>let's replace a world-renowned, iconic, simple design

>>33454128
Because it weighs a fuckton and eats bullets like a fat girl at a buffet

>>33454128
>world-renowned
For the Cold War.

>iconic
For collectors and historians.

>simple design
It's unusually simple for the fact that it's roller delayed, rather than being locked. That it's less complex than average doesn't make average bad.

>with this complex piece of shit that has a slower rate of fire
It's lighter, modular, and the slower rate of fire is beneficial, here's a newsflash for you, an RPM of like 1200 is actually not great for a GPMG because you eat through your ammunition too fast.

The original MG42 wasn't exactly an ideal choice back in it's day because of how Germany suffered from an ammunition shortage, and the MG3 wasn't really ideal past the first half of the Cold War.

>>33454128
>make the barrel shroud lighter
>use polymers for the FCG/trigger assembly
>use aluminum where it can
>change a few things with the mass of parts and the size of the rollers to reduce rate of fire
Literally not that difficult.

>>33454182
>use aluminum where it can
>roller delayed blowback
Have fun with that receiver lifespan.

>>33454180
There are a thousand modifications that could have been made to make a competitive design, or better yet! Steal what the Russians have been doing with the PK/PKM.

>>33454192
>lets try to polish an old design that was meh for it's time to desperately appeal to nostalgiafags

The MG3 isn't that good.

>>33454192
Didn't they do an improvement package for the MG3 and found it still couldn't cut the mustard?

>>33454158
>>33454180
>hurrr it's lighter
Well no shit? It's fucking 5.56. Completely replacing a 7.62 NATO GPMG with a 5.56 light machinegun is fucking retarded.

>>33454203
Did they even have a 5.56mm LMG before this? Or was the MG3 all they had?

>>33454128
>What is the MG-3

>>33454197
It's better than replacing it with a fucking 5.56 lmg
>>33454200
They also created an artificial "scandal" with the G36.

>>33454128
MG3 is overrated trash

>>33454210
>they made up some shit about the (largely mediocre) G36
>that means the MG3 isn't obscenely obsolete

File: m60e6 GPMG.jpg (72KB, 758x451px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 758x451px

>>33454211
This, the Danes replaced it with the M60E6, good choice I'd say.

>>33454212
Find ONE way that the MG3 is obsolete. Literally the only problem so far is that it's "heavier", which is true, however they're also looking at adopting the MG5, which is a 7.62 NATO version of the MG4 and surprise surprise, it weighs almost the same as the MG3.

>>33454210
>gun melts
>t-t-t-that's not real guise

HK shills out in force

>>33454224
It has needlessly high rate of fire for it's purpose and isn't particularly modular.

I also wonder about the wear on current MG3s, god knows their roundcount.

>>33454228
Well it does melt, but only if you try to do a bunch of sustained fire with it like an MG, which you as an infantryman with a rifle, is just not supposed to be doing, that's not good for most rifles.

>>33454228
The problem was after them magdumping a bunch on full the groups would open up because a few blocks that the handguard and receiver connected to the barrel would heat up and expand and press on the barrel. It was an easy fix and not worth dumping the whole G36 line. It'd be like dumping the M16 because it had a pencil barrel that would fail after magdumping it instead of just coming out with rifles with a thicker barrel.

>>33454245
Hasn't that been disputed by private owners of G36 rifles? That they can't seem to reproduce that in their own testing.

>>33454236
Do you realize how not and issue it is to reduce the rate of fire on a machine gun design? Also the logic of
>well we haven't bought some in a while so they're worn out and need to be replaced because we haven't bought some in a while because we're going to replace them and they're worn out since we're going to replace them why buy more? Yeah, I mean we're going to replace them so why buy more since they're worn out and going to be replaced....

File: tmp_25019-images(33)1672595627.jpg (15KB, 766x400px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 766x400px

Best GPMG coming through, get out of the way losers

>>33454252
Or maybe they need new guns and felt they wanted something better while they're at it.

The Beretta 92 is an excellent pistol design but the ones that the US Army had were mostly worn to shit, so instead of procuring the same ones again they looked at the current market.

>>33454258
Isn't the M240B basically this? Except modernized?

>>33454258
>12 kg
Meanwhile the MG3 is like 11 kg, and the PKM is only 7.5 kg.

File: WP_20170312_10_12_46_Pro.jpg (2MB, 3264x1840px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1840px

Bunch of faggots who has never used the mg3. - the thread.

