User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/15/2014 6:52:20 AM EDT
[#1]
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2014 7:45:24 AM EDT
[#2]
Almost all of my experience with the M60 involved a blank adapter.
It didn't work well with the blank adapter. Fair or not, I'm not a fan. I'll take the 240 over the 60 any day. Good video. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2014 9:24:05 AM EDT
[#3]
Good video, but the M60 should be been consigned to the scrap heap years ago. There are just too many far superior MG designs available.
The ones we used in the Air Force back in the 70's were garbage. Sometimes we had to literally pour BreakFree into the receiver to get them to work. They make a good civilian range toy today, but I hope the military has disposed of them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2014 10:42:49 AM EDT
[#4]
Upgraded E4/E6 variants are still in use and most likely, continue to be in use due to relatively lighter weight.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2014 11:19:33 AM EDT
[#5]
Took em' 50 years, and even completely different alloys, but we did finally get the E4/E6 right.
Almost 2 lbs lighter than the lightest M240 variant. And at 500-odd RPM, your ammo belts will last a lot longer too. U.S. Ord took the M60E and made it what it should have been in the first place. Overall layout and operating principle is the same old M60, but done right. And actually reinstated all the good features that the inspiring rifles and GMPG's that were borrowed from , like the ability to close the feed tray/top-cover on a forward or rearward bolt, glove-less quick change barrels with a BREN-like barrel carry handle, and most all parts re-worked to be only one-way assembly, or actually reversible/directionless like the gas-piston. And U.S. Ord also has .mil contracts for MAG58's-M240's, and for U.S. M2's, so they know the strengths and weaknesses of each inside and out. Were I so lucky to have a choice, I'd want an M60E over a 240. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2014 4:07:36 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Upgraded E4/E6 variants are still in use and most likely, continue to be in use due to relatively lighter weight. With who? Any unit that has a reputation for using those variants are using the MK48 now. The M60E3 is 20.6 lbs. The MK48 is 15.44 - 18.6 lbs depending on configuration. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2014 4:58:39 PM EDT
[#7]
Outside US.
I believe E6 got adopted by Danish armed services beating other contenders. Also, I think the E4 kits were exported outside US and I think M60 variants will continue in service. Money drives military power more than anything else if you look at the top 10 military in the world and the economy financing it. US still pretty much outspend everybody else, including China and Russia, by a huge margin (not even in the same league), whether Congress/POTUS is Democrat or Republican. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2014 5:14:52 PM EDT
[#8]
how does it(MK48) compare to Negev NG7?
Video here. Quote HistoryQuoted:
With who? Any unit that has a reputation for using those variants are using the MK48 now. The M60E3 is 20.6 lbs. The MK48 is 15.44 - 18.6 lbs depending on configuration. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Upgraded E4/E6 variants are still in use and most likely, continue to be in use due to relatively lighter weight. With who? Any unit that has a reputation for using those variants are using the MK48 now. The M60E3 is 20.6 lbs. The MK48 is 15.44 - 18.6 lbs depending on configuration. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2014 5:22:43 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
how does it(MK48) compare to Negev NG7? Video here. Quoted:
Quoted:
Upgraded E4/E6 variants are still in use and most likely, continue to be in use due to relatively lighter weight. With who? Any unit that has a reputation for using those variants are using the MK48 now. The M60E3 is 20.6 lbs. The MK48 is 15.44 - 18.6 lbs depending on configuration. No idea. I've just had several friends that have carried the MK48 into harms way and it seems to have a favorable reception by those guys. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2014 11:13:26 PM EDT
[#10]
hearing the pig, reminded me of my grunt days!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2014 2:37:18 PM EDT
[#11]
Even though Ian did a good job on the video he still left out two other issues with the original version of the M60. The front sight was not adjustable so individual barrels could not be independently zero'd. So every time the barrel was swapped the gun would change point of impact and the sights would have to be rezero'd. The other issue was the aluminum top cover for the feed would wear off its anodizing and become a nice bright shiny beacon for the enemy to spot you. This was not fixed until the E4.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2014 7:01:08 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Even though Ian did a good job on the video he still left out two other issues with the original version of the M60. The front sight was not adjustable so individual barrels could not be independently zero'd. So every time the barrel was swapped the gun would change point of impact and the sights would have to be rezero'd. The other issue was the aluminum top cover for the feed would wear off its anodizing and become a nice bright shiny beacon for the enemy to spot you. This was not fixed until the E4. Good opportunity to practice Kentucky windage. Also, as for shiny top cover to signify target, you don't want all the advantage to be on one sided! Humour. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/26/2014 5:58:13 PM EDT
[#13]
Ive always assumed the M60 to be Godlike.
Have fired it in the Army and it was good to go. After seeing this perhaps the Old School Browning 1919A6 was the shizzle after all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/26/2014 7:03:43 PM EDT
[#14]
PKM ftw!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2014 8:02:09 AM EDT
[#15]
I think that's a good video from a nerds perspective. But his analysis has no soul, it's like an engineer looking at a Shelby Cobra and saying, "that thing won't do well". I love Forgotten Weapons but the M60 is really due more praise than he gives it. It's lighter than the 240, and it shoots WAY, WAY better. The M60 can be shot reasonably accurately offhand out to about 100 meters. The 240, that guy had better be stout if he's going to shoulder it. The pistol grip is more forward on the receiver so it balances better, and the recoil is like a sewing machine. It has a little jump to the rear, but the forward motion of the bolt returns the sights back to where it was aimed. I haven't shot a ton of machine guns, but I think in terms of a GPMG I'd rather shoot an M60 than a 240, PKM or MG3.
