User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/31/2021 1:34:36 AM EDT
[#1]
MG 42.
Bren. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2021 5:10:59 AM EDT
[#2]
Quoted: What else is out there? Did any military ever use the HK 21 series? It looks nice but as a built up G3, is it trying to fill a role that too demanding for anything but a ground up designed MG? ... What do the Brits and Frenchies use as their ground deployed MG? A) Portugal used the HK21 in its colonial wars, alongside the MG-42. B) Both Britain and France use variants of the FN MAG-58, France having replaced its aging AA-52s a few years back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2021 6:30:00 AM EDT
[#3]
I owned a 7.62 saw k it beat the feed roller on the oprod into the Top cover and the roller kept breaking we converted it back to 556
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2021 6:33:50 AM EDT
[#4]
Hey schornstinefager, you still have that MG42 postie?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2021 6:47:21 AM EDT
[#5]
Naw I sold it with 53 others to the rental range in Kissimmee when i closed Thermo. Thou i have one partaily built and 4-5 kits for when i get the itch . Im in limbo at the moment only have a saw and 60 in belt feds at the present . Feeding them is the problem
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2021 8:38:06 AM EDT
[#6]
A very important function of the 240 and other MGs is suppressive fire. You don’t need to shoulder fire it for that function. Carrying it on the sling and shooting from the hip can be used effectively to get peoples heads down. If you need more accurate fire, prone out and go to the bipod.
My favorite was the 240. I wasn’t a huge fan of the SAW or the M60. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2021 8:49:54 AM EDT
[#7]
Thats why our Saw came from US MGA as a mk48 in 308 it just beat itself up I think it was under buffered I never got to play with the 240 was after my Generation I guess
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2021 9:26:18 AM EDT
[#8]
Obviously the ma deuce is the best...
Seriously though, the question is a little too broad. I get what you're asking. But there is a reason US infantry uses 3 or 4 different belt fed MGs. As far as always dismounted. The knight's/stoner LMG or LAMG is seriously cool and extremely lightweight. I also am partial to the DSA RPDC in full auto. Sure it lacks the quick change barrel, but it could be developed to be a great weapon, lighter than a 249 and bigger bullets. (Though a 249 with 300blk barrel is similar) |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2021 9:33:03 AM EDT
[#9]
I like Knights LMG, unfortunately I've never gotten to use it
240's always ran well IME, but I mostly shot truck mounted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2021 10:21:31 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I like Knights LMG, unfortunately I've never gotten to use it 240's always ran well IME, but I mostly shot truck mounted. Yeah most people haven't. 240s are great mounted. But I never want to carry one, even if it's just to the helicopter across the flight line |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2021 11:17:12 AM EDT
[#11]
Polish PKM in 7.62
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2021 11:48:39 AM EDT
[#12]
M240L is what you seek.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2021 2:51:14 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: M240L is what you seek. Do the receivers still kk break in the cold? Barrett/Geissele have a variant that’s lighter but still steel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2021 12:19:52 PM EDT
[#14]
The 240 at 30 pounds is just too heavy for troops to carry. Would be great mounted, but ground pounders, even big strong ones like I (was!), can't carry that much weight and be effective.
20, 22 pounds is about the max anyone can carry for long. MG42 was awesome for the time, but at 1100-1200 RPM is too fast - you burn through your ammo too quickly, and MG's just don't need to fire that fast to get good suppressive fire. If I was building a MG for ground troops, I'd focus on this: No more than 22 pounds, with optic, no ammo. QD barrel feature like on the M60, where you can swap out barrels in 10 seconds. Some modern 6mm round - would give you more range than the 7.62 round for longer engagements, and flatter shooting so as to not have to walk the rounds in as much. Belt fed, but with the ability to be mag fed as well - it's too slow to reload a belt when things are hot and heavy. Light weight box for 50 / 100 /and 200 round belts, so that the ammo isn't swinging around. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2021 12:27:36 PM EDT
[#15]
The lightest M240 variant is about 20 pounds, using the Barrett designed receiver, a fluted barrel, and no handguard. The M240N is like 24 pounds and doesn't come with a bipod.
