Quoted: Ya, I would. Here's the criteria...
Ability to accept belted ammo or mags with minimal to no conversion work (viz, field changable.) Ability to accept and function with M203/37mm underbarrel attachment. Ability to use relatively easy-to-find links (NOT Stoner 63 links - I seem to recall they are STILL a pain to find. Correct me if I am wrong...) Ability to easily mix ammunition types per belt (I anticipate no trouble here.) Able to carry container for ammunition belt and a link catcher.
Look at the original AR10, and some of the Ciener conversions. I know Ciener has worked up a beltfed, and the old AR10 would feed from belt or box with no trouble. Watch the video that Armalite posted recently...
FFZ
|
ArmaLite has stated that there was PLENTY of trouble with the belt fed AR10.
As for DarkHelmet's "sources", I think he's a lurker over on subguns.com. It's been common knowledge over there for over a year that ARES Defense claims to be working on something that actually pays rather than continuing on the Shrike. I don't claim to be connected to anything, but I do read a lot of stuff and know a few folks in DoD who buy things. The last I heard, the Shrike wasn't dead but there were no firm plans on a start date for production.
I'd shell out as much as $3K for a well made belt fed upper. You semi-auto shooters may not appreciate one as much but blasting with one full auto is the sheeeit. I'm not too fond of a 23lb M60 and I hate cleaning the junky MFerz. The 1919/M37 isn't my cup of tea. I'm not paying $20K+ for an MG34, MG42/74/3. Forget that MG34/M16 setup. I saw an HK21 this weekend and can say for sure that I will NEVER buy one of those. Now I know why Germany stuck with the MG3 instead. Too much recoil, no top cover, action is too short to for belt feed.
If Todd Bailey gets a decent beltfed upper with a chrome lined bore out on the market, I'd give it a try with much fear and trepidation.
If ARES ever gets the ball rolling on the Shrike, then I'd go for one of those too. I'd prefer the Shrike.