PDA

View Full Version : Help settle a squad weapon debate!!!


F8ality
10-31-2010, 4:55 PM
Hey I'm would like some real world input on what the best squad weapon is between the Saw, M60, and the M240? Just to settle a discussion between friends.

Thanks

C.W.M.V.
10-31-2010, 5:00 PM
The only one of those that's a squad level weapon is the 249. 240's are in weapons squad, a platoon level asset. M60 no longer in use.

Regardless between the three the SAW. I dont like 5.56 but its a truly awesome weapon. Lays down an amazing amount of fire very accurately, but still portable enough to be carried by anyone all day. Only thing against it is the 5.56. 7.62 is just sooooooo much better in nearly every aspect, especially penetration.

nick
10-31-2010, 5:05 PM
Good luck trying to SETTLE that debate :p

F8ality
10-31-2010, 5:12 PM
Haha well I was thinkin the saw as well but I too don't care for 5.56, but for suppressive fire lead is lead right! How about functionality and problems?

C.W.M.V.
10-31-2010, 5:15 PM
Good luck trying to SETTLE that debate :p
Right up there with .45acp V 9MM, AK V AR, etc...
Haha well I was thinkin the saw as well but I too don't care for 5.56, but for suppressive fire lead is lead right! How about functionality and problems?

All of my 240's and 249's were great, the 60's I briefly used were old and beaten to hell, so no comment.

smle-man
10-31-2010, 5:22 PM
Haha well I was thinkin the saw as well but I too don't care for 5.56, but for suppressive fire lead is lead right! How about functionality and problems?


The 249 doesn't like to feed from 30 round magazines very well but otherwise it will run all day. As a true squad auto weapon it can't be beat. The 240 is a company level weapon and is an excellent base of fire weapon. I've seen 249 barrels no longer straight from continuous fire. you don't get that from an unreliable weapon.

The 240 is the U.S. version of the Belgain MAG 58, a widely used GPMG. It is an excellent MG but heavy.

PyroFox79
10-31-2010, 5:27 PM
The navy still has M60s, well I know at least the LCAC armory had them. I like the 240 but only when mounted on a hmmwv. I like the 249 as far as being on the ground carrying it by hand.

kendog4570
10-31-2010, 5:32 PM
My son uses the FNH MK 48 MOD1. Basically, it's a SAW M249 in 7.62mm, belt fed only. Kicks butt.


http://www.fnhusa.com/le/products/firearms/model.asp?fid=FNF055&gid=FNG008&mid=FNM0042

Peter.Steele
10-31-2010, 8:12 PM
M60E4 / Mk43 Mod 0. Just as good as the 240B, and nastier than a 249.

rero360
10-31-2010, 8:18 PM
I prefer the 240 as the SAW is just to uncomfortable to carry around for long periods of time, all sorts of pointy spots and sharp corners that poke you and cut you up. I'll take the extra weight of a 240 any day.

tiger222
10-31-2010, 8:27 PM
Never shot a M240, but did have some time behind a M249 para. Fixed stock way better than the collapsing one, para barrel is nice and short.

I actually preferred using it with magazines over belt fed. It is an awesome device.

I would have no issue with the short barrel /fixed stock version.

F8ality
10-31-2010, 9:27 PM
Ok so I gotta ask just because...well I have to. What keeps us from owning any of these in Calif, if you got one that is in semi-auto and put a solar tactical grip on it?

Just wandering:whistling:

NiteQwill
10-31-2010, 10:00 PM
Ok so I gotta ask just because...well I have to. What keeps us from owning any of these in Calif, if you got one that is in semi-auto and put a solar tactical grip on it?

Just wandering:whistling:

With those configurations (plus no flash hider), nothing.

G-forceJunkie
10-31-2010, 10:09 PM
Except for that whole firing from an open bolt thing...With those configurations (plus no flash hider), nothing.