I carried the M240 a little bit (just a little) and it was a beast. I'm glad I didn't have to carry it for a living. It's also very long and hard to maneuver. The problem with the shorter variant that Barrett designed is that it doesn't work on the T&E, but it is like a foot shorter and 7 pounds lighter, so it would be great for an assault gun and shitty in support by fire. Mounted, just buy the M240N with the Barrett designed receiver. The vehicle doesn't care, but it will be easier for female troops to move the weapon around and get it mounted up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2021 12:45:46 PM EDT
[#16]
Largely agree but I don’t want mag feed. One, because what I want in a machine gun round isn’t what I want in a rifle round. Two, if it’s anything like the SAW the magazine feed won’t work and will cause failures even with belts.
The GPMG concept has been dead in most nations for decades but no one admits it publicly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2021 12:49:57 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The 240 at 30 pounds is just too heavy for troops to carry. Would be great mounted, but ground pounders, even big strong ones like I (was!), can't carry that much weight and be effective. 20, 22 pounds is about the max anyone can carry for long. MG42 was awesome for the time, but at 1100-1200 RPM is too fast - you burn through your ammo too quickly, and MG's just don't need to fire that fast to get good suppressive fire. If I was building a MG for ground troops, I'd focus on this: No more than 22 pounds, with optic, no ammo. QD barrel feature like on the M60, where you can swap out barrels in 10 seconds. Some modern 6mm round - would give you more range than the 7.62 round for longer engagements, and flatter shooting so as to not have to walk the rounds in as much. Belt fed, but with the ability to be mag fed as well - it's too slow to reload a belt when things are hot and heavy. Light weight box for 50 / 100 /and 200 round belts, so that the ammo isn't swinging around. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2021 12:50:55 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Polish PKM in 7.62 While there are a lot of people with more experience than me, I worked with this exact MG overseas and it was incredibly simple, reliable, easy to run, relatively light weight compared to the 240B, and I recall that it fed from an ammo can under it that was mounted to the gun which made movement much easier for the gunner. I was lucky to get to go to a foreign weapons course back when the war in Iraq was rolling. We spent a good bit of time on PK series machineguns and I walked away impressed. It is a contender. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2021 2:18:57 PM EDT
[#19]
Yeah, though 6.8 mm, while a great round for 0-500, isn't as good for longer range as 6.5 Creed, 6.5 Grendle, or the 6mm ARC round. So one of those three, probably the 6.5 Creed, as it has more power than the others, and sometimes it's nice to be able to chew through cover.
I've heard varying reports on that one - if it worked fine it would be a nice set up for ground use. I wonder if it was a scaled up SAW, and just can't handle lots of full auto 7.62mm pounding, while it would be fine with the lighter 6.5 Cred. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2021 2:38:58 PM EDT
[#20]
The SAW was designed to be a 7.62mm and they didn’t shrink it when they made it a 5.56mm.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2021 2:54:36 PM EDT
[#21]
Interesting. Was the mag aspect an add on for the 5.56mm, or was there a mag version of the 7.62 mm as well?
The mags seems to work fine in the M249s Semi version - is that from it being closed bolt compared to open? Or some other aspect of the design of the semi version? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2021 3:35:00 PM EDT
[#22]
Only the 5.56mm version went into serial production until the Mk48, which is temperamental. I don’t think the 7.62 was ever mag fed.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2021 3:44:04 PM EDT
[#23]
Mg34
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2021 7:47:11 PM EDT
[#24]
Czech VZ 59
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_vz._59  Attached FileAnd, semi-autos in 7.62x54R are available and AFFORDABLE https://youtu.be/79WFwpiB7Fk |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 9:01:06 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Interesting. Was the mag aspect an add on for the 5.56mm, or was there a mag version of the 7.62 mm as well? The mags seems to work fine in the M249s Semi version - is that from it being closed bolt compared to open? Or some other aspect of the design of the semi version? The On another note, let's not overlook the limited life of Mk48's as a result of their receivers stretching with high round counts. It's a good system, but runs at the design's limits. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 9:50:39 AM EDT
[#26]
If my experience with a new ish post sample M249 and various metal mags is correct, they don’t run with new everything, either.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 11:29:35 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The On another note, let's not overlook the limited life of Mk48's as a result of their receivers stretching with high round counts. It's a good system, but runs at the design's limits. Would they last longer I wonder if set up for 6mm ARC or 6.5mm Credmore? Those would be better rounds for longer range, though they don't have the same chew through ability of 7.62mm at closer ranges, such as chewing through concrete blocks until cover no longer is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 11:41:23 AM EDT
[#28]
IWI Negev?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 12:05:32 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Interesting. Was the mag aspect an add on for the 5.56mm, or was there a mag version of the 7.62 mm as well? The mags seems to work fine in the M249s Semi version - is that from it being closed bolt compared to open? Or some other aspect of the design of the semi version? In my experience, the m249 just outruns magazines. Without a belt hanging off the side to slow the bolt down a little, the ROF goes up. This then causes the action to cycle too fast for a magazine to move the next round into position fast enough for reliable function. Semi autos don't really have that problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 12:19:28 PM EDT
[#30]
That's partially why I referenced crappy GI mags still being used. If their springs are worn and don't generate as much force with each cycle, they usually get outrun by the bolt as you mentioned. Coupled with older 249's that have worn gas ports (and higher bolt speeds), voila: mag feeding is useless.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 1:20:44 PM EDT
[#31]
The Belgian MAG-58 was designed as a ground/infantry machine gun. It entered the US inventory as the M1 tank's coax machine gun.
