General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

LRRPFco52
The Armourer's Bench
comments

Comments by "LRRPFco52" (@LRRPFco52) on "The Armourer's Bench" channel.

Collector market in Europe would buy them. Can't import them into the US though, because....reasons.
106
So much easier to get rimless to feed from a mag than rimmed.
31
Wagner has been seen in Syria wearing US-made after-market combat clothing in ATACS. They've been acquiring NightForce and Schmidt & Bender scopes, US Garmin GPSs, and lots of other US and European-made gear that actually is quality.
25
Yup. This makes much more sense than 6.8x51 or 7.62 NATO. Will be excellent in LMGs and DMRs. The receiver set needs to be smaller though for the carbines and rifles.
17
@ProtesttheAntagonist You can plug the numbers into a ballistics program and see what kind of performance 6.8x51 gives you, while noting the size and weight of the firearm. If you've spent some time with 270 Winchester or 270 WSSM, then you have a good idea of what 6.8x51 falls within since it's about 200-300fps slower than those with the 13" barrel, based on what we've seen on LabRadar velocity measurements and other channels who have chronographed their samples. Nothing mysterious...
8
Mod 2 gas block, barrel, lock ring, and suppressor are meant to work together to the extent that they beat: SIG Hk 416A5 DD
8
 @broderman5 I've been using 25rd 6.5 Grendel mags since 2009. They're just like a 30rd 5.56 mag in size and shape.
6
@broderman5 CProducts and Elander, with ASC being hit and miss initially. The newer ASC mags are very refined from all I can see. First dedicated Grendel mags were made for AA by Cproducts. Those were tested and accepted or rejected in batches. CProducts and ASC had some type of relationship which split into CProducts Defense and ASC in the late 2000s if I recall. AA contracted Elander to make mags as well. Amend2 also makes polymer 10rd mags. Duramag makes Grendel mags as well. I've been running Grendels through DM Courses and LR shooting events each year since 2009. I'm used to seeing brass piled up next to shooters that looks like a machinegun position, so we're talking pretty high round counts with no malfunctions. We went through tons of growing pains with 5.56 mags along the way if you study AR-15 history.
4
@CircaSriYak The inevitability of 6.8x51 isn't inevitable. Even combat arms units are going to push back heavily once they get XM7 in their hands. Almost every duty position in an Infantry Company will be hindered by XM7, not helped. The only duty positions it makes sense for are DMs, which aren't even in the MTO&E last I checked.
4
@CircaSriYak The cartridge as a replacement for 7.62 NATO is one thing. I'm talking about the XM7 rifle, which defies logic when you look at the MTO&E. 5.56 was developed prior to US ground troops being deployed en masse to Vietnam. 5.56/AR-15 was immediately embraced and loved by SAS, SF, SEALs, Recon units within SF, LRRPs, Force Recon, SASR, Airborne, and Airmobile units. So far, every single multi-decade SF NCO has said exactly what I'm saying, and have been saying about NGSW: The LMG is cool, makes sense. The Rifle only makes sense in a DMR capacity. Most people who have never been in an Infantry unit don't understand that many of the duty positions are not Riflemen, nor do they understand the ways Riflemen actually employ carbines. They don't understand how our fires elements are organized, trained, and task organized, and they don't understand the flow of logistics down to and through a Company or Platoon. Furthermore, they don't understand how soldiers, NCOs, and officers are supposed to be trained vs actual training, and how inadequate most of that is in regular infantry units. The XM7 is the embodiment of senior Army leadership being obscenely ignorant of everything I just mentioned above as well, with a myopic focus on a singular terminal performance requirement that creates a large carbine that is detrimental to every duty position within the Company outside of DMs.
4
It sucks, is heavy, doesn't allow mounting of OTN accessories very easily, inaccurate, bad ergos, really gasses you in the face when suppressed (ejection port right under your face), more small parts (trigger linkage).
