3 ms·
I was under the impression that 3 round burst was a waste and rarely used. The increased fire rate dramatically reduces accuracy compared to firing three rounds
by dfc 14y ago
I was under the impression that 3 round burst was a waste and rarely used. The increased fire rate dramatically reduces accuracy compared to firing three rounds quickly. The army's recent RFP got rid of the 3 round burst requirement:
http://www.defensereview.com/u-s-army-issues-new-individual-carbine-rfp-request-for-proposal-how-will-the-next-carbine-improve-on-the-colt-m4m4a1-carbine-we-have-some-ideas/ http://www.defensereview.com/u-s-army-issues-new-individual-...
- rdl 14y agoThe big problem with it in the M4 IMO is that it degrades the semi-auto trigger pull. Firing from vehicles was basically suppression, or very close at a large target from a supported firing position. Contractors were limited to rifles under most contracts, generally (although .30 cal machine guns were allowed in some cases, so the RPK was quite popular), so that's the main reason they used rifles that way rather than what the US Army would do (an M249, M240, or better, M2 or mk19). The greater argument here that semi auto is adequate for almost all rifle/carbine use, I fully agree with, but there were both US military people and contractors (and most of the indigenous security forces) who used full auto or 3 round burst.
- hga 14y agoAh ha! I've heard that, but never gotten confirmation. What I've heard is that on semi-auto mode, the weight of the trigger increases with each pull in a three round cycle. If true, it again tells us how little the Army cares about individual rifle marksmanship ... which I suppose is another causality of the McNamara DoD regime.
- rdl 14y agoYeah, I just stuck to my Browning Hi Power, CZ-97B, M14, and various disposable AKMs when possible; M9 when forced. Also, let's just say Brownell's catalogs were pretty popular :)