In the mid- to late-80s the US Army's Vietnam-era M60s had been re-built many, many times, many past their useful life, earning terrible, unfair reputations as jam- and stoppage machines. The Ranger Battalions asked for a more dependable machine gun, and the interim recommendation came about to use tank M240s with the ground-mode conversion kit (M240G). The newer guns earned a reputation for being dependable like the Energizer Bunny. Duh. So Army started retiring the M60 for the M240. Meanwhile, on exercises with our allies, my experience with their new-production M60E4 machine guns floored me. Light, dependable, and a sentimental favorite, those things ran like perfect Swiss watches. As far as compromise, I'd rather run a heavier machine gun that works 99% of the time than a lightweight that spends 40% of its time in direct-, general-, and depot-level maintenance. The ideal is an effective, 99% available gun that weighs nothing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 1:59:55 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The 240 at 30 pounds is just too heavy for troops to carry. Would be great mounted, but ground pounders, even big strong ones like I (was!), can't carry that much weight and be effective. 20, 22 pounds is about the max anyone can carry for long. MG42 was awesome for the time, but at 1100-1200 RPM is too fast - you burn through your ammo too quickly, and MG's just don't need to fire that fast to get good suppressive fire. If I was building a MG for ground troops, I'd focus on this: No more than 22 pounds, with optic, no ammo. QD barrel feature like on the M60, where you can swap out barrels in 10 seconds. Some modern 6mm round - would give you more range than the 7.62 round for longer engagements, and flatter shooting so as to not have to walk the rounds in as much. Belt fed, but with the ability to be mag fed as well - it's too slow to reload a belt when things are hot and heavy. Light weight box for 50 / 100 /and 200 round belts, so that the ammo isn't swinging around. If we are going new gun/ caliber I vote Singapore's ultimate in 6.5 grendell. Range is there (though less penetration than creed) and weight is not there,around 11 pounds empty weight, uric. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 3:03:48 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In my experience, the m249 just outruns magazines. Without a belt hanging off the side to slow the bolt down a little, the ROF goes up. This then causes the action to cycle too fast for a magazine to move the next round into position fast enough for reliable function. Semi autos don't really have that problem. I've heard that about the full auto ones, and the reviews of the semis have said they run fine with mags. Now how fast is a SAW, without a belt? M16's are what, 600-700 RPM? So is a mag only SAW quite a bit faster? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 3:11:00 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Belgian MAG-58 was designed as a ground/infantry machine gun. It entered the US inventory as the M1 tank's coax machine gun. In the mid- to late-80s the US Army's Vietnam-era M60s had been re-built many, many times, many past their useful life, earning terrible, unfair reputations as jam- and stoppage machines. The Ranger Battalions asked for a more dependable machine gun, and the interim recommendation came about to use tank M240s with the ground-mode conversion kit (M240G). The newer guns earned a reputation for being dependable like the Energizer Bunny. Duh. So Army started retiring the M60 for the M240. Meanwhile, on exercises with our allies, my experience with their new-production M60E4 machine guns floored me. Light, dependable, and a sentimental favorite, those things ran like perfect Swiss watches. As far as compromise, I'd rather run a heavier machine gun that works 99% of the time than a lightweight that spends 40% of its time in direct-, general-, and depot-level maintenance. The ideal is an effective, 99% available gun that weighs nothing. Sounds like my Army experience in the early 90's. If you had a 60 that had been taken care of, and you knew how to clean and oil it up, they ran fine. As a gun nut, mine always sang as I enjoyed taking care of my Hog. But lots were worn out, and needed to be scrapped. But the cheap ass refused to spend a grand or two to make firearms for the Infantry actually work. Or were locked into some 15 year long project to find the perfect gun, and ended up keeping what they have (like they did for 20 years with the M9, or keep doing with the M16). Never seen an E4 version of the M60, but if they ran fine, that would be to me a great MG for ground mounted Infantry. Even lighter than the regular 60, and a front grip to swing it around more easily. Never fooled around with the M240 - they were on M1's and Bradleys when I was in, and not for ground troops. From the boxy shape, they look as if they have a heritage John Browning 1919/1937 history - is that correct, or are they gas operated instead of (I think) recoil operated like the 19/37? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 3:17:45 PM EDT
[#35]
And on another topic, what round do you think would be best for a MG?