4
When the unit that was looking for a replacement for their SR-25s did a series of practical shooting tests with 6.5 Grendel 12"-18" carbines, they were asked by Hornady afterwards whether or not there were any of the events where they would have preferred SR-25s. All the shooters stated that no, they preferred 6.5 Grendel in every single scenario. So Hornady took 6mm AR and set the shoulder back, calling it "6mm ARC" for the same purposes for this unit.
3
5.56 should be replaced with a shorter cartridge that has same or better performance, like 6x35 PDW stepped up in mv. That would allow lighter, smaller magazines and a smaller weapon for: CO 1SG XO RTOs Drivers FSO JTAC Commo NCO Supply NCO Supply clerks PL PSG RTO FO JTAC Rifle Squad Leader Fire Team Leader Grenadier Rifleman Weapons Squad Leader AG AB Anti-Armor Weapons Specialist The main duty positions that would benefit from a High Performance Intermediate Rifle Cartridge would be SAW Gunners and DMs. We need an Arms Room approach for Squad Leaders and Team Leaders who could either draw the PDW carrtidge blasters, or DMRs like this. DM Training needs to be incorporated into Infantry OSUT and NCOPD.
3
@andrewpeterson549 There's a huge difference between range rentals and weapons you take into the field, especially for units that shoot high volume and bang the weapons around. Ergonomics on the SCAR leave a lot to be desired, and rail space is very limited unless you add non OEM parts. Then there's the trigger, gas block jets compromising signature under NODS, issues with suppressing, lots of extra parts for armorer work and things coming loose (SOFNAC has these in the course syllabus to address for SCARs), doesn't play well with tripods and saddles due to charge handle location, and breaks ancillary electro-optical systems at a faster rate than SR-25s do. FN also ignored end-user feedback from senior SF NCOs, so that's why SCAR-L died quickly.
3
@Ukraineaissance2014 Barrel length does not equal accuracy. It only affects velocity and weapon weight.
3
Combat Engineers, FOs, JTACs, RTOs, 1SGs, Drivers, AGs, ABs, Combat Medics, etc. all need a PDW chambered in a new compact, small caliber, high velocity cartridge that's smaller than 5.56 in length, with superior performance. Take the 6x35mm PDW and juice it up into something like the MP7 or KAC PDW.
3
@johndowe7003 Like what Justice Roberts did with his Irish adopted kids?
2
@CircaSriYak The optic makes perfect sense for DMs, but not everyone. I'm talking about future conflict as well. Doctrine doesn't even survive the initial deployment cycle of getting to the air bases you stage out of. Doctrine is for desk jockies and classroom officers, not actual airmen, soldiers, and sailors. The Maneuver Center of Excellence is the embodiment of what I'm talking about. There isn't any excellence happening there by slapping buzzwords on what they're doing at Benning. Regardless of whether you're in "conventional war" or COIN, it's very rare for an Infantry soldier to see the enemy during actual fighting, until actions o the objective when most of the enemy has been killed or wounded once you sweep through in close quarters. The best you get is partially-exposed body parts for maybe a few seconds, and runners in between cover and concealment after most of their forces have been decimated by echelons of fire. US echelons of fire in MDO include more than the combined past year of all Russian and Ukrainian munitions expended within a few days. That's why nobody wants to go toe-to-toe with us, because they would be erased. None of that has to do with small arms. Does that make sense?
2
@zoiders Colt didn't CNC any parts for AR-15/M-16 in the 1960s, 70s, or 80s and I wonder if they even did in the 1990s-2000s. Manufacturing techniques were well within the pioneers of metal-working capabilities and the home of the industrial revolution in England. Receivers are aerospace-grade aluminium, and England had been making superb aircraft airframes out of aluminium for many decades prior to that. I'm interested to see what other reasons we might be overlooking.
2
@superfamilyallosauridae6505 T48 shot very poorly in the US Army service rifle testing in the mid 1950s. There were old test reports uncovered several years ago that showed this. Parts count was really high too.
