Quoted: http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040729/news_1n29rifle.html Observations include: It should last longer, with barrels able to fire 15,000 rounds before being replaced rather than the 6,000 to 9,000 rounds it takes to wear out an M-16 barrel.

WTF?

An AR barrel only lasts 6-9K? I know it is a small bore, and that throat erosion is a big deal in many small bore high velocity rifles, but 6-9k for a weapon of war like this? Isn't that low? I mean I can understand what service schedules are like. You can run your engine oil 5k miles and not hurt a thing, but you should change it at 3k miles. However, I wasn't aware that buying 6 cases of ammo is enough to render a barrel worthless by military standards.


I don't know if this is AK-47 boasting and propaganda or BS, but those rifles, as well as some WW2 weapons are said to be shot 20,000 times and still function fine and still have decent accuracy. Many people say they have shot some of their weapons over 20k rounds and have no problems.


Are those who shoot 30cal anything full of shit, or does the small bore of the AR not last as long?

Quoted: I don't know if this is AK-47 boasting and propaganda or BS, but those rifles, as well as some WW2 weapons are said to be shot 20,000 times and still function fine and still have decent accuracy. Many people say they have shot some of their weapons over 20k rounds and have no problems. Are those who shoot 30cal anything full of shit, or does the small bore of the AR not last as long?

The only time you know that you're barrel's "worn out" is when you've noticed it losing accuracy.  An AR-15 match rifle used for highpower might have its barrel replaced after 4-5K rounds after a high master loses a point and decides to blame it on the "barrel".  I'm told that a chrome lined Colt AR-15 barrel should get around 10K rounds before accuracy begins to fall.  I'd refurbish the rifles after this many rounds or 5 years anyway if I had to make maintenance policy for an Army.   [I might add that I've never done this myself and I am not a military armorer].  

As for AK's and WWII weapons  - it again depends on what you're accuracy standards are.  Will you really notice if an AK's "accuracy" begins to fall off after 5K rounds (i.e. 4MOA to 4.5 MOA)?  What kind of accuracy can you expect with an issue Mosin-Nagant, Mauser 98, or Garand with issue ammo (not really much better than the AK AFAIC)?   After a year of fighting in France (or on the Eastern front),  how many rounds will you have fired? Will you really notice the difference in accuracy?   My answer is, "I don't think so".      

Anyway, the point is, shoot the barrel until you KNOW that it's not as accurate as it used to be.  Peacetime military barrel replacement schedules don't necessarily have anything to do with the replacement schedule of your own rifle, or the schedule of an AK, or the schedule of a Mauser in the hands of Private Schroeder fleeing Belgograd in the dead of winter.    

And as far as HK goes, even though I like HK stuff, I have no reason to believe its barrels are any more durable than Colt's or FN's.      

The M-16 was criticized when it came out and its been in service for 40 years. It may be a good step forward.

Let's see what the ground pounders have to say after a while!

Quoted: Let's see what the ground pounders have to say after a while!

The problem with that is that the switch to the XM-8 would have to be a complete replacement of the M16 platform. Otherwise you'd have the logistical FUBAR of stocking parts and mags for both weapons systems. If they do it, going back won't be very easy, and would be an even bigger waste of money.  Again, if it offered some tangible advantage at all, such as improved lethality, I'd be all for it. It doesn't, so why give all that money to the Germans?

Quoted: why give all that money to the Germans?

Well, not ALL the money. Don't forget it will built at the new H&K plant in Georgia. That means more American jobs, and a large portion of gov't money (read: taxpayer dollars) going back into American paychecks, using and paying for American infrastructure (utilities, contractors, suppliers, housing etc.). In a time where we are sending more and more high-paying high-tech jobs to sewers like India and Indonesia (outsourcing they call it), this is not something to scoff at.

H&K is a foreigned OWNED firm, but the rifles will all be made here in the USA.

Quoted: Quoted: why give all that money to the Germans? Well, not ALL the money.

I was referring to all of the profit. Besides, the krauts haven't exactly been our best buddies lately. Let them sell their weapons to France.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: why give all that money to the Germans? Well, not ALL the money. I was referring to all of the profit. Besides, the krauts haven't exactly been our best buddies lately. Let them sell their weapons to France.

Right, but don't confuse the Political sector with the Business sector. Business interests tend to be Apolitical. Just like Haliburton was dealing with Libya the whole time they were supposed to be sanctioned. Daimler (a German Firm) owns Chrysler Corporation, nobody has compained about Mercedes engines in the top of the line Chrysler luxury sedans. In the end, the perception of who is sympathetic to the US from a popular emotional media standpoint become less important than the facts of who our allies are by treaty and business dealings that have common benefit. The Germans have been good Allies for many years, I wouldn't write them off just yet.