Author Archives: parvusimperator

Reports From The Range: Light Rifle Trials

Posted by

When last we left Parvusimperator’s Rifle Works, we had a rifle built to a concept. Perhaps a somewhat vague and nebulous hodgepodge of a concept, but a concept nonetheless. So let’s get her to the range and talk Trials, see how she fared, and how we liked her.

But first, a name! Because the name seems to suit her, and for a bunch of personal reasons I won’t go into here, I’m going to call my light rifle Bridget. Say hello, Bridget.

Second, Bridget needs an optic. As built, she has no sights at all. So I needed an optic. I have a bunch of nice optics sitting around, but not one really suited to competition. Plus, I really like optics on my pistols. I usually carry one, and I almost always take a red dot equipped pistol with me to the range if I’m going to be shooting pistols. And a red dot puts me firmly into the Open1 division of any two- or three-gun competition. So, I shouldn’t really compromise on my optic in terms of close-in performance or performance at range. Which made my choice obvious: the SpecterDR 1.5x/6x.

Let’s look at this optic. It’s made by Elcan, a division of Raytheon. And it’s huge. It’s also unique in that it has a mechanically-operated prism system internally, giving it exactly two magnification levels. This is the bigger SpecterDR model, so those two levels are 1.5x and 6x. There is nothing in between, and switching between the magnifications is super fast. The conceit here is that for variable power optics, nearly all of the time is spent at either the lowest available or the highest available magnification. The SpecterDR gets rid of the others. It also features a massive 42mm objective lens, which is great for low light, or just getting a really clear sight picture. And if you’re a glass snob, the engineers at Elcan have you covered with some phenomenally clear European-grade glass. The reticle is a lot like a TA01 Acog: a big crosshair with bullet drop compensation markings for useful ranges. You can get a reticle calibrated for 5.56 or 7.62 as is your preference. Mine is calibrated for 5.56. The reticle also has a range estimator scale. You can illuminate either the center dot of the reticle or the entire reticle. If you’re illuminating the center dot only, you can get Aimpoint-grade brightness out of the Elcan. You won’t have an issue with that washing out. It’s rated for an average battery life of 3,000 hours, which is really good for a variable-power optic. Or, really, anything not made by Aimpoint. Plus, this thing is built like a brick shithouse. It’s not gonna break on me. It’s probably good for anything short of getting shot or having C4 strapped to it. It satisfies the MIL-STD-810F standards for durability, in case you like looking up technical descriptions.

Now for the downsides. Remember how this thing is built stupid tough? And it has a giant, Illuminati-approved, all-seeing objective lens? Well, it’s also a heavy beast of an optic, tipping the scales at 700 g (1.54 lbs.). This is a lot, but bear in mind that it includes a mount. So if you’re comparing it to a more conventional optic design, add in the weight of a mount and then get back to me. It’s a bit lighter than the super popular Vortex Razor HD Gen II 1-6x on it’s own, and rather lighter once you add a mount to the Vortex. Downside two is the price. MSRP is painful. And, downside number three is that Elcan is a division of Raytheon. They are a military contractor. This optic has an NSN. Having a super good warranty isn’t high on their features list. Nor is having a customer service department that can be there to hold your hand and reassure you that you are a special snowflake. They don’t care. If you object, feel free to take your business elsewhere. I don’t really care, so I ponied up the cash and bought one.2 Oh, the one other thing to be aware of is that the integral mount uses ARMS levers. Some people don’t like those because they’re not adjustable and don’t work if the rails on your upper aren’t in spec. There are better clamping designs now, but these work. Plus, I can’t change them out. Hardly a dealbreaker.

Enough of me babbling about the optic. Let’s mount it up! Even with the Elcan beast mounted on the rail, Bridget weights in at 7.53 lbs., which is lighter than Kat without her optic. It’s also about as much as Maryanne, my SCAR 16S, weighs without her optic.

