XM8 and FN2000

XM 8 seems to be a good rifle but i rather have the FN SCAR-H



www.defrev.com...
www.defensereview.com...

I liked the G11 idea myslef.
Pretty nice, 2000 rounds per minute!

is that how the XM8 will look in the end????

Why wasting money, if you get in the end again almost an G36
G36A2(in use in germany and norway):

Originally posted by Russian

Originally posted by WeBDeviL
Hehe Russian, its not that we are out of metal! Its for lighter carrying, easier accessibility, etc..don't judge a book by its cover..

That thing looks badass to me

-wD

its lighter but it will break faster.

it will get clogged faster.

it will be a peice of trash after it falls from a truck...

Accutually plastics are very good becuase theyd ont dent like metal which can ruin the gun. Also its probably not some cheap McDonalds toy plastic, probably super strong. THeres plastics that you can run over with a car and it wont break.

I like the camo on the first G36.

I didn't like the XM-8 at first, but I crew to love it, esspecially the Black XM-8...very nice IMO.

I don't mind plastics at all, I prefer synthetics over wood and steel.

I have to agree with Tomcat though, i'd pick the SCAR as well.

No doubt the XM8 and FN F2000 will be fine weapons. But which is better? To be honest, I don't know or even care.

One thing bothers me about both these weapons. They're both chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO. Now I could start a whole new topic about whether or not this light round is sufficiently powerful for todays Army, but I won't.

There is a new cartridge out, 6.8x43mm if I'm not mistaken, that was developed as a possible replacement for the old 5.56. I think the SCAR has been chambered for this round as well as a modified M4A1.

There were plans to chamber the XM8 in this round but what about the F2000? If not I'd say my mind's made up right now.

Originally posted by Russian

Originally posted by WeBDeviL
Hehe Russian, its not that we are out of metal! Its for lighter carrying, easier accessibility, etc..don't judge a book by its cover..

That thing looks badass to me

-wD

its lighter but it will break faster.

it will get clogged faster.

it will be a peice of trash after it falls from a truck...

actually it is made of a polymer that is next to unbreakable. i saw the weapon test videos, and they buried it in sand, then fired on full auto. no problems. then in water, and the same results. next in mud, and it performed beutifully. Then they ran it over to prove its durability. the rifle is amazing.

What's the matter with you people? Why choose expensive plastic toys when British Aerospace Engineering produces one of, if not the best, modern assault rifles the world has ever seen.

YES! I'm talking about the L85A1, the L85A2 and the L86A1.

Nothing in the entire world comes close to matching these weapons!

Originally posted by fritz
Why choose expensive plastic toys when British Aerospace Engineering produces one of, if not the best, modern assault rifles the world has ever seen. YES! I'm talking about the L85A1, the L85A2 and the L86A1.
Nothing in the entire world comes close to matching these weapons!

Um, OK. Please tell me you don't actually think the LA85/86 series are the best weapons in the world. Isn't the Steyr AUG similar in performance? If so, I'd say that qualifies as coming close. What about an OC14 Groza chambered in 9x39mm? Similar dimensions with a much more powerful round. But hey, enough with all the bullpup designs, what about something like an M4A1? Or a SIG 552? These are all decent weapons, but to say that any one of them is the best in the world sounds just a wee bit biased. Tell me, do you work for British Aerospace Engineering?

You have to have the right tool for the right job. An LA85A2 just doesn't have the range or power of the L1A1. I'll never forgive those British chaps for canning such an excellent service rifle. Or if you really needed something more compact, start shelling out those EM2's. I think they were on to something with that 7x43mm.

Well now I'm sidetracked, Where was I? Oh yes, why buy these expensive plastic toys? Well probably because we've got a huge defense budget and original LA85's were chock full of problems. I know they've mostly been fixed but that thing tends to stick with an otherwise decent weapon. I mean, look at the M16A2 being criticized for the M16A1's problems. But all things considered, I'd like to have an LA85. It's a strange little weapon in its own, kinky little way.

By God Smeg, you're so right!

The L1A1 SLR was and still is, s superb rifle.

In Gulf War 1, after the SAS/SBS had recaptured the British Embassy in Kuwait, they trolled local units for personnel armed with SLRs to go up on the roof and keep 'cavee'. Obviously SLR has got longer range and when fitted with an M16 Bipod and charged with an LMG Mag and SinglePoint or SureShot (RedDot) sights - SUIT was crap - pointer the wrong way up!!!!! - pretty awesome!

The main reason we went over to 5.56mm was the bloody yanks. They binned a superb weapon called the M14 in favour of the M16 - just because [at the time] nobody in their massive arms industry could change the design into a bullpup! Now they can, a private venture I believe, nobody wants them!

As to my offering of the L85A1/A2 and L86A1 being the best assault rifles in the world - THAT WAS A JOKE! Apart from the cadet rifle, and that's crap, the L85 family and the L86 are rubbish!

Here I feel that I must stand up for the L86A1/2 Gun, Light Support as it was my personal weapon for almost ten years. After lugging the frigging LMG all over the place, it felt as light as a feather.

On the range and other live firing - unless there was a gale force wind howling across the area, I found that with the SUSAT dialled UP a hundred metres, I could consistently hit targets out to 800 metrs - as it's supposed to do. Otherwise it was aim off into the next county - and all because of a lightweight 5.56mm bullet!

But yes Smeg - I do so pine for a proper rifle like my FN-SLR (Serial No: 117909 - Dated 1952) YES! It had wooden handguard and butt.