>>33454269
>Weight = everything

File: lel-kek.png (177KB, 4167x4167px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 4167x4167px

>but it doesn't shoot FAST!

>>33454263
You have yet to prove in any way how the MG4 or MG5 is "better" than the MG3. Your only two reasons are
>rate of fire too fast (an easy and cheap fix)
>the older ones are worn out
There is nothing inherently wrong with the design that isn't the matter of a small tweak to the platform and yet somehow you can rationalize that away to replace it with one gun (the MG4) that is 5.56 and barely any lighter, and another (the MG5) that is 7.62 but is as heavy as the MG3 herself. If they were going to replace the fucking thing they should just get the license rights to make clone PKMs if they're so fucking worried about it.

>>33454285
Wrong.

>>33454275
That's what most of the people here are complaining about and I'll concede the one point that the FN MAG is a heavy as fuck shit box. It's more nostaglia faggish than the fucking MG3

>>33454288
Oh? Would you like to have give a reason?

>>33454285
>If they were going to replace the fucking thing they should just get the license rights to make clone PKMs if they're so fucking worried about it.
It doesn't work that way you autist.

>>33454292
no

>>33454295
No shit it doesn't work that way. My point is that if they're so concerned about the MG3 being "outdated" then maybe they shouldn't replace it with a shit box that weighs as much if not more or is a compromise on caliber (or change in doctrine). The MG3 isn't perfect but it's quite easy to fix the few problems with it and if they just refuse to do that then take some inspiration from the PKM since it's pretty much the perfect GPMG. Do what the FN FNC is to the AK, except this time German and inspired by one of the most robust, reliable, and now lightest GPMG's out there.

>>33454304
Wrong.

>>33454258
Heavy as fuck but a joy to shoot.

>It has been selected to replace the 7.62 mm MG3 general-purpose machine gun in the Bundeswehr at the squad support level; it will complement the MG3 in other roles.

Maybe do a little research and reading before having a sperg attack.

>>33454306
kys

>>33454215
M60 is junk you fucking memelord. T. person who used one before the M240 replaced it.

>>33454128
>roller delayed blowback
Yeah, no thank you, I'm all about the gas.

>>33454315
Which M60 did you use, an E2? Quite a world of difference.

>>33454313
did I hit a nerve? XD

>>33454309
Yeah, that's still a problem. Now they've just fucked their logistics up by having two MG's that are functionally the same thing doing different things. It'll be a logistics nightmare.

>>33454315
>hurr I used one that had probably been in service for 30 years and was a hodgepodge of old parts thus I know what a brand new one ran like

>>33454321
Wrong.

>>33454321
>Oh no! We can't possibly have TWO guns in TWO calibers that are both already in our supply chains! What will we do?

The Americans do it just fine, there's no reason you can't have an LMG and a GPMG in a squad, and the logistics are hardly difficult.

>>33454274
Who are you referring to exactly?
>inb4 it's shit because I used a bunch of ancient worn out ones that have like 200k rounds through them, if not more, and inconsistent armory level maintenance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuoAdirVFW4

>>33454330
Do you really think the Bundeswehr has the logistics and the funding to be chasing around two completely different platforms?

>>33454331
Yeah, being worn out does make them kind of shitty at that point.

So while they're at it, why not get something that's new and better and which has spare parts and customer support. Is anyone even making the MG3 anymore?

>>33454335
>>33454343
Wrong.

>>33454343
>better
NO ONE HAS PROVIDED ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT THE MG4 OR MG5 IS "BETTER" THAN THE MG3

>>33454335
They'll have to take that up with their government, but again, it's hardly difficult, they have 5.56mm NATO and 7.62mm NATO, they don't need a new cartridge, they're just replacing a gun with one in the same cartridge, while introducing one in another cartridge they also already have.

>>33454349
Lower rate of fire, gas operation is less violent, modular by design.

>>33454349
>>33454351
>>33454354
Wrong.

>>33454128
They needed a 5.56mm Squad Automatic - the MG36 was a bust.

As for the 7.62mm MG4 variant (too lazy to look it up) I don't think it offers any tangible benefits over Rheinmetalls product improved (shortened models available) MG3 - at least not for the average grunt and certainly not for the Coax and pintle roles - German SF and export users should have got that shit, not the entire army.

