Why did the United States Armed Forced of America ditch

Because the M60 is garbage and the FN MAG is a better gun in every regard

because they replaced it with the 249, not the 240

>>34355663
Why did the America Forces drop their firepower from 7.62 down to 5.56?

>>34355671
Because 7.62 is heavy as fuck and squad ammo commonality. The M240 isn't usually used at the squad level.

>>34355582
Because the VC command pleaded with the U.S. to switch to a more humane weapon
After my uncle mowed down every slant eyed village he came across with his born to kill M mother fuckin 60

>>34355582
They replaced the M60 with both the M240 as a GPMG and the M249 as the SAW.
This video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNVegwmZiQM
talks about it some, but the M60 had some design flaws and the receivers were getting worn out.

Because the M60 sucked balls.

>>34355582
Because the M60 design was pretty fuckin mediocre.

File: M60E6.jpg (359KB, 2048x1366px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 2048x1366px

Modern m60s are fine/good

>>34355635
/thread

>>34355635
>>34355929
>>34355955
Why is /k/ so anti-M60?

>>34356211
it fuggin sucks

>>34355582
because asbestos gloves are unhealthy

>>34356211
Because they don't know how it feels to remove a forest of it's trees with the pull of a trigger Anon
And this upsets them

>>34356211
Early Vietnam era myths.

>>34355582
They wanted a gun that can't be shoulder fired.

>>34356211
Because run away belt fed guns aren't fun and the M60 would run away easier than most.

>>34356249
But you can do this even better with a 240B. M60s are just lame desu.

>>34356211
because the hughes amendment, they cost $100,000, and ammo is fucking expensive as shit to feed the pig.

>>34356255
This. Fudd lore

The FN MAG is superior to the M-60 by any measure of a machine gun. The Minime and the -249, on the other hand, shouldn't even exist.

>>34356424
Uh...
>Ergonomics
>Handiness
>Aesthetics

>>34356424
>The Minimi and the -249, on the other hand, shouldn't even exist.
>He wants to have to lug an M240, or any 7.62 beltfed for that matter, at the squad level
Fuck that.

File: M60_machine_gun_barrel_change_DF-ST-90-04667.jpg (230KB, 1024x684px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1024x684px

>>34356211

Because the M60 had a retarded design where once the barrel gets heated up, there is no way to safely remove it without a special glove. Each barrel on the M60 had a permanently mounted bipod and no carrying handle to grasp during combat barrel changes. There was no way to change the barrel quickly without burning your hand. And of course, if you lost your special glove, you're fucking screwed because now there is basically no way to swap out an overheated barrel.

>>34356580
>B-B-B-B-B-BBUT MUH A E S T H E T I C S
My dad told me about the glove form his days in during the vietnam era. he was so glad to be a short little shit in signal corps making sure the radio huts ac was working and falling asleep drunk ever morning till chow, and scratching his crabs on Ft. Knox.

he told me of the thrid time he caught VD from some scag off post, and was in the infirmary getting shots, when they had some guy come in with 3rd degree burns on his hands and arms from that fucking barrel and having wet gloves. this was around 1973.

>>34355582
In the early 90s the Army wanted 1 GPMG. The M240 is the superior MG even though the ergonomics of the M60 are much better. The new M60E6 from Ohio Ordnance is very, very good for the dismounted troop on the move. That is why NSW went with the Mk43. However, the Army crossed the MG bridge some time ago and they will not adopt a new GPMG any time soon.

>>34355671
The Army wanted one cartridge at the squad level.

>>34355671
>>34355714
>>34355663

249 and 240s both have their own place in an infantry or scout platoon as man portable machine guns, and both are integral parts of an infantry platoon in 2017

249 is a team level position that is literally just a way to give a fireteam more outgoing bullets than giving that same guy an m4

theres generally a full squad of n240 teams (3-4 guns) that are utilized on a platoon level for more strategic or defensive placements

cooks and truck drivers will deny this

>>34356255
>>34356405
But anon, it's the opposite; they worked fine during 'Nam, but because their design was retarded, they wore out way too fast, and to the point that internal surfaces need to be peened with a hammer or something.

>>34355582
>Why did the United States Armed Forced of America ditch the M60 for the M240?

stupidity

also what is a gpmg

>>34356255
>>34356405
bulb shit. The M60 had many flaws. There was a good machine gun in there somewhere, but not when it was in service with the USMC and US Army.

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

>>34356840
This is bait.
But on the off chance you are this retarded its a machine gun.