2
Appreciate your coverage. This cartridge would be cool in an AR-15 receiver set with a larger mag well like the POF Revolution/Rogue, or Ruger SFAR. Keep the receiver set small and clean, configure it out from there.
2
@modelrailwaynoob With 133.6 million admitted/recorded American gun-owners (twice the entire population of the UK, and not including those who didn’t answer), I’d say a lot of people care about the American Civilian Market, far more than any military contract in any nation at any time in history. Target shooters and competitors in the US were at over 30.6 million people in 2021. There are only 1.5 million active duty military personnel in the US, and only 660,000 full-time police officers. US gun-owners dwarf the military and police by such a large number that they basically don’t factor in anywhere close to a significant source of demand for firearms and ammunition compared to the civilian market.
2
SA80 simply can't ever be as accurate as an AR-15. Trigger linkage and things attached to the barrel don't help the SA80 in the accuracy department. AR-15s are as close as you'll get to free-floated bolt guns.
2
@jonny2954 CAG has been seen with something new. They have superb direct armorer support that rivals any other unit, and have been instrumental in many of the fixes and improvements to the 416, let alone its creation. I lived through the early days and even helped source parts for the Hk prototypes. A lot of operators preferred to keep their lighter M4A1s.
2
@crashdsnowman1 If it’s based on .264 USA, then it’s a .441” case head cartridge like 6.5 Grendel, not a .473” case head diameter like 6.5x47 Lapua or .308 Win.
1
@crashdsnowman1 I measured another more clear photo, which does seem to indicate a .473" case head, 2.500" COL. Extractor groove is unusually large with 2 steps in the rim, which is odd.
1
@crashdsnowman1 I just ran some numbers through an internal ballistics engine based off the premise of applying NGSW pressures to a 6.5x47 Lapua with 130gr. From a high pressure 6.5x47L, looks like you could spit a 130gr from a 13" barrel at 2686fps. This case has less volume, so they'll be lucky to hit 2650fps from a 13" barrel. 18.5" barrel could probably hit 2850fps tops, which is like 6.5x47 or 6.5CM 24" barrel performance. Would be great for DM/Semi Auto Sniper Systems. Would be better with an enlarged mag well on the AR-15 receiver set with FCG moved back slightly.
1
@crashdsnowman1 That makes sense. Was that with 130gr Berger? When I did pressure ladder tests with my first 16" 6.5 Grendel and CFE223, I took it to 2698fps with 123gr A-MAX. It went way higher than I ever thought it would before departing the trend line. I never produced that load of course. I load 123gr A-MAX, SST, and ELD-M to around 2500fps at less than 50,000psi. With the higher pressure steel cases even at Grendel form factor, they could come really close. This is why I don't think .473" case head is necessary. .473" case diameter screws you over on soldier's load due to magazine thickness and stored weight away from your center of gravity. 7.62 magazine thickness isn't fun to carry.
1
@fridrekr7510 SAS have been using AR-15s since 1965 because they are reliable, lightweight, have great ergonomics, are very accurate, and performed better than any other assault rifles that were available through each decade since then. Since they get to choose what the use based on performance, it says a lot. The longer barrel lengths of bullpups don’t offer any real practical advantage with 5.56 NATO or other cartridges because 5.56 bleed energy so rapidly, and the short barrels shoot much faster than people realize. The SA80 was a home program that was pushed and stubbornly held onto, when the entire Army could have had better weapons since the 1970s really.
1
ATN is Chinese garbage that breaks if we're talking thermals. They are widely-known to be avoided on the US hog hunting world.
1
@mrjockt AR-10, AR-15, AR-18, G36 etc. use the British Fosbery shotgun bolt and barrel extension patented in 1891. The British bolt locking mechanism is the most popular and prolific among modern military gas-operated rifles in the world, though forgotten generations ago in its 19th Century origin.
1
 @andrewpeterson549 AUG uses a Fosbery/Ljungman/Stoner rotating multi-lug bolt. Compare a Steyr AUG bolt to an AR-15/G36/AR-18 bolt some time.
