so as i understand, it is a beefed up M16? With the 249 you can pin the enemy down and make sure you get that kill instead of clipping him and him saying that he was a civilian and gets away to only put an IED down and kill several of our men? I agree that we need a more pinpoint fire support weapon system but we need a larger mag capacity so you can still do what is needed. sometimes in life you cant get a shot off but you can put there head down and let the M16A4 next to you shoot him when i go on a reload and its that. you never can replace suppressive fire to pinpoint rifle fire. thats just like saying hear lets all give you bolt action rifles to take several guys out in that building and you cant use your M9 as thats semi auto and has more suppressive fire capability.

How is this weapon different from the M4 Carbine? 

Just saying, I like to hear that that the M27 is more accurate and whatnot than the M249, but you it’s like comparing apples to oranges. The M249 was designed for suppressing fire which is meant to keep the enemy’s heads down so a squad can advance on a enemies position, not for accurate shooting like an assualt rifle. The M27 is being put into the wrong role, unless it has a faster rate of fire and troops would be able to put in 100 round magazines instead of using 30 round magazines that you can go through almost instantly if it is being used for suppressing fire. In my opinion, if the M27 should be a replacement for the M-4/M-16 because it is basically an assualt rifle, all you need to do is put on an M-203, put on a burst option and you are done.

M27 FACTS- I dont agree with what you are saying. There is a difference between suppression and “NOISE”. Please tell me the Mission of the Marine Rifle Squad. They Key to it is Fire and Maneuver. What if the IAR gunner cannot hit or kill the enemy? What if his rounds are EFFECTIVELY Suppresing the Enemy? And those Rounds are allowing the remaining members of the Fire Team or squad to Close with and destroy? That would go against all the logic you are saying. Just remember, there is a DIFFERENCE between EFFECTIVE and INEFFECTIVE suppression. Dont get me wrong, I like the IAR, but Maybe im old school because I still love the SAW. It seems like you may have done a fire and movement range Once or Twice. But something is not jiving with me about you. Any “SAW Gunner” or Automatic Rifleman or hell, any Marine Infantryman will tell you the same thing as I. Or maybe Im just too Salty or “Old School” because Ive been in the Grunts for 11 years with 3 Comabt deployments to Iraq and another Combat Deployment to Afghanistan. Get your FACTs right before you throw “your” opinion and become rude to other individuals just to say YOUR PRODUCT is better than something else.

“If so there is no need for an automatic rifle. One shot, one kill.” Exactly! The role of the Automatic Rifleman is not the same as the machine gunner

M27 Facts,

    As a Marine who carried the M249 SAW in combat I have to agree and disagree with you. The M27 IAR may be the replacement of the SAW but a Marine carrying 8 to 12 thirty round magazines compared to a Marrine carrying 600 to a 1000 rounds of belted ammo doesn’t quite add up. Yes it may be more “accurate”, but what is the rate of fire of the M27 IAR compared to the M249?

    When I went through the squad assualt course on Camp Lejeune, I was carrying the SAW and I had no problems navigating the course. Marines know that sustained rates of fire are the most accurate with a fully automatic LMG. Yes you can do that with a M27 IAR but after 4 or 5 bursts you have to change mags. With a typical squad of 13 Marines split into 3 fireteams of 4 you have 3 SAW’s in addition to the squad’s AR’s. Thats  rounds available to be sent downrange as you know. If the squad was to be armed with M-16A4′s, M4′s, and the M27 IAR, you have only 390 rounds available to be sent downrange. Is accuracy really a good trade off for volume of fire? As most Marines know that right now most of the current engagement ranges in OEF are beyond your typical CQB.

   Yes, the M27 IAR may more accurate but it has alot of downsides to its design. For example as far as this Marine can tell it lacks the ability to change out the barrel when it overheats. Unlike the M27 the M249 has that ability therefore extending the service life of said weapon. If I can remember correctly the M249 has a maximum effective range on a point target of 800 meters. The M27′s maximum effective range on a point target is only 550 meters. Some people might also argue that the SAW has a better reach on a area target.

   There is talk that a M27 gunner would be issued 22 thirty round magazines (STANAG). Which is supposedly equals out to a standard combat load of a M249 SAW. 

They need to put a drum mag on this and it’ll be good to go. But one thing that Im worried about is that marines won’t be able to put down that volley of fire needed to suppress enemy fighters with the standard magazine. While the riflemen in the squad take the more accurate shots. it’s kinda like having another rifleman in your squad. But if you’ve seen the HK 416 on future weapons you’ll know how durable it is. Soo a drum mag would make this weapon very lethal. Not to mention, you can have dirt, grime, sand, water, and this gun will still be able to operate as efficiently. Just my two cents. 