>>34356840
>also what is a gpmg
general purpose machine gun

>>34356840
Gross Patron Maschin Gavaer

>>34356766
Is it always like that though?

I thought when the Mk48s were getting introduced that they were being fielded as a replacement for the m249s which would be the squad level right?

And dont special operations and maybe elite infantry units have access to more of these kinds of mgs if command lets them and lets say they were located in an entrenched base with more emplacements and such.

>>34356580
The be fair, the MG 34 and MG 42 required similar gloves and /k/ loves them.

>>34356631
>3rd degree burns coz wet gloves

This is such an obvious problem wtf.

>>34357127
This desu

>>34356211
OK buddy, this is why.
The US took a look at the MG-42 and thought it was cool. Then they got drunk, forgot what the MG-42 was, and confused it with the FG-42. Then they built it, fucked it up, and GI' s died.
THE END.

>>34357127
those came out 20 years earlier and didn't have reliability issues
granted those issues have been solved in later iterations

>>34357222
The M60 saved more lives than it lost.

I don't know the short comings of the m60 but I got a chance to shoot one full auto a few years back and it was fucking awesome

>>34357464
Source?

>>34357497
7.62: Annals of the Conquest of Indochina, 1991

>>34356840
General Practice Medical Slut

>>34356840
Gucci Pussy Magnet Gat

>>34355582
same reason they ditched woodland for UCP
because fuck things that actually work

>>34355582

The 240 is less prone to parts breakage and stoppages and is also capable of a higher volume of fire.

File: go find it yourself.png (100KB, 632x725px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 632x725px

>>34355671

Good question.

File: m60-1414168032116.jpg (74KB, 550x389px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 550x389px

>>34356211
>Why is /k/ so anti-M60?

1) The fire control group can unlodge itself from the receiver and cause the gun to run away. The only way to stop it is for the operator to jank the belt hard enough to cause a misfeed.
2) Parts can be assembled backwards causing it to become a single shot firearm.
3) The receiver warps under heavy use and needs frequent rebuilds.
4) Parts need to be attached with metal wires to prevent them from literally falling off.
5) The bipod is attached to the barrel, meaning that each fucking spare barrel has its own fucking heavy bipod.
6) Barrel swapping requires fucking asbestos gloves.

The M240 might be a beast to fucking lug around, it is way superior.
I'd argue that the PKM is probably better suited for patrols on foot though.

>>34355964
>Modern m60s are fine/good

It only took them 50 fucking years to unfuck the design...

M60E4
Short barrel 22.5 lb
Long Barrel 23.1lb
Assault Barrel 21.3lb

M240L

Weight 22.3lbs

>>34356211
It's shit

>>34355582
more dakka

>>34357910

this desu

I'm glad that majority of /k/ is pro-M60 and it's just a small vocal minority spouting their anti-M60 rhetoric.

>>34358055
Give one good thing the M60 has over the M240.

File: russell wilson unimpressed.png (201KB, 372x362px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 372x362px

>>34357308
>MG 34 and 42
>didn't have reliability issues

oh u

>>34358017
All off the later M60s were too late. Fuck colt for only making a decent product when the US Army,Marines and Air Force decided to ditch their shitty MMG.

>>34358060
muh MG42 roller bouncing in and firing unlocked

apparently wasn't common enough to keep it from being used

File: sad.jpg (36KB, 403x403px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 403x403px

>>34358067

>implying the Wermacht was very choicey by 1942

Oh you.

>>34358058
It doesn't look like ass?

>>34358079
>don't worry lads, I'm sure this Stalingrad thing will turn out great

>>34358087
It looks like a homo. You must look like a M60

>>34357086

The MK48 is SOCOM stuff the Army isn't replacing its MGs.

Spooks do spooky things with weapons that may be moderately better for one thing or another but not good enough for the big army to spend money on it.

File: m60 barrel change.jpg (86KB, 907x586px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 907x586px

>>34357127
you don't need to handle the barrels on either of those guns nearly as much as the m60.

iirc the idea for the m60 was, to use the bipod as the handle to lever the barrel out of place without touching the barrel proper, which became almost impossible under normal battlefield conditions.

Both the MG42 and MG34, all you need to do to change the barrel is open up the shroud/rotate the action of the gun and let the barrel slide out, or yank it out in one clean motion, then slam the clean one home. The time you actually spent hands on the hot barrel was far shorter than what you were supposed to do with the M60.

pic related

>>34358103

I mean, the MK48 and MK46 are pretty much just retrofit kits. I'm innairborne and we just got some railed forends for our 249's. (but not the nice stocks, cuz "muh para stock").Whatever, at least the para stock makes it easier to carry on long hauls.

