the US better not use the xm-8

barrel 2 iches shorter than the m4?? uhhh yeah...nuff said
5.56?? *cough*weak*cough*
NOT A BULLPUP!! all i got to say is WTF.

well getting to the good side...
reliability
price

but who cares about those goods. those bad out weigh the good so much.

I dont know where you got your information but.

The XM-8 is a modular rifle that can be fitted with more then one type of Barrel three types.

Sharpshooter-20''
Assault-12.5''
Compact-9.0''

And the Bullpup design is not perfect not even close just ask the UK how their new Bullpup rifle was.

The Army is also thinking about changing the round to a larger 6.8 so you have a good point there and I agree. The 6.8 is a great round with better preformance then even the AK 7.63x39

[edit on 9-12-2004 by ShadowXIX]

The XM-8 has reliability and its to some extent combat proven( German troops using the G-36 in the Balkans). And its got better sights than the M-16 trust me, when your shooting varing range pop-up targets between 25-500m you want a sight magnification, I did. And bulllpups altough look cool but not as effective as everyone believes. And another thing the Germans already tried a diffrent caliber assalt rifle with the HK36 (precourser to G-36) and as you can see it didnt work. I happen to like the XM-8.

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
And the Bullpup design is not perfect not even close just ask the UK how their new Bullpup rifle was.

Can the UK have your m16's when you get rid of them

Information on xm8


Link to Source

Caliber: 5.56x45 mm NATO - undecided
Action: Gas operated, rotating bolt
Overall length: 838 mm in basic configuration, butt extended
Barrel length:
- 318 mm in basic configuration;
- 229 mm in Compact
- 508 mm in Sharpshooter and SAW versions
Weight: 2.659 kg empty in basic configuration
Rate of fire: ~ 750 rounds per minute
Magazine capacity: 30 rounds (STANAG) or 100-rounds double drum in Automatic Rifle/SAW role

compared to m16a2:

Caliber: 5.56x45mm NATO
Action: gas operated, rotating bolt
Overall length: 1006 mm
Barrel length: 508 mm
Weight: 3.77 kg empty in basic configuration
Rate of fire: 800 rounds per minute
Magazine capacity: 30 rounds

The higher the caliber the less ammo that can be carried. When the M16 originally was released it was a .22!!!! The logic was a soldier could carry twice as much ammo. So dont get hung up on caliber, its a trade off between power and logistics.

Originally posted by skippytjc
The higher the caliber the less ammo that can be carried.

The new 5.56mm xm8 will be 20% lighter due to a massively improved design. However it doesn't say whether this will apply to the proposed 6.8mm round.

Link to Source

This new ammunition will have composite cases, with brass bases and polymer walls, which will reduce weight of the complete ammunition, while maintaining compatibility with all 5.56mm NATO weapons. Along with 20% weight reduction in the XM8 (compared to the current issue M4A1 carbine), this will be a welcome move for any infantryman, already overloaded by protective, communications and other battle equipment.

The size of the caliber is not everything. Small calibers and high velocities with pop your head like a grape...

The XM-8 appears to be an awesome weapon. It appears to be a lot more reliable than the M-16 or SA-80. Also the modularity makes it look like a brilliant weapon since it can be adjusted to each soldier's needs. Also it can be set up for the open battlefield or house to house searches by shortinging the stock and such.

But is it better or worse than Steyr AUG?

Steyr has a sight, and is bullpup.

The Steyr AUG is a good gun but the XM-8 is more versitile. I like the sight on XM-8, plus it uses a pretty common battery.

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
I dont know where you got your information but.

The XM-8 is a modular rifle that can be fitted with more then one type of Barrel three types.

Sharpshooter-20''
Assault-12.5''
Compact-9.0''

And the Bullpup design is not perfect not even close just ask the UK how their new Bullpup rifle was.

The Army is also thinking about changing the round to a larger 6.8 so you have a good point there and I agree. The 6.8 is a great round with better preformance then even the AK 7.63x39

[edit on 9-12-2004 by ShadowXIX]

ok your right. BUT what is the common soldier gonna be carrying around? the BASIC CONFIGURATION. not everyone im sure is gonna be carrying around all the barrel types. correct me if im wrong.

And yes its reliable. and thats awesome. BUT can it perform well? i really dont konw about performance.. if anyone has that information PLEASE share.
If anything im just worried about its accuracy.

I think the 12.5 inch barrel will be standard issue but changing barrels in the XM-8 is easy to do even in the field not sure if they will carry every barrel it with them though. There is even a option the LSS lightweight 12 gauge shotgun module which can be easily added to the XM8 by the user in the field without tools. Good if you have to clear out building Close quarter Combat you could always outfitt it with the 9 inch barrel also to make it even better. You also have a option for the 40mm grenade launcher as a option.

From a review in popular mechanics, the author was shoot with about the same accuracy as the M-16. I dont recall which issue exactly but it was a couple of months ago.

Aelita,
you call that a sight???!!!!!
are you serious?
have you used it?
that was the biggest problem i had with it.
the sight is terrible!!!
the gas plug gets stuck to easy and kak handers dont get a kack handed rifle!
dont get me wrong thats the only problem with the Steyr as i see it but that is a Problem!
have you used it?
and if so where?

oh and just to be a prick.........
cyberdude78,
its not a gun.
thats one of the fundamental things that most people dont understand about projectile weapons.
they arent all called guns!
its a rifle.
there is a difference

Originally posted by Aelita
But is it better or worse than Steyr AUG?

Steyr has a sight, and is bullpup.

My brother knows an Australian guy who apparently used the AUG in the reserves over there, and he said that it wasn't anything special accuracy wise and had a problem with firing in full auto (apparently the reciever or some other plastic part would melt if you tried to unload the entire magazine on a hot day...). Not really a big fan of bullpups either. I like them for awhile, but all I have heard is that they are usually less reliable, can have problems with ambidexterity (seems like the newer ones are fixing that) and they have balance issues when shooting. It just sounds like the good old standard configuration is the way to go for general combat.

I like the look and specs of the XM-8...Does anyone know if its going to become the norm...I know its undergoing combat tests, but are there plans in place to mass produce it?



I also like the XM-25...Who doesn't like air-burst! No more hiding behind walls anymore.

XM-25

skippytjc
The weight of ammunition is a non-issue when comparing 6.8SPC, 7.62x39, 5.56Nato or 6.5 grendel (another round being tested atm)
The ammount of ammo an average GI-Joe carries would be the same 6-9 mags (30rnd mags), and the weight difference of the heaviest and lightest loads would be non noticeable for the GI

All i have heard of XM8 or 6.8SPC have been positive. I know boyh Military weapon testers and competition shooters (rifle practical) that praise the round highly for being more accurate than 5.56Nato and more effective than 7.62x39

7.62x56 or 7.62Nato are a different story...

I really like what I've seen of the XM8. I would have no problem shelling out up to $2500 or so for one chambered in 6.8.

I'm not too fond of the 223 but it will work just fine if you put 3 rounds COM. It is a decent round but it just doesn't quite have the effective range it should.

I have always dreamed of a lightweight gun like the AR chambered in sort of a hot 7.62X39. I think an XM8 in 6.8 would be perfect.

[edit on 26-8-2005 by imas]