Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 9/21/2004 4:10:48 PM EST
alot of magazines and internet sites say the M16 is being replaced with the H&K XM8? Is this true? When?
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 4:25:29 PM EST
IS being replaced or WILL be replaced?
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 4:27:30 PM EST

Originally Posted By potis:
alot of magazines and internet sites say the M16 is being replaced with the H&K XM8? Is this true? When?



Don't believe everything you read in gunrags or the internet. There are a lot of stupid people writing in both.

-Cap'n
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 4:46:12 PM EST
Okay, the skinny I've heard from someone on the pointy tip is that the XM-8 is scheduled to start deploying in January with SF.

Link Posted: 9/21/2004 5:15:38 PM EST

Originally Posted By giffmann:
Okay, the skinny I've heard from someone on the pointy tip is that the XM-8 is scheduled to start deploying in January with SF.




Good one!
HFG
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 5:25:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/21/2004 10:20:00 PM EST by Dave_A]
As of right now, funding is frozen

The gun has yet to be formally adopted, and may or may not be...

As of now, it's not happening...

But it might...

And it would be a mistake...

Of course, this is coming from someone who's 'issue weapon' will be a Beretta 92, should he get selected.

This is also coming from someone who genuinely LIKES the Beretta 92 more than the M1911
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 5:28:58 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

And it would be a mistake...

Link Posted: 9/21/2004 5:30:50 PM EST
I've played with the 2nd generation M8, and it is a nice weapon. While it may not be liked by many of us, the end user will find it to work well in the field. T&E is not complete as of this time, and its future it is not carved in stone, it certainly seems close to it.
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 5:56:14 PM EST

Originally Posted By HipFiredGun:

Originally Posted By giffmann:
Okay, the skinny I've heard from someone on the pointy tip is that the XM-8 is scheduled to start deploying in January with SF.




Good one!
HFG



HFG,
This caught me offguard as well, but I have no reason to doubt the source as I've known him for going on 20 years now and am quite familiar with his current job responsibilities and the command he reports into.

Link Posted: 9/21/2004 6:22:29 PM EST
The XM8 will most likely begin replacing the M16 in 2005
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 6:39:03 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 6:43:23 PM EST
It has been fielded by SF in Iraq, but it will not be replacing the M16/M4, it simply does not do anything better than an M16/M4. I was able to speak with some of the guys who have been testing them while I was in New Mexico. The M16 that they refitted as an SPR for about $350 was able to shoot better groups at 300 yards than the XM8 marksman variant was able to do at 100 yards. BTW that XM8 has a price tag of $3,000.

Without starting a flame war I challenge anyone to post how the XM8 is somehow a rounder wheel than the M4.
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 6:44:46 PM EST

Originally Posted By Troy:

Originally Posted By gsd2053:
The XM8 will most likely begin replacing the M16 in 2005



NOT.

Granted, HK is pushing hard for this, and they've been greasing a LOT of wheels for nearly a decade to get support for it, but even they know that it is far from being a certainty, which is why they developed an AR piston upper. They want SOME part of the US military action, so they will make whatever they think they can get the US military to buy. Lots of back-room deal-making going on...

-Troy



Exactly.
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 6:49:04 PM EST

Originally Posted By Troy:
They want SOME part of the US military action, so they will make whatever they think they can get the US military to buy. Lots of back-room deal-making going on...
-Troy



Because they're certainly not going to be getting any juicy contracts from european countries..especially from their homeland Germany.
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 6:53:55 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 7:08:54 PM EST

Originally Posted By giffmann:
Okay, the skinny I've heard from someone on the pointy tip is that the XM-8 is scheduled to start deploying in January with SF.





did you hear this durring a beef jerky transaction.

sorry
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 7:27:47 PM EST

Originally Posted By Troy:

Originally Posted By gsd2053:
The XM8 will most likely begin replacing the M16 in 2005



NOT.