>>34358109
How is that stock. I've always wondered how shit it feels to fire from it, looks so utilitarian.

>>34358109

I was under the impression the the receivers were actually different.

>>34358115

The cheekweld is fucking garbo, but the stock itself is pretty comfy. It's got like an inch of padding.

>>34358134

Nope. A lot of early run MK46's were built off of Minimis, but after USSOCOM adopted them they started coming up wtih 249 retrofit kits.

>>34357497
Thing is, the M60 was actually a reasonably good gun as long as it was new, you didn't lose that asbestos glove, or drop that flat spring that held the trigger group on. Its real fatal flaw is how poorly it aged. It beat itself to death to the point that even the receiver was considered a replaceable component.

File: 1352622649847.gif (3MB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 320x180px

>>34358105

>>34355635
FPBP

>>34356211
Ian told us that it is shit so we all parrot it now like brainless idiots.

>>34358151

Gonna *really* need a source on this one.

>>34358173
Really? Strike Witches.

>>34358156
>Muh Ian
Oh please. People have being saying its shit since its first issuance, FW only influences public opinion on weapons that dont have a preexisting public opinion.

I actually just shot one a few hours ago. It has a lot of long-term and field-related issues but nothing is comparable to the feeling of a machine gun spitting out .308.

>>34358091
It could have worked out and Germany could have won.

I was reading or watching someone who said that unironically on either youtube or /k/ or something.

If they had conquered Russia and taken their oil and put their factories to work... Could they have held off the allied forces long enough to win?

>>34358151
what?

a dual snail drum magazines for an MG42?

those didn't exist did they? should only be a snail drum with like 50 rounds of 8mm mauser in it.

Grabbed one of those on Day of Infamy one time and realized 50 rounds in a GPMG is really a specialty item.

>>34355582
I'm no expert, but off the top of my head I can guess ammo weight and commonality had a lot to do with it.

File: 4ec9d15e-215b-4c2a-b26f-1991234318e6.jpg (115KB, 749x500px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 749x500px

>>34357844
>you can't hit targets at 500 yards with a M4
>SEAL team 1 is incapable of killing people

File: 1481685716162.png (187KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 640x360px

>>34358320

>>34357464
And if it would have been an even better design it would have lost fewer lives

>>34358320
No

>>34357844

>We shot guys with a 5.56 mm center mass and had them walk in 5 hours later and say 'you shot me.' Then we would medically evacuate them.

Okay, I'm an ignorant civie, but why would an enemy combatant be okay with just "walking in" to a place where special forces are present?

>>34358156
You think Ian just made that shit up? Those issues have existed for years before his video

>>34358151
Anime is fucking trash, holy shit.

>>34355663
>because they replaced it with the 249, not the 240
wrong. the 249 replaced the full auto M-16 that the Automatic Rifleman carried. The 240 replaced the M60. The problem is that during the mid and late 90's when some units were waiting for their 240s, they had to turn in all of, or all but two of their M60s. Late 90s at Ft Hood, my Infantry company had 2 M-60s and they were assigned to HQ platoon.

File: 1452728492899.jpg (96KB, 723x680px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 723x680px

>>34358614

>>34358383
>get shot
>ditch gun
>lol am civilian now
>goto FOB/wherever and get free hospital trip
Situations like that even when you know 99% damn sure the guy got shot whilst fighting it's near impossible to prove it so you have to treat them as injured civilian and provide medical care, and the moderately smarter durkas know it.

>>34355582
Because the M60 was a hunk of shit and only became actually good by the E3 version.

>>34355671
They didn't, they field both the 5.56mm M249 and the 7.62mm M240B.

>>34356211
>structural weaknesses, stretches and batters itself to death, bolt peens itself
>parts work themselves loose from recoil, such as the pistolgrip+FCG unit, or the gasplug
>sear engagement known to wear, which is an unbelievably fucking big problem in an open bolt weapon, as the gun actually might fire if dropped or bumped, on top of the bolt plain skipping the sear and the gun continuing to fire when it's not supposed to, this probably caused numerous incidents
>bipods attached to spare barrels for some unimaginably retarded reason

>>34356249
>implying an M240B doesn't do this better

File: ynA_hKL8Ikk.jpg (190KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1200x800px

unpopular opinion

PKM and PKP are better than M240 and M249

PKP minor ammo is lighter than both

>>34356631
Your dad sounds like a real gentleman.

