Armory Sponsor
Sig NGSW M7... (Page 1 of 2)
Member
Joined:
Aug 2024
Posts:
36
EE: 100% (3)
IN, USA
Posted: 6/19/2026 12:55:25 AM EDT
|
Well, I wanted to take some hands-on experience with the M7 before I decided to make this post. Here's a little back story, I'm currently an active duty 11b with one of the ID that decided to field the M7 and boy do I have some things to truthfully say about it. If you have any personal thoughts, feel free to reply. So, I have been here at 25th for a while and truthfully, I was not happy when we got issued the M7, I was used to M4 (and other variants as well) and then they handed us the XM157 too and shall I say it is very heavy and very inconvenient due to the jungle environment. I just went through KTA with it, and it was beyond brutal... comparing it to an M4 is crazy, it's like carrying a SAW in my opinion (I'd rather this). Busting the gulches with not only a 320, but also the M7 and in full kit was beyond brutal and truthfully was not a good day to say the least. The M7 is very awkward in the jungle, not even just that I have no clue why it was fielded to be suppressed since the round is supersonic on its own. Also, how are we going to go from 30rds and 7 mags, to 20rds and 7 mags... that's short a lot of ammo. Hell, talk to any GWOT vets about being in contact and they'll tell you most of their squad was black on ammo right after the first contact. So, that being said why are we dropping 70 rounds from combat load. It seems every turn that is made the Army is picking the decisions that make the least amount of sense. I'm sure I have plenty of other words for the M7 as it was heard from my Team Leader and up heard during this exercise. Feel free to ask questions! I'll answer what I do know about it. -Pet |
Member
Joined:
Aug 2024
Posts:
37
EE: 100% (3)
HI, USA
| So, I don't deserve a can....? And you say bound 300m with a M250? I already carry a Carl G and an M7, if you have the balls to lighten the load let me know. Also, with a round that is point target of 650m, why in the ever-loving hell would I need that when the average engagement range during Vietnam was 5-15m make it make sense please. I'm in a triple canopy jungle. I'd be fine with a 5.56 change my mind. |
Member
Joined:
Aug 2024
Posts:
38
EE: 100% (3)
HI, USA
|
Originally Posted By PleaseDontPet: Genuinely. We don't have threats of LAVs or of long distance shooting. it doesn't make sense. Originally Posted By PleaseDontPet: Originally Posted By vellnueve:  Genuinely. We don't have threats of LAVs or of long distance shooting. it doesn't make sense. The wording you used was very confusing and didn't make sense. It seemed like you were linking the suppressor and the speed of the round. The can just makes it quieter regardless of the load being used. Less hearing damage and flash. |
BikerNut:
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Member
Joined:
Aug 2024
Posts:
39
EE: 100% (3)
HI, USA
|
Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: The wording you used was very confusing and didn't make sense. It seemed like you were linking the suppressor and the speed of the round. The can just makes it quieter regardless of the load being used. Less hearing damage and flash. I mean I guess that makes sense in that theory but still. explosions going off around you... I think a can is the least of the worries. And if I am correct the part that damages your hearing isn';t necessarily the boom itself but the crack the round makes. |
|
Well, if the reports out of Eurosatory are correct, you might be getting some badly needed improvements. The M8 is several inches shorter, at least a pound lighter (weighs the same as an M16), and will have 25rd mags. Check this out: https://x.com/JakOSpades/status/2067172486014243115?s=20 |
|
That XM157 weighs 2.5-3lbs on it's own. So let's call a spade a spade here. It's more of a systems problem and not just the M7 when it comes to weight. As far as suppression goes- SF units have been using 5.56 suppressors since Vietnam. No one ever promised anyone that adding the can to the system would make it silent. Think of it more like a motorcycle with a muffler or without a muffler. One is loud and the other is REALLY loud. The suppressor suppresses the sound near to you- but yes a supersonic crack is a supersonic crack and suppressor or no suppressor- that is an inevitable outcome on essentially every military related caliber. Your expectations were probably too high on how these things actually function. |
Some people shouldn't own boats. -Hollister
|
