XCR, SCAR, sig 556, &...; next gen rifles?

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Roadwild17

Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
1,143
Location
Undisclosed
I read in a lot of gun rags that guns like the XCR, SCAR, Masada, Sig 556, etc, etc are the next gen assault rifles (not making an issue of the selector switch).

But what makes these rifle the next generation?

Is it because they are using a gas pistion that the AK has been running on for over 60 years? How ling has the sks run this system? Not to mention the FAL has been running this system forever also. If so, what about pistion ARs, just a way to catch an older rifle up to the times?

Now I dont want this to turn into a "hate the ar gas system", but really, it seams like there taking the lessons learned with the AR (light, accurate, modular, rails) and going back to something that has been around a bit longer like the gas pistion.


Just my thoughts and observations, worth every penny you paid for them :cool:
 
I think the AR platform will be with us for a while. Now, they may change certain things like caliber, but we all know changing uppers is easy as pie. (i mean physically, not politically, monetarily, etc.). It's a very familiar, durable, adaptable platform. So its my belief that they may continue to improve it as they have been doing for decades, but I don't think we'll switch anytime soon. Doesn't seem to me like any of the rifles you listed are worth the military's efforts to switch. The next major platform change will probably be a bullpup design. That's all I can see being different enough to justify a platform change.
 
New designs, new materials, ect. They are all very modular, and beat the AK, SKS, and AR by quite a margin. They are making very very modular ARs that have AK like reliability, and are cheaper/lighter.
 
No doubt they are improvements. Absolutely. I just don't think they offer enough of an improvement to overhaul the military.
 
I think they need to back to the good ol' M14 rifles in the .308 caliber although the SCARs look pretty good.
 
gvnswt, yeah your right, they do use different materials (slightly) and the designs are different from one to another. But all in all they are adapting the modulability of the AR to a gas piston. And as far as I know, they all cost MORE than an AR.


Im not really talking about this from a military standard issue rifle approach, but more of a "If Im going to buy a new rifle, should I get an AR of next gen rifle?"
I agree they are improving on the standard AR, but I think the next gen name is taking them a bit far.

cbrgator, I also think the next GI rifle will be a bullpup design, probably in a new caliber.
 
what is so next gen about the 556?

it is based almost 1:1 on the SIG550 Rifle, a rifle in service for almost 20 years.
a tested and very good design.. but next gen?

heck, if the Politicans would not have interfered and forced the military to get the 5.56 NATO Caliber with the new service rifle, the SIG550 would have been ready in 84 or 85, just with the actual intended 6.45x48mm cartridge.

so again.. a (very good) 20-25 year old design = next gen?
 
Is it because they are using a gas pistion that the AK has been running on for over 60 years? How ling has the sks run this system? Not to mention the FAL has been running this system forever also. If so, what about pistion ARs, just a way to catch an older rifle up to the times?
Click to expand...

There's not a whole lot new under the sun as far as the guts on rifles/carbines goes at the moment, but "next generation" or cutting edge or whatever sort of weapons tend to be ergonomically refined in terms of control placement and such based on the high level of refinement in CQC/CQB kind of shooting styles. They also, as has been mentioned, are increasingly modular as far as both accessories and performance tailoring go (i.e. the ability for the end user to change barrel lengths on the SCAR, XCR, etc).

Of course, the original question was about what the gun rags call the next generation of rifles, which tends to mean whatever is hitting the market next from someone who'll advertise in the magazine. As long as their new product doesn't look positively archaic, it's "next generation" (and if it does look like an antique, they'll probably run an article praising back-to-basics just like grandpa guns . . .).
 
I also think the key word here is modular. There seems to me growing demand to be able to customize and mix and match to any combination of calibers, barrel lengths, and accessories anyone wants.

However, these apps have limited practicality in the military. Those who are a position to need a high degree of flexibility already have access to more than one weapon. Rank and file soldiers need little ability to customize when they have little to customize with in the first place.
 
In the case of the XCR.

1. Not JUST a "gas piston", a true Kalashnikov style longstroke piston system.
2. Extreme modularity (barrels/calibers, bolts, etc.)
3. Ease of takedown and parts change without any tools
4. Monolithic receiver
5. Additional ergonomics: "Proper" charging handle placement.
6. Non-reciprocating, yet engageable at will (for 2-way bolt control) charging handle
7. Extreme simplicity with low parts count.
8. Adjustable gas flow with hand adjustment
9. Better "standard" trigger

The XCR has all those advantages over the AR15, for example, as well as retaining all the many advantages of the very advanced modern design of the newest ARs (ergos, materials, quad rails, use of STANAG mags with push-in seating, light weight, good accuracy, etc., etc.). The other new ones mentioned have some but not all of these additional advantages, IINM, except maybe the Masada and it's vaporware.
 
I really believe that a good AR15 for the money is better than almost all "next gen" rifles out there.

When you have a rifle going for more than $2,000, you really have to figure out if the rifle's features, cost of accessories, and general supportability is worth the price tag.

*collectors need not apply.
 
No doubt they are improvements. Absolutely. I just don't think they offer enough of an improvement to overhaul the military.
Click to expand...


