This can't be good...

[PT-The Italian Commie]

Colt Defense LLC wins US$126M contract to produce 7'62x51mm-NATO M-240/B LMG for the U.S. Army

Now, the M-240 (a.k.a. the MAG) was way the best GMPG in the world... as long as its manufacture remained in the hands of its original conceiver, FN. Now that Colt is taking the matter into its hands, I can't dare imagining the results...

[D Yankee (The Zionist)]

I have a love/hate relationship with that weapon. Me and my partner had to lug the damn thing for a year through the desert. But once you fire it, you remember why you love it so much.

[PT-The Italian Commie]

Originally Posted by D Yankee (The Zionist)

I have a love/hate relationship with that weapon. Me and my partner had to lug the damn thing for a year through the desert. But once you fire it, you remember why you love it so much.

The FN MAG/M240 is definitely the best GPMG in the world, better than the MG-42/59 (Mg3), the M-60 or the PKM, and unsurpassed by the newest SAW-based GPMG entries like, to say, the H&K MG-4 7,62mm or the FN MINIMI-LMG. It's less than fit for dismounted/light infantry, but in all conflicts it was employed, its direct users (machinegunners) saw the highest effectivity/kill ratio between the troops.
Too bad it can't be lightened...

[D Yankee (The Zionist)]

We carried it over our shoulders (Vietnam Style) Because the shoulder sling either falls off constantly, or the sheer weight of the beast makes you feel like your back is broken. No matter where we were, if we were in a Humvee we would mount it and make it into a gun truck. If we were defending an outpost, it was aimed right at the fron gate. It was always our primary line of defense.

[JCoyote]

Originally Posted by PT-The Italian Commie

Too bad it can't be lightened...

Somehow this sounds like a dare to me.

[D Yankee (The Zionist)]

They made a lighter model for dismounts. It had a shorter barrel and lighter stock and....it's still heavy as fuck.

[REMOV]

Originally Posted by PT-The Italian Commie

The FN MAG/M240 is definitely the best GPMG in the world, better than the MG-42/59 (Mg3), the M-60 or the PKM

Rubbish. The PKM machine gun is far better than MAG 58. The only weak point of the Russian weapon is the ammunition.

It's less than fit for dismounted/light infantry, but in all conflicts it was employed, its direct users (machinegunners) saw the highest effectivity/kill ratio between the troops.

It is true statement if it is general, because it applies to all machineguners not only MAG 58.

Too bad it can't be lightened...

It can be lightened, but the game is not worth the candle.

[PT-The Italian Commie]

Originally Posted by REMOV

Rubbish. The PKM machine gun is far better than MAG-58. The only weak point of the Russian weapon is the ammunition.

Matter of points of view. Rhodesian and South-African soldiers used both and their favour always went upon the MAG. I don't consider the 7,62x54R a "weakness" anyway

Originally Posted by REMOV

It is true statement if it is general, because it applies to all machineguners not only MAG-58.

Well, the kill ratio of machinegunners armed with modern SAWs or with other types of machinegun is reportedly lower than the one registered with machinegunners equipped with the MAG. There's no match, to say, with the M249; and even with the Mg42/59 (a.k.a. Mg3).

Originally Posted by REMOV

It can be lightened, but the game is not worth the candle.

In fact, that's why "it can't be lightened" (without actually loosing effectiveness).

[REMOV]

Originally Posted by PT-The Italian Commie

Matter of points of view. Rhodesian and South-African soldiers used both and their favour always went upon the MAG.

I don't know what machine gun was favoured by Rhodesian or South African soldiers and why (because here may be the answer) - I also do not consider them as "the world experts about machine guns" - but it has nothing in common with your general statement about MAG as "the best machine gun in the world", which it is not.

I don't consider the 7,62x54R a "weakness" anyway

I do, because of the rim of the case. It complicates the mechanism of the machine gun. The best such construction in the world will be PKM fed by the rimmles case cartridge.

Well, the kill ratio of machinegunners armed with modern SAWs or with other types of machinegun is reportedly lower than the one registered with machinegunners equipped with the MAG.

Who measures it? Who compares it to any other machine gun? Such statement sound to me as utter rubbish. By the way "SAW" is the name of old American programme of the light automatic rifle fed from belt, which was won by the Minimi, not the name of any category of the machine gun.

There's no match, to say, with the M249; and even with the Mg42/59 (a.k.a. Mg3).

I agree. Sure, there is no match to general purpose machine gun to the light automatic rifle (call it LMG if you want) like Minimi. And sure, there is match to the MG3, because this is the same category of machine guns. Who told you that MG3 is worst than MAG and why? It make no sense.

In fact, that's why "it can't be lightened" (without actually loosing effectiveness).

Nope, it is not true. I can be lightened, without loosing effectiveness, but the cost of it is higher than switching from general purpose machine gun to such light machine gun like M60E3 or FN Minimi-7,62. The problem is, which you cannot understand, that if the PKM is truly GPMG covering of all aspects of general purpose - light, tripod and vehicle mounted, the MAG and MG3 are a slightly better as the tripod and vehicle mounted weapons, but far more worst in the light MG role. The PKM is truly universal, which MAG and MG3 are not quite.

I still cannot understand where are you find such false statement, that "MAG is the best machine gun in the world" from American Holywood movies? The MAG is good, reliable weapon of war, but it is not "the best" one.

[JCoyote]

Originally Posted by REMOV

By the way "SAW" is the name of old American programme of the light automatic rifle fed from belt, which was won by the Minimi, not the name of any category of the machine gun.

It was the name of the program, but it is generally accepted in the english speaking world as a definition for light machine guns which fire assault rifle class cartridges. Indeed, the nature of the program lends itself to this; it outlined a set of characteristics which define a unique category (as opposed to defining a specific weapon).

Similar could be said about "PDWs", that they are really the name of specific programs and needs statements and just claim they are all submachineguns. (This could actually be a bit more valid.) But there are significant qualities that make PDWs a very specific type of SMG.

Likewise, as a commanding officer, while I can employ full power cartridge light machine guns in much the same manner as each other, I cannot employ an M249, Ameli, RPK, RPD etc in the same way I can a bipoded M60, MAG, PKM, or HK21. The qualities of these SAWs, or "extra light machine guns" if that makes you more comfortable, is significantly different in terms of range, terminal ballistics, cover/soft target penetration, and weight, enough so that it's downright dangerous to think substitutions can be made between "traditional LMG" and "SAW" type weapons, in either direction. They have different tactical characteristics and thus many define them in different categories. And while by general definition any SAW is an LMG, not all LMGs are SAWs.

(This is a lot like scientific naming and phylogeny; while elementary and high school students might imagine scientific names are set in stone somewhere, they are actually a field of argument and change, and the only thing that gives any scientific name weight is a form of general consensus among experts and multiple names for the same species is common. Ask most firearms experts what a SAW is, and usually you'll get back a machine gun using assault rifle rounds. Since there is no International Firearms Categorization Committee, we usually have to go with general consensus too.)

Originally Posted by REMOV

I still cannot understand where are you find such false statement, that "MAG is the best machine gun in the world" from American Holywood movies?

I can't remember the last "Hollywood movie" I saw a MAG featured in. I could see making this argument with things like P90's or MP5's that have been darlings of the film industry, but when it comes to belt fed arms they still usually land on variations of the M60 or M1919. So you're getting a bit spurious there...