Range trials proceeded without too much drama. That gas system runs great. No problems in rifle operation were found. Though, I didn’t run a ton of rounds through Bridget yet at this stage. In terms of handling though, I’m super impressed. Bridget isn’t front-heavy like most other ARs, and she’s not rear-heavy like a bullpup. The vast majority of the weight is concentrated right around the magwell, where your strong hand is. So she’s not tiring to hold up and maneuvers super easy. That long handguard is actually quite nice with the weight distributed this way. It makes transitions really easy.

What else did we notice? Bridget is loud. Very loud. And the blast is obnoxious. How obnoxious? Well, two lanes over, Fishbreath remarked “Holy cow that’s obnoxious!” And he’s not one given to profanity. Translating to something a bit more colloquial gives us “Fucking ow!” Fishbreath has also mentioned the sensation of getting blasted in the face with the particles that come out of the business end of a rifle is a lot like getting pepper sprayed.

That said, after understanding that Bridget is going to helpfully try to get you some extra shooting space so that you both can get comfortable, she’s a remarkably flat shooting gun. I’m no expert in recoil control, but that little M4-72 brake is amazing at keeping the muzzle where you pointed it. No jumping, no nonsense. Plus, even less recoil than you’d expect from a 5.56. Bridget feels like shooting a .22 that someone made heavy, but somehow is being magically supported. Oh, and you’re right behind a cannon that’s synchronized to you. Because roar.

In case it’s not obvious from the above, I like Bridget very much. She’s lots of fun to shoot. Having a light, well-balanced rifle is pretty awesome, and it’s a solid validation of my part selection. I’m quite happy with her as is. I was a little concerned that the heavy Elcan would ruin everything, but because of the balance, I don’t have any complaints. I might swap to something else in the future, but I’m happy with the Elcan for the time being. I’m also quite happy with my choice of stock and handguard. Thanks, BCM! I do need to remember a glove for sustained shooting, since the handguard heats up quick. The Geissele SSA-E is a good trigger, but I might like to try something different given my expected uses. We’ll see–I’ve got a match coming up on the 10th, and I’ll take note if any conclusions shake out of that match, other than I need more practice.

1.) Or “Un-Limit-ed” now, I guess. Name changes, ugh. Maybe I’ll call it Ultd. Anyway, same great nearly-no limits as Open, brand new name.
2.) I got mine from CS Tactical. They do have great customer service.

Parvusimperator’s Light Rifle

Posted by

As per usual, I wanted to do another AR-15 build, which of course, needed a concept. I decided to try for a Light-ish rifle. I’m gonna pick some parts on the lighter side of things and see how I like the result. There are some exceptions, which I’ll get into below. Also, if possible, I wanted to give one of those long handguard things a try, see why everybody likes them. And I’m going to make this a nice, generally high-end race-ish build. So let’s cue the music.

Receivers: Mega Arms NiB-coated billet set
Well, that ended quick. Just kidding. Really though, I bought these because they look freaking cool. NiB (Nickel Boron) finish is pretty, and Mega Arms makes nice receivers. Billet receivers are heavier than forged, in general. Oh darn. Let’s look at the receivers themselves in detail:

Upper Receiver:
Well, it’s NiB coated, which looks cool. Internally, this should be pretty slick. Otherwise, it’s mostly adding a bit of bling that we can pretend is something vaguely resembling practical. This is a pretty typical billet upper, with some details particular to the manufacturer to make it look cool, and provision for a forward assist and dust cover.

Lower Receiver:
It’s also NiB coated. Plus, matched billet set, so the design is supposed to flow nicely. Blending and all that. Woo. There are a couple other things of note here that are nonstandard. First, there’s a small setscrew at the back to control fit of the upper and the lower and remove any wobble. Not that the wobble matters, but it’s nice to be able to take it out, get that custom gun feel. We also have an extra bit on the right side–a southpaw bolt release! There’s a button on the right and a longer guide rod so that a southpaw shooter can release the bolt easily with his support hand when he reloads. Cool. Note that there’s no way for him to lock the bolt back with this particular gubbin, but that’s okay. Bolt lockback is nearly always an administrative thing; it doesn’t matter if it’s awkward. Also, the bolt catch is to be held in place with an included setscrew, not a roll pin. Great! Roll pins are of the devil anyway, especially that one, which is about the most awkward thing to install.

