SAW = piece of crap(?) thread

[MikeyD]

Don't blame me, I've never touched the 5.56mm SAW mg myself. But I was talking to my nephew who's ex-Marine weapons specialist who had some unexpectedly harsh things to say about the SAW. He said, sure, its a nice concept and a shiney new weapon is pretty good. But apply a dash of hard combat use and desert conditions and it becomes a nightmare. Hard to keep clean, resulting in lots of jams (he said "fire 3 rounds - jam - fire three rounds - jam"). And he said its not as light as it looks. I said "At least its not like carrying an old BAR" to which he replied "At least a BAR would fire!"

Can anyone confirm/deny? I started to suspect something was up with the SAW when I spotted a photo of a soldier on patrol in Iraq lugging a big 7.62 mg as his personal weapon!

In relation to the game, I hope U.S. weapons aren't going to be modelled as miracles of techology that never jam or fail.

[ April 24, 2006, 01:50 PM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

[flamingknives]

AIUI, the USMC weapons are old and a bit worn out, which takes its toll on any weapon. The British army has just acquired FN Minimis (which the M249 is a license-built copy of) and there are no complaints there.

The big 7.62 is probably an FN MAG (M240 in US military parlance, GPMG in British use). As these, in the light role, are platoon level weapons in US and British armed forces, seeing one as a personal weapon shouldn't be unusual.

[zmoney]

I carried the SAW for three years and never had a problem with jams. It's hard to keep really clean due to all the lube it use's for the bolt etc.... The lube tends to collect a lot of dirt but no more than any other weapon. I just cut down on how much oil I used. Mine weighed about 27 pound's with all the optic's on the weapon. If you have a hundred round nut sack on it, it weigh's about 30lb's. But towards the end of my service we were given a 12 inch barrel that made it less ackward for CQB.

Today we use the MK 46 which weigh's like 4 lb's naked. It's a better gun but thats not saying the saw was bad.

The guy you saw carrying the 240B 7.62 was probably part of a gun team consisting of three soldiers. Trust me no one would carry that beast as a individual weapon. You can't shoulder fire it very effectively if at all plus you can't carry enough rounds by yourself to make it worth your while.

[Splinty]

I carried a SAW during my time in Iraq, and it never gave me much in the way of problems. It was a little awkward to carry around on a sling when not in a dangerous area (such as going to the chow hall) but other than that it was a fine weapon.

[cassh]

Used the FN Minimi in Canada and it held up brilliantly for weeks of live-fire exercises.

As the Minimi (M249 SAW) working parts and mechanism are essentially a scaled down M240/Gimpy I'd be very surprised to hear these weapons were proving unreliable.

I don't recall the weapon jamming often, if at all.

With regard to weight, if you've ever been a GMPG gunner then the Minimi comes as an awfully nice alternative form of suffering.

To be honest I'd be thankful for these awesome little powerhouses - if you've ever had to use the dreadful British fire-team support weapon, the LSW, you'd be dreaming of Minimi/SAW and its belt-feed drum. I'm just surprised it took us so bloody long to adopt them when the shortcomings of what we had were so obvious.

[edit typo]

[ April 19, 2006, 09:09 AM: Message edited by: cassh ]

[MikeyD]

This is something I've noticed on other boards on this topic. You hear from four guys who absolutely love the SAW and one guy who hates it outright. Maybe it depends on if he's trading down to a a small bullet mg from something more impressive or up to a small bullet mg from a rifle. Makes the SAW sound like a car. Every once in a while someone gets issued a lemon and it colors his outlook on manufacturer's overall performance.

[cassh]

MikeyD - I am not really sure if anyone is trading down or up but rather that the M249 fulfils the role it was designed for, light support, incredibly well.

I used the C9 Canadian variant for only four weeks, but was very impressed with its ability to deliver sustained fire whilst also being highly mobile when compared with a GPMG. It also seem just as reliable as the GPMG. Basic cleaning and maintenance routine of weapon and ammunition as you would with any weapon meant there were no dramas.

In terms of comparison with other weapons I have used I thought I would bore you all with the following impressions:

FN MAG 7.62mm SF role

Used extensively

Reliable, predictably-accurate, highly-effective in the SF role

Requires highly trained team

900mm Observed/tracer (tracer burns out at 1100m but being lighter they drop short of where the ball rounds impact)

1800mm Observed/fall of shot

FN MAG 7.62mm Light role

Used extensively

Reliable, predictably-accurate, reasonable mobility, difficult to find comfortable forward holding position once fired as too many hot surfaces - wear a gardening clove on your left hand for scorch-free operation

Improvised ammunition feed required (web pouch) on patrol

700m

Sterling SMG 9mm

Used moderately

Unreliable, inaccurate, magazines prone to damage, can pinch fingers when folding stock.