556 is too light, for a MG you want the ability to chew through cover, and take out vehicles. 762 is the standard, but would a 6mm ish round be better? 6.8mm is great for 0-300 but starts to drop off after than. 6.5mm Creedmore? Perfect blend of power, longer range, less recoil so less wear on MG that are run as hard as any firearm out there? How about an M60E4, 6.5mm Creed, a slot to put in plastic box mags like the SAW, with 50 and 100 round boxes. Green mil spec laser on the side to walk in your rounds, and a red dot optic on the top. Semi-auto setting on it as well, in case you want to use it in a more rifle like mode. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 3:26:14 PM EDT
[#36]
The M240 is a BAR operating system upside down with an MG42 feed system. The receiver has similarity with the 1919 in that its machines and riveted steel for longevity.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 3:32:14 PM EDT
[#37]
And the MG42 feed system was highly regarded for it's design and reliability, is that correct?
I've read people say the M60 has a too weak feed system. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 3:48:20 PM EDT
[#38]
Correct.
The M60 has similar lineage but wasn’t a great copy. That said the E4/E6 variants are good. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2021 10:56:06 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Mg34 Barrel change requiring a glove is so passé. For dismounted use, the M60E6 looks like an attractive option. For a vehicle, make mine an MG3. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2021 9:20:58 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Belgian MAG-58 was designed as a ground/infantry machine gun. It entered the US inventory as the M1 tank's coax machine gun. In the mid- to late-80s the US Army's Vietnam-era M60s had been re-built many, many times, many past their useful life, earning terrible, unfair reputations as jam- and stoppage machines. The Ranger Battalions asked for a more dependable machine gun, and the interim recommendation came about to use tank M240s with the ground-mode conversion kit (M240G). The newer guns earned a reputation for being dependable like the Energizer Bunny. Duh. So Army started retiring the M60 for the M240. Meanwhile, on exercises with our allies, my experience with their new-production M60E4 machine guns floored me. Light, dependable, and a sentimental favorite, those things ran like perfect Swiss watches. As far as compromise, I'd rather run a heavier machine gun that works 99% of the time than a lightweight that spends 40% of its time in direct-, general-, and depot-level maintenance. The ideal is an effective, 99% available gun that weighs nothing. I'd kill for an M60 E6. An MG3 would do as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2021 3:25:09 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Barrel change requiring a glove is so pass. For a vehicle, make mine an MG3. You'll need a glove for that too, unless you're letting it fall out from the gun being elevated.  I like my M60E3. Haven't tried a MK48, but one gunner on YouTube with time on both said he prefers the M60E4 (and later variants) to the MK48. I like the PKM but wouldn't trade my E3 for it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2021 3:25:32 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'd kill for an M60 E6. An MG3 would do as well. I'd rather have an MG74. 850RPM and slick looks. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2021 6:57:46 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryGorgeous! I didn't know of this variant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2021 8:06:09 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Gorgeous! I didn't know of this variant. Quote HistoryQuoted: Gorgeous! I didn't know of this variant. It's the most up-to-date one there is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2021 11:00:19 PM EDT
[#45]
It is amazing how long the MG42 design has lasted.
