Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 2/12/2006 4:35:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/12/2006 4:36:10 PM EDT by Essayons]
Do you think there is a viable market for a Colt MARS (Mini Assault Rifle - Black Rifle II, pp.137-141) clone in 5.7 given the availablilty of ammo?
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 5:24:57 PM EDT
Pics?
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 5:31:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JBowles:
Pics?


+1
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 11:19:17 AM EDT
I don't have digital pics. I guess I could scan some photos from the book and post them (assuming I can figure out how).

Basically Colt's prototype MARS consisted of a shortened upper and lower receiver and a shortened bolt carrier. The lower receiver of the prototype was actually cut and rewelded vertically about 1/2" behind the front of the mag well. It looked like a baby Colt Commando.

The book says Colt had Israel in mind as a potential customer, because Israel wanted to replace the Uzi.
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 1:31:26 PM EDT
Hmm that would be sweet the Mars was basically a shortened M16 reciever, the mag well being the shortened part, would look kinda sweet, they shoulda done it for the 9mm carmines too IMHO

James
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 1:37:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By UKGuy:
Hmm that would be sweet the Mars was basically a shortened M16 reciever, the mag well being the shortened part, would look kinda sweet, they shoulda done it for the 9mm carmines too IMHO

James



Thats a great idea! about the 9mm suggestion.

A note on the 5.7:

There is a company, name escapes me now, that is making an upper receiver for an AR15/M16 that fires 5.7 and uses p90 mags. Priced at like 550 it seems pretty cool.

Someone will come along and post a pic of that I'm sure
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 1:39:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ggllggll:

Originally Posted By UKGuy:
Hmm that would be sweet the Mars was basically a shortened M16 reciever, the mag well being the shortened part, would look kinda sweet, they shoulda done it for the 9mm carmines too IMHO

James



Thats a great idea! about the 9mm suggestion.

A note on the 5.7:

There is a company, name escapes me now, that is making an upper receiver for an AR15/M16 that fires 5.7 and uses p90 mags. Priced at like 550 it seems pretty cool.

Someone will come along and post a pic of that I'm sure



To fulfill your prophecy: Rhineland Arms.
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 1:40:39 PM EDT
thanks

Link Posted: 2/15/2006 1:44:39 PM EDT
The PS90 is a great seller, and there appears to be good anticipation for other rifles shooting the 5.7, including the one from Rhineland Arms, and I bet there would be 'some' market for the MARS. I don't think it would be viable until the cost of ammo comes down.

Even with ammo production in the USA prices are $18 - $50 per 50 rounds when you can find it in stock.

Imagine the outcry if all the people used to paying Wolf prices had to start springing for ammunition at the current 5.7 prices! hock.gif

Link Posted: 2/15/2006 2:00:49 PM EDT
Wolf has all but doubled recently too

At least the 5.7 seems to be getting easier to find.
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 2:10:50 PM EDT
I want one of those Rhineland uppers badly. I want a PS90 even worse though. That'd make an awesome SBR. But I've gotta get an M4 first!!! Then I dunno if I'm gonna finish the PPSH48 or start an XM177E2... Too much crap to do and not enough money to do it with.


Also, I've heard that Wolf is gonna start making 5.7mm ammo. I think...
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 2:26:50 PM EDT
Why? .22 Winchester magnum is almost as fast and a fraction of the price. Just as fun, and neither is useful in the real world.

Link Posted: 2/15/2006 2:40:08 PM EDT
The 5.56x30mm MARS is ballistically superior to the 5.7x28 FN. The MARS is good for ~2,600 fps with a 55gr projectile from a barrel roughly equal in length to that of the P90.
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 2:47:29 PM EDT
I would like to see that put into a conventional caliber, like say a 9mm. Could the rotational feed still work though?
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 2:55:04 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/15/2006 3:08:02 PM EDT by redfisher]
This is the Colt MARS.

It is a mini-M4 that shoots the mini 5.56 x 30 ammo




edit: BTW: the MARS was a miniturized M4 that was a full 9.5" shorter than the 14.5" M4 (length w/collapsed stock)

Designed to compete with the 5.7 x 28 cartridge guns, and replace all those 9mm sub-guns in use as PDW's, security detail, and entry weapons

Sure wish I had one!
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 3:03:15 PM EDT

Sweet . . . . . . .