F8ality
10-31-2010, 10:09 PM
Really? It can have a muzzlebrake right? Any dealer that you guys know of that would do the transfer?

F8ality
10-31-2010, 10:09 PM
Closed bolt

Sgt Seahorse
10-31-2010, 10:16 PM
i've used both machine guns while i was in the Marines. As far as a squad weapon I'd choose the SQUAD auto weapon (duh ..it's in the name). It's lighter to carry and much more maneuverable. The 240 is a more "let's hunker down" weapon. Plus I don't like carrying it. It's heavy.

One's a light machine gun the other is a Medium machine gun. So I think it's kind of comparing apples to oranges.

Bellehood
10-31-2010, 11:06 PM
as others have said, you can't really compare the 249 to 240, as they are in a different class. that said, both have negatives and positives. My 240's have always been more reliable feeders than the 249's, the SAW's always seem to have 2-3x more jams. and dont even bother trying to feed them with your m4 mags, jams like crazy. but carrying around a 240 sucks balls, being in a weapons squad is not worth the extra weight of the 240, the extra weight of all the 7.62, and the extra weight of the tripod, unless you just ride around in Stryker's all day

bondmid003
10-31-2010, 11:16 PM
The only one of those that's a squad level weapon is the 249. 240's are in weapons squad, a platoon level asset. M60 no longer in use.

Regardless between the three the SAW. I dont like 5.56 but its a truly awesome weapon. Lays down an amazing amount of fire very accurately, but still portable enough to be carried by anyone all day. Only thing against it is the 5.56. 7.62 is just sooooooo much better in nearly every aspect, especially penetration.

CWMV hit the nail on the head. The only weapon you mentioned at the squad level is the 249. The 240G (USMC) is at the weapons platoon level and is not organic to an standard infantry platoon let alone a squad. They may be attached to a squad if the mission calls for it but that would be up to the platoon commander or higher.

I've lugged around both (albeit not nearly as much as the LCPL's that carry them everyday) and the 249 which is usually the heavy one becomes the lightweight when you throw the 240G in the mix. She is one heavy lady especially when you start factoring all the extra gear that comes with it like the barrel bag (think of a nylon case filled with small bricks). Let's also not forget the rarely used but always heavy tripod that another poor LCPL has to lug around (again if the mission calls for it).

Donk310
10-31-2010, 11:26 PM
I used the M60 for most of my USMC days, and I loved it. The M240 and the M249, which may both be used as a squad weapon regardless of what the it is named came into play for me at the end of my career. Though I thought they were cute and all, "The Pig" is where my heart is.

Quiet
11-01-2010, 12:29 AM
I loved the M249. Lot easier to carry than the M60 or the M240. :p

M240 > M60


IMO...
The US military should have adopted the FN MAG (M240) as an infantry MG in the late-1950s instead of the late-1990s.

Politics be the reason why the US military did not adopt the FN FAL over the M14 and the FN MAG over the M60, back in the late-1950s.

God Bless The Mauser
11-01-2010, 12:42 AM
MG3, what the M60 wants to be.

DSA_FAL
11-01-2010, 12:54 AM
How about SAW vs. BAR?

metalliman545
11-01-2010, 9:47 AM
saw vs bar. lets see, more ammo, lighter, smaller, shoots faster milder recoil. id take a SAW. i havent had to carry one all day but i know its light. thetimes i did carry it i was able to carry it like an M4. and just walk around with it holding it by the pistol grip

F8ality
11-04-2010, 10:06 AM
So what are the main differences between the M60 and the M60E3?
If you guys that have experience with the 60's and the 249's had a choice which one would you use?

Wafflestomper
11-04-2010, 10:19 AM
M240G. Hands down.

The 240 is far more reliable, accurate, and can sustain fire for a longer period of time before changing barrels. Variations of the 240 allow the operator to use it as a coaxial gun on LAVs/AAVs, a crew served ground weapon, a Humvee mounted support weapon, or a helicopter mounted support weapon.