>>34357127
I have issues with the MG42 and MG3 too.

>>34356631
>>34356580
>SPOILERS: That glove was 99% asbestos

>>34357814
>M60
>actually works

>>34358320
No, Germany had unbelievable fucking issues with logistics, as well as economy, which they arguably handled worse than the Commies (a fucking achievement for sure).

There is no realistic scenario where Nazi Germany would achieve their goals, much less survive into and beyond the 1950's.

>>34358889
The only way Germany could survive is that Hitler an hero'd 4 years early.

>>34356475
One PKM per platoon in Warsaw Pact forces, if they can do it then why the american manlets can't?

>>34358984
Not even then, he was certainly a third wheel with his micromanaging and tactical impairement, but there were just way too many fundamental and systematic problems with their war effort and economy.

>>34358103
I believe during the tail end of Afghanistan that some of the 82nd got their hands of mk48s, given some helmetcam combat footage that they had using them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llEWrL9ghyg

I believe this guys regular infantry.

File: rommel.jpg (200KB, 1200x1082px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 1200x1082px

>>34358320
I will contribute further into derailing this thread

But no, Stalingrad couldn't have turned out well.
Germany's only chance against Russia was defeating their military in summer of 1941, causing the state to collapse, like had happened during ww1.
But the entire attack was miscalculated, the German army didn't have the capabilities to counter Russian war production and manpower.
Germany couldn't have fared in a war of nutrition because all the factories and oil fields they captured from Russians were destroyed when they were retreating.

It is a miracle how long Germany was able to hold against all it's enemies and the bravery of the German soldier is something to be admired.

>>34355582
>>34355582
Well seeing as how no ones wants to give you an in depth answer OP

The more recent iterations of the M60 were much better than the original because they removed almost all of the original's many issues and design flaws. When the US military was looking to replace the M60 it compared more recent models of the M60 to the M240

Pros of each

M60E4:
>Lighter than M240
>Better ergonomics
>Actual way to hold the belt
>Shorter overall due to semi bullpup nature

M240
>More reliable than the M60, not by much but still
>Better for vehicle mounting


As the military was only going to adopt one gun for both infantry and vehicles it was decided to go with just the M240. The M60E4 and other recent models however are better infantry weapons because of the aforementioned benefits which is why you'll sometimes see special forces using it.

File: 1433921414623.jpg (382KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

382KB, 1600x1200px

>>34358762
>unpopular opinion
>PKM and PKP are better than M240 and M249
I dont think you know what an unpopular opinion is

>>34359046

> a war of nutrition

Thanks anon now my sinus cavities are filled with hot coffee.

File: image.jpg (58KB, 1200x570px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 1200x570px

>>34355582
Don't forget the real mvp belt fed weapon

>>34358762
5.56 Serbian PKP in action when?

>>34355886
Please re-read that and I hope you realise how incredibly retarded you sound

File: Ee04Pzo6OPU.jpg (740KB, 2313x1422px) Image search: [Google]

740KB, 2313x1422px

>>34359191
Russian are developing 5.45 belt feed LMG

>>34358087
>aesthetics over function and reliability in the field

Unfuck yourself this instant

>>34358156
>this is your argument

While I like the M60 it's important to understand it's flaws.

Stop being pooper peeved.

>>34358999
>Platoon
>Squad
lol literally what's the difference?

>>34358999
You are retarded, there are 2 or 3 240b at platoon level. And 2 SAWs at squad level

>>34359059
Oh yeah, the E4, and especially the more recent E6, are quite fantastic machineguns.

>>34358156
>asshurt nostalgiafag
>Ian brought up these documented and widely know flaws, and his fans brought them up, that means they're not true!

At least argue for the E3 or something you sensitive bitch.

>>34357222
kek the true story indeed

File: FN Minimi Mk3.jpg (105KB, 1200x799px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 1200x799px

Why did we choose the 240 over a 7.62 minimi? was the minimi eve considered? What did the 240 have to compete against?