1
@ostiariusalpha Funny thing is that soldiers in dismounted infantry engagements tend to seek cover and concealment as a rule. You're dealing with partially-exposed soldiers at-best, obscured and concealed soldiers as the norm. Fortunately, the US doesn't fight large nation infantry soldiers with infantry, so NGSW doesn't matter in that fight anyway. Any troops in fortification or motorized movement are dealt an unfair series of blows with echelons of fire from air power and long range PGMs. Howitzer Artillery is down on the list after that using PGM warheads with 3m or less error. If taking ground is one of the objectives, then Infantry comes into play. Not sure what ground anyone is interested in taking from Chinese, since multiple Asian armies allied with the US occupy all those spaces currently.
1
 @ScottKenny1978 Depending on the type of unit and service: M1 Garand BAR M1 Carbine M1903A4
1
@ScottKenny1978 Thompson and M3 .45 ACPs are SMGs, so not sure if I would throw them in, though both are shoulder-fired. Thompsons suck to carry due to weight, limited range, and ballistic potential.
1
@ostiariusalpha Infantry are crucial to fighting and managing Counter-Insurgencies for local and regional security until the host nation can be built up. Dismounted Infantry are not even part of the Corps-level task organization for a more conventional war, other than for securing staging areas in friendly environments in the rear, which is usually done by MPs. Mechanized Infantry are the last echelon in conventional warfare, after USAF Global Strike (B-2A, B-1B, B-52H), TACAIR/CAS (F-15E, F-35A, F-16CM+, A-10C, MQ-9A), Army CAS (AH-64D/E), MRLS, Artillery, and Mechanized heavy mortars have prepped the objective before organic TOWs, Javelins, 25mm, .50 BMG, and 7.62mm have attrited enemy light armor, fortifications, and dismounts. At that point, M4s and SAWs in the hands of dudes pouring out the backs of Bradleys and Strykers are fine. The XM250 would be fine for that, but not a real factor in the outcome. The terminal performance requirement seems myopic to focus on, given the ground truth reality. DMRs in a COIN setting make tons of sense due to minimized collateral among a civilian population when attriting insurgent cells and protecting perimeters. That doesn't require the XM7. It requires taking DM training seriously.
1
@ostiariusalpha As far as the budget is concerned, it is absolutely harmonious with my assessment. You will not even be able to find NGSW unless you’re specifically looking for it in the list of funded Aviation, Armor, Artillery, Long Range Fires, Drones, Medical, EW, NBC, Comms/JTIDS/Linked Net-Centric systems, etc. Small Arms are a tiny portion of the overall budget, and the few competent people they recruit and train in the officer corps are allocated to Aviation, Artillery, Armor, etc. If you ever look at Army Officer promotions, it’s a monstrous abortion of how to train, develop, retain, and promote competent leadership. For starters, they recruit from outside the Army from the civilian world, instead of recruiting from within with a giant pool of NCOs with proven leadership and experience. This is how you end up with Colonels and Brigadier Generals who have only maybe 4-6 years of actual Command time over combat arms units in their Career Management Field. The rest is staff time pushing papers, PowerPoints, labyrinthine matrices, and reports. This makes them institutionally incompetent as a rule when it comes to how combat units actually function.
1
@ostiariusalpha Cop-out. You've proven you can make intelligent statements better than that.
1
@ostiariusalpha General McConville was recruited from the civilian world into West Point. He's a Cavalry aviator, rotary wing officer who did far more staff time than operational or command (the norm). Talk me through how you think that's relevant to development of dismounted Infantry weapons development.
1
@ostiariusalpha Bronze Star is standard issue to key leaders E-6 and above on deployments during GWOT, including desk drivers. If medals mean something to you, then you're looking for that "V" device. In the Aviation CMF in the Army, the people you want to listen to are Warrant Officers, not Os. Warrants actually do the job day-to-day. Officers are rated for the airframe(s) in the unit, but not typically frequent fliers/high hour pilots. They're there to command and do staff work, while CWs execute daily missions. Again, what does any of that have to do with driving the development of NGSW? What specific citation were you referring to from General McConville?
