Comments on: US Army looking for lighter .50 machine gun http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/ Firearms not Politics Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:38:33 +1300 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: AK™ http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-9197 AK™ Tue, 05 May 2009 02:48:21 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-9197 Funny stuff. personally I would feel safer lugging around the M2 than a light version of the M2. The Army thought we didn't need the M14/M21 anymore..too heavy or whatever.. What we need are stronger soldiers to heft the guns around ;) Funny stuff.
personally I would feel safer lugging around the M2 than a light version of the M2.

The Army thought we didn’t need the M14/M21 anymore..too heavy or whatever..

What we need are stronger soldiers to heft the guns around ;)

]]> By: Ben http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-9092 Ben Fri, 01 May 2009 18:42:33 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-9092 Vitor: clearly you've never spoken to someone who owns a 1911 then :D Thats Brownings designs for you. Tiger: the cost of a weapon made out of titanium would be pretty phonomenal. Some fabrication companies I've worked with in the past won't deal with the stuff as its just too expensive to replace if a machinist makes a mistake. Vitor: clearly you’ve never spoken to someone who owns a 1911 then :D Thats Brownings designs for you.

Tiger: the cost of a weapon made out of titanium would be pretty phonomenal. Some fabrication companies I’ve worked with in the past won’t deal with the stuff as its just too expensive to replace if a machinist makes a mistake.

]]> By: RJ http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-5383 RJ Wed, 21 Jan 2009 19:13:22 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-5383 I know Vitor, it boggles my mind too. Stealth Technology? No problem. Lasers in space? No problem. Predicting the outcome of nuclear explosions with mathematics and supercomputers? Yawn. But a new rifle or machine-gun invented 100+ years ago? IMPOSSIBLE. TOO COMPLEX. I know Vitor, it boggles my mind too. Stealth Technology? No problem. Lasers in space? No problem. Predicting the outcome of nuclear explosions with mathematics and supercomputers? Yawn.

But a new rifle or machine-gun invented 100+ years ago?

IMPOSSIBLE. TOO COMPLEX.

]]> By: Vitor http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-4567 Vitor Mon, 05 Jan 2009 16:39:37 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-4567 Making a lighter gun than the M2 is no rocket science. The russians and chinese already did that decades ago. Why? Cause the M2 is was designed almost 90 years ago!! Although a very a good design, it baffles me that american companies have a hard time to surpass something made 90 years ago. Making a lighter gun than the M2 is no rocket science. The russians and chinese already did that decades ago. Why? Cause the M2 is was designed almost 90 years ago!! Although a very a good design, it baffles me that american companies have a hard time to surpass something made 90 years ago.

]]> By: Jcamelo http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-3160 Jcamelo Thu, 23 Oct 2008 02:11:32 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-3160 Sounds like what they need is an XM312 .50 cal. they are way lighter and more portable. Sounds like what they need is an XM312 .50 cal.

they are way lighter and more portable.

]]> By: Tiger http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-2380 Tiger Mon, 14 Jul 2008 20:21:31 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-2380 Instead of reinventing the wheel, why not change the material? Instead of a new gun, build a M2 out of Titanium or Scandium with a Carbon fiber barrel? Instead of reinventing the wheel, why not change the material? Instead of a new gun, build a M2 out of Titanium or Scandium with a Carbon fiber barrel?

]]> By: Steve http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-1652 Steve Fri, 07 Mar 2008 01:51:44 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-1652 I read that the problem with the XM312 was the slow rate of fire (260 rounds/min), half the rate of the M2. I read that the problem with the XM312 was the slow rate of fire (260 rounds/min), half the rate of the M2.

]]> By: Daverino http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-1651 Daverino Fri, 07 Mar 2008 01:47:22 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/03/03/us-army-looking-for-lighter-50-machine-gun/#comment-1651 Sounds like the XM312 would be good fit. If they haven't canceled the program that is. Sounds like the XM312 would be good fit. If they haven’t canceled the program that is.

]]>