Why is the M60 on its way out?

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

p35

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
999
Location
Puget Sound
I keep hearing that the Army is getting rid of the M60 .30 cal machine gun and going to something else. The M60 has been around since Vietnam and I've never heard the kind of complaints that the early M16s, for example, generated. Is the M60 a problem weapon?
 
Not a problem weapon like the early M16 but it isn't all that great and I'm sure they can do a whole lot better now.
 
It's been heading out for a long time now. The 249B from FN has pretty much replaced it, and now the 249b is going away it seems since it's pretty much been worn out.

I don't think the 60 was that bad, my experience with them was good. I think it just got old and they became an issue due to age and breakage. Also, think the 249b is a bit lighter and updated.
 
OC:

I think you might be getting the M249 SAW & M240 mixed up.

The M249 is a 5.56mm squad automatic weapon. One per fireteam in the US Army. The M240 (G or B) is a 7.62NATO belt-fed med/GP MG that replaces the M60 in the US Army. Our weapon squad had three of the monsters.

Both are made by FN.

The M240 sure felt heavier than the pig (M60), but I can not recall the actual masses. The M240 is a freakin' hoss of a GPMG. The ones I had experience with were reliable as the day is long. The M60 was getting long in the tooth & most examples I had experience with were not as robust as the M240. I believe the M60 design took alot from the German MG42.

If I missed anything, I bet more will be along to set me straight.
 
The M-60 is being/has been replaced by the M-240B, an American version of the FN MAG. As far as I know there are no plans to replace the 240. The M-249 is the SAW the US configuration of the FN Minimi.

The 240 has a higher rate of fire than the M-60, but it is also longer, heavier and less comfortable to carry. I guess all in all its a better weapon, the differences in weight and length are small. Supposedly the M-60 had a tendancy to continue firing after the trigger was released if the weapon was dirty.
 
the m60..... when properly maintained, assembled correctly and operated by a knowledgeable user.... was a GREAT gun.

when well worn or any of the above 3 items were not present it is a jamomatic POS.

it was NOT trooper proof.

i liked it ;)

rms/pa
 
Right, the M240B has replaced the M60.
The M249 has several variants now: the MK46 - a lighter-weight version of the M249 and the Mk48 - a 7.62 version of the MK46. Both are in use by the SEALS.

lawson4
 
I had extensive experience with the M60 and have absolutely nothing bad to say about them, whatever is replacing it must be like the hand of God himself to be any better.

As long as I kept complete idiots away from the M60 it ran, no matter what. Maybe I had 8 exceptional weapons, but I doubt it.
 
The M60 had a lot of problems, including having critical parts in the pistol grip, where they were liable to be damaged in mechanized operations. It had vibration problems, too -- some parts had to be safety-wired in place. It was prone to chip pieces off the sear, bent, and locking lugs. It didn't have an adjustable gas system, which affected reliability under adverse conditions.
 
The Army uses the M240B. The Marines have the M240G, which has no forward handguard.

And yeah, they are awesome weapons...unless you're using blanks and a BFA. Then it's just the worlds worst single shot .308. :eek: :evil:
 
The Marines spent more effort with the weapon and ended up with a more robut weapon, that said, The German MG3 really seems to be a better weapon, lighter, easier to change barrels on and faster to clear jambs. that said, the PIG when in the possesion of a trained and responsible gunner was a weapon to be feared.
 
I cross trained as an 0331 my third year in the USMC. Went from ammo man to gunner in a couple of months. Did a lot of humpin' with the M60, and nothing bad to report. This was early 1981 to mid 1982. Loved that gun.
 