1
@ostiariusalpha So if I have a bunch of medals from all my deployments as an 11B, I should be fine telling Army Aviators what tools they need to conduct MDO under the new force structure. See why medals are irrelevant here? Now, I would expect a Cobra, OH-58D, and AH-64D pilot to be familiar with aerospace-influenced electro-optical aiming and fire control solutions, and net-centric warfare, which makes me favor that type of background over 11 series for Army Chief of Staff. I don't expect him to truly grasp dismounted Infantry work, even with his EIB. The XM157 is agnostic as to what firearm it mounts.
1
@ostiariusalpha All career officers who make General are desk drivers most of their careers due to staff ticket punch requirements, including aviators. The way to avoid being a desk driver in Aviation CMF is going Warrant. Warrants don't become Generals.
1
@ostiariusalpha Again, how is this relevant to the weapon and its role in dismounted infantry units? You cited McConville's vision for MDO. Net-centric warfare is great, however, the applied physics related to soldier's load and combat persistence have been either overlooked or dismissed, especially for every duty position within an Infantry Company. Someone needs to explain how they think a heavier rifle with less capacity and more volumetric space taken on the soldier's load will benefit: CO HQ- CO 1SG XO Drivers Commo NCO Commo Specialist Supply Sergeant Supply Clerk FO NCO JTAC Medic Rifle Platoon- Platoon Leader PSG RTO Combat Medic FO JTAC Combat Engineers Rifle Squad Leader Fire Team Leader Grenadier Rifleman Weapons Squad Leader Assistant Gunner Ammo Bearer Javelin Gunner Mortar PSG RTO Mortar Team LDR Mortarmen The only duty positions I didn't list are SAW and M240 gunners. SAW is getting replaced by the XM250, which is lighter than the SAW. M240 is getting chambered in 6.8x51, which is slightly lighter ammunition that 7.62x51 NATO M80A1, but has flatter trajectory and superior barrier defeat than 7.62. Makes sense for all our belt-feds, doesn't make sense for anyone else but DMs, and they haven't even put DMs in the MTO&E.
1
Replace 7.62 NATO with this, which would improve the overall small arms footprint and capabilities for less weight and recoil.
1
@iterationfackshet1990 This out-performs 7.62 NATO though from a smaller case, smaller magazine. 5.56 needs a smaller case to out-perform and replace it, like something based off .221 Fireball size, for smaller weapons and mags. We don't want anything bigger than 5.56 to replace it, since most soldiers carrying 5.56 are already overburdened.
1
@iterationfackshet1990 Have you seen 6x35 PDW? Cool little cartridge. Allows you to stack more mags in the same space, with similar performance from shorter barrels. Apply the improved performance cartridge design to that and out-match 5.56 even more.
1
@Rainersherwood Wrong. ATF Mafia ASACs wanted his collection and Biden DOJ wanted to make an example out of a popular YouTuber. Organized Crime doing their normal business, then threatened his family if he didn’t plead out.
1
@rossg4788 LMT DMR rifles in the UK are 7.62x51 NATO. The KAC complete carbines are fine just the way they are.
1
@jonny2954 Lots of problems with the Hk416 have required frequent band-aids, like the hammer slap basket over the disconnector, multiple iterations of barrel lengths, gas blocks, gas regulator, furniture, as well as end-user input into improvements.
1
@jonny2954 Each Operator has a large selection of weapons, not just one. Sniper/Recce guys have been using their own carbines with specific mods since 1990. Even when they got M4A1s, they kept using the free-floated 723 carbines until KAC made the MRE for them. How many of the Sniper sections do you think adopted the 416 vs kept their accurized carbines? 416s are on the way out.
1
@jonny2954 The vast majority of things used in JSOC never see the light of day. You haven't even seen the tip of the tip of the iceberg, and you never will.
1