Ultimax always looked like a winner. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2021 9:41:37 AM EDT
[#46]
I was on a machine gun team at one point with the M60.
For anything dismounted the m-60 is probably the best. The only feature not helping it is the slip fit barrel interface. They shoot area target patterns at 500-600meters about the size of three guys standing shoulder to shoulder. I had a worn op rod groove on a gun causing runaways and cleaned it up with a file. The gun ran flawless after that. The 240 is great on vehicles but absurdly heavy for dismounts. I had one on duty malf with a 240 in Iraq- I attributed it to running the low gas setting. The gun was probably dry from wind driving around in 140f heat. After that I always ran the ~850 rpm setting. The high gas setting is like 1200rpm- the belt flaps and its less controllable. The 240 is like a belt fed bren gun. Very accurate. At one point I took out several vehicles that weren’t responsive to warning shots (about 9)with a 240 on orders to clear 40mph msr traffic in 2005 without injuring any occupants which was my personal objective. In a moving vehicle at about 65mph it was easy to take out a particular tire opposite a sole occupant or a gas tank between occupants. It was better for them than the vehicle ram by our 15000lb vehicle that would have absolutely happened next if I couldn’t clear the road. I got 9 out of ten vehicles off the road at one tire or a gas tank, and the tenth car the driver rammed and pretty much totaled. There is no way they didn’t know we needed them to yield. The first 30 vehicles behind those had yielded to warning shots. Command detonated ieds are a lot more accurate on vehicles going 40mph than 65. In Samarra where we lived maybe 16 vbieds were stopped by 240’s in 04-05 When totally disabling a vehicle is required, they stop a vehicle in 6-9 rounds most of the time. I don’t think that ever took more than a 3 second burst to get a vbied to trigger early. Sometimes gate guards would engage 2-4 vbieds at a time. That kind of stuff is really serious and scary. One guy in our battalion was killed on gate guard by concussion. Not a scratch on him- the explosive force killed him. Thats atypical as vbieds usually produce a lot of schrapnel. I saw one throw an engine 360 meters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2021 9:54:25 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Czech VZ 59 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_vz._59 https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/132994/98864F98-6E4B-45B5-94D6-B0D3CDDD222D_jpe-1889183.JPG And, semi-autos in 7.62x54R are available and AFFORDABLE https://youtu.be/79WFwpiB7Fk A VERY underrated gun. A great shooter, light and easy to use. Lots of neat design items they did with it. No moving parts in the top cover. Charging without removing your hand from the controls. A nice gun for sure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2021 1:14:30 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A VERY underrated gun. A great shooter, light and easy to use. Lots of neat design items they did with it. No moving parts in the top cover. Charging without removing your hand from the controls. A nice gun for sure. Yep. And with milled receiver so as never to stretch, wear out, etc. and become unserviceable while still remaining light enough weight to be man portable. It's accurate too! Don't need a belt loader, the 50 rd belts can be connected to each other for a single 2000 round belt if you want. As a non resupplied individual, i like simple, strong non disintegrating belts that can be used hundreds of times. The 50 round assault can attaches to the gun securely and keeps it ready and portable. Ask me how I know.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2021 1:55:24 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yep. And with milled receiver so as never to stretch, wear out, etc. and become unserviceable while still remaining light enough weight to be man portable. It's accurate too! Don't need a belt loader, the 50 rd belts can be connected to each other for a single 2000 round belt if you want. As a non resupplied individual, i like simple, strong non disintegrating belts that can be used hundreds of times. The 50 round assault can attaches to the gun securely and keeps it ready and portable. Ask me how I know. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/132994/UKM_pic_jpg-1914612.JPG Yeah, but the belt loader is flippin sweet.  UK 59 Speed Loader - 7.62x54R Belt Speed Loader Mine broke its locking block. I have made a couple to replace it, but I cant get the heat treat right. They keep cracking. Its some tough steel for sure. ETA- I dont like the Marcomar barrel handle. The original let you use it as a forward grip to shoot from the shoulder. See this video at 2:07  Knob Creek Machine Gun Shoot April 2014 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2021 3:31:55 PM EDT
[#50]
notso,
I will pm you later so I don’t hijack this thread.................more. |
|
|
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.
