OHF marking on butt

Speaking of which, I have never seen any serious test report comparing the performance of the GPMG or M240 with the Russian PKM. I can't believe that neither the UK nor the USA has done so. I'd love to know how it came out.

M

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee Enfield

I've read that in testing the Mag58/M240 gets the desired velocity out of the "training standard pressure" "Fury" round without the super high pressure 2 part case.

Something about the MAG having a normal length barrel.

The US Mil has been sold on "free lunch" yet again...

You need the multi part exotic case because you need super high pressures to get the velocity out of the super short barrel that you need because of the large can that you need with the super high velocity blast that you need with the super short barrel that.....ect ect....

resulting in exotic alloys for the parts to minimize breakages and wear resulting from the super high pressures that you need because of the super short barrel that you need because of the can that you need because of the super blast from the super short barrel that you need because of the...."free lunch"...

---

Who knows what the thought process was that came to the conclusion that the new SIG round was the way to go although I'm sure we can agree that cost to the taxpayer wasn't part of the conversation. Whatever the cost, the improved penetration of body armor and greater 'point blank' range will be appreciated by the men at the tip of the spear.

If I had to choose between a 762 - 54R PKM and a GPMG, it'd be a hard choice Mike. The PKM is just so wonderfully simple, built like a brick sh......., er....., out-house. Just look at the claws that drag the rounds from the belt as a good example. Barrel changes too. Niot that the Soviets worry too much about barrel change discipline.

But the GPMG has a place in my heart too..... Next to the L4