Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
>Providing< they meet specifications (incl field duty), they should be built by the lowest bidder.Built by the lowest bidder.
I love my Eotech (mounted on a SIG 556), but have heard more than one vet of recent deployments that they tended to have issues with long term durability. Aimpoints and ACOGs tend to have a better reputation.Any opinions or preferences on optics such as Aimpoint, Trijicon or EoTech and how they actually stand up to combat duty?
660 rounds vs. 240 rounds for 22 Lbs. THAT is the main reason we use the 5.56 instead of the 7.62.
U.S. armies have NEVER been equipped with the latest and greatest. Not since the Henry (Winchester) was rejected in the Civil War. QUOTE]
There would be some who would disagree with your above sweeping statement....US Army entered WWII with the finest infantry combat rifle of the time already in use, the M1 Garand. It was the "latest" and definitely the "greatest" at the time. One could say the for the M2 .50 cal. when discussing heavy machine guns....
But I do see your point that the average Joe or Jane doesn't get the top bidders' weapon, but the lowest bidders' weapon or sometimes what politics deem "the best". I would submit this....for all the bad mouthing of the 5.56mm why did the Soviets adopt the AK 74 with a 5.45x39 round?
Probably the same logic used in the US adoption of the M16.... more bullets for conscripts and much cheaper to manufacture in the US' case than the M14.
Brutus Out