Marines ditch the SAW

[Compatriot G]

I remember reading an article on this subject a few years ago. It seems the Corps was wanting to get back to the idea of a BAR instead of a light machine gun. If I'm not mistaken, FN designed the SAW as a 7.62mm machine gun. I want to say that SEAL units have used the 7.62mm version, but I'm not certain. It will be interesting to see how all of this turns out.

 

[Bill B]

I carried the M60 and later the SAW. I'll take the M60 any day. Better reliability, more powerful round, longer range, more versatile.

 

[jblomenberg16]

I'm just recovering from the small stroke I just had when I read it wouldn't take PMAGS!!!! How can this weapon have any tactical capability if it can run with Magpul goodies?

 

[colt45er]

That is sustained fire, not cyclic rate. Cyclic is probably in the 600-800 rounds per minute range. The idea is burst fire from a full auto weapon, (which we already do to keep the barrel from overheating)
.

6-9 round bursts, Die Mother FER Die....at least that's what I was taught.

Heavy? I carried a M60 and then was issued a SAW that POS was light!

When I was at basic I saw a M60....In the museum

Beat me to it!

I remember reading an article on this subject a few years ago. It seems the Corps was wanting to get back to the idea of a BAR instead of a light machine gun. If I'm not mistaken, FN designed the SAW as a 7.62mm machine gun. I want to say that SEAL units have used the 7.62mm version, but I'm not certain. It will be interesting to see how all of this turns out.

The 249 or SAW is 5.56, the 240 replaced the M60 which is 7.62. Do the marines use the 240?

I carried the M60 and later the SAW. I'll take the M60 any day. Better reliability, more powerful round, longer range, more versatile.

I would take the 240 over the 249 too!

 

[Walt_Jabsco]

I remember reading an article on this subject a few years ago. It seems the Corps was wanting to get back to the idea of a BAR instead of a light machine gun. If I'm not mistaken, FN designed the SAW as a 7.62mm machine gun. I want to say that SEAL units have used the 7.62mm version, but I'm not certain. It will be interesting to see how all of this turns out.

What you're talking about is the M240B, basically just the beefed up version of a 249 SAW. They're in pretty common usage throughout the US Military, especially as back ups to crew served weapons on top of vehicles.

As for the article, anybody that thinks a SAW is inaccurate has never fired one. While it's certainly not as accurate as an M16 or similar rifle, it's not shabby by any means. And as for reliability, I'd probably argue it's more reliably than an M16 as long as it's properly maintained. The open bolt firing mechanism just allows a greater margin of error for debris and dirtiness.

I really do think this is a mistake on the marines part. It will require a complete redesign of the fire team concept and could be exceptionally difficult to put into practice. I know I'd be nervous not having 200 rounds at my back in an infantry fire team.

 

[Compatriot G]

What you're talking about is the M240B, basically just the beefed up version of a 249 SAW. They're in pretty common usage throughout the US Military, especially as back ups to crew served weapons on top of vehicles.

As for the article, anybody that thinks a SAW is inaccurate has never fired one. While it's certainly not as accurate as an M16 or similar rifle, it's not shabby by any means. And as for reliability, I'd probably argue it's more reliably than an M16 as long as it's properly maintained. The open bolt firing mechanism just allows a greater margin of error for debris and dirtiness.

I really do think this is a mistake on the marines part. It will require a complete redesign of the fire team concept and could be exceptionally difficult to put into practice. I know I'd be nervous not having 200 rounds at my back in an infantry fire team.

If you will check out this link, you will see that FN does make a 7.62mm version of the SAW.

Machine Guns

I knew my mind wasn't going. I've been reading the gun mags and Soldier of Fortune since the late 70's.

The M-240 wasn't designed from the SAW or MINIMI. It was designed from the Browning Automatic Rifle!

Oddly enough, I used an M-240 before they were standard issue in the U.S. military. I was a Marine Corps tanker. I attended tank school at Ft. Knox from January-March of 1986. The M60A-1 tank I was on used an M-240 coax gun. We were the only tank in the company that had one. I never saw another one after that. At Camp Lejeune, my tank had the standard M-60E2 coax gun. I have no idea where the M-240 came from or how it got on a tank at Ft. Knox.

