...but Bushhamster had spirited off the Masada before I got to their booth on Sunday.
Other than the SCAR, it's the first new rifle intro that has piqued my curiosity. (The AUG was a curiosity the first time around; if I wanted one, I'd have bought one then. The SIG 556 could be fine if they hadn't dropped the ball with the charging handle placement. On the other hand, it's not like my M4geries are inadequate or anything...)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Did they really name a rifle after the plateau known for the defenders all committing suicide?
"You'll never take me alive" is one thing, but "I'll beat you to it" is another.
Maybe I can order one in matching colors with my Chevy Nova.
Bushmaster is calling it the ACR, though the latest news is they're more interested in selling them to LEO and MIL organizations than civvies.
http://www.bushmaster.com/acr_update.asp
I like my M4gery a lot despite being Californicated as it is, and I still think itlooks better than the Bushmaster "LittleBigHorn".
Tamara,
What don't you like about the 556 charging handle placement?
It's on the wrong side of the firearm.
If I need to operate the charging handle to clear a malf or whatever, I want to be able to do it with my non-dominant hand while my master hand retains a firing grip on the weapon and the weapon remains mounted in my shoulder. If I have an optic parked atop a 556, I have to reach very awkwardly over the top of the weapon, blocking my line of sight with my own arm, in order to manipulate the charging handle. This is unsat.
This is the reason that an entire industry has sprung up for enlarged latches for AR charging handles: to allow one-handed manipulation with the weak hand without removing the weapon from a firing position, and this is why the SCAR specs called for ambi charging handles.
What about if you went underneath like this guy?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S27cZDurPBY
It's still an awkward and unnatural movement forced by design flaws.
Who is going to shoot this thing in combat: Engineers, or trigger-pullers? Why do I need to practice complex ballet to make up for shortcomings that never should have made it out of the CAD program?
The main reason that the M16/M4 is as dominant as it is amongst the door-kicking/trigger-pulling crowd has nothing to do with pistons or impingements or folding stocks or bullpups, but because it's possible to fight the gun without fighting the gun; all the controls fall readily to hand without pulling the rifle out of a firing position (at least with the addition of a tac-latch or other oversize charging handle they do...)
The next carbine needs to build from those ergonomics (eg HK 416, Masada, or SCAR), not take a giant step back...
Post a Comment