In a perfect world, what rifle setup would you want to equip our troops with?

[Safetyfirst]

This is a hypothetical scenario where all logistics are irrelevant. Clean slate, no budget problems or previous supplies, no retraining necessary. It can be any platform, any accessories, whatever, as long as it fills the most versatile and effective role a combat rifle/carbine can for the modern solder. Here is my personal list, though feel free to tweak it.

-DGI AR derivative
-Ambidextrous controls (including bolt catch)
-Keymod free float handguard
-A barrel coating that is superior to chrome-lining
-16 inch barrel
-Most effective flash suppressor on the market
-Exterior coating
-Upper and lower resized to better accommodate an alternative caliber to 5.56, something that has proven itself superior in terms of range and kinetic energy (ex. 6.8 SPC)
-Variable zoom optic with appropriately cantilevered mount
-Canted iron sights with tritium inserts
-Momentary on flashlight with integral green laser aiming module
-Dedicated suppressor designed to work with the gas system

Anything stand out as a poor decision? What about your list? I think the current platforms are great, but they could certainly use an improvement. For example, if in another scenario we were stuck with the M4, I would at least update it with a stronger buffer spring, upgraded barrel and exterior coatings, canted iron sights and replace the quad rail with a slimmer profile one.

 

[jmr40]

The M-16 platform and 5.56 round have been used by our military for 50 years now. Longer and more proven than any other rifle in US history. While the AK 47 was introduced earlier, it was dropped in the late 70s and the Russians copied our 5.56 round with the AK 74. So the AR outlasted the AK47 with 20 years longer service, and counting, as a front line weapon for a major military power. The basic platform has been tweaked and improved as has the ammo. All things considered we already have about as close to perfection as we can get.

Lots of people keep dreaming up scenarios where the 5.56 is less than adequate and coming up with rounds they think offer better performance. No round is perfect in every application, and the 5.56 comes up short for some things. But all of the proposed replacements also have areas where they would be less than ideal. In a perfect world our solders would carry around bag full of different weapons like a golfer carries around a bag full of clubs. If you had to play a round of golf with only 1 club, which would it be? That is what the AR is. It is the best compromise of what is needed if you can only have 1 rifle to play with.

For all of its shortcomings I still say we would have filled more body bags over the last 50 years if any other rifle had been issued.

 

[crazysccrmd]

From someone who used one for a living - canted iron sights, variable zoom optic, and suppressor aren't needed. We also already have flashlights, visible and IR lasers so that's covered. A visible laser is really only useful for escalation of force, it isn't used for engagements ever in any of my experiences. The current rail system is fine, but a durable free float could be an improvement in terms of accuracy.

 

[Safetyfirst]

Lots of people keep dreaming up scenarios where the 5.56 is less than adequate and coming up with rounds they think offer better performance. No round is perfect in every application, and the 5.56 comes up short for some things. But all of the proposed replacements also have areas where they would be less than ideal.

And where exactly do you feel the 6.8 SPC II falls short when compared to the 5.56?

 

[Safetyfirst]

From someone who used one for a living - canted iron sights, variable zoom optic, and suppressor aren't needed. We also already have flashlights, visible and IR lasers so that's covered. A visible laser is really only useful for escalation of force, it isn't used for engagements ever in any of my experiences. The current rail system is fine, but a durable free float could be an improvement in terms of accuracy.

What optic did you use? Why wouldn't you want either of my proposals?

 

[benEzra]

And where exactly do you feel the 6.8 SPC II falls short when compared to the 5.56?

I'd imagine ammo weight, ammo volume, and muzzle rise, all else being equal. Reserve magazine capacity is slightly diminished for a given length magazine, and ammo loadout for a given weight or a given number of magazines is decreased.

A round of 6.8 SPC weighs between 1.5x and 2x the weight of a 5.56x45mm cartridge, depending on bullet weight and such.

 

[savanahsdad]

back to the 308 (7.62) maybe a AR 10 , maybe in 243 or the 6.8mspc AR15 type , but in a perfect world we should be thinking out side the box , like a new short mag with a integrated full length suppress barrel with a magazine that go's in the side for easy mag change shooting from prone , and it should kick the brass out the bottom of the gun on the ground , oh and lets make it out of titanium , and full strip down with no tools , quick change barrels ,

 

[crazysccrmd]

What optic did you use? Why wouldn't you want either of my proposals?

I used a 4x32 ACOG which is just about perfect for the ranges that your average rifleman is capable of engaging at. Variable zoom just adds unnecessary bulk, weight and complexity.

Canted iron sights aren't needed, if the ACOG breaks we have BUIS mounted. The canted sights are just another thing to snag and hang up on stuff.

Like I said, we already have lasers and flashlights that work and can be attached/removed as needed.

Suppressors add weight and length to the end of the rifle, make the balance wrong and don't have a lot of benefit for the average ground soldier.

 

[Safetyfirst]

I'd imagine ammo weight, ammo volume, and muzzle rise, all else being equal. Reserve magazine capacity is slightly diminished for a given length magazine, and ammo loadout for a given weight or a given number of magazines is decreased.

A round of 6.8 SPC weighs between 1.5x and 2x the weight of a 5.56x45mm cartridge, depending on bullet weight and such.

Magpul makes 6.8 mags for LWRCI that hold 30 rounds, and while you're correct about the round weighing a little more than 5.56 I think it's important to note that since it has 2-3 times the knockdown power of the 5.56 less rounds would need to be expended.

