>>63821196 (OP)
Probably would have desu, but they didn't enter it and put this out after sig got called the winner. Its just better.

big army should just pass all authority on small arms procurement to socom

>>63821272
NSW Crane are incompetent lying retards who's top brass make a decision, and they then fabricate results to back it up. The SCAR had that retarded reciprocating charging handle because of them and they made absolutely ridiculous claims about the M4 having like one stoppage every 250 rounds

>>63821196 (OP)
What ammo is that?

>>63821409
.264 USA

>>63821409
Never mind. Google search=6.5x43mm

>>63821196 (OP)
>NGSW but with less overmatch
Why? Did you forget how Russian/ISIS hybrid kicked Americans ass in Afganistan with superior SVD/PKM?

>>63821196 (OP)
You're not a 6mm C-T gun.

>>63821331
Those tests were done by ATEC Aberdeen, not NSW Crane, you mouthbreathing retard. The "muh burst reset stoppages" cope is also fuddlore that was started by Colt to damage control the situation. What the tests actually showed, irrespective of burst failures, was rates of failure to feed and failure to extract that were multiple times worse than the competing rifles. Colt made a variety of firehose of falsehood bullshit allegations about it being run improperly to try to preserve their cash cow, meanwhile in Afghanistan, Wanat was happening. The M4 got fixed with a product improvement package despite Colt's efforts, but 99% of the shit on the internet about those tests is Colt spin.

>>63822144
>>63821331
Further, EVERYONE who ran reliability tests on original and unimproved M4s in that period found that they were massively unreliable pieces of shit. It wasn't even just ATEC and NSW, partner countries tested them as well and even the USMC did a head to head on M16A4 and M4 in 2001/2002 and refused to adopt M4 because of its unreliability.

You die-hard "M4s on Mars", "DI is perfect" motherfuckers have been suckered by Colt propaganda from 15 years ago hardcore.

>>63822144
And what did this “improvement package” consist of?

>>63822170
Bren, SCAR, ARX, HK416, MCX, there are six gorillion and a half improvements on a design from the 1950s, Stonerfags are just neo-fudds

>>63822175
From memory about 250. Far too many to list. By the way, did you know that not only does Colt allege that professional military small arms engineers forgot how the M4/M16 burst mechanism worked, they also expect you to believe that they forgot how it worked more often the dirtier M4s got? Joke's on me, because the whole fucking internet believes that in 2025 apparently.

>>63821196 (OP)
>Probably would have desu
No, it would not have, because it just doesn't meet the base requirements.

>>63821331
>absolutely ridiculous claims about the M4 having like one stoppage every 250 rounds
Every 80 rounds. The results were basically replicated by everyone who ever did a similar test. M4s were pieces of shit at the time. It's assumes they're fixed now, but who knows.

>>63821216
Anything is better than Sig stuff. Remember, sig also won the LPVO contract with their tango‐6 lemon of an optic. The drop firing P320 winning the pistol contract just sealed it. Sig only won anything through bribery.

>>63822233
I don't know what Colt was doing back then and frankly I don't care. Your post is bait.

>>63821196 (OP)
>lightweight, yet stiff mono upper
good
>full length picashitty cheesegrater
really?
>external charging handle rod
bad
>AR lower with shit ergos
bad
>not a bullpup
*autistic screeching*

>>63822243
Goes to show, modern, properly engineered guns form reputable serious arms manufacturers like H&K do not require cleaning to function properly.
Meanwhile Colt garbage cobbled together by cleetus in the garage needs to be cleaned autistically or it ceases to work immediately.

>>63821196 (OP)
What about the MG?

>>63821196 (OP)
It doesn't do anything special that an M4 upgrade package couldn't also do. The only logical options were upgrade the M4 or adopt a bullpup.
>>63824244
That's MLOK, blind retard.

>>63824321
ON THE TOP YOU DUMB CHIMP

>>63825809
How is it a cheese grater if it's on top? Are you wrist over bore Costafagging like it's 2010?
>AR lower
>bad ergos
Is that why everyone copies it? Post guns, I'm not sure you've ever held one.

>>63824125
>bribery

why wasnt A2 put in charge of the NGSW program?

so why can we not just continue using m4/m16? it seemed to work fine to me.

>>63824125
I don't think its even necessarily that, this is a multi-service thing so I think there's a top-down initiative to eventually have a sole-source American manufacturer for all small arms; so our logistics are insulated from any shit that goes on in Europe that might affect FN or HK or Glock. Its just sheer bad fortune that the horse that was chosen to hitch that all to was a cost cutting pajeet outsourced pile of shit.

>>63822299
>>63822170
>>63822144
Given the shitload of good information online these days (that gets overshadowed by complete garbage to be sure), what *exact" improvements were made? Heard somewhere that like 80% of the problems the m4 had in Afghanistan were pinned down to old magazines, which was how Magpul got their foot in the door selling their mags at the PX.
What exactly was "fixed" for the M4? Different bolts? Chamber material?

>>63829821
I assume they're talking about the PIP. New barrels, trigger groups and bolts.

>>63829821
An O ring under the extractor spring.

>>63821272
>Big Army sucks at procuring new small arms, they should delegate it to the geniuses who brought us the Mark 23 and SCAR-L
pfft

>>63821331
how is a reciprocating charging handle bad? and dont say it hurts your thumb. Do you have an opinion outside of what guntubers tell you?

>>63829768
lmfao

>>63829842
Aside from correcting bratty grunts who use a thumb-high magwell grip, the reciprocating CH can also snag on pieces of the environment like VTAC barricades if you jam the rifle magwell-deep into it when you're stabilizing the gun for a longer shot. It is largely theoretical considering how far back on the receiver the SCAR's charging handle is, but that, in turn, leads to the end user having to install an aftermarket CH or be unreasonably diligent in his optic selection and placement to avoid racking his knuckles against his optic's mounting hardware.
The problem, ultimately, isn't with reciprocating charging handles in general—the AK and Garand have them, and they're obviously fine—but with the SCAR's implementation of the concept, which is only partially mitigated by the recent NRCH "upgrade".

>>63829867
do you even fuckin shoot?
>It is largely theoretical
ah right, you dont.

>>63821196 (OP)
Using the tail of the bolt carrier is a good idea to make it ambi-able
Still prefer the FAL CH tho

>>63821461
LICC MUH DICC

>>63829867
so mount it on the other side then? it can be done without tools in like 2 minutes.