The 249 is less reliable. While they are lighter to carry and have a faster firing rate (good for covering fire), they tend to have more malfunctions than any other crew served weapon in service. Bipods are broken constantly, rounds double-feed often, the barrel overheats under 150 rounds, and gas regulators build up carbon at a retarded rate. The 249 can be mounted on Hmvees with a special adapter plate but they are ineffective as a support weapon vs a 240 with greater penetration.

The M60 is outdated. The M240s replaced the M60 back in the 1980s.

If you are ble to carry a 240, go with that. The 249 is lighter and is great for covering fire but is no match in comparison to the M240.

KCDS
11-04-2010, 11:25 AM
I vote for PKM

metalliman545
11-04-2010, 11:42 AM
M240G. Hands down.

The 240 is far more reliable, accurate, and can sustain fire for a longer period of time before changing barrels. Variations of the 240 allow the operator to use it as a coaxial gun on LAVs/AAVs, a crew served ground weapon, a Humvee mounted support weapon, or a helicopter mounted support weapon.

The 249 is less reliable. While they are lighter to carry and have a faster firing rate (good for covering fire), they tend to have more malfunctions than any other crew served weapon in service. Bipods are broken constantly, rounds double-feed often, the barrel overheats under 150 rounds, and gas regulators build up carbon at a retarded rate. The 249 can be mounted on Hmvees with a special adapter plate but they are ineffective as a support weapon vs a 240 with greater penetration.

The M60 is outdated. The M240s replaced the M60 back in the 1980s.

If you are ble to carry a 240, go with that. The 249 is lighter and is great for covering fire but is no match in comparison to the M240.

240s and 249 dont need anything special to mount as long as they have the pintle holes in the, then a pintle can be attached and then it can be put on any of those vehicles, we use 240b on our humvees and mraps. weve used a 240b as the loaders machine gun on our tank because we didnt have the butterfly back plate.

Maddog5150
11-04-2010, 11:47 AM
Have you guys even thought about this? I think its the best squad support weapon by far.
http://www.imfdb.org/images/3/3a/Annihlator_2000.jpg

donw
11-04-2010, 1:39 PM
the BAR was the squad AR while i was "in"...heavy? yes.. reliable? yes...firepower? yes...30-06 firepower...

the m60 (and M14) became issue while i was 'in' heavy? yes...reliable? yes...firepower? yes...7.62x51...

never had the opportunity to use a 240/249 or anything of the like...but i can tell you that the M60 (and BAR) is nearly impossible to hide from 0 out to 1000 yards. i saw that in the jungles of SE Asia.

the debate should be focused on application of 5.56 vs 7.62 in effectiveness in a select environment as i suspect ALL weapons here are reliable, accurate and effective when applied by the field commanders in proper applications...such as a sqd/plt assault on 'hard' targets, etc...or a light inf assault from a helo/Humvee/parachute against light, mobile, inf force...a 5.56 is not a good choice to use against a T-72, as an example...

if i had to do it again, I'd have to go with the M60...it's really hard to argue the effectiveness of that 7.62 against almost ANY target at ANY range out to 1000 yds.

a soldiers familiarity with his weapon is a key factor in success for any engagement in any war, at any time. the commanders use of that familiarity is another key to success.

basically: "what do i use against what i have to assault?"

Hump0311
11-04-2010, 1:59 PM
No debate really. As mentioned by previous posters only the saw is a squad weapon. The 240 is a crew served and can sometimes be attached to squads depending on the mission at hand. the M60 is no longer used.

The 240 is a heavy weapon and lays down some heavy firepower. It is worked in teams but I have seen a few extremely large marines carry them like M4's.

When you need to suppress a target the M249 is the weapon of choice to do this. It has extremely effective fire rates. I saw a few poster talk about it having problems being fed by magazines instead of belts. The magazine is a last resort and depending on its conditionyour magazine may or may not have problems feeding. Sand,Dirt,Grit in the magazine are all problems that could cause a 249 to jam.