That's because they had to be compatible to the old problem (5.56mm NATO round, AR15 mags,...).
The need to be compatible with weapons/ammo currently in service is what kept them from having a much higher advantage over the stuff is currently in service.

Actually the standardization imposed by the 5.56mm round and the 7.62 NATO before it, ruined a lot of great combat rifle designs. :(
 
I'm very happy with my XCR and will probaby have a SCAR within the next 4 weeks or so

Also, I dont think the 556 classifies as "next gen" considering its spec sheet is lacking when compared to the XCR, and SCAR. The ACR/Masada is still vapor at this point, so we'll have to see how it turns out next year

XCR12A.jpg
 
Also, I dont think the 556 classifies as "next gen" considering its spec sheet is lacking when compared to the XCR, and SCAR.
Click to expand...

other then the lack of easy interchangeable calibers, wich is a toy at best, what else is missing?
 
it's gonna be hard to get rid of the M-xx platform. Most of the new designs share extreme amounts of parts commonality and control layout. Also, don't forget that Colt and all are going to be introducing their own improvement. There is still alot of testing to be done, so there is a good chance that any change won't happen for as long as another ten years or so - maybe a bit sooner if the HK416 keeps up its strong showing in actual use, and it will of course take years after to actually fully phase out the old for the new.

just my guess.
 
I agree with Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow

The M-16 is going away. Why? Because there are better designs out there. It may not be today, it may not be tomorrow, but it will happen. There have been better designs around for a long time, but the logistics have entrenched the M-16. The "next generation" will have a long stoke gas piston system. Why? Because it's a better way to operate an autoloading rifle than the direct gas impingement system of the M-16. It's not that most people hate the M-16 it's just that there are better designs out there.
 
(variablebinary) your xcr looks so much better than the factory one,the short barrel & pistol grip make a big difference.looks much better than the longer thin barrel. one think ive got to say about the m16 design; if israel mostly phased out the galil to all but certain units,+no longer use the fal (phased out for the galil) & uzi, but still uses the m16/m4,that says a lot about it. & they have been in combat in one form or another for almost 60 years.....
 
SDDL-UP,

Could you explain why you believe the next generation rifle will have a long-stroke gas system? It has been my understanding that long-stroke gas systems are more typical of older designs, and with the exception of the XCR, most newer rifle designs seem to use a short-stroke.
 
Could you explain why you believe the next generation rifle will have a long-stroke gas system? It has been my understanding that long-stroke gas systems are more typical of older designs, and with the exception of the XCR, most newer rifle designs seem to use a short-stroke.
Click to expand...

The long stroke system has actually been used in more firearms than you think. The FNC, SIG 55x, and Daewoo come to mind. Then there is the obviously slew of AK style weapons like the Valmet and Galil.

As for the short stroke design, it's also very popular with HK which is why we see it in the XM8/G36 and HK416.

The SCAR on the other hand, is somewhere in the middle between a short stroke and long stroke

P1000594.jpg


And as you said, then there is the XCR. Personally, I think the XCR is coolest thing on the market, followed by the SCAR

My XCR especially :)

xcrhk1.jpg


xcrhk2.jpg


xcrhk3.jpg
 
I think horsesoldier said it best. These new rifles aren't too terribly different than decades old designs internally, but they sport a slicker human interface. There's a simple and pragmatic reason for this; look at the smoking wreck that was the US Army ACR program. Duplex rounds, caseless ammunition, flechettes, super high ROF bursts...

Turns out that the cheapest way to improve hit probability on an M16 is to machine a rail into it so you can attach a scope.

Tamara K gives a good explanation:

http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/2006/03/boomsticks-blinded-me-with-science.html
 
The XCR may function better, but an M4 sure is prettier.

And I will still hold to my initial opinion that the assault rifle that replaces the AR variations will be a bullpup. It will likely share many features with the XCR, SCAR, etc. such as piston system but I don't see the improvements of these weapons important enough to replace the AR rifles. To be worth it for the military to replace them, a radical improvement such as a bullpup design will be necessary (IMOH). That type of design comes with its own problems, but if they can be worked out, I think that's what's next. The future of combat looks to be in CQB and I don't think I have to list the benefits of a bullpup in CQB, but I cannot think of a more effective platform for that purpose. The improvements of the XCR, SCAR, SIG 556, etc. appear to me to be marginal. Improvement? Yes. Worth the switch? No.

Of course, I could be absolutely incorrect.

Having said that, I hope the prices of these next gen rifles come down. I'd love to own one.
 
The M4 had it's time, but it has been superceded. If not by the XCR than certainly the SCAR. This is purely the reliability question. There is no telling how much will be saved in terms of logistics and maintenance.

dust.jpg
 
LOL. I agree with one of the contributors above a la Lorcin: A gun rag can put a turd in a cup and tell you it is mocha.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

N
  • Locked
Advanced AK
2 3 4 5
Replies
117
Views
19K
Matrix187
M
K
  • Locked
sig 556 or ar15
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
Art Eatman
A
T
  • Locked
XCR or AR15 + mods?
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
3K
Sam1911
S
C
  • Locked
  • Poll
Assault rifle poll
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
Carter
C
I
  • Locked
Sig M400 or Sig 556?
Replies
12
Views
2K
inkinskin
I
Back
Top