Funds for ongoing XM8 development were axed by Congress for FY2005, so any development that happens at all next year will have to come from other Army funds. And the rifle is still in development; it was hoped that a company-wide trail could happen in 2005, but that's unlikely at this point. Even IF there is such a trial in 2006, that doesn't mean that the XM8 will actually be adopted.

Granted, HK is pushing hard for this, and they've been greasing a LOT of wheels for nearly a decade to get support for it, but even they know that it is far from being a certainty, which is why they developed an AR piston upper. They want SOME part of the US military action, so they will make whatever they think they can get the US military to buy. Lots of back-room deal-making going on...

-Troy



They just want at least a small slice of some pie.
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 9:45:12 PM EST
They just want at least a small slice of some pie.Did you say pie? I like pie...
Link Posted: 9/21/2004 10:32:47 PM EST
shouldn't this be in the x-m8 or hk forum here?
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 1:22:06 AM EST

Originally Posted By TheFNG:
It has been fielded by SF in Iraq, but it will not be replacing the M16/M4, it simply does not do anything better than an M16/M4. I was able to speak with some of the guys who have been testing them while I was in New Mexico. The M16 that they refitted as an SPR for about $350 was able to shoot better groups at 300 yards than the XM8 marksman variant was able to do at 100 yards. BTW that XM8 has a price tag of $3,000.

Without starting a flame war I challenge anyone to post how the XM8 is somehow a rounder wheel than the M4.



Is that price the estimated mass production price or just the prototype? I assume it includes some sort of optics? Can someone tell how much an M4A1 costs with BUIS and ACOG, for the army that is? A ball park estimate will do, just for comparison.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 4:45:45 AM EST
Something about a plastic rifle really rubs me wrong. I mean this isn't the same type of myth that people had about the AR or the Glock being made of synthetics, that rifle has too much plastic.


They are looking at that POS just because it is so modular? Might as well just stick with the G36, same gun, minus the crap. Or, a revised G36 that has a LOT more metal. I dunno about you, plastic is fine in some areas. HK and Glock have proven that on pistols. I just don't know that it is such a great thing on a battle/assault rifle. Magazines, grips and such are ok....but the XM8 is the real plastic fantastic.


There must be a point of diminishing returns. I know they want lighter and ligher weapons, but at what cost? In my mind, there is a point where it is better to have a little more weight, and have something tough and solid rather than light. Better to go bang, than to be a joy on a hike. What do I know, the experts can test it. Hope it works out and doesn't get too many men killed.


PS, I am all for innovation, but sorry - this is NOT a major improvement and innovation over the AR system to justify spending so much money on either.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 5:08:16 AM EST

Originally Posted By Dont-Tread-On-Me:
Something about a plastic rifle really rubs me wrong. I mean this isn't the same type of myth that people had about the AR or the Glock being made of synthetics, that rifle has too much plastic.


They are looking at that POS just because it is so modular? Might as well just stick with the G36, same gun, minus the crap. Or, a revised G36 that has a LOT more metal. I dunno about you, plastic is fine in some areas. HK and Glock have proven that on pistols. I just don't know that it is such a great thing on a battle/assault rifle. Magazines, grips and such are ok....but the XM8 is the real plastic fantastic.


There must be a point of diminishing returns. I know they want lighter and ligher weapons, but at what cost? In my mind, there is a point where it is better to have a little more weight, and have something tough and solid rather than light. Better to go bang, than to be a joy on a hike. What do I know, the experts can test it. Hope it works out and doesn't get too many men killed.


PS, I am all for innovation, but sorry - this is NOT a major improvement and innovation over the AR system to justify spending so much money on either.



While I am huge AR fan, I get the feeling that this same arguement was brought up during the early to mid 1960's regarding the M-16.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 5:23:55 AM EST

Granted, HK is pushing hard for this, and they've been greasing a LOT of wheels for nearly a decade to get support for it, but even they know that it is far from being a certainty, which is why they developed an AR piston upper. They want SOME part of the US military action, so they will make whatever they think they can get the US military to buy. Lots of back-room deal-making going on...

