Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 3/17/2006 7:35:23 PM EDT
Navy SEALs to get new rifles

By Scott Gourley JDW Correspondent
California, US

The Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) has witnessed the fielding of several new small arms enhancements for US Naval Special Warfare SEAL (Sea, Air and Land) teams. Jane's recently examined a number of these enhancements during a visit to Naval Special Warfare's La Posta Mountain Warfare Training Facility.

One of the most recent additions to the SEALs' small arms inventory is the Mk 14 Mod 0 Enhanced Battle Rifle (EBR). The weapon is the result of continuing efforts to modify older 7.62 x 51 mm M14 rifles to meet the SEALs' GWOT requirements.

According to Chief Warrant Officer Richard Coddington, ordnance officer for Naval Special Warfare Group One, the EBR has been available to SEAL teams "for about a year".

Significant system design features include a reduced barrel length, collapsible stock and the integration of multiple accessory mounting rails. The mounting rails are designed to allow application of components from the US Special Operations Peculiar Modification (SOPMOD) kit.

Unfortunately, in order to allow for optics and lasers to be zeroed with the barrel, the M14 design required an aluminium chassis stock, resulting in a design that still possesses significant weight even without ammunition or SOPMOD accessories. The system is still heavier than desired, so further modifications are in the works to lighten it and make it more effective for GWOT operations. "We've got the EBR in our inventory but not too many guys are carrying it," CWO Coddington said.

(freebie article from www.janes.com)
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:37:03 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:39:30 PM EDT
i assume this looks like some of those franken-M1A's that are in the M1A picture forum
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:39:50 PM EDT
EBR... hahahaa....

We all know that really stands for Evil Black Rifle....
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:40:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/17/2006 7:40:54 PM EDT by COLE-CARBINE]

Originally Posted By kpel308:
TTIWWGP

This Thread Is Worthless Without Gun Porn!



I wish I could get the whole article but Janes is damn expensive. Hopefully someone will be along with pics.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:41:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/17/2006 7:42:59 PM EDT by Zaphod]
Apparently, this is the stock:




ETA:

Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:42:06 PM EDT
M14 with Sage/Rock stock? Isn't this old news?
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:42:15 PM EDT
EBR's kick ass

Isn't that what Pachino used in HEAT?
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:43:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Verity:
EBR... hahahaa....

We all know that really stands for Evil Black Rifle....



You beat me to it.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:44:01 PM EDT
Another pic:

Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:45:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/17/2006 7:47:51 PM EDT by Tomislav]
Are AR-10s so unreliable that the SEALs don't want to use 'em? I can't imagine that a full EBR conversion is going to cost much less than .gov pricing on a AR-10...
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:47:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/17/2006 7:48:09 PM EDT by NoHarmNoFAL-01]
Jesus, just get a FAL and stop trying to make the M-14 into something it can not nor ever will be.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:50:18 PM EDT
Why not use FN/Fal para's???
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:50:49 PM EDT
My friend showed me one of these EBR stocks. The pistol grip is a low-quality POS that looks like something Choate would make. Shocking, considering the anal rape prices they charge for this stock.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:51:13 PM EDT
looks bitch'n though and very scarry
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:51:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By shooter0311:
Why not use FN/Fal para's???



"Not Invented Here"
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:53:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By NoHarmNoFAL-01:
Jesus, just get a FAL and stop trying to make the M-14 into something it can not nor ever will be.




The FAL design is just as old as the M14.

They should just buy SR25 Battle Rifles or AR10s.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:53:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Another pic:

www.athenswater.com/images/MK14Mod0firstissue.jpg



So they went from simple not to many parts to complicated with a ton of parts and screws.

Makes no sense.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:54:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/17/2006 7:55:02 PM EDT by slaughter]

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Another pic:

www.athenswater.com/images/MK14Mod0firstissue.jpg



Who make the shoulder stock in this pic ?
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:55:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By NimmerMehr:

Originally Posted By shooter0311:
Why not use FN/Fal para's???



