|
Spitzer Reply
"...they couldn't manage to build the Rheinmetall gun to same degree of precision for the same amount of money as the Germans, to attempt do so would cost way too much according to US studies. So the US simplified the design to use fewer & less complex parts, the M256 was the result."
Goodness. So our options were to produce a barrel by the thousands of units at the Rheinmetall specified standards or accept a less precise barrel. Spitzer, you've equated a more functional design achieving near optimal performance with less parts for a lower unit cost with imprecision.
May America perpetuate imprecision. The best validations of such imprecise functionality lie as battered and burned-out tank hulks in tank graveyards scattered throughout Kuwait and Iraq.
Your approach was a fascinating exercise in logic which ultimately has little to do with nationality. However, I won't deny that I've a special curiousity as an American in your conclusions as expressed here.
No doubt that we'll someday need an new rifle design. Until then, I remain unconvinced that the M16/M4 aren't perfectly capable to our current tasks.
__________________
"This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
|