Barrel: Daniel Defense 16″ Lightweight Profile CL
That’s more like it. It even says lightweight in the name. Anyway, I went with Daniel Defense because they have a good history of making quality AR barrels, 16″ because I don’t want to bother with pinning the muzzle device or NFA paperwork, and chrome lining (“CL”) because duh, chrome line that barrel for best barrel life results. The lightweight profile is what was originally called for by Stoner in the basic AR-15/M-16A1 design, so we’re in good stead here. Plus, I’m not a benchrest shooter, so I don’t want a barrel that weighs as much as a Camaro. Light rifle, lightweight barrel profile. Perfect for the Run ‘n’ gun.

Handguard: BCM KMR 13″
Oughta make up for all those places I opted not to cut weight. Note that this is not the KMR-Alpha. This is Original KMR, made with BCM’s fancy, proprietary, and apparently hard-to-find aluminum-magnesium alloy. Just like a fancy racing engine block. And it’s laughably light. Holding the handguard in your hand is like holding nothing at all. It’s stupid light. There’s basically nothing to it given that it’s over a foot long. Why 13″? Because I wanted to have a long handguard to see what all the fuss was about. But I still wanted a bit of barrel at the end for the narrow firing port drills you sometimes see at matches. This fits the bill for both. Plus, it’s got the modular keymod interface. Is keymod better than Mlok? I have no idea. I just like this handguard design. I figure both will be around for a long time, because people hang on to guns for a while.

Muzzle Device: Precision Armaments M4-72
I could probably have gotten a lighter muzzle device. I don’t care.1 The M4-72 is universally acclaimed as a super effective muzzle device, coming in at or near the top in several effectiveness tests. It is also apparently horrifically loud. I do not care about this either. Ridiculous race gun comps are always something I’ve been interested in trying. So here it is. One of the baddest of the bad, if you can take the abuse. Or, I guess if people around you can take the abuse.

Gas Block: BCM low profile .625″
Not much to say here. It’s a gas block. It attaches via setscrew, mostly because I lack a drill press to pin it properly. Oh well. .625″ because that’s the diameter of my barrel at the gas port. It is not adjustable, because I don’t really want to fiddle with gas systems too much. I don’t tweak rifles to shoot as light as possible for some custom load. I like my rifle to run with any reasonable factory load.

Gas tube: BCM midlength
Yes, I bought a gas tube. No, there’s nothing special about it. Makes rifle do that autoloader thing.

Bolt Carrier Group: WMD Guns NiB-X coated M16 BCG
Here’s another place where I could have saved some weight, but didn’t. Personally, I’m not a huge fan of low-mass components in the operating system, because I like unfussy, reliable rifles. This is one of the few places where there is mass in an AR-15, so of course someone is gonna try to cut weight here. If you go with a reduced-mass BCG, you nearly always need to tune your gas system for correct functioning. Since I’m not the biggest fan of fiddle-farting around with the gas system, and I have no capacity to do so on this rifle as designed, I kept the stock-dimensioned BCG for reliability. I don’t like fussy, high maintenance guns. NiB coated because my upper is NiB coated, and NiB on NiB is going to give me maximum lubricity. Plus, it looks really cool.

