PDA

View Full Version : Why didn't they do this with the M-60?


Dagobert II
January 15th, 2013, 8:22 AM
Selective fire with closed bolt for semi-auto and open bolt for full auto, a 4X scope, weight no more than a K98. Yeah it's magazine fed, but it could have taken belts also with just a little bit more work like some of the after market systems for AR-15 belt feeds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdaUPUZXdSM
IronErnin
January 15th, 2013, 9:38 AM
They didn't do it for the M-60 because no one saw a need for it.
Dagobert II
January 15th, 2013, 10:25 AM
They didn't do it for the M-60 because no one saw a need for it. Whomever did not see the need for these features never had to carry the 23 pound M-60. Lack of an easily changed barrel might be a drawback on this weapon for extended fire, but then again, this was intended for paratroopers who may not have been intended to engage heavy units with sustained fire. Perhaps that explains the difference between this and the M-60.
Ludwig
January 15th, 2013, 10:39 AM
They didn't do it for the M-60 because no one saw a need for it.

They did not se the need because they did not have German engineering expertise. :)
mac
January 15th, 2013, 10:41 AM
They did not se the need because they did not have German engineering expertise. :)

groan........
Dagobert II
January 15th, 2013, 10:52 AM
They did not se the need because they did not have German engineering expertise. :) You may be joking, but the Germans do seem to be brighter than some other bulbs with their engineering.
IronErnin
January 15th, 2013, 11:57 AM
That would be because Herr Hitler pushed engineering as an educational policy. When was much younger, and in Germany, as a dependant, I met an older fellow who was an artist. His oil landscapes were breathtaking, but in school he'd been taught to do engineering artwork.
Mestral
January 15th, 2013, 4:44 PM
Whomever did not see the need for these features never had to carry the 23 pound M-60. Lack of an easily changed barrel might be a drawback on this weapon for extended fire, but then again, this was intended for paratroopers who may not have been intended to engage heavy units with sustained fire. Perhaps that explains the difference between this and the M-60.

Metallurgy has come a long way. The barrel of the M240B and M240C are so well engineered they can fire for extended periods without being changed. Or at least that is what their users say.