Cool

How would you say the accuracy of the scar is compared to the m110?

Judd Hack With Fed 308 GMM 168 you can get between 1 and 1.5 MOA. Which is not bad for a battle rifle with a 16 inch, chrome lined lightweight barrel. It’s also a whole lot lighter. 600 yards is about it’s max effective range on a man sized target with match ammo, and a good scope. Muzzle velocity with old style Fed 168 will be around 2600. The new production stuff is about 100 FPS slower.

Indeed, MrGNG

Is it true that the Mk20 SCAR SSR has somewhat replaced the M-110 in the Spec Ops world?

Congratulations. You are now qualified to be an acquisitions manager for the D.O.D.

As someone who works in military acquisitions i havent seen 1) much, but the rest are spot on. Unfortunately there is so much politics and penny pinching involved that the best possible product rarely makes it to the field.

Well when everything on the market is just some variation of an AR you can pretty much just throw darts at a board because no matter what you will have an AR or an AR.

Same goes for the Akm system.. There's short barrel sub machine guns and long/short carbines, as well as light machine guns/saw in the RPK.. The Romanians even made a DMR version with the PSL in 762x54r.. I wouldn't count the Dragunov as it's a completely different operating system being short-stroke piston vs a standard AK long-stroke system (which the PSL has a long stroke). There are even pistol caliber shooting versions of aks like with the ar15.. Albeit the ar15/ar10 is more suitable for accuracy for dmr's.

That would be the stoner 64

If you think carrying a Bren gun is bad, there were guys still carrying Grease Guns - and still driving M60A3s

@@Laotzu.Goldbug Yeah, my dad met some of those guys. It was the USMC, right?

@@muwuny you know, I actually think that it was Big Army. 1 AD if I'm not mistaken. To my knowledge, the USMC wasn't issuing SMGs to armored crews at the time

@@Laotzu.Goldbug Ah

The active duty Marine tankers went into theater with M60A1’s. The M3A1 SMG’s were not part of the SL-3 gear for that tank. They had M16A2’s and M9’s. The Marine Corps never got the high tech M60A3. Delta Company 4th Tank Bn which was a Reserve Unit had transitioned to the M1A1 before deploying. They were loaned Army M1A1’s when they arrived in Saudi. The active duty side got the M1A1 tanks after they got back. That came from a team mate on the USMCR Rifle Team. He served with 1st Tank Bn during Desert Storm. When they crossed the Line of Departure they were in M60A1 RISE / PASSIVE Tanks. That tank used an optical range finder, and had passive night vision, and appliqué armor. The Saudi armored units had newer and more capable M60A3’s. He mentioned that they ran across one sitting along side the MSR. Being good Marines they promptly cut the lock on the turret hatch, and proceeded to rat fuck it for anything useful! The British forces that deployed during Desert Storm had the L85, and LSW. The SAS units used M16A1’s. There may have been some British Units with L1A1’s. I know the Royal Marines that attended the Marine Corps Eastern Division Matches at Camp Lejeune in the spring of 1990 used L85’s. And they were a piece of crap then. They couldn’t even shoot US M855 ammo because it was to hot for the receiver. They had to ship over their own issued ammo for the Matches. They were still using Browning 9MM Highpower pistols at that time. Those were pretty decent.

*hk made a better version of the csass

No. *Eleven.*

Nah, KZfaq will just delete his channel again.

Very good presentation on E.Stoners work /creations ! Though , No one should ever say that about J.M.Browning, as I'm pretty sure E. Stoner would agree ! Cheers

Nice ,I prefer the Mark 23 navy ,I forget which mod :)

M14 is crap for anything besides Color Guard...😉

@@aaronorr5586 That's totally untrue.

Andrew Tolbert What else is it good for?

@@echofoxtrotwhiskey1595 I guess the M14 can be okay for 21 gun salutes at funerals, granted blanks for the M16 are just as accessible so it comes down to whichever looks better.

@@at6062 it's a trash rifle

17B's were issued M110's? Interesting. The 3.5-10x Mark 4 on the M110 uses the TMR, which is FAR superior to the standard mil-dot like the one in the M3A we used on our M24's as each element of the reticle is much finer allowing for better range estimation, etc. BTW, the two M110's we had in my section when we deployed to 🇦🇫 in 2008 we serial numbers 36 and 42.

I know this is a old ass comment but I just wanted to stop by and call bullshit. Why in the flying fuck would a 17B get issued a m110 lol? What are you going to engage with it, your computer screen? 17Bs are totally one of the MOSs that get issued the old school m16s longer than a musket you see POGs lug around some kush FOB, or BAF/KAF lol

No you didn't

You will not find it, because sadly the gun gurus give no respect to A.R.M.S. When is the last time anyone did a video on his products and the quality and price.