-Troy



My biggest gripe about this is, why can't we AT LEAST use an American company to produce our weapons?? Is it THAT MUCH of a stretch?

Aside from all the reasons mentioned above (many of which are very valid).

Doc
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 5:45:12 AM EST
What American company?
Ruger has what, the Mini-14? Great, we'll give our troops an ugly ranch rifle.
Smith and Wesson has never made a rifle, at least not recently.
Remington has the 7400 which is also more or less a sligtly more accurate ranch rifle.
Winchester isn't even American anymore. They got bought out by FN Herstal a while back.
Colt is what they are. You may like them or hate them but they're the only American company with any experience in producing battle rifles and they haven't developed a new rifle in decades.

Like it or not, the four weapons manufacturers responsible for producing and/or designing the weapons used by almost every army in the world are all in Europe. H&K, FN, and Sig are all within a day's drive or so of each other. The fourth one is Kalishnikov/IZHMASH in Russia.
Sorry to break it to you guys, but us Americans are much more focused on improving old designs than making new ones (1911, AR, etc.). Europeans on the other hand develop new designs all the time. Not to say that either one is bad in the short run, but in the long run, there is only so much you can do to something that dates back before WWI or in our case, Vietnam.
Don't get me wrong, I think the AR still has a lot of life left in it but there will come a time when we will have to move on to something that is more reliable, more accurate, more effective, and lighter. Ignoring such development will sooner or later catch up to us bite us in the ass.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 6:29:24 AM EST
I don't like the XM8. Ugly, too expensive, too much plastic, phony test reports, and all!

I also don't like H&K. If you think that Colt is not civilian friendly you should try these arrogant Kraut bastards. And if you think that Beretta bought the pistol contract with rigged tests and bribes in high (and low) places just wait until you find out what H&K's been up to!

Unfortunately we have a problem developing new individual infantry weapons here in the US. It's such a financial gamble that the boards of our major arms manufacturers, because they are large stockholder owned conglomerates, will not risk losing their money dealing with our long entrenched military/congressional procurement system. No one will seriously get into the design and development of military small arms when they can invest their time and money in an almost sure thing. Electronics, home appliances, power tools, etc. Design it here, make it offshore for peanuts, and ship it to our gullible consumers at huge profits. History has shown us that we only get truly motivated in times of real crisis.

When McNamara closed down Springfield he figured that private enterprise would do it better. Too bad that private enterprise in this country has been crippled by the mulit-nationals and Wall Street.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 6:29:54 AM EST
The US Army has a history of adopting foreign small arms.

M1896/Krag
M1903/Springfield
M1917/Enfield
M9
M11
M249
M240
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 6:55:12 AM EST

My biggest gripe about this is, why can't we AT LEAST use an American company to produce our weapons?? Is it THAT MUCH of a stretch?



You mean like FN USA who has been making the M16A2 for the last umpteen years?
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 7:00:20 AM EST
Only companies like HK, FN, Sig, Beretta have the where with all to take the huge financial risk of putting up a weapon for the US military. Can you think of ANY us company that could do the same? I can't....even colt has been bottle fed for years to keep it from sliding into bankruptcy.

Yes, small contractors can come up with a spicy design for implementation, but do they have the actual means to build a friggen production facility that could tool up for production in a few weeks? This is all taken into consideration.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 7:00:48 AM EST

Originally Posted By caneau:
I think the AR still has a lot of life left in it but there will come a time when we will have to move on to something that is more reliable, more accurate, more effective, and lighter. Ignoring such development will sooner or later catch up to us bite us in the ass.



be sure to let us know when it's here
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 11:19:53 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 11:32:54 AM EST
Yes, I know all of your points are good, but it still gripes me that the military couldn't somehow keep that money at home.

Oh well, more important things to worry about.

Doc
Top Top