HK does an incredible job either bullying or crybabbying it's way into contracts or convincing governments to buy shit it doesn't need and I think it's because they have a credible boogeyman they can point at (German export laws and local govt's fucking with them) and they manage to convince NATO that they are more important then they really are.

>>33454158
.5 ounce heavier than an M60. 2lbs lighter
than a FN MAG (even more than an M240B)
>>33454180
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/01/06/bundeswehr-mg3kws-upgrade-program/
>>33454200
It was partially adopted, Germany cannot replace it's MG3's with he new 7.62 HK's at any reasonable rate, but the above upgrade kits are in fact in the german supply system and have seen limited use. The upgrade is limited to infantry MG's.
>>33454203
They are adopting HK's 7.62 HK4 to fully replace MG3. As it stands the MG3 is out of the section and only a platoon or higher MMG
MG3 was already lighter than FN MAG, and Rheinmetall's upgrade program was cheaper

>>33454356
That mad, huh?

>>33454208
Intermittent use of the earlier roller locked 5.56 and 7.62 belt feds occured, but that kind of thing was limited to Navy and german special forces

>>33454359
>>33454360
>>33454365
Wrong

>>33454351
You're a fucking moron.

>>33454354
>muh rate of fire
Easy change as has been stated half a dozen times
>gas operation is less violent
Doesn't matter
>modular by design
>muh modularity
Yeah because they're going to be going around making a bunch of person modifications themselves, right?

File: 9842439.jpg (52KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 500x500px

>>33454370
>y-you're a fucking moron!

>>33454315
>>33454315
You used an M60 (M60E1 is the first shortened barrel model). Basically it was old as shit
the M60E6 is basically a new weapon with almost no parts commonality with the original M60's save for I think barrels.
They offer a rebuild kit for old pigs, and it involved reinforcing the reciever (or outright replacing it)

>>33454236
Rate of fire issue was solved in the 80's. Just because the Germans didn't standardize it (on infantry LMG's) doesn't mean it isn't available

>>33454381
If you think just because your LMG is the same caliber as your service rifle that that means you're going to be using the same loading for both... and that the only part of logistics is ammunition and the caliber commonality between your lmg and your service rifle... then yes, you're a fucking moron.

>>33454388
It's no use, without that they have no real argument between ancedotes about a old worn out guns and some fantasy that the German government is going to fund the shit necessary for the "modularity" to be relevant.

>>33454392
>If you think just because your LMG is the same caliber as your service rifle that that means you're going to be using the same loading for both
America does that exact thing.

>>33454385
The barrels are different, only the completely stripped receiver is the same I think.

>>33454396
Yeah, because they can afford to you illiterate fuck knuckle. The point isn't that it's impossible, the point is that it requires the kind of money and logistics of a country that isn't the Bundeswehr. The caliber difference is just icing on the shit cake.

>>33454128
>Rheinmetall makes a thing, it's cheaper and performs just as well as the competitor, save for weight and features
>Ala MG3KWS and Steyr-Rheinmetall AR (and others)
>HK swoops in
>Germany consistently shits on it's other main small arms manufactures and gives HK basically fucking everything.
>Walther never ever gets a German contract outside of a minor police one, they even adopted a Jewzi over the MPL in the 60's
>There is a reason SIG considers itself Swiss and has begun divesting the German side
>Rheinmetall gets fucked consistently.

I honestly want to see Walther jump in on the Steyr-Rheinmetall contract, it's about time the other german giants took on HK in the contracts game

>>33454264
Yes.
The newest M240L is 10.1kg. MG5 is 9 something, M60E6 is very light at 9.27kg. Mk48 and Pecheneg are tied in weight
PKM is lightest - owning to it's lack of needless handguards, hollow stock, and stamped construction

>>33454285
IMO the MG5 is worse than the MG3 in the coax and pintle role. They could make the argument that the front line grunts and SF need the "slightly" lighter MG5 with it's array of features, but the average second line infantry and non combatants are perfectly served by MG3KWS upgrade package.

Germoney has no political will to spend money on it's military ffs

>>33454304
The germans don't have a word for simplification.