If insurgents are behind cover, why wouldn’t you just want to kill them when they popped their heads up?  Why do you believe they have to “suppress” them with a larger volume of rounds being fired at them, in order for maneuvering elements to move?

As it stands in Helmand Province, when insurgents are behind cover, they move pretty easily a lot of the time, and slip out of the noose we try to put around them, while still employing a number of automatic weapons.  If your fires are more accurate because your IAR-men are not smoked from trying to displace at the same speed as the riflemen, then wouldn’t that be a beneficial thing? 

The lack of a drum magazine on the IAR is not going to impede maneuver.

Suppression is a pretty big deal in my opinion, at least equip it with a drum magazine. How is it any different than an M16. has just about the same spects.  

I by no means claim to be an “expert”, but I understand where you were going with the comment.  Seems folks around these parts think that by passing along facts, I am trying to pass myself off as an expert.

There has been chatter and speculation (mostly on tactical forums where consipracy theories abound), but that’s been mostly from outside of the service.  The M16 product improvement program (PIP) continues to loook at ways to improve the M16A4, but the there aren’t any serious discussions about putting a HK-variant rifle in the hands of every infantryman. 

9 rounds does just fine.  It doesn’t blow up in some catastrophic explosion like you see in the movies, but APDS-T cuts through a BMP like a knife through hot butter.  I’m tracking on your point though, and yes, I’ve shot a frontal with a few “splash” rounds that counted.  Killed plenty of BMPs and BTRs for real though.

I think you might be confusing the old CRISAT standards in terms of armor penetration  (penetration of a 1.6mm titanium plate back by 20 layers of Kevlar), with any discussion of an armor penetrator.  This standard was developed a while back in Europe, and has hung around for a long time.

When NATO sought to standardize a 5.56x45mm round, it chose the 62-gr FN SS109 round.  Among those considered was the US 55-gr M193 round, but it lost out to the SS109.  That’s the round that you may have heard cause massive wounds due to fragmentation–the whole urban legend that 5.56mm was fielded because the bullet tumbled, created wounds rather than killing, and took more enemy out of the fight as they tried to tend to a wounded compatriot.  There are elements to the legends that are true, but the whole myth is a compilation of facts, half-truths, and issues that have no connection at all to 5.56mm development.

The 62-gr M855 round was developed to meet NATO standards formalized in the SS109.  Only recently have adaptations of the basic design been able to match or exceed 7.62mm ball penetration effects on hardened steel targets, so here’s the rub: the BMP-1 was developed to defeat 23mm rounds across the frontal arcs and against 7.62mm across the side and rear arcs (wikipedia reference to Jane’s Defense notes).
�
M855 steel tip does penetrate armor (personal body armor) and metal, but it is not classified as an armor penetrating round.  That’s the M995 steel core “black tip” round. I still haven’t seen any reference in my recent research where M995 black tip was designed to defeat BMP-1 armor. Perhaps against the top armor, but I’m scratching my head and wondering why SAWIC would have passed that bum scoop that “green tip” was designed to defeat BMP armor.  Then again, it wouldn’t be the first time urban legends and myths crept into a period of instruction–at any level.  I’ve seen it a number of times.  I’ll stand corrected if you can cite a reference about the 5.56mm and a BMP, but for now, I still believe you’ve got it wrong.
�
This article about the M855A1 round is interesting (although it drifts off into mention of “stopping power” for whatever reason), but I’m not so sure its assertions about the limitations of original M855 are true.  I’ll have to dig back through my stuff to find old abstracts about the development of the round.
 �
As for 9mm vs. .45, yes, I understand what you’re talking about.  A 9mm does have to hit a popper at just the right height in order to drop it, where the impact of a .45 will usually drop it easily.  That “knockdown power” you reference on a square competition range doesn’t have anything to do with killing an opponent.  That is a function of penetration, permanent wound cavity, fluid loss and shock, or incapacitative effects from damaging the nervous system (spinal cord or brain).�
�
One of the more interesting things I have witnessed is a comparison of 9mm vs. .45, .44, and .22 against the quarter panel of a Crown Vic at 15 yds.  9mm went clear through both sides every time, while the other rounds did not fare nearly as well.

And what are your credentials besides Playstation. As someone who HAS used and instructed squad, platoon and company tactics, tell me what the M27 gives me that the M16A3 (fully auto capaple M16) doesnt. Tell me HOW to use this weapon in a base of fire operation when its uninterrupted sustained rate of fire is actually worse than the M4 and the M249 (higher rate of fire with equal/lower magazine capacity means LESS time in operation between magazine changes and more magazine changes).
You cite an article that could have been written by some berkley historian. If you have ever actually BEEN in a Marine Rifle Squad, instead of citing articles about one and claiming some higher ‘understanding’, maybe you would get it.