"Not Invented Here"



So...FN owns our military small arms contracts as it is. What's one more
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:55:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Another pic:

www.athenswater.com/images/MK14Mod0firstissue.jpg



That is the FUGLIEST gun I have ever seen in my life!
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 7:57:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By motown_steve:

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Another pic:

www.athenswater.com/images/MK14Mod0firstissue.jpg



That is the FUGLIEST gun I have ever seen in my life!



And what's with the no anodizing?
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:01:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By motown_steve:

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Another pic:

www.athenswater.com/images/MK14Mod0firstissue.jpg



That is the FUGLIEST gun I have ever seen in my life!



+1 Give me a stock M14 thanks.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:02:19 PM EDT
No, they don't use FAL's because we have lots of M14's in stock already and lots of mags, and its easier to rebarrel them and toss on a new stock then it is to introduce a whole new rifle into the supply system.

We still have lots of M14 parts and guns to go around. Getting FALs would require putting a whole new weapons system with a brand new training system, spare parts, mags, etc, etc, etc, into the system, supply system, etc, and that simply is not as cost effective as taking old M-14 rifles that have been sitting in storage for decades and modifying them with the latest aftermarket goodies and putting them into service.

Honestly, it IS more cost effective to pay cracksmoker prices for a new stock and a few rail mounted goodies to put on an old, pre-existing rifle then it is to introduce a whole new weapons system.

Its all about the benjamins baby.

Chris
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:02:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
+1 Give me a stock M14 thanks.



i dont even like the composite stock M1A's.....

if it's not wood, it's not an M1A/M14 IMO
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:05:21 PM EDT
I think the JAE stock is a better alternative.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:08:41 PM EDT
Don't those things weigh a ton?
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:12:29 PM EDT
HAHA,I always said that that Sage abomination was a nose heavy pig,guess the SEAL's think so too. I wonder why they don't just go with an 18'' Crazy Horse M14 with a G.I. fiberglass stock.If you must have rails they can be mounted and the butt can be shortened for shorter OAL.Would be cheaper,alot lighter,and just as capable.The Fal can't hang with the M14,never could.Not to mention that it is not a weapon they can pull out of a depot.The AR10 types are probably an eventuality but I hope they at least nix the gas system for a piston type.Face it,The M14 is simpler ie. less parts,proven in all conditions,hits hard and accurately,and is available.It was and remains the finest Battle Rifle ever produced.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:22:34 PM EDT
Pacino used a Fabrique Nationale FNC in the movie "Heat"

FNC

pato
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:23:00 PM EDT
The SCAR will be here soon; why waste the money?

If they really need a .308 battle rifle (and how many could they REALLY need?), just buy a few FALS with a railed handguard...
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:31:09 PM EDT
tagged
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:44:15 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:45:56 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:46:46 PM EDT
tag
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:48:47 PM EDT
Brought to you by the friendly folks at Crane.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:50:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/17/2006 8:53:15 PM EDT by Andreuha]

Originally Posted By MadBodhi:
HAHA,I always said that that Sage abomination was a nose heavy pig,guess the SEAL's think so too. I wonder why they don't just go with an 18'' Crazy Horse M14 with a G.I. fiberglass stock.If you must have rails they can be mounted and the butt can be shortened for shorter OAL.Would be cheaper,alot lighter,and just as capable.The Fal can't hang with the M14,never could.Not to mention that it is not a weapon they can pull out of a depot.The AR10 types are probably an eventuality but I hope they at least nix the gas system for a piston type.Face it,The M14 is simpler ie. less parts,proven in all conditions,hits hard and accurately,and is available.It was and remains the finest Battle Rifle ever produced.



I believe the only reason it (the M14) was selected over the FAL or AR10 was politics(/some other BS reason, eg, the AR being a plastic POS nothing like the garand styling that the .mil was used to). No?
Just wondering.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 8:59:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By kpel308:
JAE stock? Have not heard of it Links? Pix?