The actual implementation of such weapon systems would be up to the squad leader. But this would be getting more into squad tactics and that's going off topic.

I noticed that all the weapons you named happen to be used in call of duty and was wondering if this is what started the debate or is that just a coincidence?

caldivers
11-04-2010, 2:08 PM
I have used all three and If I where to have to go out with only squad strenghth I most likely would take a SAW. But remember, a squad differs from Branch to Branch. A Marine squad is deferent than an Army INF squad in numbers.

The M249 light machine gun (LMG), previously designated the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW), and formally written as Light Machine Gun, 5.56 mm, M249, is an American version of the Belgian FN Minimi, a light machine gun manufactured by the Belgian company FN Herstal (FN). The M249 is manufactured in the United States and is widely used by the U.S. Armed Forces. The gun was introduced in 1984 after being judged the most effective of a number of candidate weapons to address the lack of automatic firepower in small units. The gun provides infantry squads with the heavy volume of fire of a machine gun combined with accuracy and portability approaching that of a rifle.

The M249 is gas-operated and air-cooled. It has a quick-change barrel, allowing the gunner to rapidly replace an overheated or jammed barrel. A folding bipod is attached near the front of the gun, though an M192 LGM tripod is also available. It can be fed from both linked ammunition and STANAG magazines, like those used in the M16 and M4. This allows the SAW gunner to use rifleman's magazines as an emergency source of ammunition in the event that he runs out of linked rounds. However, this will often cause malfunctions because the magazine spring has difficulty feeding rounds quickly enough to match the SAW's high cyclic rate.

M249s have seen action in every major conflict involving the United States since the 1989 invasion of Panama. Soldiers are generally satisfied with the weapon's performance, though there have been reports of clogging with dirt and sand. Due to the weight and age of the weapon, the United States Marine Corps is testing the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle with plans to partially replace the M249 in Marine Corps service.[3]


Many of the M249s in U.S. Army and Marine Corps service have been worn down by continuous use and are becoming increasingly unreliable. A refurbishment program intended to extend the service lives of these M249s has been carried out, though the weapons are still deteriorating from heavy use. In particular, warping of the receiver rails is a nearly ubiquitous defect in heavily used first-generation M249s. This defect is no longer present on the current-issue M249, which has reinforced rails and full-length welding rather than spot welding.

The Marine Corps is testing the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle, a lighter, magazine-fed rifle to supplement and partially replace the M249. With plans to buy up to 4,100 IARs to complement and partially replace its 10,000 M249s (of which 8,000 will remain in service) held at platoon level,[47] it has acquired 450 of the Heckler & Koch HK416-based weapons for testing.[3] The U.S. Army does not plan to introduce the IAR. Colonel Robert Radcliffe of the U.S. Army Infantry Research and Development Center stated that an automatic rifle with a magazine would lower the effectiveness and firepower of a squad. While the Marine Corps has 13-man squads, the Army organizes its soldiers into squads of nine and needs considerably more firepower from the squad machine gunners to make up the difference. The U.S. Army does, however, want to replace aging M249s with newer weapons.[47]

The U.S. Army is currently working on replacing the M249's buttstock with a redesigned adjustable stock.[48]

Uriah02
11-04-2010, 2:10 PM
Since when do forums SOLVE debates?

caldivers
11-04-2010, 2:13 PM
HAHA!!

Hump0311
11-04-2010, 2:39 PM
Did this debate between you and your friends have anything to do with Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 ???

I noticed all the weapons you all are debating about are in the game.

If so ... just so you know in "real world" situations you don't get a care package for getting a 3 kill streak.

The 249 is a squad automatic weapon.

The other two you named are crew served weapons and fired in teams

I know a few Marines who are huge enough to carry around 240's like they are M4's and fire them accurately from the standing. I'am extremely proud of these individuals and am honored to call them friends and would hate to be their enemies.