 That’s the gunnery standard. Gunnery standard on the range is also 3 rounds impacting the target (or just one hitting the dirt below it and splashing it up onto the target and registering 20+ hits). 9 rounds is probably not going to kill a BMP-2, and definitely not a BMP-3.

I think you mean Black Tip

The M27 IAR is a very accurate weapons system that has a some what high rate of fire. I say a somewhat high rate of fire is because it is magazined fed. Now an “IAR Gunner” will carry a full combat load of 6 magazines approved by the Marine Corps to be reliable. The rest of the squad will carry the rest of the IAR gunners Magazines in turn loading those Marines down even more. The fact of the matter is you are taking the fully automatic weapon out of the Marine Rifle squad, which does provide suppressive fire “a high volume of accurate fire” (not noise). I don’t know about you “m27 facts” but if I were the squad leader i much rather have 3 automatic weapons organic to my squad than 3 IARS and a 2 or 3 machine gun teams attached. The reason I say this is because i trained these “saw gunners”, If i was an 0306 a Marine Gunner or the senior gunner in the Marine Corps I would give each squad 3 saws and have the assistant automatic rifle man or rifleman carry the IAR. 

Did you just say, “Did you just say, “Did you just you the word “Clip”????” !?.” !?.

You know I’ve read other comments from others and I’ve really thought on this.
I do enjoy the SAW as a dedicated squad tool, it’s a lovely machine gun that can get the job done.
And what about the IAR? To me it appears like a souped up assault rifle with a few bonuses here and there (put in a bland manner). Can it be more accurate than the SAW? Most likely; it’s smaller and the rate of fire can probably lead to better grouping of shots. Can it perform like a SAW? Possibly; the M27 IAR does appear to based off of the 416 of H&K’s prodigious line of assault rifles, and no doubt has very similar attributes.
All in all the IAR does appear to be a capable weapon. It certainly sounds like an effective ‘death-dealer’ in its own right, but then again, I enjoy the sight of a single weapon laying waste to what used to be enemy cover.
I’m sure given time the M27 IAR might see some adjustments here and there that will bring it to an effective existence in the Marines. The quick transition though will be the most difficult. Its the downsizing in firing capability (as in how many bullets spat in a relative direction) that a good number of automatic riflemen will have to adjust to.
That said, I like the looks of the M27 IAR, and hope that it provides ample service in the Marines.
Thanks for the picture and the posts.

Though a fine replacement for a SAW, which had no business in a squad, this mostley points out the shortcomings of the M4/M16 direct gas system over the piston.
M27 Expert, any chatter about perhaps a gradual changeover to say the 416 or a selctable M27?

the saw is a shock and awe weapon very loud and very big with alot of ammo you cant get better then 200 rounds of lead comming toward you and having to reload after every 30 shots is horriable and play you just cant get the fire power from the saw to the m27 iar you just cant the iar is just trash i belive the saw should have ben replaced with somthing just as good or even better persionaly this is a down grade for an automatic weapons guy in the squad when people look to you to provide COVER FIRE with the saw it makes you hide and scream like a little girl but 30 rounds of 556 ammo oooo whats that going to to do NOTHING ABSOLUTLY NOTHING at any distance 762 will knock you on your ass after 1 round a few or 556 are need for the same affect just no just stop making them already

No you cant.If you use precision shots it makes your enemy scatter so it does exactly the opposite of suppressive fire. I agree with most of the posts m 16 should of been replaced not the saw.the saw has been proven in the field this new weapon if you want to call it that hasnt been proved in the field so how can you test it accurately

Looks like a good replacement…for the M4. It looks like an improved assault rifle. It’s great that it’s really accurate but 30 rounds of 5.56 is the M4′s job. We still need M249s.

Unfortunately, the reality is that “concerned citizens” who want so badly to help are the ones who write to Congress and allow too much gunstore commando drama to leak out, in turn influencing the narrative.

I’m totally calm through all of this.  Believe me, it gets to a point where I shake my head to see the comments and ignorance, but this is all just education for folks who seem well-intentioned, but just do not know the facts.

Looks a like a M-4 with all the extras. Not sure about this. But, with our government building the F-22 that has been in service since ’05 and now the F-35 is on the way…for what? The F-22 cost $43 Billion. Takes $12 million a year to mantain. Gee I wonder what that could have done with that kind of money for our ground forces. The new Body armor. We do not even have anyone to use the F-22 or the F-35 against. Guess we will next built a few new Battleships. I mean it’s only been since ’45 they have seen action. 

The M60 gunners were attached to maneuver elements from the infantry platoon which got them from the weapons platoon.  They were never ‘squad’ weapons.  There was a dedicated AR in the fire team – he was supposed to be the only one on full auto on the M16A1.  Then the SAWs came in.  Now we’re back to the M16 – hope the heat shields in the handguards are good.