I want a Rhineland Arms upper too . . . . .
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 3:05:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Why? .22 Winchester magnum is almost as fast and a fraction of the price. Just as fun, and neither is useful in the real world.






And 5.56 is just a varmint round, no good on humans . . . . . . .
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 3:08:39 PM EDT





5.56x45, 5.45x39, 4 different MARS loads, 5.7x28, and 9mm para.
The MARS round had higher velocity with heavier bullets, higher performance than the 5.7x28. By using different powders, they got the same or higher MV than 5.56x45 (2650fps/55gr FMJ) out of the 11" barrel, with less muzzle blast and flash.

That MGI modular lower receiver might be a nice platform to resurrect the MARS rifle, if they would make a companion shorter upper for it (and pistol caliber versions as well).
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 3:17:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ARmory04:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Why? .22 Winchester magnum is almost as fast and a fraction of the price. Just as fun, and neither is useful in the real world.






And 5.56 is just a varmint round, no good on humans . . . . . . .



Your arguments shows a lack of fundamental understanding of how the round works on tissue. You can use high velocity to damage tissue or cause a large cruch cavity with a large slug. Not willing to do either? Go ahead and get a 5.7. Fun toy.
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 6:42:05 PM EDT
Red,

Is there anyway you could post a high-res of that illustration, please? ^_^

j
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 7:16:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Why? .22 Winchester magnum is almost as fast and a fraction of the price. Just as fun, and neither is useful in the real world.



Quick! Fire off an email to FN before they start to manuf..... damn, too late! You should have set them straight man!

Cheers
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 7:52:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Moe-Ron:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Why? .22 Winchester magnum is almost as fast and a fraction of the price. Just as fun, and neither is useful in the real world.



Quick! Fire off an email to FN before they start to manuf..... damn, too late! You should have set them straight man!

Cheers



Hey, they are capitalists and that is their perogative. I wish them luck in their business venture.

Doesn't mean the 5.7 is any good.
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 8:28:40 PM EDT
I had the crazy idea of rebarreling one of Olympic's .30 Carbine uppers with a 10.5" 5.7 Johnson/Spitfire barrel, but apparently 30rd Carbine mags are not reliable.

Of course, I'd have to load my own, but the PS90 SBR seems ideal for a PDW.
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 8:28:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/15/2006 8:29:31 PM EDT by Gamma762]

Originally Posted By squall05:
Red,
Is there anyway you could post a high-res of that illustration, please? ^_^
j


I think the copy I have is a little larger...

The drawing does vary from the photos of the actual rifles.
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 9:42:24 PM EDT
Thanks Gamma

I did a little digging and if anyone is interested the patents Colt filed for this weapon are available online.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,827,992.WKU.&OS=PN/5,827,992&RS=PN/5,827,992

Click on images and you can see the inner workings of it.

For some reason I am completely fascinated with this thing at the moment :-D

j
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 9:57:02 PM EDT
The 6.8 SPC may have eclipsed it. It would be interestiwng to see what they could come up with using a 77 or 75 grain bullet loaded to magazine length in a regular M4 using cut down brass and all the latest high-zoot barrels and piston systems.
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 10:14:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Gamma762:
67.128.245.205/ar/mars/MARS_files/Colt_MARS_Prototyp.jpg

67.128.245.205/ar/mars/MARS_files/Colt_MARS_side.jpg

67.128.245.205/ar/mars/MARS_files/Colt_MARS_Munition.jpg
5.56x45, 5.45x39, 4 different MARS loads, 5.7x28, and 9mm para.
The MARS round had higher velocity with heavier bullets, higher performance than the 5.7x28. By using different powders, they got the same or higher MV than 5.56x45 (2650fps/55gr FMJ) out of the 11" barrel, with less muzzle blast and flash.

That MGI modular lower receiver might be a nice platform to resurrect the MARS rifle, if they would make a companion shorter upper for it (and pistol caliber versions as well).