I have used and owned a number of battle/assault rifles over the past 21 years and I have seen it all, good and bad. Simply said, I am through with the M-16/M-4 type weapons!!! They are accurate rifles but that is about it. The time has long past for the type to be replaced. The H&K XM-8 is shaping up to be a super good weapon as well as the new FN SCAR rifle. The later being designed for SOCOM forces. As to the FN2000. Nice rifle! I have fired this weapon on 2 range sessions. Nice! There are some things I would change, mainly the sight! But the modularity of this rifle will allow the user to configure it to their needs. Word is that FN is planning a 6.8mm version of this rifle and the SCAR. Smart move on FN's part as the 6.8mm blows the 5.56mm out of the water in terms of terminal ballistics. But then again, I'm a big bore guy having 2 M-14/M-1A rifles in my inventory! For anyone who would like to buy a FN2000, they will be on sale in semi-auto only form to the US pubilc very soon. I have mine reserved at impactgunsonlinestore.com.
They might be ready this fall or as late as this time next year. Cost: $1750 US!!! Save up those coins!!!

Forceten66-Former Doorkicker->USA->Current Contractor.

I don't know if I'm reviving an old threat but I have to say that IMO the M-8 and to a degree the FN F-2000 are both old generation firearms. A generational leap requires some sort of major improvement over the last generation. Take the case of fighter aircraft for example;

The Su-27 is widely regarded as the best 4th generation fighter aircraft. The Su-30MKI is a highly upgraded version of the Su-27. Its near twice as maneouvreable, has 50% extra missile range, 100% extra radar range and world class avionics compared to 1980's era Russian avionics. Yet it is only considered 4.5th generation.

In the case of the M-8 here is how I see it. The G-36 was Germany's last ditch attempt at a 4th generation rifle after funder for the G-11 was cut. The G-11 was attempting to make a 2 generation jump cutting out the 5.56x45mm and 5.45x39mm generation altogether. Its high rate of fire, caseless ammunition and armour piercing rounds were all major new concepts. In the end the G-36 was one of the best of its generation but it was only 1 generation ahead of the G-3.
The M-8 is only a series of small adjustments to the design of the G-36, most of all visual adjustments. This means it is a better looking 4th generation rifle based off one of the best around. Its rate of fire, performance, ammunition and reliability don't exceed other similar generation rifles by much on average and there are better rifles in each specialisted category;

M-16A4 has a higher rate of fire
Ak-74 has lower recoil
The old generation M-14 has higher accuracy
Ak-47 is more reliable

To truly make a generational leap a whole new concept needs to be applied to the rifle. The G-11 is probably the best example that comes to mind. There are certain other specialised rifles that have moved into new categories with their own independent generational challenge. The Russian 9x39mm super-quiet rifles are an example of this.

As for the AN-94, that is damn close to a new generation of rifle. It has a new sight system, no recoil on the first 2 shots and is still not considered a finalised design. At the moment, of rifles likely to go into service, I'd have to say that this is the only one that comes close to been classified as next generation. Its drawback of course, that Russia does not have the finances to make a new, better suited ammunition for it.

Oh and on the subject of plastics, there is nothing wrong with it. I've held a Steyr AUG and it feels just as solid, if not more so then the mostly metal FN Minimi (M249). Another advantage to plastics, asides from the previously mentioned issued of dinting is they don't warp. Much like the reason for making so many old rifles out with part wood. A warped casing on a rifle results in in-accurate sites and over time and usage all purely metal rifles warp. Of course sites can be adjusted to account for that but sometimes people are lazy and / or don't know how to. So plastics, just like wood, makes sense in rifle design and I agree with it 100%

[edit on 20-1-2006 by Senor Freebie]

I was looking at a FN2000 in a gun store today for 2K usd. It seems like a nice bullpup, an dI was wondering what other people could get one for? gunsamerica showed several for sale, but for more money.

Also does anyone know if you can buy a Tavor TAR 21 in the US and how it compares to the FN2000 design? thanks

it wasn't going to look anything like that....but it doesn't matter because it failed testing which is a damn shame.

it actually jammed less than the M16 and most other AR's...its not plastic its a composite which is almost as rugged and strong as metal.

reply to post by ultra_phoenix


o word the 7.62 is better.......ok lets see here ak 47 fired at 100 yards 3 rounds none hit ...m16 100yards iron sights 3 shots all bullseye

o yea look a the russian guns the new ones there all amaller then 7.62 they figured it out if your not 20 yards away its a peice of #. the 5.56nato spins in the body making it harder to pull out without causing further damage so shoot wat u want were american we have the right to but just know a 5.56 is always gona be my bullet of choice

How about an XM8, with metal body instead of plastic, and chambered in 6.8 SPC?

I took it upon myself to test reliability of several rifles. With the help of my local police department I was able to procure several class three weapons to test. M-16a3, HK G-36, XM-8, L-85a2, AK-74, AK-47, Steyr AUG, and FAMAS rifles. All in brand new condition. My first test was to simply drop about a tablespoon of sand into the magwells of each weapon, charge, insert mag, 30rds auto. All but the AK m8 and g36 rifles jammed before the fifth shot m16 and l85 failed to fire completely. Second test coat the outside of each weapon in pond mud, leave to dry for 12 hours, 30rds auto. Only the ak47 fired all 30 rounds. The rest of my testing was cut off since i was deploying but it seems that the m8 will be a very reliable weapon. I hope to see it in my lines soon.

XM8 was cancelled as of Oct.31/05, moreover, last I heard, it won't be until about 2010 before the US Army considers a new battle rifle seriously.

Most likely, the 416 in 5.56 will make the cut, based on various reports from Delta, and law enforment agencies using that weapon. Not to mention, training costs and procedures remain the same with the 416.

(shrugs) But who knows? Maybe the 6.8 SPC will make it big too.