Uh huh. Can't figure how it would be superior to the G3 or whatever the German 7.62 MG is called. The BAR was a good solid piece of work for a SAW but the MG42 was a phenomenon. The MAG is a BAR action turned upside down and adapted to belt feed with a quick change bbl.
M60 Machine Gun
- Thread starter Nightcrawler
- Start date
- Status
Sleuth
Member
Nightcrawler, the locking system of the MAG58/M240 is that of the BAR (Circa 1918) turned on it's side. So, after a interlude with the M60, once again a John Browning design is protecting our troops! ( Along with the M2HB, of course.)
Nightcrawler
Member
WOW. Some things are timeless, I guess! 
Sleuth
Member
BigG, I will defer to those with more experience as to the comparison of the MG3 and the M240. I do know the MG3 has a higher rate of fire (actually, there are two bolt kits for 2 rates of fire). I think it also uses non-disintigrating belts in some models.
The MG3 has those who have adopted it (Germany, some of the Scandinavien countries). As well, the MAG58 had been used by the UK and others.
" Best" is always a term to be qualified by how and where it is to be used. Best for defense may not be best for infantry, or armor, or aircraft use, etc. Everyone whose opinion I respect agrees that the M60 is "best" for none of these. Of course, your choices may vary.
The MG3 has those who have adopted it (Germany, some of the Scandinavien countries). As well, the MAG58 had been used by the UK and others.
" Best" is always a term to be qualified by how and where it is to be used. Best for defense may not be best for infantry, or armor, or aircraft use, etc. Everyone whose opinion I respect agrees that the M60 is "best" for none of these. Of course, your choices may vary.
No, no, Sleuth. I know not any more than you do about BEST in combat. I just know that both designs are age-old and the Browning was clearly inferior to the German MG in WWII based on users comments. The MG42 was portable and fired at a high cyclic rate. The Browning's putt-putt-putt sound is familiar to all kids who watched WWII movies.
So, on that basis I think the Browning would still be second best to the Rheinmetall or Solothurn or whatever they call the German MG.
So, on that basis I think the Browning would still be second best to the Rheinmetall or Solothurn or whatever they call the German MG.
BigG comparing the BAR to the MG42 isn't really a fair comparison.
The BAR was a 20 shot automatic rifle. It was used by one man.
The MG42 was a GPMG and had a crew.
Now if you are comparing the 1917 to the MG42 then that is a valid comparison.
The BAR was a 20 shot automatic rifle. It was used by one man.
The MG42 was a GPMG and had a crew.
Now if you are comparing the 1917 to the MG42 then that is a valid comparison.
Sleuth
Member
I will agree that there were huge advances in design and production between 1917 (When the design of the 1917/1919 Browning MG was set) and 1942, with the MG3. But the higher rate of fire was not an asset when YOU had to carry the ammo. I always remember the picture of the #4 in the MG42 crew, who had to carry his rifle, pack, and 10 (yes, 10) ammo cans for the MG. He was the guy who had really P.O.'d the Sgt! And, at 1,200 RPM, that was only 120 seconds of ammo!
Also, in almost every war, the guns that the enemy is using to kill your buddies seem "better" than your guns, where the effect cannot be seen.
Also, in almost every war, the guns that the enemy is using to kill your buddies seem "better" than your guns, where the effect cannot be seen.
mephisto
Member
Owen
Moderator Emeritus
I believe the first MK48's were delivered in August, but it's not my project, so I don't know all the details.
Owen Cramer
Product Design Engineer
FN Manufacturing
Owen Cramer
Product Design Engineer
FN Manufacturing
This thread has gotten off in the wilderness, but FWIW, the M60 machinegun was adopted in 1957. Production was slow and the M60 was a while getting into the hands of the troops; some M1919 Browning machineguns were rebarrelled to 7.62 NATO in the interim.
The "60" is not the year; U.S. weapons have not been designated by year since the early 1930's. The M1 was the first rifle adopted under the new system.
Jim
The "60" is not the year; U.S. weapons have not been designated by year since the early 1930's. The M1 was the first rifle adopted under the new system.
Jim
Owen
Moderator Emeritus
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention,
A high cyclic rate is only a big advantage if the gun is being fired from a moving platform, like a helicopter. A certain number of rounds must be delivered to an area to ensure a hit. A higher round count than you need to ensure a hitting everybody in your beaten zone is a waste of ammo.
The military thinks of machineguns the way we think of shotguns. They have a maximum group size, and a minimum group size, to ensure that an appropriate pattern size and density is acheived. A gun that is to inaccurate is no good. A gun that is TO accurate is NO GOOD. The standard seems to be around 800 rpm. What is the rate on the MG3? I bet it is no 1200 rpm.
owen
A high cyclic rate is only a big advantage if the gun is being fired from a moving platform, like a helicopter. A certain number of rounds must be delivered to an area to ensure a hit. A higher round count than you need to ensure a hitting everybody in your beaten zone is a waste of ammo.