>>33454330
Outside of a dynamically ranged threat environment like Afghanistan, we don't need 7.62mm in the infantry squad intermixed with 5.56. 5.56 SDM's and SAW's do a fine enough job as it is.
leave that shit at the platoon level unless situation dictates

>>33454343
>Is anyone even making the MG3 anymore

Yeah, the people who've always been making it, and it's predecessors - Rheinmetall

>>33454354
The MG3 is not gas operated - roller locked recoil action and the only thing it ever required to slow ROF was a buffer/bolt weight

File: image.jpg (239KB, 1024x636px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 1024x636px

>>33454128

>>33454466
I agree with you on the latter part but he didn't mean that the MG3 is gas operated, rather that a gas operated action is less violent than the roller delayed blowback action

>>33454335
You're right, it's impossible to throw a few cases of linked 5.56 into the truck along side the other ammunition. What a logistics nightmare

>>33454482
Perfect

>>33454506
And how do you think the specific loading of 5.56 for the LMG's gets there? How much 7.62 mg ammo are you taking off the truck for the 5.56 mg ammo?

File: jrLBhkf.jpg (370KB, 1500x1125px) Image search: [Google]

370KB, 1500x1125px

>>33454245
>>33454251
All Export G36's have metal blocks where the barrel trunnion rests. The German government jewed out of it, so they could import shitskins.

>>33454397
Even then the reciever gets reinforced.

File: 1-capa-DSC_0497-HK-Trijicon.jpg (605KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

605KB, 1024x683px

>>33454128
>he thinks the MG4 is a replacement for the MG3
It fills the same role as a SAW retard, the MG5 is the MG3s replacement.

>>33454482
CUTE
U
T
E

File: maxresdefault.jpg (396KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

396KB, 1600x900px

>>33454330
Do the 240s even run around with a squad? I thought they were set up at like.....the company level.

>>33454796
Platoon level -x2 per (for lights/dismounts - not including whatever stays mounted on a gun truck)
In Afghanistan it would have been more common to tote around a M240 and eventually a lighter Mk48 at the squad level because of distances involved

>>33454380
>implying changing the reciprocating mass is a simple affair when the gun is tailored to a single loading
There comes a point where we call a spade a spade and admit that the MG3 has a very narrow use case

>>33454796
Depends. The average US Army Platoon has a weapons squad that carries 240s and Carl Gustavs. The Marine Corps has it on a Company level, where one of the three Platoons under a company is a weapons platoon, that houses mortar teams, machinegunner squads and AA/AT squads.

I'm sure that this varies when in the field, though. You won't see an all machinegunner squad go out on patrol. They probably attach a MG team with whichever element is headed out for patrol/assignment. Same with the Marine Corps.

Itt: angry Naziboos holding up the MG3 as some sacred, unfallible holy artifact

>>33454190
It's short recoil tho.

>>33454275
Less weight means more ammo.

>>33454180
what the fuck is it with germans and roller delayed gun designs?
every fuckin german gun is roller delayed, what's the deal?

>>33455152
MG34, MG42, nor MG3 are roller delayed.

>>33454180
It's not roller delayed tho, it's short recoil.

>>33455152
The MG3 isn't roller delayed.
It's a roller locked recoil operated MG. The barrel moves with the action slightly
The Hk G3/MPt/HK33/etc were roller delayed blowback

File: Sturmgewehr_45_reproduction.png (449KB, 1483x528px) Image search: [Google]

449KB, 1483x528px

>everyone ITT saying it's roller delayed
No, shut up, the MG34 and its derivatives are all short recoil, pic related is the first gun to use a roller delayed action.

>>33455177
>The Hk G3/MPt/HK33/etc were roller delayed blowback
ok why tho?
no other country makes that many rollers, why is germany so fixated on over engineering shit?

>>33455191
Roller delayed action in principle is cheaper to produce and lighter than gas operated actions.

It just seems that Germans are dumb as fuck or something since pretty much all their roller delayed action rifles are as heavy and as expensive as their gas operated contemporaries.

>>33455152
>what the fuck is it with germans and roller delayed gun designs?
They codeveloped the roller delay design with the Spanish, and later licensed the CETME rifles for the G3 design and later bought all the rights There are some parts compatibility between the rifles and some parts need minor fitting to interchange with one another. The difference is that one underwent proper quality control and the other has not. Have a minor summary on the history of the G3 and the CETME and the parts they're compatible with
http://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/faqs/hk-91cetme-faqs/

>>33455216
really makes you think huh

>>33455191
>no other country makes that many rollers,
they either bought it or licensed it, like Greece, Turkey, Portugal, third world asian countries, most of Latin America, The Nordic and Baltic countries, etc. Now a days they issue to rear guard or government backed militias or sell it to sand people

