Ultimax 100 Mk5 / General dynamics IAR
I have previously discussed the Ultimax 100 Mk4. This is the latest iteration of the Ultimax 100 design and is being entered into the IAR competition by General Dynamics, although it designed by Singapore Technologies Kinetics (STK).
Photos by SMGLee. Click to expand:
Quick Change Barrel
I like the design of the ambidextrous fire selector.
Compared to the Mk4 the Mk5 takes unmodified STANAG (M16) magazine, has quad rails and a bipod/foregrip rather than a separate bipod and foregrip.
I am not sure if the Ultimax 100 Mk4 100 round drum magazine will be made compatible with the Mk5. The Mk4 took modified STANAG magazines.
Ultimax 100 Mk 4
Ultimax 100 Mk 5
UPDATE: Defense Review has more info.
I shot this weapon a lot during my 2 years National Service in Singapore. It is a very easy weapon to handle, extremely accurate and low recoil. I can fire this weapon with hundreds of rounds with the Bi-pod up and the weapon will not even move an inch…its that good really.
I am proud that our small country has an impact in the military circle…For eg, the Bronco, SAR-21, Bionix and so on…
I’ve done a lot of research and this is currently the best lmg out there right now…hands down. I wish our military’s weapon procurement would get over their political agendas and just pick the best weapons. This weapon is so much more mobile than other lmgs and is much quicker to reload because it is not belt fed. We should have grabbed this and not the 249 back in the eighties. I also think they should have dropped the m-16 and grabbed the daewoo k-2. Now we pay millions for weapons we don’t even end up adopting (XM8, OICW). This scar is costing us way too much and doesn’t even incorporate all the latest in weapon design (non-reciprocating charging handle, switch from closed to open bolt on full auto). How about some home-grown american designs? The RobArm XCR is excellent and the ACR looks very promising.
“Constant recoil” here simply means that the heavy bolt group never hits the backstop in the receiver by using a longer receiver housing and carefully measuring the strength of the spring.
apparently it uses some “constant recoil” or “consistent recoil” concept or something that sounds like that… i dont quite understand it though
The bipod/fore grip combo are great !!! It may be hard to believe, that is because like melvin have say it only when you fire it then you understand, because this is not another machine gun. The recoil is so low, that you could not believe you are firing a real gun.
Thus it is the dream light machine gun, which enable you to run and shoot, very mobile and able to shoot in positions that you never dream of possible.
Trust me…the bipod is more than able to work very steadily. This is due to the very low and controllable recoil of the weapon. You gotta fire it to understand.
The standard bipod wouldn’t shift even on full-automatic fire.
I doubt a belt-fed would be in the works as the Ultimax design was originally created for high-mobility firepower and MOUT scenarios, a belt-fed removes some of the mobility by being unable to reload on the move (not that I ever recall doing any reloading other than stationary) but most importantly, reduces the ability to fire almost straight up, an important consideration when trying to clear buildings with multiple stories as you’d have to provide covering fire up stairwells. The 249 was designed for stationary (base of fire) and open field support, so the design purposes of the 2 weapons are different, hence the difference in focus of what the weapon is good at.
I have reservations about this bipod/fore grip combo. I can see its utility for an assault rifle, but a suppressive fire weapon like an ‘automatic rifle with bipod’ deserves a true bipod that offers more stability.
Now they need to make a belt feed version to sell the Army…