The gun is in 5.56x45mm caliber and with the 12.5 inch barrel, the effective range should be about 200m(maybe). The 6.8x43mm is purely speculatory.

The US should adopt a different design, something a little *better*

[edit on 12-10-2004 by Kozzy]

Originally posted by Mystical Redemption
Does any1 have any direct info on the gun? like calibre, effective rang ect.

I know im asking for alot but I'm realy interested to know.

Watch Mail Call on the History Channel, at some point there will be an episode about the XM8, it has already been done, but it goes into great detail.

What about adopting a desighn like the FN P90. In my opinion one of the best smg's ever made. If theres ever been room to improve on and remodle a gun this is it.

I think that the best weapon for the job depends on the job.

I like the Kalashnikov design (obviously; that's me as my avatar), since it has good stopping power in any range I might use it for (up to, say, 200 meters); I can use the same cartridge (with a different bullet, of course) to murder Bambi, and the gun is basically idiot-proof.

The XM-8 has no electronics in it so I take it were are talking about the XM-29 or OICW. Which does have electronics and when the battery dies this is what happens.

You lose Airburst on the 20mm grenades it shoots and thats it. The gun will still function and the grenade launcher will become a Impact grenade launcher that will still function in semi-auto.The Gun XM-8 part will still function the same as it always does.

Thats it no the gun will not work, no the grenades will not fire. They people that make these weapons are not stupid.

[edit on 13-10-2004 by ShadowXIX]

Ive heard alot about the XM8 and I don't like it, they put alot of work into it but I dont think it was enough to become the AR of the future.

The p-90 would be a god awful weapon for the modern combat situation. It is designed to be armor penetrationg. Only problem with armor penetration is that it has no stoppping power. Sure, the p-90 can put one round through three kevlar vest at 100 yards, but it does absolutely no shock damage to the person(s) being shot. FN9the manufacturers of the p-90 know their gun is for armor penetration. The new ammo-hollow internal cavity with weight glued to the back, so that it flies foward on impact and pushes the round through the target-is designed to go through even more armor. And stopping power is momentum of bullet being applied to target. AP(armor piercing) goes right through and transfers little energy. Hollow points expand and, hopefully, disperse all their energy into the target. Therefore a larger(heavier) bullet traveling the same speed has more momentum and therefore is more likely to stop the target. Not only does teh bullet have more momentum, but it also has a larger front surface area to disperse it's energy to the target. This shows that larger rounds are better if they can maintain the same or higher momentums. the .50 BMGf is better than the 7.62 NATO is better than the 7.62 Russian is better than the 6.8 is better than the 5.56 is better than the .22 is better the .17 HM2. The xm-8 in 6.8 would be better to stop. News flash though, they're staying with the .223.

There is no on board chip on the XM8.

the switch to the xm8 is a bad move IMHO.other than an improved gas system,it offers no advantages over the M-16 weapon platform.there will be no wholesale move to the 6.8 spc,maybe issuied to sf types,but we will stick to the 5.56 nato for general use.there are ways to make the current 5.56 more lethal.the 60 gn bullet of the russian 5.45x39 round uses an air pocket under the tip of the jacket,upon hitting flesh the core shifts forward causing the bullet to tumble.A bullet design like this would solve alot of the stopping power problems with our current round out of a M-4.to give reliable tumble on target,our current round has to be traveling at about 2500 fps.starting from a 12.5" barrel,the round will not travel far before dropping below that threshold.

Ok, for future References, the XM-8 HAS NO ELECTRONICS IN IT!!

The weapon that has electronics in it that some of us are thinking about is the XM-29 OICW.(Too complicated)

In my opinion, the XM-8 is better than the M-16. The XM-8 will be issued to all military personnel in the United States Army just as the M-16 had been.

The XM-8 as an AR will do its job. I believe that Heckler and Koch makes very reliable weapons, such as the G-36, and the USP 9000 Handgun with supresser.

Shattered OUT...

The barrel can be interchanged VERY easily, so the 12.7 inch barrel, that may become a problem at longer ranges can be changed... squads can go into battle with the right barrel for the job. Also most people were talking about the xm29 not the xm8. As for calibre there was an option mentioned somewhere that for SF purposes it can be changed to support 7.62x39 rounds.... probably cuz its as common as sand in Iraq?

Eerm... you DO realize you just dug up athread thats 8 months old, dont you?

The government had a test phase and H&K didnt submit the XM8 in time as I understand and the winner of the SCAR contract will go to FN (Fabrique Nationale) for their 5.56 entry. Knight Armaments came in 2nd.

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
The government had a test phase and H&K didnt submit the XM8 in time as I understand and the winner of the SCAR contract will go to FN (Fabrique Nationale) for their 5.56 entry. Knight Armaments came in 2nd.

You do realise that this thread essentially died over three years ago, back when the information on it was in date?

Just for future reference, take a look at the thread dates before posting.

Originally posted by MrJingles
What onboard computer? I didn't see any computers on that thing...

The onboard computer is rudimentary bullet counter

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Nice vid dude - never seen that one before

Devil wasp - you are indeed thinking of the OICW. This is different then the XM8. Besides - the OICW and (I would assume) the XM8 are designed to be of use even when battery power fails. "Crashing" of the computers is not really of concern - they are doing small tasks like finding ranges. Loss of these coputers simply forces the user to use traditional sights, thus your example with the AK's is a bit off base because the rifle can still be fired in the exact same manner as those AK's your talking about. The concern should be for battery life and the ruggedness of the computers. These devices offer advantages only if they can be used.

The computer that used on that gun is rugged ones

XM8 rifle is cancelled in favor of strategy where the USA infantry is become soft target for Enemies in urban warfare that forces them to call airstrike that are overkill for Iraqis and afghans civilians.