>>33455191
>Over-engineering
>Forgets Spain and Switzerland making rollers
>Forgets somewhat similar lever delayed French AA-52 and FAMAS

The G3 and HK33 were cheap to produce and actually brilliantly simple. If you ever get hands on a PTR-91 or a MP5 clone you will understand

Action cycles fast and with fluting has a very good extraction and reliability

No need to drill into a barrel, allowed free floating very easily

>>33455216
Civ pricing does not translate to military pricing.
The HK33 was below costs for a new M16 and only a lil bit more expensive than a surplus M16A1 for most of its service life. The G3 was generally even cheaper

>>33454128
The mg 4 is not the replacement for the MG 3. tha hk 121/MG 5 is its replacement.
Why arent retards like this not getting banned?

>>33454180
i see the M249 fanboy is here too.

when youve used a 249 and have experiance with it, come back and tell me how you feel.

until then, its shit. especially compared to the mg42.

every time someone tells a civi that their favorite military gun is shit, they bring up some defence of "hurrr muh 6 gorrilion soldiers shot it, it wasnt new"

no its shit lol

>>33454513
I imagine it would be mission dependent. The MG3 will probably be used as more of an MMG while the MG4 will probably be used as a SAW/LMG. So the logistics could plan accordingly depending on the needs of the people being supplied. Of course, I don't know, but it's not that hard to see how they could do it.

>>33454228
The G36 did EXACTLY what the Bundeswehr asked of it. When you do things with it that fall beyond those parameters, yeah, it can fail.
This is a failure of the requested specs, not of the rifle.

Which is why the courts all found that the German Government was full of shit.

>>33454410
The P1 is a Walther though.
Rheinmetall is pretty big in Ammo manufacturing together with the Metallwerke Elisenhütte and manufactures the cannons for most german tanks.

>>33455152
It's like with their tanks, all being boxy and shit. Germans are autists, if they like something they'll stick to it.

>>33454128
That they wanted a weapon that doesn't require the entire platoon to carry ammo for it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyJs6expvT8

>>33454482

Sorry to tell you that the AMELI is known in the spanish army as the jam machine.

>>33457482
>you cant reduce the rpm of the MG34 and its derivatives.

>>33457739
probably because of
>spanish quality

>>33457760

Bad resource management.

>For XX money i can't make it light and strong, we need expensive composites.
>For XX money I want you to make it strong AND light with what you have.
>B. but...

The AMELI in a nutshell.

>>33455330
>hurr the M249 is bad because I used one that had seen more abuse than Joseph Fritzl's children

>>33454128
Changing out barrels every few minutes can get pricy. So does 1200 rounds a minute

>>33454410

Sig Sauer is gonna compete for the new Bundeswehr service rifle which they would produce in Germany as well. But chances are high that it'll be an HK again no matter how good other competitors will perform.
It's a shame.

>>33454158
/thread

>>33454274
>posting a picture in the wrong orientation

No one will take you seriously faggot.

>>33454128

I agree, would rather have an MG42 than a fucking 240. SAWs are nice but people struggle to find anything nice to say about 240s.

>>33454380
>muh modularity
>being able to tailor a weapon for the job at hand is stupid
Make a like a banana and kill yourself.

Does going from 7.62 to 5.56 even matter if the idea is to suppress and pin in engagements less than 600m? Just want to put some holes in walls or something?

>>33454482
>SUSAT

vomit.jpg

>>33454128
>MG42
>Fires so fast that eating itself alive is almost a design feature
>Fires rounds so fast that an entire infantry unit carries spare belts for it to eat like a hungry hungry hippo.

File: upset-manga-girl.jpg (116KB, 698x658px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 698x658px

>>33458585
>but people struggle to find anything nice to say about 240s

>>33454321
This. There is no possible way that a modern army can be expected to reliably supply its troops with as many as two different kinds of ammunition. I propose a complete disarmament of all of Europe.

>>33454370
Cry more, bitch.

File: lindy.jpg (118KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 1600x1200px

everyone knows the only replacement for a spandau would be a bren

>>33454258
Thats not the PKM

File: 0369A148_EC9A_64D6_A1293960B0E521E5.jpg (18KB, 685x312px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 685x312px

HAY GUISE I'M A MACHINE GUN TOO!!!!


SOMEBODY?


ANYBODY?

>>33458922
fuck outta here

>>33455137
And harder recoil