Originally Posted By PleaseDontPet: I mean I guess that makes sense in that theory but still. explosions going off around you... I think a can is the least of the worries. And if I am correct the part that damages your hearing isn';t necessarily the boom itself but the crack the round makes. Originally Posted By PleaseDontPet: Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: The wording you used was very confusing and didn't make sense. It seemed like you were linking the suppressor and the speed of the round. The can just makes it quieter regardless of the load being used. Less hearing damage and flash. I mean I guess that makes sense in that theory but still. explosions going off around you... I think a can is the least of the worries. And if I am correct the part that damages your hearing isn';t necessarily the boom itself but the crack the round makes. You can't help the crack that's absolutely true. The overall noise is what gets you and it's all cumulative which is what fucks us all and a decent can can take a ton of noise out of the equation. I don't know anything about Mil/LE etc but a can on a rifle can make a huge difference in being able to communicate and shoot around each other. The closest I've come is rolling around shooting rabbits and we could shoot shorty's AR's and similar without wincing even though we were most certainly doing damage  I can't even imagine all the factors a soldier would need to consider on whether a can was worth it. |
BikerNut:
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Member
Joined:
Aug 2024
Posts:
40
EE: 100% (3)
HI, USA
|
Originally Posted By ikickhippies: That XM157 weighs 2.5-3lbs on it's own. So let's call a spade a spade here. It's more of a systems problem and not just the M7 when it comes to weight. As far as suppression goes- SF units have been using 5.56 suppressors since Vietnam. No one ever promised anyone that adding the can to the system would make it silent. Think of it more like a motorcycle with a muffler or without a muffler. One is loud and the other is REALLY loud. The suppressor suppresses the sound near to you- but yes a supersonic crack is a supersonic crack and suppressor or no suppressor- that is an inevitable outcome on essentially every military related caliber. Your expectations were probably too high on how these things actually function. I mean I see where you're coming from and I know about the suppression factor that was used in Vietnam. truthfully, I just think it's pointless. That being said, the weight is still pretty bad truthfully; rucking with the M4A1 vs rucking with the M7 is night and day difference, the weight of the M7 is so brutal due to the weight being right near the star chamber itself since the rifle is so beefed up. I can understand the fact of suppressing it but it's still ridiculously heavy regardless. the XM157 is just a crazy addition to weight, on top of that the mag is about a pound loaded. |
Member
Joined:
Aug 2024
Posts:
41
EE: 100% (3)
HI, USA
|
Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: You can't help the crack that's absolutely true. The overall noise is what gets you and it's all cumulative which is what fucks us all and a decent can can take a ton of noise out of the equation. I don't know anything about Mil/LE etc but a can on a rifle can make a huge difference in being able to communicate and shoot around each other. The closest I've come is rolling around shooting rabbits and we could shoot shorty's AR's and similar without wincing even though we were most certainly doing damage I can't even imagine all the factors a soldier would need to consider on whether a can was worth it. I understand what you're saying but regardless it's still cumulative by a lot, I'm on weapons squad so hearing 240s rock near you is still crazy. I haven't had any time on the M250 otherwise I'd put my input in on that. I just wanted to mention what I've been learning and my personal thoughts on it (these are all over the past half year). |
Member
Joined:
Aug 2024
Posts:
42
EE: 100% (3)
HI, USA
|
Originally Posted By SpyHawk: Well, if the reports out of Eurosatory are correct, you might be getting some badly needed improvements. The M8 is several inches shorter, at least a pound lighter (weighs the same as an M16), and will have 25rd mags. Check this out: https://x.com/JakOSpades/status/2067172486014243115?s=20 I mean shedding weight anywhere is going to be nice in itself, but until we get to field the M8 I'll rely on what I have and probably still complain about it frankly. |
|
I understand the idea for it, I think the m8/m7 should be in the armory, or another weapon of a similar caliber. But not a standard issue weapon, save it for when we go places that will need longer shots. Heck even decent ar10's would do so they have exactly the same manual of arms but with much better down range ballistics. The next problem is even a 6.5cm/308 class weapon that shoots 4 moa is basically going to be misses at ranges over 500 yards and a miss with 5.56 at 500 gets people to duck just as well. The optic was a terrible idea, too heavy, too complicated and eats batteries but from what I under stand they are not issuing it. |
