M2 .50. All quite old weapons. One thing that im confused about is, why is the M24 in there? Thought the Marines used the M40?
	[RGG] - Pte.Phillips - www.rggsquad.co.uk - Arma ftw Really Gay Guy America was a tad late into the First World War. They redeemed themself's and came in slightly sooner in the Second. Now they seem determined to start the Third.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

01-25-2007, 01:15 PM	#3
$kelet0r Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Dublin, Ireland Posts: 1,321	firepower over hitting power is the answer oh and cost/money was probably an important factor

01-25-2007, 01:19 PM	#5
$kelet0r Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Dublin, Ireland Posts: 1,321	interesting about the dislike for the M249 - I've rarely before heard a thing said against it

01-25-2007, 03:45 PM	#8
El_Vikingo Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Inside the "Search Function". Posts: 4,930	they chose the 5.56 round over the 7.62 round becuase of the weight of a full magazine.

01-25-2007, 03:47 PM	#9
SiN\|ScarFace Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Colorado Posts: 4,504	Range, optics and big holes seem to be the ish.

01-25-2007, 04:06 PM	#10
Rambo Hunter Join Date: Dec 2006 United States of America Location: Honolulu, Hawaii Posts: 1,565	yep, they just like big calibers! That's why the M240 was a thumbs up and th M249 was down. M2 .50 ftw

Sponsored Links

Sponsored Links