BF2S Forums Marine Corps Weapons Review: From Iraq

FatherTed wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

@ the SA80 series, over ODS and a while of OIF the military were using SA80A1s - these were terrible; fragile, prone to jamming the works. the army then sent a shitload of them to H&K who made the A2 variant, which by all reports is fucking amazing. I've played with a single-shot version of the A2 and it is unbelievably sturdy, nicely weighted and accurate as shit.

I've used the F88 (Steyr AUG) many times and I find it to be a really nice weapon. Good accuracy, feels good firing, light...

idk i don't like 'light' in a rifle

awww im getting nostalgia now, i'll try and find some of my old target papers

Yeah I know what you mean. But I've gotta say that while doing pack marches, I was glad It's a light rifle lol

inb4 marines/armymakingsissyairforcecomments

The_Lance_117 wrote:

by the way, has anyone had any experience with the 6.5? thoughts?

I killed 3 men with it.

The_Lance_117 wrote:

Marlo Stanfield wrote:

The_Lance_117 wrote:

by the way, has anyone had any experience with the 6.5? thoughts?

I killed 3 men with it.

pics or it didnt happen

I could dig them up but my neighbors might notice...

Please rename thread to:

"Real World Facts about Marine Corps Weapons"

The_Lance_117 wrote:

by the way, has anyone had any experience with the 6.5? thoughts?

Grendel or mpc?

mtb0minime wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Please rename thread to:

"Real World Facts about Marine Corps Weapons"

^ this. Especially since the skepticism regarding the article's accuracy and truthfulness would fit perfectly!

I dont understand how anyone can say the saw sucks.  Never had mine jam up on me when it mattered and the thing just spits bullets.

They should replace the shitty M16/M4 with the M416 or better yet, the M417

This isn't the '60s! The M16A4s and M4A1s don't need to be replaced. If they sucked that badly the US military wouldn't still use them.

Chou, it depends on the objectives they're aiming for. So lets say they just want em to have a functioning government, then they'll pull out once that's complete. I'm just giving an example.

Last edited by -Sh1fty- (2010-04-23 04:11:16)

Chou wrote:

I understand that but the objective is Democracy and that'll never work in Muslim countries, right?
Plus the moment we pull out of there, Iran and Co. will invade and turn the tables to whatever they wish to see.

Where's the end?

piss off out of this thread with that.  go to DST with that shit.

Sydney wrote:

They should replace the shitty M16/M4 with the M416 or better yet, the M417
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGwkHktk … re=related

It is refreshing to see there are other ppl than myself who likes to shoot guns while bathing

rdx-fx wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

I dont understand how anyone can say the saw sucks.  Never had mine jam up on me when it mattered and the thing just spits bullets.

The first ones we had were jam-o-matic junk. 
Would jam if you used the 30-round M-16 magazines in them.
Would jam within 50 rounds on certain lots of the 'old style' belt-mags.
Would jam if you looked at it funny.
Would jam if the belt was twisted 'just so', or had too much tension on it.

Generally, they were a nightmare compared to the old reliable M-60 they were trying to replace.
Easier to jam, smaller ammo with a shorter range, harder to field strip.

the only time Ive ever had a saw jam was at Hood firing blanks.  Even then, I remember firing off a few magazines of blanks one time at the mout site and I was surprised by how it didnt malfunction once.  I believe I was told the reason why so many people hate the saw is because all the ones in our armories have gone through a gazzilion rounds already. 

The ones we were issued to in iraq were brand spanking new parasaws

as far as mout weapons go, I dont think you can find a more appropriate one than the saw

Last edited by eleven bravo (2010-04-23 08:34:48)

eleven bravo wrote:

rdx-fx wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

I dont understand how anyone can say the saw sucks.  Never had mine jam up on me when it mattered and the thing just spits bullets.

The first ones we had were jam-o-matic junk. 
Would jam if you used the 30-round M-16 magazines in them.
Would jam within 50 rounds on certain lots of the 'old style' belt-mags.
Would jam if you looked at it funny.
Would jam if the belt was twisted 'just so', or had too much tension on it.

Generally, they were a nightmare compared to the old reliable M-60 they were trying to replace.
Easier to jam, smaller ammo with a shorter range, harder to field strip.

the only time Ive ever had a saw jam was at Hood firing blanks.  Even then, I remember firing off a few magazines of blanks one time at the mout site and I was surprised by how it didnt malfunction once.  I believe I was told the reason why so many people hate the saw is because all the ones in our armories have gone through a gazzilion rounds already. 

The ones we were issued to in iraq were brand spanking new parasaws

as far as mout weapons go, I dont think you can find a more appropriate one than the saw

I've put 50 rounds through a SAW without any issues. Therefore, my experience > RDX's.