Stoner 63: What went wrong?
Other urls found in this thread:
Nothing.
Was it the lack of a forward assist button?
>Over engineered
>To many parts to lose
>high cost
>Armor's nightmare
Introduced right after the M-16 was adopted. No where near enough of an improvement to warrant a change that soon.
Really the reason why anything is not adopted:
>Not a good enough improvement to justify the cost.
If you had the time to maintain it, absolutely nothing.
Modularity is a retarded meme that noone actually asked for.
this
It does seem to add a crazy amount of complexity.
youtube.com
Simplicity...is where it went wrong.
This is insane
After watching that video I felt like they would have had a winner if they'd focused on simplifying the machine gun version instead of trying to make it one size fits all.
Thats the gist of it yeah. But the idea was to have one production line cranking out everything instead of one for service rifles, one for lmgs, one for precision rifles etc etc. Besides, who doesn't want an M96
anyone got pics of the bren setup?
that wasn't the original design, military added it
kinda funny that it's open bolt and full auto only in this config
Maybe I'm retarded but the bren set up seems quicker to reload than magazine on the bottom from prone, especially since your non dominant hand should be on the stock
That was the point of having the magazines on top in the first place on the actual bren gun.
Only problem is that its still retarded compared to putting it in belt feed mode
Alex Robinson.
So it's failing is that it tried too hard.
It got so far and it didn't even matter.
As an LMG it is absolutely the peak