If you have ever fired a 240 then you know this is not an easy feat.

Big up's to all my weapons Bubba's out there.

Wafflestomper
11-04-2010, 3:33 PM
240s and 249 dont need anything special to mount as long as they have the pintle holes in the, then a pintle can be attached and then it can be put on any of those vehicles, we use 240b on our humvees and mraps. weve used a 240b as the loaders machine gun on our tank because we didnt have the butterfly back plate.

Actually, yes, you do need an adapter to accept a pintle mout. you can use a mk64 cradle mount but it complicates things with obtaining the correct size ammo can basket most of the time.

The 249 requires the pintle adapter (tripod adapter assembly) to be mounted to a vehicle. Here is NSN right out of the bag:1005-01-225-1156. Even then, you will still require an adapter with a male pintle to fit into the vehicle mount slot.

240s just require the adapter or "frog legs" so the female end, located on the vehicle can accept the pintle.

240 coax are meant to be mounted to LAVs/AAVs where they are controlled mechanically by the operator inside the vehicle. The 240E is the one used with the spade grip but are mainly used in helicopters. The 240G/240B are primarily used on light vehicles.

Hump0311
11-04-2010, 3:58 PM
Actually, yes, you do need an adapter to accept a pintle mout. you can use a mk64 cradle mount but it complicates things with obtaining the correct size ammo can basket most of the time.

The 249 requires the pintle adapter (tripod adapter assembly) to be mounted to a vehicle. Here is NSN right out of the bag:1005-01-225-1156. Even then, you will still require an adapter with a male pintle to fit into the vehicle mount slot.

240s just require the adapter or "frog legs" so the female end, located on the vehicle can accept the pintle.

240 coax are meant to be mounted to LAVs/AAVs where they are controlled mechanically by the operator inside the vehicle. The 240E is the one used with the spade grip but are mainly used in helicopters. The 240G/240B are primarily used on light vehicles.


what's a 240E ? was this a mistype? the bravo and golf I'm familiar with.

Norccer
11-04-2010, 4:37 PM
This thread just gives me more respect for my brother. Currently E6 at 24 in USMC. (used a lot of fun guns) :43:

F8ality
11-04-2010, 6:23 PM
Did this debate between you and your friends have anything to do with Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 ???

I noticed all the weapons you all are debating about are in the game.

If so ... just so you know in "real world" situations you don't get a care package for getting a 3 kill streak.

The 249 is a squad automatic weapon.

The other two you named are crew served weapons and fired in teams

I know a few Marines who are huge enough to carry around 240's like they are M4's and fire them accurately from the standing. I'am extremely proud of these individuals and am honored to call them friends and would hate to be their enemies.

If you have ever fired a 240 then you know this is not an easy feat.

Big up's to all my weapons Bubba's out there.


Call of Duty is Bad@$$ and im an old guy, but no. Im looking into the possibility of buying one and we were disciussing the best one.

Hump0311
11-04-2010, 6:45 PM
Well in that case I just saw a M249 complete parts kit for $8,100 which is a really good price.

Link included
http://fnforum.net/wts-m249-saw-complete-parts-kit-w-accessories-t21038.html

If you buy it can I shoot it for giving you the link? :)

akjunkie
11-04-2010, 7:16 PM
With a M240 (hand held)

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/campaigns/our_boys/3210951/Rambo-style-Gurkha-in-solo-Taliban-blitz.html

F8ality
11-04-2010, 7:33 PM
Well in that case I just saw a M249 complete parts kit for $8,100 which is a really good price.