I would think a fibreglas M-14E2 stock would fill the bill just as well.



Arfcom/JAE stock thread The JAE stock is more for a purpose built sniper rig but it seem's to me that the SEAL's are looking to combine a compact CQB weapon with all the trimmings while retaining long distance capability.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 9:02:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/17/2006 9:02:49 PM EDT by hughjafj]
Or maybe it is because the M-1 garand and M-14 design distinguished itself in much tougher conditions by our troops than any of that other shit.

Plus it's more accurate.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 9:04:24 PM EDT
They should just get the best of BOTH worlds and get a SE M1a.....I did.






Link Posted: 3/17/2006 9:08:22 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 9:15:11 PM EDT
I'll take one, but only if I can get it annodized in day-glo gold with pearl inlays!
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 9:19:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Andreuha:

Originally Posted By MadBodhi:
HAHA,I always said that that Sage abomination was a nose heavy pig,guess the SEAL's think so too. I wonder why they don't just go with an 18'' Crazy Horse M14 with a G.I. fiberglass stock.If you must have rails they can be mounted and the butt can be shortened for shorter OAL.Would be cheaper,alot lighter,and just as capable.The Fal can't hang with the M14,never could.Not to mention that it is not a weapon they can pull out of a depot.The AR10 types are probably an eventuality but I hope they at least nix the gas system for a piston type.Face it,The M14 is simpler ie. less parts,proven in all conditions,hits hard and accurately,and is available.It was and remains the finest Battle Rifle ever produced.



I believe the only reason it (the M14) was selected over the FAL or AR10 was politics(/some other BS reason, eg, the AR being a plastic POS nothing like the garand styling that the .mil was used to). No?
Just wondering.



The AR10 was not in the running.The selection trials were between the M14,then designated T44, and the Fal,then designated T48.Both did very well albeit there was some claim of unfair advantage in Arctic trials as it was claimed that the M14 was doctored up with lighter weight oil to perform better while the Fal struggled in this testing.They were both declared suitable for adoption but the M14 got the nod because it was claimed that Garand tooling could be easily switched over (not exactly true),the manual of arms between the Garand and M14 was similar so it would cut down on retraining,and what I think was the biggest reason is that the M14,like the M1 Garand was designed as a rifleman's rifle.It possesed superior trigger and sights to allow engaging an enemy at extended ranges.The long range Rifleman is part of the American Tradition dating back to the Kentucky rifles of times past.Despite most combat occuring at ranges well within the effective range of the less accurate Fal the fact is that the M14 was a better fit for how we as a people viewed ourselves.There was no doubt some political dickering but that's normal and it was nothing like what happened in order for the M16 to be adopted.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 9:21:15 PM EDT
Give them the 6.8.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 10:17:51 PM EDT
I remember when those used to be a nice looking rifle.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 10:20:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By shooter0311:

Originally Posted By NimmerMehr:

Originally Posted By shooter0311:
Why not use FN/Fal para's???



"Not Invented Here"



So...FN owns our military small arms contracts as it is. What's one more




The SCAR Heavy must not be ready yet.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 10:21:32 PM EDT
Taggity.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 10:22:36 PM EDT
16" barrel is too short for .308
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 10:28:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AyeGuy:
16" barrel is too short for .308



Link Posted: 3/17/2006 10:34:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AyeGuy:
16" barrel is too short for .308



You gone and done it now...
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 11:00:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By NoHarmNoFAL-01:
Jesus, just get a FAL and stop trying to make the M-14 into something it can not nor ever will be.



+1
The M14 will always be a rifleman's rifle.
The FAL is a far better choice for this mission.
Link Posted: 3/17/2006 11:04:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By pato:
Pacino used a Fabrique Nationale FNC in the movie "Heat"

FNC

pato



Really? Are you sure?
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top