The only one I think beats it is the mk48, which suffers from the same problem as the M60. Short lifespan I think maybe due to thin walled stamped receiver. We saw reliability go way down on them once they hit around 50k rounds. We also broke a bolt on one in around the 20k round mark, which is no bueno for a belt fed. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2014 11:50:25 AM EDT
[#16]
cool but in terms of actual usage, how often is accurate unsupported fire from .30cal machine gun needed?
Also, what are the pros and cons of such usage compared against taking the extra time to have it supported? I can see value with .223 machine gun (inherently more mobile and controllable w/o support) but I think most of the time, supported fire is the way to go with .30 cal machine gun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2014 11:58:03 AM EDT
[#17]
In an immediate react to contact it's pretty helpful. But you bring up a good point. I do think I prefer a 240 if shooting from a tripod. But probably only then. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2014 12:12:07 PM EDT
[#18]
I think you would get a higher payout from immediate 223 LMG and M4A1 fire while .30 LMG is being setup.
Faster, more accurate fire wins the day, while .30 is preferable to .223. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2014 12:19:52 PM EDT
[#19]
I think the shooter could have dropped to ground and presented a smaller target while also delivering more accurate fire unless the angle of fire made it necessary to shoot standing up, unsupported.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2014 12:22:15 PM EDT
[#20]
In the of LMG shooter, shooting the MG with folded bipod over sandbag, wouldn't it make sense to use the bipod? Seems like he's creating more work/disadvantage for himself by shooting it this way.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2014 12:27:37 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In the of LMG shooter, shooting the MG with folded bipod over sandbag, wouldn't it make sense to use the bipod? Seems like he's creating more work/disadvantage for himself by shooting it this way. I think it's a matter of being pressed for time, combined with not wanting to stick yourself up any higher into enemy fire. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2014 12:28:03 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In the of LMG shooter, shooting the MG with folded bipod over sandbag, wouldn't it make sense to use the bipod? Seems like he's creating more work/disadvantage for himself by shooting it this way. In this case the shooter was engaging targets across 270 degrees, constantly moving a few feet here and there to better gain direct line of sight on Taliban. He's on a makeshift fighting position on top of his OP so he can shoot across at fighters 300m+ and down into the deadspace at fighters 50-200m away. In keeping this on topic, kind of a good argument for 60 vs 240. The 240 would stuggle here, the 60 would do okay, but the mk48 really is the tits. Mobile and easy to shoot offhand. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2014 12:43:50 PM EDT
[#23]
thanks for the insight.
I think a 200m/300m shot with .30 LMG would be a lot easier supported. Also, in the instance of shooting with folded bipod over sandbag, couldn't the shooter placed sandbag behind the extended bipod and shot at 200m/300m from a position of stable rest with sandbag protection? That would have increased hit probability substantially while also providing cover. Quote HistoryQuoted:
In this case the shooter was engaging targets across 270 degrees, constantly moving a few feet here and there to better gain direct line of sight on Taliban. He's on a makeshift fighting position on top of his OP so he can shoot across at fighters 300m+ and down into the deadspace at fighters 50-200m away. In keeping this on topic, kind of a good argument for 60 vs 240. The 240 would stuggle here, the 60 would do okay, but the mk48 really is the tits. Mobile and easy to shoot offhand. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
In the of LMG shooter, shooting the MG with folded bipod over sandbag, wouldn't it make sense to use the bipod? Seems like he's creating more work/disadvantage for himself by shooting it this way. In this case the shooter was engaging targets across 270 degrees, constantly moving a few feet here and there to better gain direct line of sight on Taliban. He's on a makeshift fighting position on top of his OP so he can shoot across at fighters 300m+ and down into the deadspace at fighters 50-200m away. In keeping this on topic, kind of a good argument for 60 vs 240. The 240 would stuggle here, the 60 would do okay, but the mk48 really is the tits. Mobile and easy to shoot offhand. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2014 7:59:45 AM EDT
[#24]
Only thing I can add is that my buddy took first place in the gov20 MG match with my 60 against a bunch of 240s. I know nothing of the other shooters, but I was impressed for an old dog to put up a fight.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2014 8:25:36 AM EDT
[#25]
He's got a great channel, I've learned a lot about some guns I've never touched. But the true awesomeness is the fact that I have carried and shot M60s a good bit and just learned a lot.
"so that's why we had to learn the runaway gun drill" "so that's why that wire was there" (I thought it was just to keep the arms-room tag on it) I'm in the firm camp of loving them BTW, on a tripod and knowing how to use the T&E I could out shoot our rack grade M14s with little issue |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2014 8:56:42 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Only thing I can add is that my buddy took first place in the gov20 MG match with my 60 against a bunch of 240s. I know nothing of the other shooters, but I was impressed for an old dog to put up a fight. The Hell you say!?!? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2014 9:06:14 AM EDT
[#27]
Thanks OP! I am now a new subscriber.
That was a very good video in my opinion and I learned allot. My experience with the M60 is limited. But I did find the M60 easier to shoot unsupported. I liked the sights and the intuitive take down of the 240 better. The fragility of the receiver and feed system is a real issue for the M60. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