The M-60 has had a few problems, but has been well-recieved in spite of them. Originally, it was said the M-60 was an updated version of the MG-42 (I WISH), but that was pretty much limited to the fact that it was stamped.
An interesting point about the M-60--you notice how no other Army has snapped them up? I think only Australian actually bought any in anything other than token numbersl, and those were replace long ago by the FN-MAG (240). Of course, I don't think the Aussies were keen to give up their BRENs.
I recall something quirky about the way the belt had to be loaded and the sear/pistol grip area was a bit flimsy. The bipod is actually mounted onto the barre--which could be changed fairly easy, if 20 years of memory serves me correctly. Wow, 20 years ago...and they were old then. :)
All that aside, I don't think I ever saw a stoppage or a runaway. That's a whole lot more than I can say about the M-16.
(I think the cone of fire was a bit tight too? Probably due to the bipod near the muzzle.)
I'm not real sure why we don't use MG-3s. (MG-42 in 7.62)
 
IIRC you can put it together wrong and it is not evident until you need it. Infantry weapons should only go together one way - imho.

Also, no infantry weapon should need to be safety wired together. The resemblance to MG42 is only cosmetic. The other guys have provided other probs. HTH
 
The Corps has M240G and M240D, which is essentially a G with a butterfly trigger for Helo mounts. You can quickly convert a D into a G.

And I don't think the -60 is on the way out, I think it's been going for years. It was already getting replaced by the FNs at LEAST a decade ago. I never had a problem with the FN, but my expierence was limited to MCT, Helo Ordnance school, and cleaning them on deployment.
 
I wouldn't say the M60 is too old to be in service. The M2 has been in service a heck of a lot longer and its still going strong. My only personal issue with the M60 when I was still in the National Guard was just the risk of damaging walls or teeth when the buffer spring tries to shoot out during take-down for cleaning. :neener:
 
M240 works

Im a humvee gunner any time we take them out and i usualy have a 240 on top. A 240 will fire...period end of discussion. Ive seen two 240s jam before: first had a cracked gas regulator and would only fire single shot, the second was mine. We went to the range and i didnt pull the belt completely out of the cardboard box before firing. the gun jammed and when i looked up the 240 was eating the box through the feed tray :( Opened the feed tray and removed the box and she ran fine after that.

Its accurate too...comparably. I can hit a man sized target at 800 meters with relative ease on my second burst. :D

the difference betweem a B and a G is length. the G is shorter than the B.....I think the space is saved in the frame and not the barrel. Not sure though, Ill have to ask a Marine about that.
 
Last edited:
Any machinegun that requires an asbestos glove to facilitate changing the barrel is plain and simple garbage.
I have other complaints about the M60, don't wish to share them here, will be happy when the gun is completely removed from service and given to some deserving nation such as Iraq.

HSSmith, you had an exceptional weapon, you must have treasured it because yours was a one of maybe five total in the system that were like that.
 
I think there are seven parts that could be installed backwards, or upside down....the ones on the ship worked OK, but were tired and worn, and showed it.
 
HSSmith said he had 8 good ones.

But I agree that the design has faults. For example, the gun is on its bipod and you need to change the glowing barrel. But the bipod is on the barrel. So you drop the main part of the gun in the mud as you try to hold it up while changing the barrel. Yeah, the assistant gunner is helping but he slips at just the wrong time. You get the picture. And the weight of the spare barrel that you have been carrying all week includes bipod, front sights, and part of a gas system.

I think that the MG-42 feed mechanism is the part that was copied into the M-60. If the MG3 (modern MG-42) could have a reduced firing rate, instead of 1200 RPM it would be a contender for best darn MG. What do you guys think is the ideal firing rate?

Bart Noir
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

N
  • Locked
M60 Machine Gun
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
Nightcrawler
N
M
  • Locked
An interesting story about the GI 1911
Replies
4
Views
417
Pilot
P
D
  • Locked
New way to keep weapons in working order
Replies
24
Views
1K
PAshooter
P
D
  • Locked
'Fiddy-Cal' Becomes Weapon of Choice in Iraq
2 3
Replies
69
Views
4K
crashresidue
C
P
  • Locked
Beretta 92 on its way out??? Discontinued Models
Replies
7
Views
2K
Dodger02WS6
D
Back
Top