Comments on: Marines Replace M249 SAW with M27 IAR (HK416)

By: Ken

Ken — Sun, 05 Apr 2015 20:49:43 +0000

you can bet your bottom dollar that the Marines have checked this out. The reason we have the m16 and the m4 is because of the airforce, they needed a like weapon to guard air planes and they thought the m-14 was to heavy. turn out the m16 was a peice of crap got alot of marines killed. I know I was there when they came out. They are better now, but not by much. The 416 is a better weapon. I own a MR556 and love it.
Semper Fi, MSGT RET 66-94

By: Austin

Austin — Sun, 08 Feb 2015 03:44:25 +0000

You can put a 100 round beta magazine in the m27 but the saw us still a superior lmg. As an ar the m27 is top notch though.

By: Henry

Henry — Sat, 13 Apr 2013 00:39:15 +0000

They can easily fit the M27 IAR with a 100 round Beta-C drum magazine to provide the sustained firepower needed for the light machine gun role. I believe even with the Beta-C, it would still be much lighter than the M249 SAW. They can use the Beta-C as the standard issue magazine while still having the option of using STANAG magazines in an emergency. Heck, I always wondered why the British never used a 50 round drum magazine (like those available for AR-15 platform weapons) for their L86 instead of using STANAG as the standard issue magazine. Being a bullpup is no impediment for a drum magazine (as long as it is not too big and unwieldy). The Red Chinese use a drum magazine for their QBB-95 LSW.

By: Conspiracy Theorist

Conspiracy Theorist — Sat, 15 Oct 2011 08:11:26 +0000

I wonder if something else might be going on here? In WW2 the germans referred to the Sturmgehwer Stg44 as a machine pistol during its early development to keep hitler out of the loop. Only when glowing battlefield reports reached hitler did the weapon get his blessing.
Perhaps the marine corps would really like to replace the M4 with something more reliable, but are blocked by some influential politicians with financial interest in the M4.
Makes sense to then introduce the weapon as a replacement for the M249, and then when glowing battlefield reports come back, push to have the weapon adopted universally.

By: Adam

Adam — Sat, 15 Oct 2011 04:34:56 +0000

I carried a SAW for a number of years, it was no picnic. Butter, Butter, JAM. Couldn’t dump enough CLP on them to keep them running. As to the changeable barrels, if you need to change a barrel you’re doing something wrong. The ammo capacity is no worse off, even two hundred round drums the jam rate was often enough that this probably beats the snot out of the SAW due to it’s reliable feeding. Light weight and reliable, two things the SAW doesn’t have.

By: Mikee

Mikee — Fri, 14 Oct 2011 08:59:56 +0000

Editor re: MG32, MG40 – The German military used the MG34 and MG42 as the universal GPMG’s. I hope this was just a typo?

By: Dave White

Dave White — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 23:27:47 +0000

I took a look at the Surefire webpage and they seem to have thought the capacity issue through.

http://www.surefire.com/highcapacitymagazinesinfirefights

Sure looks ungainly, loading those in combat must be a real chore, let’s see that would be 20×5-round stripper clips… Perhaps they need another grunt (or perhaps a mule) to hump that load! I guess that is what the SAW gunners have to do now.

By: Holds Tight

Holds Tight — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 20:34:34 +0000

Gas piston is a plus but for sustained fire a mag isn’t going to cut it and with the minus of not having a swapable barrel. The SAW in a sf role needs belted ammo, the rate of fire is so high that magazine springs could not keep up.

By: Duke

Duke — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 19:26:07 +0000

They are going to use the Surefire 100 round mags with it. That puts it back on the same footing as the M249

By: Dave White

Dave White — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 16:53:24 +0000

Ok, I’ll bite… what is the advantage in replacing the existing weapon? The H&K does not appear to provide anywhere near the sustained firepower of the SAW. Replacing one in four Marine’s weapon with one of these does not appear to provide any significant improvement in combat, as these guys would be pulling empty magazines at the same pace as the other three that were still using the M4’s…

Editor: Dave — you’re affirming what quite a few other observers are saying. One observer says this whole IAR project was simply a way for the USMC to get a better, more reliable assault rifle than the M4, which the Corps, apparently, is not particularly fond of. This way the Corps gets a bunch of piston-operated, heavy barrel ARs in each squad, with a much better MRBF (mean round between failure) rate than the M4. But one can argue that ANY rifle limited to a 30- or 40-round magazine with non-swappable barrels cannot perform the role of the M249 SAW. Perhaps the USMC felt the superiority of the IAR as a “room-clearer” was more important than the traditional infantry employment of a light machine gun. Look at the German’s use of the MG32 and MG40 in WWII to understand how a machine gun with a high rate of fire can be used effectively with squad flanking tactics.