The military thinks of machineguns the way we think of shotguns. They have a maximum group size, and a minimum group size, to ensure that an appropriate pattern size and density is acheived. A gun that is to inaccurate is no good. A gun that is TO accurate is NO GOOD. The standard seems to be around 800 rpm. What is the rate on the MG3? I bet it is no 1200 rpm.
owen
Correia: Yes. I was comparing the MG42 to the Browning 30 cal M1919 etc. The MG42 was actually more like in between the BAR and the Browning 30 cals. It was portable and had a quick change bbl as well as a cyclic rate that made it sound like a zipper. No, i would not care to be the ammo bearer but I imagine a guy could use a little trigger discipline and keep the enemies heads down with an MG42 without unduly burning ammo.
Nightcrawler
Member
Hey Owen, you work for FN?
Tell 'em to lighten the trigger on the SAW. Zeroing the thing was a pain in the butt with that heavy, long trigger (after all, to zero, we fire in single shots). Also, no one at Camp Grayling had the tool to adjust the front sight; we were using the rear battle sights to zero for elevation, but that's the military's problem, not FN's.
Tell 'em to lighten the trigger on the SAW. Zeroing the thing was a pain in the butt with that heavy, long trigger (after all, to zero, we fire in single shots). Also, no one at Camp Grayling had the tool to adjust the front sight; we were using the rear battle sights to zero for elevation, but that's the military's problem, not FN's.
Speaking of the continuing firing after release of the trigger, thats called "runaway gun". It's caused by "milking the trigger" thats when you barely touch the trigger, instead of just pulling it all the way back. Many boot machinegunners do it, and it will very quickly wear away the sear, and cause runaway gun. I don't really think its a flaw in the gun, but more of a operator caused malfunction, maybe there are ways to prevent this in the manufacturing, but I don't really know about that.
Edited to add: BTW I'm referring to a 240G here, I believe the M60, will also do this.
Edited to add: BTW I'm referring to a 240G here, I believe the M60, will also do this.
Nice to hear a 'positive' comment about the old beast. To hear some folks talk, you'd think it was a totally useless piece of trash.
I had good success with them in peacetime training. Not a jammamatic by any means. 'Course, I never had to use it in combat.
I got a chance to fire the Belgian Army's "new" FN squad MG back in '77. Would that have been the MAG? Anyway, it was a SWEET piece. Much more accurate than the '60. A fair comparison would be a BMW next to a Chevy, I think.
clint1911a1
Member
Oh, if only the M1919-A4/A6 hadn't been so awkward and cumbersome, there would never have had to be an M-60 or M240-B.
T.Stahl
Member
My experience is limited to the MG3, but I have nothing but good things to say about it. The mechanics are simple, there's no gas-system to keep clean or to adjust, you can change the barrel faster than on any other MG, the bolt can be changed fast, too. And when you add the weight of an exchange barrel, it's probably lighter than an MAG/M240 and the weight difference to the M60 becomes much smaller.
The MG3's cyclic rate IS indeed 1200 rpm. The MG42's was 1500 rpm.
The rate of fire influences the way an MG is employed. The lower rof of the M60 makes it possible to suppress a larger area, while the high rof of the MG3 gives you more rounds on target per target exposure or during the first seconds of a firefight/ambush.
M60: Bapbapbapbapbapbap...
MG3: Brrp-Brrp-Brrp...
The MG3's cyclic rate IS indeed 1200 rpm. The MG42's was 1500 rpm.
The rate of fire influences the way an MG is employed. The lower rof of the M60 makes it possible to suppress a larger area, while the high rof of the MG3 gives you more rounds on target per target exposure or during the first seconds of a firefight/ambush.
M60: Bapbapbapbapbapbap...
MG3: Brrp-Brrp-Brrp...
RepublicanMan
member
I can't believe so many people are coming down so hard on the PIG.....I loved mine while I was in....while I never actually shot it in combat I did have it in the first Gulf War and it was shot alot over there on various "ranges"....I can't honestly remember ever having any problems other than an overheated barrel once while in Germany trying to eliminate the ammo stock since it was late September and the FY was upon us.
Owen
Moderator Emeritus
Nightcrawler, I think you will find most open bolt machine guns have heavy triggers. Besides, lowering the trigger pull will violate our contract.
The sear on the open bolt MG's that I know of all use the sear as a slide stop. The operating group weighs quite a bit, and is driven by a powerful spring. Putting a fine sear, with just enough engagment to stop the bolt when the gun is new almost gaurantees a run away gun in the future.
owen
The sear on the open bolt MG's that I know of all use the sear as a slide stop. The operating group weighs quite a bit, and is driven by a powerful spring. Putting a fine sear, with just enough engagment to stop the bolt when the gun is new almost gaurantees a run away gun in the future.
owen
Nightcrawler
Member
Okay, just so long as it isn't just mine. The trigger pull is almost like a double action revolver. *shrug*
Works, I guess.
Works, I guess.
- Status