File: IMG_4667.jpg (2MB, 3447x1964px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3447x1964px

>>34359577
>that stock + cheekweld
Are they taking notes from B&T and issuing it to dudes wearing helmets with visors?

politics most likely

>>34360209
>didn't read the thread

File: 101120ritchie20pursley8yp.jpg (467KB, 1291x726px) Image search: [Google]

467KB, 1291x726px

Because by the late 80's the M60's where completely fucked. The problems they had in Vietnam where much worse as the guns had seen extremely heavy use. The 75th Ranger Regiment wanted new guns so they got an FN MAG, an M60E3, and a standard M60 as a base line and had all three in their machine gun section. They found the FN MAG to be superior in every way to either M60 and pushed to get it adopted as the 240G. The marines had gone with the E3 and found it to be a hunk of shit and went with the 240G as well. Pic somewhat related, rangers in Somalia one MAG/240G and an M60

>>34355582
>worn feeder pawl springs popping out
>worn yokes falling the fuck out for no reason when the feed tray cover is raised
>bolt cracking and breaking at the connecting point to the op rod
>that stupid fucking internal piston

The MAG-58 was always a better GPMG, and it became obvious when the U.S. started using them as coax guns on their armored vehicles. When the U.S. command finally decided to shit-can the M-60 in the late 80's / early 90's, they realized that they had a surplus of coax 240's they weren't going to be using anymore due to armored force reductions scrapping the need for so many mech vehicles, so they decided to slap a buttstock on those fuckers and give them to the infantry.

The only thing the M-60 had to offer over the MAG-58 / M240 is that it was about 5 pounds lighter, and 5 inches shorter, but it was inferior in every other way. You could get damn near 1000 RPM out of the MAG-58 and the early M240 B series thanks to the adjustable gas settings, where the M-60 chugged along at like 550 RPM....when it wasn't gunked the fuck up.

The M-60 just wasn't a very well thought out piece of kit, and was pretty much inferior to even the MG-42.

>>34356424
>The Minime and the -249, on the other hand, shouldn't even exist.

The 249 is a great weapon IF you take care of it, but apparently that's a rare thing in a lot of shit units equipped with them.

>>34359925
Did the 7.62 Minimi exist when the Army was looking at the 240?

>>34360321
M249 is a FANTASTIC weapon, it's just that they're worn out and wern't being maintained properly.

>>34356211
"The Pig" is based on the MG42 (yes, the german Mg in WW2) and is heavily outdated.

Also the Belgs do a really great job at constructing weapons.

>>34357308
Are you kidding???

The MG34 was shit-tier and the MG42 was only good when the soldiers had good training, it wasnt easy to shoot with due the rate of fire

>>34358328
Those doublemags did exist, but had issues with the bullet feeding mechanism

File: this guy_ron.jpg (50KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 640x480px

>>34360373
>M60 is based on the MG 42

File: 1497893618972.png (1MB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 800x800px

>>34359046
>Surprise Inspection
>Soldier get at his MG42
>Forgets to load the gun
>"Ah shit i hope nobody realise it"
>Avoids eye contact
>Rommel doesnt see it
>MFW


This pic is gold

File: Chumlee.jpg (26KB, 624x352px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 624x352px

>>34360373

>>34360407
>The MG34 was shit-tier and the MG42 was only good when the soldiers had good training, it wasnt easy to shoot with due the rate of fire

Euhm, the MG34's major shortcoming was complexity and cost. I'd take an MG34 over an MG42 any day.

I know a guy owning both, and he exclusively shoots the MG34 because it's so superior.

>>34360291
I don't think a ROF of 550RPM is bad though, fast enough and lets your ammo last.
But yeah, the M60 wasn't very durable.

>>34360430
>>34360512
The action is different obviously, the numbskull don't get that, but the belt feed and cover is copied from the MG42

Isn't the German army phasing out the MG3 because it has too high a fire rate and eats through ammo too fast for prolonged suppression?

>>34356840
Grandpa Porks My Grandma

>>34358999
2 PKMs per jaeger squad in Finland. Shit was pretty cash.

>>34360334
The original minimi was designed for 7.62 in the late 70s (don't know the exact date) and the 240 was adopted in 77, so if it did exist, it was cutting it close.

File: nutrition.jpg (51KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 640x480px

>>34359046
>war of nutrition

Onward Comrades!!

...huff pufff...I'll just...huff...be right behind you.

>>34360827
Partially, it also beats itself somewhat, and you need an asbestos glove for barrel changes.

I think they want to go the US route of a 5.56mm SAW and a 7.62mm GPMG, but I don't know if they have that money.