"I am gonna laugh my ass off looking out the air vent of the box car watching some of you shot in the head in a ditch when you finally realize it's time to resist." stolen from RR_broccoli
Member
Joined:
Aug 2024
Posts:
43
EE: 100% (3)
HI, USA
|
Originally Posted By StaccatoC2: I understand the idea for it, I think the m8/m7 should be in the armory, or another weapon of a similar caliber. But not a standard issue weapon, save it for when we go places that will need longer shots. Heck even decent ar10's would do so they have exactly the same manual of arms but with much better down range ballistics. The next problem is even a 6.5cm/308 class weapon that shoots 4 moa is basically going to be misses at ranges over 500 yards and a miss with 5.56 at 500 gets people to duck just as well. The optic was a terrible idea, too heavy, too complicated and eats batteries but from what I under stand they are not issuing it. They are issuing the optics, just not mass issuing due to shortages of producing it. But, you aren't wrong and get this. The new weapon system is literally a 3MOA rifle, and a 4MOA round... makes no sense as to why we are using a HICAR weapon system. should've used a modified m21 or a updated m110. |
|
Originally Posted By PleaseDontPet: Genuinely. We don't have threats of LAVs or of long distance shooting. it doesn't make sense. Originally Posted By PleaseDontPet: Originally Posted By vellnueve: Genuinely. We don't have threats of LAVs or of long distance shooting. it doesn't make sense. Past 150~200 yards, a suppressor will obfuscate the muzzle retort to the point that it will negate echolocation; when you hear the crack of the bullet breaking the sound barrier as it passes you, you'll swear the shot came from a position 90 degrees away from where it actually came from. Less than 150 yards with contemporary suppressor designs, closer to 100 or even less. Flow cans throw a lot of blast forward, making them a little more distinctive. Granted, the above is based on an open field with no barriers. In an urban or forested setting, a suppressed rifle becomes very difficult to locate by sound. |
|
Originally Posted By PleaseDontPet: They are issuing the optics, just not mass issuing due to shortages of producing it. But, you aren't wrong and get this. The new weapon system is literally a 3MOA rifle, and a 4MOA round... makes no sense as to why we are using a HICAR weapon system. should've used a modified m21 or a updated m110. Originally Posted By PleaseDontPet: Originally Posted By StaccatoC2: I understand the idea for it, I think the m8/m7 should be in the armory, or another weapon of a similar caliber. But not a standard issue weapon, save it for when we go places that will need longer shots. Heck even decent ar10's would do so they have exactly the same manual of arms but with much better down range ballistics. The next problem is even a 6.5cm/308 class weapon that shoots 4 moa is basically going to be misses at ranges over 500 yards and a miss with 5.56 at 500 gets people to duck just as well. The optic was a terrible idea, too heavy, too complicated and eats batteries but from what I under stand they are not issuing it. They are issuing the optics, just not mass issuing due to shortages of producing it. But, you aren't wrong and get this. The new weapon system is literally a 3MOA rifle, and a 4MOA round... makes no sense as to why we are using a HICAR weapon system. should've used a modified m21 or a updated m110. Agreed, 2-3 MOA rifle with shit ammo is a pisspoor host for something like the XM157. I still think the Rangers did it right, ordering a known quantity optic with a dedicated BDC reticle in the EBR7F Razor. I don't see much point in pushing high pressure ammunition when 95-99% of dudes can't outshoot an M4 with M855A1. The URGI is already in service, it would be a suitable intermediate replacement for basic M4A1's as they wear out. An M4A2 pip with a FF rail, Armad barrel, and Aermet bolt would've been 100X better than trying a battle rifle again. Even the MCX, with all of its faults, and additional expense in replacing the M4, would be a better option than the M7/M8. The only high pressure option that would make any kind of sense is the Knox high efficiency cartridge; made with Federal's peak alloy, that might have been worth exploring, seeing as it would increase one's practical combat load by 2/3 for not much increase in overall weight. Assuming they could figure out the issues with using a straight wall cartridge, anyway. |
|