I would like to point out the gun is these pictures it cut down from full size receivers. Note the lines in the recievers and the step on the mag well rim.
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 4:54:23 AM EDT
That's sweet.
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 4:59:17 AM EDT
I enquired with an old contact I had at Colt about the MARS project after reading this thread and this is what he replied:

"The MARS project ended a while ago. We are on to bigger and better things
now. There is something quite interesting in the works. It would really
blow you away if you saw it. Sorry, I can't release anything yet. When the
design is settled (and patents filed), I'll send you some images."

So Colt is cooking up something else new ^_^

j
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 7:46:31 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/16/2006 7:51:32 AM EDT by kc3]

Originally Posted By squall05:
Thanks Gamma

I did a little digging and if anyone is interested the patents Colt filed for this weapon are available online.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,827,992.WKU.&OS=PN/5,827,992&RS=PN/5,827,992

Click on images and you can see the inner workings of it.

For some reason I am completely fascinated with this thing at the moment :-D

j

Great find!
Anyone have any more tech info on the ammo?
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 9:58:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By ARmory04:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Why? .22 Winchester magnum is almost as fast and a fraction of the price. Just as fun, and neither is useful in the real world.






And 5.56 is just a varmint round, no good on humans . . . . . . .



Your arguments shows a lack of fundamental understanding of how the round works on tissue. You can use high velocity to damage tissue or cause a large cruch cavity with a large slug. Not willing to do either? Go ahead and get a 5.7. Fun toy.





Yes! I forgot! I know nothing of ballistics!

I had no idea that the 5.56 operates on velocity, tumbling, and fragmentation! Silly me for

thinking that the 5.7 operates on velocity and tumbling also, just on a smaller scale!


Please forgive me for my "lack of fundamental understanding" of how the round works.



I've been figured out!
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 10:10:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By kc3:
Anyone have any more tech info on the ammo?


www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/mars.html
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 4:44:57 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dewatters:
The 5.56x30mm MARS is ballistically superior to the 5.7x28 FN. The MARS is good for ~2,600 fps with a 55gr projectile from a barrel roughly equal in length to that of the P90.



Yea, but where do you get 5.56x30?

So, here we are in 2006 looking at .22 PDWs. Back in the '50s, Ordinance chambered M1 Carbines for shortened .222 Remington ammo with good results inside 300 yards. Hmm...
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 5:18:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Gamma762:

Originally Posted By kc3:
Anyone have any more tech info on the ammo?


www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/mars.html



Cool, thanks!
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 6:55:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Essayons:
Yea, but where do you get 5.56x30?


Its just shortened and reformed 5.56x45 cases.
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 3:07:04 PM EDT
I read the write up in Black Rifle II on the MARS project and found it fascinating. - Maybe csbar (Chris Bartocci, BRII author and occasional poster here) can chime in here with some elaboration

The photos on the previous page are from that chapter, including the one that shows it being fired.

Note it is still "in the white" (without parkerizing).

I wish they had gone ahead with production!

I am most intrigued by the cryptic reply from your Colt friend, squall05.

Can't wait!
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 9:18:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/17/2006 10:57:08 PM EDT by Combat_Jack]

Originally Posted By ARmory04:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By ARmory04:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Why? .22 Winchester magnum is almost as fast and a fraction of the price. Just as fun, and neither is useful in the real world.






And 5.56 is just a varmint round, no good on humans . . . . . . .



Your arguments shows a lack of fundamental understanding of how the round works on tissue. You can use high velocity to damage tissue or cause a large cruch cavity with a large slug. Not willing to do either? Go ahead and get a 5.7. Fun toy.





Yes! I forgot! I know nothing of ballistics!

I had no idea that the 5.56 operates on velocity, tumbling, and fragmentation! Silly me for

thinking that the 5.7 operates on velocity and tumbling also, just on a smaller scale!


Please forgive me for my "lack of fundamental understanding" of how the round works.



I've been figured out!



With 5.7 you wont have any fragmentation. Since impact velocity will be under 2200 FPS, you wont have any hydrostatic effect in the inelastic tissues of the body, such as the brain and liver. Wound cavity would essentially suck.

5.7 has a less than stellar reputation for killing people.....except in the FN marketing department.


