http://www.defensereview.com/dr-exclusive-scar-who-meet-the-colt-cm901-modular-multi-caliber-7-62mm-nato5-56mm-nato-battle-carbinesbrrifle-for-u-s-military-special-operations-forces-sof-and-general-infantry-forces-gif/ (http://www.defensereview.com/dr-exclusive-scar-who-meet-the-colt-cm901-modular-multi-caliber-7-62mm-nato5-56mm-nato-battle-carbinesbrrifle-for-u-s-military-special-operations-forces-sof-and-general-infantry-forces-gif/)
New rifle from Colt that can take either 7.62 OR legacy 5.56 uppers. Looking at the videos, it is surprisingly controllable in 7.62 at full auto... Remember all the complaints from the 50's about M14 in this regard?
Thoughts? IMHO, this would be one sweet DMR, if Colt does not f..., I mean, screw it up.
Looks kinda like the Cobb MCR to me. Especially the magazine well. Wonder if that's where they got the idea.
Roland
Sweet looking rig. Does hint of the old Cobb idea of interchangeable magwells. Hopefully someone will clone it soon.
If it remains a Colt-proprietary system, us poor non-SOT civilians will never get a taste. Colt cares about us even less than Heckler and Koch when it comes to battle rifles.
-David
Edgewood, NM
Otlichna!
.... i oochin doroga tozhe potamushta Colt vsegda doroga doroga doroga. :wall:
I find many disturbing attitudes/statements in that article that have just turned me off to Colt (even though I'm a Colt 1911 guy through and through - Colt made'em, John Browning designed'em).
The former Marine general might be a stand up guy but I'm immediately suspicious of former officers working for companies supplying equipment to the military. The reasons have been well publicized over the last few years. And I say again, this guy might be one of the good guys but without knowing 100% for sure it gives me a bad feeling.
The statement that Colt doesn't care about the people who supply the money that keeps them in business (us, the taxpayers) bothers me to no end.
The use of the word "warfighter" in place of American servicemen/women sounds like an attempt to change the responsibilities and allegiance of the military to something other than what it has traditionally been - for the defense of the US and the US Constitution and the people that are are citizens of the US - and to start changing their way of thinking about those three things.
There's too much word twisting going on these days. Simple and honest is best. Anyone who chooses not to be simple and honest in speech and action is someone to steer clear of as their deviousness will only grow along with their authority.
Having said all the above I'll bet that darn thing will cost us an arm and a leg.
Quote from: slim on April 23, 2011, 12:42:40 AM
Otlichna!
.... i oochin doroga tozhe potamushta Colt vsegda doroga doroga doroga. :wall:
Nu, eto samo soboi. Govoryat, $2000-2500 budet stoit'. Chto, odnako, deshevle vsyakih LMT, LWRCI i prochih.
Old Dog,
I agree with what you are saying. One thing about the 'warfighter' thing--I'm in the U.S. Army, and this term is thrown around everywhere. Colt, being defense contractor, is simply repeating what they hear.
The term "warfighter" is something that came from the military itself. We haven't changed our responsibilities or allegiance to the Constitution and American public first and foremost. But, the terminology has changed (and I personally prefer the older terms).