>>34359577
>>34360123
The Tozar-2 is being developed for the MVD/FSB so it makes sense that its designed for use with a ballistic visor

File: 1496342522796.jpg (165KB, 600x399px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 600x399px

>>34355582
according to this pic its still being used in some sort of capacity. Now that the m60 isnt shit anymore(m60e6) I get the feeling we'll be seeing more of it

>>34360758
>I don't think a ROF of 550RPM is bad though

A higher rate of fire tightens up the beaten zone at range, which is exactly what's needed in places like A-stan, and even Europe.

>>34361214
>Now that the m60 isnt shit anymore

No, it's still shit....and the fact that the navy is still using it proves that fact.

>>34355964
Yeah but it lacks the gook blood aesthetic

>>34359001
Had a couple in 10th mtn in 2013.

We gave them to our DMs because lol fuck m14s, we need more machine guns.

>>34361405
The m60e6 is not shit. You're wrong and you should feel wrong

>>34358091
Kek

>>34358320
Possibly they could have held out long enough to be nuked into submission instead

>>34361463
Uh wrong, troops loved M14s and the EBR kits worked perfectly.

>>34362429
>dust off M14s for DMR purposes
>get fuckugly stocks for them that only barely makes them passable for that role

>>34361214
That's a DEA FAST team agent. They aren't the military and that pic was taken in 2011.

>>34362429
You were just told by someone that was there that they sucked so bad they didn't even use them. Wait, is this bait?

>>34362975
We don't know which AO he was in. In the city you best believe i want the MGs but if you are in the mountains the m14 or anything else that is good out to 800 yds+ is a god send.

>>34355582
>>34356211
The FN MAG is superior to the M60 in almost every way. The only reason we adopted the M60 over the FN MAG in the first was because of politics.

30 years later when we were working closely with NATO allies troops kept asking why our allies had such an amazing machine gun (they all used the MAG) and why ours was so shit. Eventually the military admitted the only reason the M60 was even adopted in the first place was because it was an american design and congress pressured them to buy american.

File: 1451381880092.jpg (36KB, 800x343px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 800x343px

>>34360430

>>34363669
Sexy.

>>34362635
>cops with belt feds and actual operating in a fucking war zone.
Respect, even if they are Ebil Weed police.

m60 has issues with longevity

>>34356211
>>34355929
>>34355921
>>34355886
>>34355714
>>34355671
>>34355663
>>34355635
>>34355582
Basically, the M-60's retention features were retarded as fuck, because instead of using captive or detented pins, they used ONE pin, that hooked onto a stud and an easily bendable flatspring to retain that one pin under tension, the receivers had poor welds and was typically made of more mild steel than what should have been used, they attached bipods to the barrels, forcing you to carry more weight to have spare barrels, then there were other cycling issues, like they mention in the video where the bolt peens, the rate of fire was retardedly slow because the camming roller that actuates the feeding pawls was supposed to be free rotating like on the MG-42, but it didn't rotate in the M-60, and it was possible to wear down the sear, causing it to jump the bolt. To boil it down, a lot of poor decisions were made in consideration of wear resistance, parts retention, and of course, long term use.

>>34358134
They are, the Mk 46 was built without a magazine well on it to save weight, but can't use M4 magazines in emergencies because of that, although not necessarily a bad thing as older or well used mags can have issues with the springs being too slow for the SAW going cyclic and occasionally the bolt would eat followers, though with newer magazines it's not as much of an issue

File: Jin-Roh.jpg (17KB, 300x429px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 300x429px

>>34358151
>Just lets hot barrel plummet to the earth
>Somehow reloaded an mg42 singlehandily despite carrying two of the damn things
>Throws away an mg42
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
>>34358614
Jin Roh was bretty good though

>>34358365
Milspec M4s with milspec ammunition are fucking horrible. We're talking ~4 MOA expected and I've heard horror stories of fucking 8 MOA rifles being sent out into combat.

>>34366673

No surprises there. New from the factory they get 2-3 MOA because the specs say 5 MOA is acceptable.

They're supposed to weed out the shitty ones, but as long as they pass the go/no-go gauges at the armory the pencil pushers are fine letting that rifle float around forever because it's probably the user's fault anyway.

>>34363457
7.62 machine can't go to 800 yards now?

>>34363457
The M14 has such mediocre accuracy that I'd rather use a GPMG in it's place.

>>34363669
That's a modified FG42, not an MG42

>>34359000
Germany seems to always decide to wage war on everyone at once and it always comes down to, will their phenomenal soldiers and new tactics shatter the enemy or will the fucking small economic/industrial/agricultural base make the country eat itself and implode. They have to accomplish their objectives immediately or fail completely