LRRPF52 Wrote:Great video....probably one of the best I've seen so far. Several of these SASR guys are using Knight's QD suppressors on their M4A1's. It's a bit nose heavy with the 14.5" barrel, which is why the CQBR uppers came out, but not everyone has those. Remember: These guys' country uses a licensed copy of the Steyr AUG as its service rifle...so why are they using M4A1's...I don't know for certain why, but I think the reasons you've given sound logical: weight, size, handling, ergonomics, etc.
Quote:...and in 5.56 NATO to boot?Ah, I can answer that in one word, and it has nothing to do with controllability. It's logistics, pure and simple. They use 5.56 NATO because it's the standard caliber for Western nations.
If the US had fielded the M16 in 6.5 Grendel back in the 1960s, that cartridge would've then been adopted by NATO in the 1970s. The M4A1 carbine would today be chambered in 6.5 NATO, and that's what the spec ops guys would be using, not 5.56x45.
Also, you would have had part of your wish fulfilled: FN would've made the Minimi in 6.5 NATO, which means the M249 would have had sufficient performance to replace the M60 as was originally planned. There would've been no requirement to create and field the heavy M240B. Everyone would be using 6.5 LMGs for infantry, and 7.62 NATO would have faded away long ago.
So, in this alternate timeline you wouldn't be here arguing for a 6.5 LMG, you'd be on m4carbine.net calling for M4 carbines to be converted from 6.5 NATO to .223 Remington...