50m barn door

100m expert users

FN FAL SLR 7.62mm

Used extensively

Incredibly Reliable, quite accurate, soldier-proof, matchstick modification full auto

300m average soldier

500m marksman

L4 Bren 7.62mm

Used extensively

Quite reliable, very-accurate, ejected cases can ping up in your face when prone

700m hit a knat's bollocks

SA-80 5.56mm

Used extensively

Questionable reliability, highly-accurate, awkward/fiddly working parts, fragile gas port cover and cheek rest, also magazine release catch on left side so can be depressed when patrolling with embarrassing lack of magazine/ammo - if it drops off it can be really tedious as the section/platoon etc have to retrace their steps to find the bastard ammunition. Also optical sight can mist in damp/cold conditions making target recognition/aiming difficult.

400m

LSW 5.56mm

Used extensively

All problems of above and also not great in the light support role

600m

L96A1 rifle 7.62mm

Used extensively

Excellent reliability, awesome accuracy (.5 MOA), robust, thoughtful design with many adjustable components to suit ones own preferences. Quite heavy, but legs can help.

Requires extensive training and rangework

900m

HK-53 5.56mm

Used moderately

Cracking little weapon that punches well above its weight

Excellent in FIBUA/CQB role and vehicles due to compact size

Robust, reliable, quite accurate, well engineered and excellent tool kit

200m

Diemaco C7 (Canadian M-16) 5.56mm

Limited use

Light, accurate, reliable if maintained (warned about gas port issue but never had any problems with fowling) excellent range scoring and easy patrolling made this popular

[John Kettler]

cassh,

When's BFC hiring you as a consultant? Also, you must be one heck of a shot to use an M-16 equivalent for fowling. Do you use head shots to prevent blowing apart the birds?

Regards,

John Kettler

[cassh]

John Kettler - Now there's a thought. Game shooting and fowling with an armalite. Hey, it was late, I was tyred [sic].

My God, you should have seen those gease [sic] fall one after another.

The pitfalls of mild-dyslexia and a few beers... My apologies for the confusion.

[cassh]

Oh, to answer your question I don't actually hit them - the round passes by the bird at a beak's length with the shockwave stunning them momentarily, causing them to tumble to the deck. I then release a pack of trained sea otters to retrieve the unfortunate geese.

[Imperial Grunt]

In my opinion, the SAW is an excellent weapon, but it does require care, like most US weapons. Compared to a RPK-type weapon, it is a maintanance nightmare but it is more effective in terms of accuracy, range, and sustained rate of fire.

The SAW can put down a very effective amount of fire that no rifle can, and the short stock version is great for room clearing the old-fashion style. Not so good for hostage-rescue I imagine. Well, maybe for Russian HRTs.

The 200 round drums can be noisy and they can fall off, destroying any kind of noise discipline you might have had on a patrol. The 100 round drum is alot better, except for static or defensive positions. Using a magazine is usually very problematic, but that is really an emergency option and not a primary method of employment.

The USMC has debated back and forth for awhile on replacing the SAW. Get an bunch of Marine Gunners togther and they will debate whether its suppossed to be an automatic rifle or a light machinegun or what its role in the squad should be for days and never agree.

Another problem with the SAW is during movement. When a fireteam is bounding, the SAW gunner has alot to do compared to everyone else when it comes to moving and shooting. But as soon as the team stops to set up a base of fire, then the SAW gunner is the man for the job. I think the USMC does want a lighter, more effective weapon, but right now nothing else is out there that rates the cost of switching from SAW.

If you task organize a squad for a mission like MOUT, then you can put three SAWs in one fireteam and have the other two teams armed with just rifles as assault/clearing teams. That is alot of firepower and if you use talking guns, then that team can keep up a steady amount of automatic suppressive fire for a good amount of time.

So, with all that said, the SAW is not a piece of crap.

[flamingknives]

Cassh, Have you used the A2 varient of the SA80, or just the A1?

[Nemesis Lead]

I heard the Army suspended the XM8 program. The XM8 was a family of 5.56mm small arms based on the German (HK) G36 series of weapons. One of the XM8 variants was an automatic rifle with heavy barrel and a 100 round drum. I wonder if this would have been a suitable replacement for the SAW.....

My guess is that they would have been far more portable than the SAW, but would not have the sustained firepower of the SAW (lighter barrel, smaller ammo capacity).

I used the SAW back in the late 1980s/early 1990s. I thought they were great weapons then...I would have thought by now they were nearly perfected. The only problem back then was that the barrels were not easily changed out like on the old M-60s and they did require significant maintanence. Firing from magazines also presented jamming problems and was avoided.

[jrcar]

Before we got the Minimi (M249 aka SAW) the MAG58 (M240) was our section (Squad) weapon for a number of years (the M60's we had were worn out, and the Minimi had problems that took a while to fix).