Link included
http://fnforum.net/wts-m249-saw-complete-parts-kit-w-accessories-t21038.html

If you buy it can I shoot it for giving you the link? :)

Ha I would have but it's already sold! I'm talking with two companies who make them and sell them with all new parts in any configuration you want$$$$$$

Hump0311
11-04-2010, 7:41 PM
With a M240 (hand held)

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/campaigns/our_boys/3210951/Rambo-style-Gurkha-in-solo-Taliban-blitz.html

Gurkha's dont use the 240.. wonder what it was maybe an SA-80 LSW??? they said that it weighed 30lbs... 240's don't weigh 30lbs

akjunkie
11-04-2010, 8:00 PM
Gurkha's dont use the 240.. wonder what it was maybe an SA-80 LSW??? they said that it weighed 30lbs... 240's don't weigh 30lbs


"weighing well over 30lb and hammering out 750 rounds a minute."

"7.62mm general purpose machine gun mounted on a tripod."

I like to see a more detailed article/acct of this story.
Since it's a 7.62Nato MPG, i'm assuming it is some sort of 240 Variant.

smle-man
11-04-2010, 8:09 PM
It is known as the L7 series in Brit service also known as the GPMG or 'Jimpy'. With the tripod it is the sustained fire gun.

Hump0311
11-04-2010, 8:33 PM
That L7 is a beast. That is a very impressive feat indeed. My hat off to you Gurkha dude. I tried to trade a Gurkha for his Knife once.. He told me if he pulled it out he would have to cut me. I told him that's fair because he would have to bull my boot out of his $$$. I did trade him a Zippo for a cool souvenir though.

pyromensch
11-04-2010, 9:16 PM
haven't seen it yet.....did anyone mention the stoner, used by seals in vietnam?

metalliman545
11-05-2010, 10:51 AM
Actually, yes, you do need an adapter to accept a pintle mout. you can use a mk64 cradle mount but it complicates things with obtaining the correct size ammo can basket most of the time.

The 249 requires the pintle adapter (tripod adapter assembly) to be mounted to a vehicle. Here is NSN right out of the bag:1005-01-225-1156. Even then, you will still require an adapter with a male pintle to fit into the vehicle mount slot.

240s just require the adapter or "frog legs" so the female end, located on the vehicle can accept the pintle.

240 coax are meant to be mounted to LAVs/AAVs where they are controlled mechanically by the operator inside the vehicle. The 240E is the one used with the spade grip but are mainly used in helicopters. The 240G/240B are primarily used on light vehicles.

so do you want pictures or something? i can show you, i have a 240b in my room right now and my room mate has a 249, all they need are those holes to get the male end of the pintle on it. almost all vehicles with a turret have the female hole inside on attached to the turret shield. insert and your ready to rock, we turned our tanks in already so i cant get a picture of that, but for the M1abrams Coax machine gun the one that that gunner controls with a button all it did was slide inand you put two pins in to lock it down. you can use ANY 240 for that as long as the buttstock is removed and a new back plate is there for safety reasons. the trigger grouping remains the same. the same thing with the loaders 240 up on top, take the butt stock off replace with a new plate and it has the butterfly trigger which is just a lever with a hook that wrapped around the trigger as its the same trigger assembly. im a 19k, my main job is tanks. i AM a loader. i work on humvees and mraps on a daily basis, im the gunner on both vehicles.

metalliman545
11-05-2010, 10:55 AM
btw we dont use "ammo baskets" we just strap the can down next to the weapon. on the coax for the tank a giant belt of about 2000-4000 rounds is in a box with a giant belt going over the breach.

Group B
11-05-2010, 11:30 AM
My son uses the FNH MK 48 MOD1. Basically, it's a SAW M249 in 7.62mm, belt fed only. Kicks butt.


http://www.fnhusa.com/le/products/firearms/model.asp?fid=FNF055&gid=FNG008&mid=FNM0042

I haven't shot any of these weapons, but the new MK 48 MOD1 really impresses me. Lighter weight, shorter length, but with 7.62Nato stomping power!