Originally Posted By PleaseDontPet: So, I don't deserve a can....? And you say bound 300m with a M250? I already carry a Carl G and an M7, if you have the balls to lighten the load let me know. Also, with a round that is point target of 650m, why in the ever-loving hell would I need that when the average engagement range during Vietnam was 5-15m make it make sense please. I'm in a triple canopy jungle. I'd be fine with a 5.56 change my mind. You should know by now bullet points on an OER are the only real reason for this change. Someone wants to say they are responsible for selecting and fielding the newest/greatest weapon system. I agree, theres zero reason to go away from 5.56, especially given the new system offers zero advantage in accuracy over most common distances. This money coulda gone to drone/anti-drone warfare and done better IMO. The M250 makes sense because it is a 33% lighter than even the 240L. It shoulda just been made in 7.62 though I will always be advocate for suppressing everything though. Its not just about sound, its about muzzle flash and disrupting detection and direction as well. They make a significant difference on 5.56, and I’ve shot 10x more suppressed as a civilian than I did total shooting in 6 years of lighter sapper shenanigans. |
|
Funny enough Dirty civilian just did a video on what they are calling the iardmr or something like that. Basically a FA rifle built with good potential accuracy, they used the 6 arc round. Better long range than 556, but standard ar sized. The way they talk about it, being able to throw cover fire at long range and then when capable aimed fire that is effective does make sense. Now I did not do any time in the desert but from what I have read one reason they have gone with the m7/8 is range due to what went on in Afghanistan. The way they do this video seems like it would have worked with what I have read and heard. I know armor is also a reason for the 277 round, but do we really think modern armor would be defeated by the 277 round at say 600 yards and more. I could also be very wrong.  The Rifle The Army Should Have Bought | 6Arc IAR + DMR |
"I am gonna laugh my ass off looking out the air vent of the box car watching some of you shot in the head in a ditch when you finally realize it's time to resist." stolen from RR_broccoli
|
Originally Posted By rb889: Past 150~200 yards, a suppressor will obfuscate the muzzle retort to the point that it will negate echolocation; when you hear the crack of the bullet breaking the sound barrier as it passes you, you'll swear the shot came from a position 90 degrees away from where it actually came from. Less than 150 yards with contemporary suppressor designs, closer to 100 or even less. Flow cans throw a lot of blast forward, making them a little more distinctive. Granted, the above is based on an open field with no barriers. In an urban or forested setting, a suppressed rifle becomes very difficult to locate by sound. This |
|
Originally Posted By Sinister: USSOCOM has asked industry for a high pressure 5.56 cartridge pushing the A1 steel penetrator bullet. Suppressors light up like a beacon under thermals and you can't hide them. So does my dick. Only way you hide from thermal is obfuscation with other heat sources, ie hot rocks under the sun in summer, or putting a barrier between you and the sensor. Not worth worrying about, the rest of you is also popping hot on thermal. Flow cans lighting up under nods is another story, but on the other hand, that only happens after you've dumped 30+ rounds in a short timeframe, so again, that may not really be worth worrying about. |
Joined:
May 2026
Posts:
14
EE: 100% (1)
IL, USA
|
The M7 is an amazing platform and a great way to send a large round downrange. Likely these rounds will be able to destroy a lot of equipment not just target enemy soldiers. What if in 7 years the battlefield is the Rocky Mountains. The .22 is a great round but it’s not a full military cartridge for every battlefield. The M16 was the right gun for Vietnam and that’s it. The M14 would have dominated Afghanistan exceptions being clearing houses “CQB” instead of shooting the house up like Ukraine has shown. |
|
Originally Posted By Video: The M7 is an amazing platform and a great way to send a large round downrange. Likely these rounds will be able to destroy a lot of equipment not just target enemy soldiers. What if in 7 years the battlefield is the Rocky Mountains. The .22 is a great round but it’s not a full military cartridge for every battlefield. The M16 was the right gun for Vietnam and that’s it. The M14 would have dominated Afghanistan exceptions being clearing houses “CQB” instead of shooting the house up like Ukraine has shown. You should tell that to all the people 5.56 has killed since it was adopted. I’m sure they’d appreciate the knowledge. |
Your painted rifle is ugly, but I’m uglier, so send it to me and I’ll make it look good!
If it weren’t for double standards, we’d have no standards at all.
If it weren’t for double standards, we’d have no standards at all.