He did go over that in the M4 videos

I did!

@@SmallArmsSolutions thank you!

He isn't the only one. Mine jammed on me constantly.

That is a urban legend. You cannot load silent with a forward assist. Especially with the amount of force needed to get the extractor to snap over the rim of the cartridge case.

@@SmallArmsSolutions I hate to argue with one of my hero's, but loading with the forward assist is substantially quieter. I haven't had to do it often, but the necessity to chamber in silence has arisen. Not being allowed to load my rifle until ready to shoot for instance. The unfortunate result of following posted rules, and have had to silently chamber a round with many deer not only present but very close. If it weren't for the forward assist, getting the rifle into battery would have been impossible. I am afraid there is no denying experience on this one. The forward assist has a place on my AR. Maybe do a video on it and show a better way without the forward assist.

lars kuno andersen two different platforms. Two different used. If you were engaging a target at extreme distances where multiple targets are not engaging you, you are right. But if every is up much closer and you are in more danger of accurate return fire, the M110 would be a better choice. It really goes to show no one platform does everything. You need to know your mission a what is the best tool for that.

Do you even saw bro

I would like to, no luck getting one to review

No expense was spared. jurassic park

I'd go with a different company. SA uses cast recievers

I’m not getting an M14/M1A of any variety.

Your comment about the forward assist is exactly what Stoner was worried about and why he was so adamant that the rifle didn’t need one.

I would disagree. None of Brownings systems ever achieved the popularity of the Stoner systems. Look at the number of M16’s in military, LE and commercial service against the numbers of all other Browning weapons of the US? Not close. Commercial success! The AR15 has achieved more success commercially than the M1911. This is my opinion dude. The AR15/AR10 continues to gain popularity after 60 years, not loose like most all the Browning guns. His M2 is all that still sees service. Again, my opinion, i respect yours as well. I guess there is no definitive answer its on what your perspective and criteria for comparison is.

Yes please

False.

False what?

@@stevewilson7819 The zero shift has been proven minimal time and time again. It is tested at the factory and meets the Army's requirement for shift. the suppressor adds about 6 inches to the 20 inch barrel, which for the amount of sound suppression you get is pretty small. Knight's delivered EXACTLY what the Army asked for. So as for false, i would say about 90% of what you heard and repeated.

Ash Hess I assume from your reply that you’ve source is KAC based? I wonder how much of what I’ve heard was operator induced then? Thanks for your reply.

steve wilson No operator would admit any error that is operator induced, lmao. Bias and lack of knowledge is why I treat anecdotes on guns with a very large grain of salt unless they can be backed with information that has been verified to be factual.

Army and Marines are getting the G28, Navy is getting the Mk20 SSR standardized

Shouldn't they have gone for an American design rather than relying on foreign tech ?

@@reddrascal0124 Europeans seem to just make better weapons these days. FN makes our M4 rifles now along with the squad automatic weapons and medium machine guns.

@@bigvaxmeanie925 that's fine until Europeans decide to also sell those designs to country's we're not friendly with .

@@reddrascal0124 why would they need to do that? USA does a pretty good job of handing their weapons over to terrorist already. Russia and China have no interest in using foreign made weapons over their government produced ones, along with different ammo standards

Yes. The M110 (made by KAC) is going to be replaced by the M110A1 (collaboration between HK and Geissele) for both the Army and Marines. Navy is getting the SCAR's version, and Chair Force never had the M110.

Luis Ortiz extremely limited numbers!

You can buy JP and LMT separate

If I only could get access to one. If you are interested, I suggest you get a copy of America’s Rifle. I have a whole chapter on the ACR/Colt ACR

Browning invented entire categories by himself. Stoner was the head of a design team that copied parts from other guns. He's just as much of a myth as Kalashnikov.

@@johngalt234: AR10 was a Dutch rifle, Armelite to buy the patent, the incompetent Stoner is never able to make it controllable, he transformed this rifle into 5.56 with exactly the same platform as the Dutch rifle, Stoner has an overrated reputation, at the beginning the M16 was a shit, at the request of the US government FN modified the M16 to make it correct and reliable, FN engineers did not believe their eyes to see a 5.56 in an assault rifle, FN built M16 and M4 for two decades FN is way better than Colt