The M-240 has been around for a long time. The rest of the world knows it as the FN MAG 58. The 58 stands for the year it came out, 1958.

 

[STEEL CORE]

HMMMMMM must have missed something back in my day as I carried a PIG and all the ammo I could. When years later they brought out the SAW, while I no longer carried an M-60, I thought the SAW was neat but that it should be augumented with the M-60 in the squad level. Now they of course have the 240 LMG and SAW system out there so if there are those saying the SAW was fun to carry around from point A to Point B and beyond, I wish on you the experience of the M-60 system of old (of course older Vets feel free to chime in about the M-1917A1 or the Lewis/Vickers gun).

Maybe this will be better than sliced bread, only time will tell.

 

[badwolf.usmc]

The SAW is not being ditched, it is being replaced in selected roles by the IAR. Company commanders will have the choice to use either weapon, and the weapon will remain the standard light machine gun for weapons platoons.

 

[redpitbull44]

If I'm not mistaken, FN designed the SAW as a 7.62mm machine gun. I want to say that SEAL units have used the 7.62mm version, but I'm not certain.

Yes, it is called the Minimi, or Mk 48.

6-9 round bursts, Die Mother FER Die....at least that's what I was taught.

Yessir!

What you're talking about is the M240B, basically just the beefed up version of a 249 SAW.

Negative. The bravo weighs 26lb and looks like this:

The Mk 48 weighs 18lb and looks like this:

FWIW, the sliding butt stock version is pretty slick:

If you will check out this link, you will see that FN does make a 7.62mm version of the SAW.

Machine Guns

Exactly.

 

[adam]

FWIW, the sliding butt stock version is pretty slick:

Like this. I also had the shorter barrel, it was quite handy but still heavy.

 

[45fan]

The 249 would run on standard M16 mags too, so really they are only giving up the higher rate of fire for more compatibility, and less weight on the backs of the infantry automatic rifleman.
As long as they still have the M2 and 240G for defensive and vehicle mounted weapons, then I dont really see that they are loosing anything.

 

[redpitbull44]

Like this. I also had the shorter barrel, it was quite handy but still heavy.

Ya, the M-4 stock is nice too.
Who's your lil' buddy?

 

[adam]

Ya, the M-4 stock is nice too.
Who's your lil' buddy?

ANP guys at some random government center we flew into.

 

[Leadeye]

HMMMMMM must have missed something back in my day as I carried a PIG and all the ammo I could. When years later they brought out the SAW, while I no longer carried an M-60, I thought the SAW was neat but that it should be augumented with the M-60 in the squad level. Now they of course have the 240 LMG and SAW system out there so if there are those saying the SAW was fun to carry around from point A to Point B and beyond, I wish on you the experience of the M-60 system of old (of course older Vets feel free to chime in about the M-1917A1 or the Lewis/Vickers gun).

Maybe this will be better than sliced bread, only time will tell.

Nothing wrong with the 1917A1 unless you have to move it. Feed it ammo and bullets and it will pretty much shoot all day.

Best of the lot is still the MG42.

 

[redpitbull44]

Best of the lot is still the MG42.

Meh, I'll take accuracy over high rate of fire any day. Several countries still use an updated version of the MG42 in 7.62 NATO called the MG3.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheinmetall_MG_3

 

[jblomenberg16]

Like this. I also had the shorter barrel, it was quite handy but still heavy.

Wait, is that the mk 48 or the minimi, or both? And if so, what's that make the guy in the middle?

 

[adam]

Wait, is that the mk 48 or the minimi, or both? And if so, what's that make the guy in the middle?

I was just referencing the butt-stock. That's a run of the mill M249 with some toys added on.

The middle guy was a hard rubber hose wielding samurai.

 

[sporter]

Hk416 is a nice rifle but is no M-249.

 

[wetidlerjr]

The SAW is not being ditched, it is being replaced in selected roles by the IAR. Company commanders will have the choice to use either weapon, and the weapon will remain the standard light machine gun for weapons platoons.

This. The SAW is not going away. Nothing like the "errornet" for spreading inaccurate info.

 

[01deuce]

Hk416 is a nice rifle but is no M-249.

True.

But compare the M-249 to the HK MG4

Heckler & Koch - USA