During officer training I used to carry the MAG58 a lot. It was heavy but you got used to it... and it was very reliable (compared to the M60).

It is very good in the sustained fire role.

Cheers

Rob

[John Kettler]

cassh,

No confusion; just love word play! As for typing, if I had a dime for every time I've had to retype the word "field" (comes out "filed"), I could retire. To continue your conceit, should we treat "beaking" birds as being on par with "barking" squirrels?

On a more serious note, this is an extremely useful thread, full of good stuff from people who've been and done, thus in another league altogether from a reference volume.

Regards,

John Kettler

[flamingknives]

That, I think, is the first time I've seen anyone claim that the M60 had an easier barrel change than the Minimi.

The MG36 (heavy barrel and bipod) would be found lacking due to not being able to change the barrel, AIUI. The 100 round mag is the Beta Co mag and will fit into any magazine well that will accept an M16 mag. I don't think the Germans use the MG36, but they definately use G36Ks (Short barrelled carbines) with the Beta Co mags.

The MG4 seems to be the issue light machine gun for the Bundesheer these days. Belt fed and 7.9kg with barrel and bipod, so it's heavier even than the SAW.

[luderbamsen]

Well, if you want to talk about bad choices in SAW/LSW, look no further than the Danish Army.

Recently, they introduced a new weapon to bridge the gap between their Diemaco C7 carbines and their MG42/59 (very early MG3 in 7.62x51mm NATO).

What did they choose: The Diemaco LSW version of the C7. That's right: ELCAN sight, fixed (albeit long and heavy) barrel and closed bolt. Standard 30rd mags are used (the LSW gunner is issued a bandoleer with extra mags) wich is probably a good thing, since something like the 100rd C-MAG would probably cause serious overheating.

How on earth a NATO army in the 21st century can choose such a weapon, despite massive evidence suggesting the folly of such a decision (they needed look no further than the Brit L86 LSW) is beyond me. Maybe the Army Staff policy on alcohol and prescription drugs is more liberal than I suspected...

[juan_gigante]

My personal favorite squad-level support weapon is the HK 21E/23E series. Comes in 7.62mm and 5.56mm. HK build quality in a M60 or M249 like platform. I've never fired one, but I've heard really good things. Then again, I'm pretty much a full-time HK cheerleader.

[MikeyD]

This topic makes me wonder at my nephew's disappointment with the SAW. But I have read a couple others complain bitterly about the gun before - and many more praising it to the sky. Funny how a weapon can produce two such opposite reactions. Like someone up above said, Marine Corps equipment is often old and worked to death. Maybe that's the case here.

[M1A1TC]

Majority of soldiers Ive come across during my past 7 years of service love the SAW. Personally I prefer Russian weapons for reliability and simplicity

[Imperial Grunt]

Here is a SAW in action!

[Sergei]

Here's a SAW for y'all:

[Peter Cairns]

M1A1TankCommander,

Well given the state of Russian right now, you'll love the next generation of simple reliable weapons they will be issuing,

STICKS and STONES

Peter.

[cassh]

flamingknives - Afraid I've just used the old A1. Everything I've heard about the A2 upgrade says reliability is vastly improved - especially in hot dusty climates which is handy if you're in Iraq or Afghanistan.

[Stoffel]

I can say that Cassh is absolute right.

Fal is a brilliant wepaon for reliability and maintainance.

Same goes for the MAG mg,I have replaced my trusty old MAG for a minimi too.

Indeed the minimi is lighter but you carry more ammo for it.

For the mag I was issued two boxes ammo while my loader/aid had 4 boxes.

Nowadays I have to carry 4 magazines myself

The Minimi has a standard carrying belt which makes it very easy to carry along,better than the standard Mag belt.

I have no problems with carrying the weapon,allthough the Elconsight makes it a bit heavier.

One thing I dont like about the minimi is that the ammo has to be fit in the weapon with a little plastic device.

This thing will shoot away after you fire a round,fun in the dark if you loose the stupid thing,therefor I connected one on my weapon with a little rope.

The plastic 200 round magazine is indeed clumsy and makes a lot of noise,specially if you fire a few rounds(and mainly in the dark)I always take out the belted ammo and use the smaller 100 round bag.

Problem with maintanance are the small pieces of copper the bullits shells leave behind in the chamber,you have to watch your fingers for splinters.

And last but not least,the calibre.

I liked the heavy round for the mAG,it could stop a car if you wanted it too,the minimi(specially the rounds the dutch army has for it)cannot damage ca cars enginer enough to do that.

Overall the minimi is a fine weapon,reliable,shooting well and light enough.

But it takes care,you have to threath her gently and loving like your girlfriend/wife and it will be good for you too