stormy_clothing
11-05-2010, 12:27 PM
a minigun with 308 rounds = game over

http://www.epicycle.org.uk/images/minigun2.jpg

Wafflestomper
11-05-2010, 12:44 PM
so do you want pictures or something? i can show you, i have a 240b in my room right now and my room mate has a 249, all they need are those holes to get the male end of the pintle on it. almost all vehicles with a turret have the female hole inside on attached to the turret shield. insert and your ready to rock, we turned our tanks in already so i cant get a picture of that, but for the M1abrams Coax machine gun the one that that gunner controls with a button all it did was slide inand you put two pins in to lock it down. you can use ANY 240 for that as long as the buttstock is removed and a new back plate is there for safety reasons. the trigger grouping remains the same. the same thing with the loaders 240 up on top, take the butt stock off replace with a new plate and it has the butterfly trigger which is just a lever with a hook that wrapped around the trigger as its the same trigger assembly. im a 19k, my main job is tanks. i AM a loader. i work on humvees and mraps on a daily basis, im the gunner on both vehicles.

I dont even see your argument, here. The "pintle" is the "adapter". There are sevral different configuration types the crew served weapons can be mounted. The Mk64 Cradle which HAS a basket, the H60 Cradle which HAS a basket, or the Universal Pintle Adapter (more common) which will require a pintle adapter wich is Just a male end piece that connects to the female part of the UPA. There are others but these are the primary types used on up-armored humvees. The UPA is more common because it uses a T&E which is used in conjunction with the M122 tripod. Less SL-3 = Less lost ****. Recently, however, the UPAs are being used less and MK64 cradles are being used more to eliminate the need of a T&E.

If you remove the backplate of the coax and replace it with a "butterfly" (spade) grip, that makes it a 240E (if it had an actual charging handle and not a cable with a loop). I'm an Armorer, my main job is guns. I worked on all crew served MGs for a Recon unit (3 yrs) and an AAV/LAV unit (4 yrs). I'm an operator and an instructor.

and BTW, MK64 cradles use a basket. Even though the vehicles that use the coax do not, most rigs will require the basket or a feed throat w/ an ammo can holder.

TheRealVIC
11-05-2010, 12:59 PM
The original question was which was the best SQUAD weapon. The saw is much lighter and and more manuverable than the M60. Never fired the M240 so i can't really give much real world imput on that one. My SAW did jam from time to time (say 1-2 times per 600 rds) but i maintained it very well. After shooting 1000 rounds continuosly it jammed practically every 10-20 rounds. The M60 does lay down much better suppressive fire and did have longer effective range capabilities. The draw backs are obvious. Its a pig. The M60 needs a 2-3 man team vs a single soldier with his M249. I would hands down choose a SAW over a M60 unless it was a defensive (bunker/fortified position) situation. :cool2:

4thSBCT
11-05-2010, 3:14 PM
All day, every day. Can't beat the 240

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c382/trevormoore1984/n589084723_1130194_3940.jpg?t=1288998857

jeff762
11-05-2010, 3:50 PM
So what are the main differences between the M60 and the M60E3?
If you guys that have experience with the 60's and the 249's had a choice which one would you use?

like caldivers i've used all 3, acually all 4. the difference between the m60 and the m60e3 is barrel lenth, e3's is shorter. bipods moved from the barrel to the gas tube. gas piston system modified if i rememer correctly.

if i had to choose between the 60 and the 249 it would be the 60e3, even though they're both finiky and prone to jamming. but if you add the 240 as a choice, i most defently take the 240. the only thing that i don't like about the 240 is the sights are too small imo.

DisgruntledReaper
11-05-2010, 4:39 PM
I would have to go with the FN MAG over the M60 anyday....of course if caliber is not an issue----good old MG42 with the 'heavy bolt' to reduce ROF..if cal is issue----MG3 in 308........

M60 was a hybrid with bits from various designs and when properly cared for was ok but..........

Spain made a 5.56 version of the MG42/MG3 ,forgot what the model was but THAT would be the Squad MG for me if I had to do 556.......smaller and lighter but with the same legendary reliability of the MG42.