|
Originally Posted By Video: The M7 is an amazing platform and a great way to send a large round downrange. Likely these rounds will be able to destroy a lot of equipment not just target enemy soldiers. What if in 7 years the battlefield is the Rocky Mountains. The .22 is a great round but it’s not a full military cartridge for every battlefield. The M16 was the right gun for Vietnam and that’s it. The M14 would have dominated Afghanistan exceptions being clearing houses “CQB” instead of shooting the house up like Ukraine has shown. The M7 is actually a terrible design. Every person I’ve spoken with in the Army (regular guys and SOF) have said the gun and vortex optic suck. It may be a great caliber, but the M7 and M250 are complete dumpster fires. 5.56 has its place. SOF units issuing 70gr TSX loadings made it shine even more. It’s a very capable caliber and one that continues to be used, even amongst SOF units. Also, the M14 didn’t dominate Afghanistan because the M14 also sucks. Early in the GWOT, lots of M14s were pulled out of mothballs and installed in Sage chassis. Really cool looking, but they had issues returning to zero after disassembling to perform routine maintenance. Plenty of SR25s performed admirably though. And they continue to do so today. |
|
Originally Posted By PleaseDontPet: So, I don't deserve a can....? And you say bound 300m with a M250? I already carry a Carl G and an M7, if you have the balls to lighten the load let me know. Also, with a round that is point target of 650m, why in the ever-loving hell would I need that when the average engagement range during Vietnam was 5-15m make it make sense please. I'm in a triple canopy jungle. I'd be fine with a 5.56 change my mind. Yeah, for you, 650m away might as well be the back side of Mars. The M-7 is retarded on ice on stilts. Obi Wan Hegseth, you’re our only hope… |
Preferred Pronoun: Space Lord Mutherfucker
|
Originally Posted By PleaseDontPet: I mean I guess that makes sense in that theory but still. explosions going off around you... I think a can is the least of the worries. And if I am correct the part that damages your hearing isn';t necessarily the boom itself but the crack the round makes. Originally Posted By PleaseDontPet: Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: The wording you used was very confusing and didn't make sense. It seemed like you were linking the suppressor and the speed of the round. The can just makes it quieter regardless of the load being used. Less hearing damage and flash. I mean I guess that makes sense in that theory but still. explosions going off around you... I think a can is the least of the worries. And if I am correct the part that damages your hearing isn';t necessarily the boom itself but the crack the round makes. It’s both, but more from the muzzle blast. |
Preferred Pronoun: Space Lord Mutherfucker
Joined:
May 2026
Posts:
19
EE: 100% (1)
IL, USA
|
Everyone here hating. Seems as though a lot of fudds wanted to hate on the M16 when it was forced on them 60 years ago. This has nothing to do with your personal outlook on firearms. These are real weapons designed for war and the battlefield has a lot of mobile equipment and people with armor. PS We also stopped using the F4 phantom |
|
Originally Posted By Video: Everyone here hating. Seems as though a lot of fudds wanted to hate on the M16 when it was forced on them 60 years ago. This has nothing to do with your personal outlook on firearms. These are real weapons designed for war and the battlefield has a lot of mobile equipment and people with armor. PS We also stopped using the F4 phantom Our opinions are based on facts, not feelings. The truth hurts sometimes. |
Your painted rifle is ugly, but I’m uglier, so send it to me and I’ll make it look good!
If it weren’t for double standards, we’d have no standards at all.
If it weren’t for double standards, we’d have no standards at all.
|
Originally Posted By Video: Everyone here hating. Seems as though a lot of fudds wanted to hate on the M16 when it was forced on them 60 years ago. This has nothing to do with your personal outlook on firearms. These are real weapons designed for war and the battlefield has a lot of mobile equipment and people with armor. PS We also stopped using the F4 phantom My info comes directly from guys in SOF units and Rangers who have said it sucks. This isn’t subjective. SigSauer USA sucks. We’ve reaped what was sowed. The rifle sucks. The caliber may have a future, but the m7 needs to die its rightful death. |
Joined:
May 2026
Posts:
20
EE: 100% (1)
IL, USA
|
Pretty sure it’s not going to “die” the number in service is extremely high. The product improvement effort model has a very nice new rail and the suppressor cuts down on blowback. The M17/M18 is a pretty low quality product but the price was right. The M4 isn’t coming back. |
|