ETA: Sorry for being so harsh, I was having a bad day. I'm an asshole sometimes.
Link Posted: 2/17/2006 10:43:54 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Gamma762:
67.128.245.205/ar/mars/MARS_files/Colt_MARS_Prototyp.jpg

67.128.245.205/ar/mars/MARS_files/Colt_MARS_side.jpg

67.128.245.205/ar/mars/MARS_files/Colt_MARS_Munition.jpg
5.56x45, 5.45x39, 4 different MARS loads, 5.7x28, and 9mm para.
The MARS round had higher velocity with heavier bullets, higher performance than the 5.7x28. By using different powders, they got the same or higher MV than 5.56x45 (2650fps/55gr FMJ) out of the 11" barrel, with less muzzle blast and flash.

That MGI modular lower receiver might be a nice platform to resurrect the MARS rifle, if they would make a companion shorter upper for it (and pistol caliber versions as well).



and others who scanned pics of the MARS out of Black Rifle II...

The guy who wrote that book posts here, and you have infringed his copyright.

I expect he will have his lawyers on you tails pronto.
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 1:10:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ggllggll:
thanks

www.rhinelandarms.com/57/pics/57proto3.jpg



Would this thing be california legal if they used one of those cut off receivers that folks are using for the 50 cal. You would have a single shot receiver with a upper with its own magazine.
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 3:12:44 AM EDT
If they build it...........I will buy it.


very interesting to say the least........I will not pay that price for the 5.7 though. I am waiting for other
ammo makers to start in on the 5.7 and make the price lower..........hell, even buying reloads will be better.
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 3:23:35 AM EDT
I'm intrigued to say the least about what Colt has in the works.



Great. Another month without food, but a new toy to play with!!



BTW...before this gets too out of hand, just STOP with the ballistics bullshit, please, for Christ's sake. This thread WAS about the MARS project gun, don't let it degrade into the same old 5.56 vs. XXX crap, please?
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 3:27:42 AM EDT
I realize the differences, but I have a SBR Colt - the 6933, and cannot emphasize enough the difference it is to shoot, versus a traditional 14.5 or 16" models

The contrast is striking.

Since the MARS wasn't built, those seeking a small packaged AR, would be thrilled with a 10.5" or 11.5" model. Ammo notwithstanding. But then again 5.56 x 45 is pretty hard hitting compared to 5.56 x 30 or 5.7 stuff of the FN.

Lousy photo, but you get a sense of what I mean with this comparison (LE6933 and 6920 carbines)



Link Posted: 2/18/2006 3:46:40 AM EDT
Personally, I can't get too excited about this cartridge, especially in an AR. It's less powerful than the 5.56mm and a hell of a lot more expensive than 9mm. Why use it?

You'd have to reload for it, but the old Johnson 5.7mm Spitfire had superior ballistics. .30 Carbine (7.62x33) necked down to 5.56mm. 3000 fps with a 40gr bullet.
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 10:46:31 AM EDT
Interesting. It's a shame Colt didnt spin some of these for civilians. PDW's are becoming very popular with LEO and civilians
Link Posted: 2/18/2006 11:43:41 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/18/2006 11:47:55 AM EDT by kc3]

Originally Posted By Dorsai:
Personally, I can't get too excited about this cartridge, especially in an AR. It's less powerful than the 5.56mm and a hell of a lot more expensive than 9mm. Why use it?

More expensive? How much does it cost? As far as I know, the gun/round never made it past the prototype stage.

The gun is quite a bit shorter and lighter than even a 10.5" 5.56, and the round apparently approaches 5.56 velocities with much less muzzle blast.

As a private citizen, I can't envision a realistic/legally defensible self-defense scenario at ranges much past 20-30 yards. In a Katrina-type scenario, with a static defense of my home at somewhat longer ranges...I have guns to handle that. I think a 10.5" AR would be perfect for home defense, except for muzzle blast. Adding a suppressor or even a Krink brake kind of defeats the purpose of the SBR. If I could get something smaller and lighter with a round that approaches 5.56 ballistics at close range without muzzle blast that will make me dizzy, I'd be all over it.

Of course, YMMV.


You'd have to reload for it, but the old Johnson 5.7mm Spitfire had superior ballistics. .30 Carbine (7.62x33) necked down to 5.56mm. 3000 fps with a 40gr bullet.