God Bless The Mauser
11-05-2010, 5:58 PM
This
It can be a light machine gun, heavy machine gun when on the tripod, AA gun, can be mounted on vehicles, and has a very efficient barrel change system


http://i401.photobucket.com/albums/pp96/Clay_James/Pictures%20for%20forums/BundeswehrMG31.jpg

Hump0311
11-05-2010, 8:06 PM
I dont even see your argument, here. The "pintle" is the "adapter". There are sevral different configuration types the crew served weapons can be mounted. The Mk64 Cradle which HAS a basket, the H60 Cradle which HAS a basket, or the Universal Pintle Adapter (more common) which will require a pintle adapter wich is Just a male end piece that connects to the female part of the UPA. There are others but these are the primary types used on up-armored humvees. The UPA is more common because it uses a T&E which is used in conjunction with the M122 tripod. Less SL-3 = Less lost ****. Recently, however, the UPAs are being used less and MK64 cradles are being used more to eliminate the need of a T&E.

If you remove the backplate of the coax and replace it with a "butterfly" (spade) grip, that makes it a 240E (if it had an actual charging handle and not a cable with a loop). I'm an Armorer, my main job is guns. I worked on all crew served MGs for a Recon unit (3 yrs) and an AAV/LAV unit (4 yrs). I'm an operator and an instructor.

and BTW, MK64 cradles use a basket. Even though the vehicles that use the coax do not, most rigs will require the basket or a feed throat w/ an ammo can holder.


HAHAHA

I love my 2111's I got a buddy who is waiting to reup 2111 from 0311 ..

Marine Armorer: 1 Army Upgunner: 0

metalliman545
11-06-2010, 4:28 AM
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c382/trevormoore1984/n589084723_1130194_3940.jpg?t=1288998857

we can use that machine gun, right there, with no modifcations to it in a pinch on any vehicle we have that is a M240B. no cables attached to the charging handle. i know what I USE and what WE use on ALL OUR VEHICLES. take the same exact 240B from humvee, to mrap, to Abrams tank. we DONT have to do anything to. the spade grips are more of a change to make it easier for us but not necessary. and armorer wow. good job. what does "marine armorer and army up gunner" have to do with anything? screw branches, were talking guns here.

Quiet
11-06-2010, 11:10 AM
Spain made a 5.56 version of the MG42/MG3 ,forgot what the model was but THAT would be the Squad MG for me if I had to do 556.......smaller and lighter but with the same legendary reliability of the MG42.
CETME Ameli
From 1982-2007, it was Spain's military issued SAW.
In 2008, it was replaced by the H&K MG-4.


http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq163/vicent_nb1/amelild9.jpg

Funbaby
11-06-2010, 2:44 PM
CETME Ameli
From 1982-2007, it was Spain's military issued SAW.
In 2008, it was replaced by the H&K MG-4.


http://i444.photobucket.com/albums/qq163/vicent_nb1/amelild9.jpg

a SUSAT? mounted on the spainish SAW....interesting

Group B
11-06-2010, 2:50 PM
This
It can be a light machine gun, heavy machine gun when on the tripod, AA gun, can be mounted on vehicles, and has a very efficient barrel change system


http://i401.photobucket.com/albums/pp96/Clay_James/Pictures%20for%20forums/BundeswehrMG31.jpg

The M60 was heavily based on the MG42, but it took a few generations before the M60 acquired a decent quick-change barrel system, no?

jeff762
11-07-2010, 8:32 AM
The M60 was heavily based on the MG42, but it took a few generations before the M60 acquired a decent quick-change barrel system, no?

mmmm, not entirely true. just the top cover and the feed tray were based on the mg42. and part of the gun was based on the fg42(paratroop rifle), but i forget which part. the barrel change system pretty much stayed the same.

kendog4570
11-07-2010, 8:52 AM
and part of the gun was based on the fg42(paratroop rifle), but i forget which part.....

I believe it was the bolt.