I remember reading on here awhile back about a possible new service rifle for the Marine Corps, but I thought the consensus was they were considering switching to a 16inch barrel.  I have a subscription to Leatherneck magazine and in it they had an article with the SgtMaj of the Marine Corps SgtMaj McMichael.

Leatherneck: There haven't been many complaints about the M16 service rifle in recent years.  Why is the Marine Corps replacing it with a new service rifle?
SgtMaj Michael: We can't keep are feet planted in the past.  This is part of transforming ourselves.  Today's weapon has a long stock and barrel which is difficult to operate in close confines, such as crawling through windows in urban areas.  It's time for us to move into a new service weapon.  It is much better to start now than wait until we're in the middle of a conflict.

That sounds like a whole new rifle to me.  Anybody heard anything about this?  

Unless they're going with an M4/CAR-15/Carbine, I can't think of any "shorter" weapon that will match the utility and accuracy of the M16.  I know they're not talking about one of those built in M16/Grenade things (ala [i]Starship Troopers[/i]) that FN is producing - that is FAR from being a "close-confines" weapon.  What type of carbine service rifle could they possibly use that would match the AR/M16 series of rifles in accuracy, cost, and customization...unless they're creating a new one of some sorts??

Oh well...unless they're using one of the above mentioned rifles, they will soon proceed to get their [i][b]asses stomped[/b][/i] by the AMU in Highpower competition and the likes.  But oh well, hope you Seadogs find something that works for you.

[img]www.auburn.edu/~littlcb/E-vil2.jpg[/img]

I beleive they are refering to the M4, or a variant of it.

The Marine Corps is experimenting with M4 for combat arms units.  3rd Battalion, 2nd Marines was issued all M4 last year to see how they work out.  So far the results have been mixed.  There have been several complaints made by the recipients of the M4
-The RAS heated up too much, most Marines preferred using the stock M4 hand guards.
-Carrying handle, when used, came loose easily and didn't hold a zero
-Sights used on the RAS didn't hold zeros well, when sights were removed and remounted they had had to be rezerored.
-Left handed shooters had a lot of malfunctions because of the gun fighter slings issued with the weapon, brass would hit the sling and bounce back into the ejection port.
-Because of the shorted sight radius, the less skilled shooters had more problems qualifying with iron sights.  
-The common tendency was to hit high. There were a few small others.
-Stock and cheek weld was down right not liked by the Marines use to the M16.

Not to mention the TRUE weaknesses will not be shown until the next combat scenario. I think we all remember the story from Blackhawk Down, right?

There is absolutely NO problem with the M16A2, but I would like to see it changed over to a gas piston action. I'd rather have a greater  bullet fragmentation range by 50-75 yards, than sacrifice it for a 4" shorter barrel.

The Marine weapon they are referring to is a combination grenade launcher/shotgun, and a 5.56mm rifle. It looks totally bulky and weird. They're not referring to the sleek looking M4 carbines.

Bohica
What you are referring to is SABR/OICW. It is a combination integrated sight, 20 mm Grenade Launcher and 5.56 kinetic energy weapon.  It is distant future item.  The M4,A1 and M16A3(A4) are being tested as possible replacements for the M16A2 in the combat arms units.

Even though I'm a devout A2-sights person, I'm all for the military switching to A3/A4 for different CQB or long-range situations.  Hell, it's "different", granted, but it's still an M16.

[brown]Evil Jewbroni~[/brown]

Since the Corps WILL listen to our .02....


Why not STOP the Klinton ideal of cutting up GOOD weapons....put a few more racks in the arms rooms...KEEP what they have.....AND...

Buy the M4 or whatever CQB rifle they want to supplement, depending on mission....

Call them a better armed military or something???


I would HATE to see them give up what little 'reach out and touch someone' they have now....

crawling through windows in urban areas?

It has to be understood that many combat situations today take place in cities rather than in an open field or jungle like in past wars.
Much fighting is done within close quarters inside buildings. Therefore a smaller M4 carbine would be more sufficient than a "20 rifle.
Long range accuracy provided by a longer barrel is not needed since your target will be at a shorter distance. You don't need 600 yard accuracy when engaging the enemy inside a building. It is much easier manuvering through doorways and through windows with a shorter weapon than a long one.
The weapon used should fit the combat environment. A standard M16A2 may be okay as a training rifle or a long distance rifle, but shorter carbines should be available when needed.

The Delta guys in BLACKHAWK DOWN were using 11.5'' CAR-15's. that short barrel doesn't create enough velocity to make the mess a 14.5 M4 or 20'' M16 makes.
There is another quote in that book were a M60 gunner says he hits a badguy several times with 7.62mmNATO before he drops.
I've blown HUGE holes into deer heart & lung with a 12ga. slug and seen 'em run 100yrds.
S**T HAPPENS