​@@hansstrouf Two things: *_First._* You can't blame Stoner for the M16's growing pains. He stopped being involved in the project in 1959 when Armalite sold the design rights of both the AR10 and AR15 to Colt. The only military testing the AR15 had while Stoner was involved recommended that the Army more seriously consider looking at the AR15 as a replacement for the less reliable, more costly, and just as deadly M14. The only reason the Army didn't do so is because its Chief of Staff didn't want to have one caliber for general issue rifles and one for machine guns. He thought it would create a logistical nightmare. (This rejection is what led Armalite to sell the "unprofitable" designs to Colt.) What the Army with the M16 did in the 1960s is squarely the Army's fault. The Secretary of Defense took care of that issue in 1968. www.forgottenweapons.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/1959-Rifle-Squad-Armed-with-a-Light-Weight-High-Velocity-Rifle.pdf *_Second._* The AR10 and AR15 aren't Stoner's only designs, but you talk like they are. He was central to the AR3, AR5, AR7, AR9, AR10, AR11, AR12, AR15, AR16, AR18, AR180, Stoner 63, Ares LMG, Ares FMG, KAC LMG, SR25, SR15, and others. (Many external piston rifles-including the Sig MCX/MPX-borrow from the AR18.) Stoner definitely deserves a place in the Pantheon of gun designers. I merely question how high of a pedestal he deserves. He was the head of a design team, not the sole engineer. Chris Bartocci's comment that "John Browning has nothing on Gene Stoner" is absurd. Browning created his ideas from scratch. The tilt-locking barrel? All his and used in 99% of all pistol designs today. The M2 50BMG machine gun? Still kicking after 100 years and not project to leave service for at least another 50 years. The M1911? Worked well for 75 years as the primary sidearm of the US military, and it is still preferred by competition shooters for both speed and accuracy. The Browning Automatic Rifle? It created a whole category known as the squad automatic rifle that we still use today. The Browning A5? World's first semiautomatic shotgun. And I haven't even talked about the seven calibers he created or the twelve other handguns he designed or the four machine guns he made that are't used anymore or his work with pump/lever action rifles/shotguns.

@@johngalt234 >imagine downplaying the ingenuity of Stoner's gas system with autistic over-reduction and how Stoner could come up with a new system that combines the best aspects of external piston and direct impingement designs while using proven technologies thus ensuring his design is actually reliable John Browning's contributions shouldn't be ignored though, he made significant contributions in practically all class of firearms

@@dunadan7136 What did I say negative about Stoner? He WAS the head of a design team, not the sole designer/engineer.

tengu190 those are difficult to get ahold of

Andrew Strong the M110 was all sold as a KAC Weapon System

jdessell just sold my m1a, unbelievably heavy weapon with sharp edges all around, lots of recoil, and not modular in any way what so ever. Once I got the scar 17 I was shocked at how people still consider the m1a a viable platform

There that sentence “my X never jams, but the Y are unreliable” use both and make the decision.

Not sure, I have a first run 1995 one

About 5000-7000 facotry configuration in today's market

Jay Hutsle You probably had the 1st gen bolt with an M16 extractor

I understand that was the reason you see the 308 caliber AR platforms using bolts with 2 ejectors. They weren’t able to get the empty case to consistently clear the ejection port with the single ejector. We have a LMT 308 MWS with the 2 ejectors. Had zeros malfunctions. It uses Pmags, and the Surefire SOCOM 762 RC Suppressor. I had heard that there were 2 common problems with the M110. Feeding issues, and ejection issues. And the suppressor was to long, to heavy, and had massive zero shifts when removed and reinstalled.

You hated that rifle but did you give up the rough gay army sex💄😮💋👠🥒🍌🥕🍗🦴🕺👬🧚‍♂️🤫

L129A1

M118 or M118Special Ball used the 173 grain FMJ bullet with a boat tail. It was used previously on the M118 National Match round. The M118NM round was made with match grade brass. That round was discontinued in the early 1980’s. It was made by Lake City. The M852 National Match round using the Sierra 168 Matchking bullet replaced the M118 NM Round. M118SPECIAL BALL used standard brass with standard primers in them. And it shot amazingly average. We only used it because we had to. The M118Long Range round was made with Sierra Matchking 175 grain OTM bullets. That was to fill a Marine Corps requirement in the early 1990’s.

Ours were utter shit. Great when they worked, but too unreliable for me to trust them. I always took an extra couple of pistol magazines just in case. That being said, there is a difference between commercial variants and military contract guns: maintenance. Our armory didn't do a good job of keeping the guns up to par, and they often replaced parts with non-OEM garbage.

@@johngalt234 Lucky for me that I am an armorer. I build and maintain most of my guns. The few that I do not build, I strip down in to tiny parts and carefully fit, polish, bed, Loctite and rebuild them. Better than factory. Always.

John Galt ...so you’ve answered why the guns you have kept failing on you, lol. Take any gun and put it through a “maintenance” schedule like that and any gun will be shit. I tell you, you can take any rifle of the month, no matter how good and I guarantee you that troops will complain about it with that kind of maintenance.