barrett.netPosted Dec 12, 2012, 4:09 PM UTC
Except for the price tag. I know, I know, including the ELCAN DR it comes to about $4100 per rifle. But budget-wise; you could outfit the entire USMC & USA infantry with these rifles by just by not ordering 2 more JSF variants or F-22 Raptors.
If only the people in charge realized that a better service rifle is more important than a better fighter plane that we are never going to have to use on anybody
Yeah, who needs deterrence anyway? We can just fly f-15/16s forever!
Keep dreaming. The Army and Marines had their chances over the last decade to replace the M16. Now that budget cuts are coming, you can bet the M16 and M4 aren't going anywhere. Especially in the Marine Corps.
You should post this and join us in the new 6.8 SPC community at r/68SPC !
Pistons are overrated and require tuning and can be knocked out of their headspace if hit hard enough.
Plus switching to a new caliber means throwing out every 5.56mm magazine, PMAG, accessory, SAW, LAR, and tool for them. Expensive.
For $4000 a piece, you could afford to give every marine & soldier who needs one an ACOG for about $1500 and then spend the rest of the money of ammunition and fees for love fire training.
I know I'd rather see every soldier & marine be run through TigerSwan training and still use their M4 or M16 instead of using a proprietary cartridge rifle that they can still barely handle.
Logic. Doesn't belong here. ;) lol.
Don't know if its a typo, but "love fire training" fitting if it is, clever if its not.
I've never had issue with a piston or heard or one happening. You'd have to beat the hell out of that rifle to screw up headspace. Have you had this experience before? And if so, was it easy to fix or no? Not to mention we already have armorers that can re-tune a rifle and reset the headpsace on various weapons in almost every unit.
Again, we spend billions each year on planes that cant even perform to design specs (Raptor/JSF) and ships that can't even make it out to sea (the new class of amphibious ships anyone?) without returning to dry dock a month later. Not to mention the const overruns for these "high tech) planes and ships.
I dont care how many rounds a dude puts through an M-4 and he is a regular Carlos Hathcock with it; the M-4 M-16 still lacks terminal kinetic energy and is underpowered. And an ACOG? Seriously? Find me someone who can effectively engage a moving enemy (I'm talking beyond 600-700 meters) with an ACOG and land half their shots. With similar training on the REC-7 exactly like we do with the M-4 & M-16 you'd have more than enough guys proficient with it. Especially when you slap a real optic on it (ELCAN/EOTECH/Leupold (not a piece or shit ACOG) or Aim point optic.
If the military adopted the 6.8 SPC it would cease to be proprietary and other manufactures would step up and make it. When the US military asks someone to create 1,000,000 6.8SPC rounds it stops being a proprietary round and starts being a contracting issue between ammo companies to make the rounds. You'd have Ammo manufacturers beating down the door to get that contract.
If you can teach a guy to shoot accurately & effectively an M-4/M-16/SCAR-L then you can doe the same with the REC-7. And then you would have guys who can effectively engage targets farther out (900-maybe 1100 meters) and maintain enough kinetic energy to cause massive cavitation woulds and knock down power.
Although you brought up some very good points man, sounds like you are the voice of reason when your commander comes up with "the magic idea fairy" on his shoulder. And one other thing, the REC-7 just looks cool. And if i've learned anything from war movies, looking cool is half the battle haha.