I've thought about trying to work up a Oly .30 Carbine lower with a short upper chambered for 5.7 Spitfire, if I could find reliable, affordable 30rd mags.
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 4:00:06 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By ARmory04:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By ARmory04:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Why? .22 Winchester magnum is almost as fast and a fraction of the price. Just as fun, and neither is useful in the real world.






And 5.56 is just a varmint round, no good on humans . . . . . . .



Your arguments shows a lack of fundamental understanding of how the round works on tissue. You can use high velocity to damage tissue or cause a large cruch cavity with a large slug. Not willing to do either? Go ahead and get a 5.7. Fun toy.





Yes! I forgot! I know nothing of ballistics!

I had no idea that the 5.56 operates on velocity, tumbling, and fragmentation! Silly me for

thinking that the 5.7 operates on velocity and tumbling also, just on a smaller scale!


Please forgive me for my "lack of fundamental understanding" of how the round works.



I've been figured out!



With 5.7 you wont have any fragmentation. Since impact velocity will be under 2200 FPS, you wont have any hydrostatic effect in the inelastic tissues of the body, such as the brain and liver. Wound cavity would essentially suck.

5.7 has a less than stellar reputation for killing people.....except in the FN marketing department.


ETA: Sorry for being so harsh, I was having a bad day. I'm an asshole sometimes.



I've been at this site awhile, I know your rep

I agree with most of what you have said, if it matters any. I've only been able to find a couple of

reports (other than FN) pertaining to 5.7 effectiveness, which were not really impressive, and there

are not enough to come to a decisive conclusion as to if it truly works well or not.


I was being a tad sarcastic myself ,earlier.

Link Posted: 2/19/2006 4:14:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dorsai:
Personally, I can't get too excited about this cartridge, especially in an AR. It's less powerful than the 5.56mm and a hell of a lot more expensive than 9mm. Why use it?



You need to compare the ballistics of the two rounds from the same barrel length. The 5.56x45mm isn't going much faster out of a Commando's barrel.


Originally Posted By Dorsai:
You'd have to reload for it, but the old Johnson 5.7mm Spitfire had superior ballistics. .30 Carbine (7.62x33) necked down to 5.56mm. 3000 fps with a 40gr bullet.



Once again, you need to compare the two cartridge out of the same barrel length. The Spitfire only reached those speeds from 18"+ barrels.
Link Posted: 2/19/2006 4:45:07 PM EDT
The only use for such a round is in short barrels. I would not be surprised if it performed better out of a 7.5 inch barrel than 5.56 would, and it would be quieter and softer recoiling as well.

The problems that I see with it are the short neck, which may mean difficulty with heavy bullets, and of course the overall low velocity. It is a very specific tool. That said, there are a few ways to try and squeeze some more juice out of it. Were the military to completly abandon 5.56, there may be a purpose to the MARS, but when it is only 15MM shorter it would be hard to rationalize.

The logistics of even a limited switch would give anyone a headache. That said, the significantly higher velocity an M4 based platform put this weapon in a far more advantageous position when compared with the 5.7FN. 400 feet per second may sound like split hairs, but I think it is a very significant difference. Perhaps there is a way to load the SS190 AP round into the MARS. That might increase velocity and penetration.
Link Posted: 2/22/2006 8:34:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/22/2006 8:35:47 PM EDT by Essayons]

Originally Posted By Wales:

Originally Posted By ggllggll:

Originally Posted By UKGuy:
Hmm that would be sweet the Mars was basically a shortened M16 reciever, the mag well being the shortened part, would look kinda sweet, they shoulda done it for the 9mm carmines too IMHO

James



Thats a great idea! about the 9mm suggestion.

A note on the 5.7:

There is a company, name escapes me now, that is making an upper receiver for an AR15/M16 that fires 5.7 and uses p90 mags. Priced at like 550 it seems pretty cool.

Someone will come along and post a pic of that I'm sure



To fulfill your prophecy: Rhineland Arms.





So can Kalifornians get that? Couldn't you put it on one of the a 10-round or single shot lowers? Or does it eject through the mag well?
Top Top