Originally Posted By Video: Pretty sure it’s not going to “die” the number in service is extremely high. The product improvement effort model has a very nice new rail and the suppressor cuts down on blowback. They can update the rail all they want. If they don’t redesign the rail-receiver-barrel interface, they aren’t actually addressing the problem. The m7 will die from being mothballed by end users because end users recognize the glaring flaws of the rifle and they have more reliable options in the armory. |
Joined:
May 2026
Posts:
21
EE: 100% (1)
IL, USA
|
I’m no engineer but Sig speaks as though they have improved the barrel interface. I don’t know who would pick the M8 up and think it’s a bad rifle, it’s 7.3 pounds, extremely nice weapon system. The M8 is the primary weapon for all frontline soldiers going forward. 25 round magazines will make some people happy. 1.5 MOA, this is a very nice system. |
|
Originally Posted By Video: I’m no engineer but Sig speaks as though they have improved the barrel interface. I don’t know who would pick the M8 up and think it’s a bad rifle, it’s 7.3 pounds, extremely nice weapon system. The M8 is the primary weapon for all frontline soldiers going forward. 25 round magazines will make some people happy. 1.5 MOA, this is a very nice system. You really just want to believe, huh? |
|
Originally Posted By JoshNC: You really just want to believe, huh? Originally Posted By JoshNC: Originally Posted By Video: I’m no engineer but Sig speaks as though they have improved the barrel interface. I don’t know who would pick the M8 up and think it’s a bad rifle, it’s 7.3 pounds, extremely nice weapon system. The M8 is the primary weapon for all frontline soldiers going forward. 25 round magazines will make some people happy. 1.5 MOA, this is a very nice system. You really just want to believe, huh? Fella's gotta pay bills, man. Want has nothing to do w/ it. SIG USA produces the highest quality products for warfighters, police, and responsible civilians, and only engagement hacking grifters would dispute that. |
|
Originally Posted By backbencher: Fella's gotta pay bills, man. Want has nothing to do w/ it. SIG USA produces the highest quality products for warfighters, police, and responsible civilians, and only engagement hacking grifters would dispute that. Oh sure. It can only be one or the other. Exeter has a very poor track record. It began when Ron Cohen Walmarted the brand and it continues today. 556, 551a1 , 320, MCX, spear and spear Lt. Actual end users (Rangers and Army SOF) with whom I’ve spoken, many of whom I know very well, have a totally different opinion from yours by the way re: the m7. |
|
Originally Posted By Video: Everyone here hating. Seems as though a lot of fudds wanted to hate on the M16 when it was forced on them 60 years ago. This has nothing to do with your personal outlook on firearms. These are real weapons designed for war and the battlefield has a lot of mobile equipment and people with armor. PS We also stopped using the F4 phantom The M-7 IS the F4 Phantom III AKA the M-14 MK 2. |
Preferred Pronoun: Space Lord Mutherfucker
Member
Joined:
Aug 2024
Posts:
44
EE: 100% (3)
HI, USA
|
Originally Posted By Video: Everyone here hating. Seems as though a lot of fudds wanted to hate on the M16 when it was forced on them 60 years ago. This has nothing to do with your personal outlook on firearms. These are real weapons designed for war and the battlefield has a lot of mobile equipment and people with armor. PS We also stopped using the F4 phantom These weapons were designed for war in jungles? Could've fooled me... next time you bust a 200m steep gulch with that heavy fucking dipstick let me know. Minimum engagements in the jungle during Vietnam were 5-15m but I need a point weapon system that can touch 650m? M<ake it make sense please I'm gonna have an aneurysm. |
Member
Joined:
Aug 2024
Posts:
45
EE: 100% (3)
HI, USA
|
Originally Posted By Video: I’m no engineer but Sig speaks as though they have improved the barrel interface. I don’t know who would pick the M8 up and think it’s a bad rifle, it’s 7.3 pounds, extremely nice weapon system. The M8 is the primary weapon for all frontline soldiers going forward. 25 round magazines will make some people happy. 1.5 MOA, this is a very nice system. So, to go back to this it is NOT a good weapon system; do you have any experience with this weapon? Because, I can say I do. I can drop photos with the m7 and the m250, can you? 25 round mags... the 20rd mags are 1lb a piece and its 7 mags. A wise man once told me, ounces equal pounds, and pounds equal pain. |
|
I have one. Saying this isn't a good weapon system would be an outright fallacy. Saying this isn't an ideal weapon system for every environment would be more accurate. The rifle itself & the accompanying loadout is heavier than a pencil/govt spec m4. I've hiked many mountains w/ the rifle w/ a heavy pack on my back, you feel the weight. In the simplest form, the M7/M8 is an updated SCAR w/ a more capable round. Any criticism or reasoning for not rolling out a SCAR heavy to general infantry could be similarly said about fielding the M7. Anyway, it sounds like the program has been halted & is in review. |