 

[towerC]

I had a SAM-R on my last deployment in the Marine Corps and we had COTS suppressors and I maybe used it 5-7 times it was usually just an extra serial number to keep track of and weight to carry. The M-4/M-16 is fine the new ambi selctor is great. The free floated rail thing eh its not like these service rifles are in my opinion not precision rifles they tried a free float system and most proved problematic they just havent made one that holds up yet.

 

[Safetyfirst]

Canted iron sights aren't needed, if the ACOG breaks we have BUIS mounted. The canted sights are just another thing to snag and hang up on stuff.

I think their intended purpose is for engaging close-up threats that your ACOG is too magnified to quickly acquire.

Also with regard to suppressors, you don't think the reduction of muzzle flash and report is an acceptable trade-off for portability?

 

[crazysccrmd]

I think their intended purpose is for engaging close-up threats that your ACOG is too magnified to quickly acquire.

Also with regard to suppressors, you don't think the reduction of muzzle flash and report is an acceptable trade-off for portability?

I've engaged people up close and personal no problem with an ACOG mounted. At close range you don't need sights, you just need to be trained and know what you're doing. Unless you're suppressing my 249s, 240s and 40mm I think it won't make a difference. War is a loud affair.

 

[rswartsell]

IMHO, and to get back to the OP's original question.

The M-4 has not been exceeded for general issue and if I was king I would designate a few long range AR-10 types as well as SAW's.

The downside is logistics, providing the extra caliber.

 

[coyote315]

based on my limited experience of 3 tours, I would want CSS/ CS troops to keep their carbine M4 size rifles, and CA to get augmented with a solid AR10 in .243 w/ a 12g "skeleton key" or m203 underslung as necessary. Flat top, allow operators to configure optics to their preference; you can't issue a universal optic to a standing Army and expect to fit everyone.

 

[BCRider]

....and while you're correct about the round weighing a little more than 5.56 I think it's important to note that since it has 2-3 times the knockdown power of the 5.56 less rounds would need to be expended.

I would not call 1.5 to 2x the weight a "little more". That is a highly significant amount and it'll either have a pretty big effect on the load carried by a soldier or reduce the amount of ammo that can be carried by that same factor.

And I understand that there's a lot of focus given to suppressive fire when it is appropriate. Which greatly affects the quantity of ammo that has to be carried so it can be expended.

 

[Safetyfirst]

What company would you want to produce the military carbine if not Colt? I'd like to see BCM Jack carbines in the hands of every infantrymen, personally.

 

[greenlion]

In a perfect world... we wouldn't need troops.

 

[torqem]

Are you aware of how many 10's of thousands of rds of rifle ammo our troops fire, for each hit that they get? Are you aware that most hits are not good hits? We are talking over 100,000 rds per kill, man. The rifle doesnt' score even 10% of the battlefield casualties. The beltfeds get that much, accidents, disease and "friendly" fire get as many or more. The remaining % are caused by fire, falling/flying debris, and shrapnel weapons. The rifle doesn't amount to a hill of beans, basically. So yes, the weight of the ammo is a big deal. If they were really worried about stopping power, they'd issue HP or SP ammo. The Hague Convention vs expanding bullets doesn't apply, since it's not a declared war between signers of that Convention.

 

[kwg020]

Nothing would change except the caliber. It would be 6x45 shooting a 60 to 62 grain bullet. This would mean there would be virtually no changes in velocity, Zero or range. I'm not a fan of the carbine length rifles and they would be replaced with 16 inch mid length barrels and for grenade launchers we should go back to the M-79 bloopers. kwg

 

[horsemen61]

Now having no military experience I can't say for sure but I liked the op's statements make it a 6.8spc II and I'm in

 

[Scoped]

M1 garands

 

[goon]

Magpul makes 6.8 mags for LWRCI that hold 30 rounds, and while you're correct about the round weighing a little more than 5.56 I think it's important to note that since it has 2-3 times the knockdown power of the 5.56 less rounds would need to be expended.

That's assuming you're making hits. If most of your rounds are misses, and a great many of them will be as you fire toward the enemy's position to degrade his ability to fight while your buddies maneuver around to be able to kill or capture him, then the slight increase in power per round is going to be wasted on dirt and whatever else he is hiding behind.
Plus, people are tough. Once your buddies get the enemy in their sights, they may have to shoot him more than once to stop him. They may shoot him several times anyhow just because a few rounds of ammunition is cheaper than their lives.

In an ideal world I might want to try to swap out the 5.56 and the 7.62x51 in favor of a more powerful intermediate round in the 6.5mm range for both rounds, but I have such a personal love of the power of the 7.62x51 round and the M-240B that I don't think I could really ever go through with it. I don't think my "ideal world" logistics considerations would ever match up with what happens in the real world.

 

[USAF_Vet]

In a perfect world, there would be no need for a standing army, so no need for the perfect battle rifle.

My last tour in Iraq, I carried a pretty simple M4 with BUIS mounted with a 1.5x32 ACOG.

The only thing I could ever want on top of that is a reciprocating bolt handle. That's the only thing other rifles platforms have that I miss on my AR.

 

[goon]

In a perfect world, there would be no need for a standing army, so no need for the perfect battle rifle.

With all due respect, I disagree.
In a perfect world I'd have an excellent select-fire battle rifle secured in my home and so would you (should you choose).

 

[USAF_Vet]

With all due respect, I disagree.
In a perfect world I'd have an excellent select-fire battle rifle secured in my home and so would you (should you choose).

Yes Sir, I stand corrected. However, it would not be issued, so I could build a perfect battle rifle, which would be completely different from your perfect battle rifle. No need for uniformity.