|
Originally Posted By JoshNC: Oh sure. It can only be one or the other. Exeter has a very poor track record. It began when Ron Cohen Walmarted the brand and it continues today. 556, 551a1 , 320, MCX, spear and spear Lt. Actual end users (Rangers and Army SOF) with whom I’ve spoken, many of whom I know very well, have a totally different opinion from yours by the way re: the m7. Originally Posted By JoshNC: Originally Posted By backbencher: Fella's gotta pay bills, man. Want has nothing to do w/ it. SIG USA produces the highest quality products for warfighters, police, and responsible civilians, and only engagement hacking grifters would dispute that. Oh sure. It can only be one or the other. Exeter has a very poor track record. It began when Ron Cohen Walmarted the brand and it continues today. 556, 551a1 , 320, MCX, spear and spear Lt. Actual end users (Rangers and Army SOF) with whom I’ve spoken, many of whom I know very well, have a totally different opinion from yours by the way re: the m7. They think it's great? B/c I've already posted my opinion in this thread, and I think you might need to recalibrate your sarcasm detector. |
|
Originally Posted By JarrettH: I have one. Saying this isn't a good weapon system would be an outright fallacy. Saying this isn't an ideal weapon system for every environment would be more accurate. The rifle itself & the accompanying loadout is heavier than a pencil/govt spec m4. I've hiked many mountains w/ the rifle w/ a heavy pack on my back, you feel the weight. In the simplest form, the M7/M8 is an updated SCAR w/ a more capable round. Any criticism or reasoning for not rolling out a SCAR heavy to general infantry could be similarly said about fielding the M7. Anyway, it sounds like the program has been halted & is in review. XM8 is being requested in favor over the M7. Current proposed orders are all for XM8 setups, so the program isn't exactly on hold, merely the M7 being shelved for the XM8. |
|
Originally Posted By Zerlak: XM8 is being requested in favor over the M7. Current proposed orders are all for XM8 setups, so the program isn't exactly on hold, merely the M7 being shelved for the XM8. Originally that's what was said. However the program is fully paused pending review, no fielding of m7, xm8, m250, m157, etc. They are trying to determine whether to modify or cancel it. |
|
Originally Posted By TheFaz: Originally that's what was said. However the program is fully paused pending review, no fielding of m7, xm8, m250, m157, etc. They are trying to determine whether to modify or cancel it. Originally Posted By TheFaz: Originally Posted By Zerlak: XM8 is being requested in favor over the M7. Current proposed orders are all for XM8 setups, so the program isn't exactly on hold, merely the M7 being shelved for the XM8. Originally that's what was said. However the program is fully paused pending review, no fielding of m7, xm8, m250, m157, etc. They are trying to determine whether to modify or cancel it. Source? Only conformed thing I can find is orders for the XM8 |
|
Originally Posted By TheFaz: Originally that's what was said. However the program is fully paused pending review, no fielding of m7, xm8, m250, m157, etc. They are trying to determine whether to modify or cancel it. Originally Posted By TheFaz: Originally Posted By Zerlak: XM8 is being requested in favor over the M7. Current proposed orders are all for XM8 setups, so the program isn't exactly on hold, merely the M7 being shelved for the XM8. Originally that's what was said. However the program is fully paused pending review, no fielding of m7, xm8, m250, m157, etc. They are trying to determine whether to modify or cancel it. What's the over/under that they "modify" NGSW to have Sig instead supply an MCX tuned for M855A1+ to piggyback on SOCOM's HICAR program? |
Joined:
May 2026
Posts:
29
EE: 100% (1)
IL, USA
| The latest solicitation is a joke. The M8 is already a 7.3 pound rifle that does everything they want and more. Whoever wrote the HICAR details didn’t know about or just wanted to again spend millions of dollars on a go nowhere program. As a tax payer I’m disappointed in the multitude of small arms contracts to only see a team of Geissele URGI’s streaming off a Blackhawk. |
|
Originally Posted By Video: The latest solicitation is a joke. The M8 is already a 7.3 pound rifle that does everything they want and more. Whoever wrote the HICAR details didn’t know about or just wanted to again spend millions of dollars on a go nowhere program. As a tax payer I’m disappointed in the multitude of small arms contracts to only see a team of Geissele URGI’s streaming off a Blackhawk. The HICAR is a completely different tool than the M7/M8 for different applications. The M7/M8 also have some glaring issues that are noticed by all who have been issued them. They suck. Federal PEAK cases are also much less expensive than Sig’s two piece design. The cost of Sig’s ammo is absurd. |
Sig NGSW M7... (Page 1 of 2)
Armory Sponsor