Buffer system: BCM milspec buffer tube, castle nut, receiver end plate, carbine buffer, carbine buffer spring
Not much interesting here. I need a buffer system to make the rifle one correctly. So I got one. It’s all pretty standard stuff. Milspec buffer tube, though it doesn’t really matter as long as it’s consistent with your stock. Castle nut and receiver end plate are also needed, and stock parts, and boring. Nothing fancy here. The buffer is carbine weight, mostly because that’s what came in the kit. I may tinker with that a bit, but Obsessive Buffer Tweaking Syndrome has screwed up many perfectly good guns. So…maybe not.

Stock BCM Gunfighter FDE
This stock is a good balance between weight, comfort, and durability. It’s one of the lighter stocks on the market, among the strongest in abuse/drop tests, and is pretty comfortable as far as cheek weld goes. There’s a rubber pad on it too, not that a 5.56 AR is abusive at all. There are lighter stocks, but most of them are less comfortable. Or I could have just gotten a backplate for the buffer, but that wouldn’t be adjustable. And I refuse to be that silly. Plus I like having features that were on the ban list for the ’94 “assault weapons” ban. Makes me feel warm and fuzzy. Oh, and I picked Flat Dark Earth (FDE to the cool kids, tan to everyone else) because it looks cool, and I’ve got a sort of two-tone look going on.

Various Upper and Lower Parts:
I’m going to list these out, grouped by function, because a bunch are decidedly not standard parts. I rolled my own lower parts kit for this one.

Forward assist: BCM forward assist and spring
Well, the upper receiver has a slot for one, so I got one. It’s a stock part. Moving on.

Dust Cover: Strike Industries Enhanced Ultimate Dust Cover
I got this because installing a dust cover is really annoying. This one is much less so.

Charging handle: Mega Arms Grip Charging Handle
This one came with my upper. It’s got some more grippiness, and it’s a billet part, but otherwise it’s a stock design. I’m fine with that for now. I haven’t had one of my guns jam up real bad, so I haven’t had to really abuse a charging handle. Maybe in the future I’ll get a fancy one.

Mag Release: Colt mag release spring, colt mag button, Norgon ambi mag catch
I got the Norgon ambi mag catch because I figured it’d be pretty silly to have an ambi bolt release but no ambi mag release. I got the Norgon one because it’s well made, puts the mag release in the same place for southpaws and even has an NSN. Other small parts are Colt because I like Colt stuff. They make good small parts.

Bolt release: Colt spring, Seekins Bolt Release Catch
These are added to the already-supplied extended guide rod to enable the southpaw-friendly release functionality. Colt spring because I still like Colt. Seekins catch because it’s a little bigger, and I like the look. Plus bigger is easier to smack when you’re in a hurry.

Safety: Battle Arms Development Ambi Safety
Again, ambi makes more sense as an all-or-nothing thing. Plus, I like ambi safeties in general, and I’m not sacrificing anything. Battle arms makes a really nice one that lets you choose from several different shapes of lever that they make. They come with a safety detent and safety detent spring.

Grip: TangoDown BG-17 FDE
FDE because two-tone. TangoDown BG-17 because it’s a really comfortable grip. It’s my favorite from testing several. And no, I don’t like the ‘more verticaler’ grips they have now. TangoDown’s grip is also shaped to keep your hand high, and a high grip is a better grip. Also, TangoDown actually makes grips in sizes for people who have big, manly hands. The BG-17 is the larger size, the BG-16 is the smaller size. Same great comfortable shape. Since I have relatively large hands, I went BG-17. Interestingly, all the goofy vertical grips seem to be made tiny. No idea why, but it’s another reason for me to not like them

Buffer retainer: Colt buffer retainer detent, Colt buffer retainer spring
Really, there’s nothing to see here. These parts are required so your gun works right. There’s nothing special about them. I like Colt, so I got ones made by Colt.

Receiver Pins: Battle Arms Development Enhanced Pin Set
These hold your receivers together. You need some pins, and the corresponding pin retaining detents and pin retaining springs. I like the Battle Arms set because they shape the pins a bit more to make them easier to push and pull with your fingers. It’s the little things. They also include a little magnet to hold the detents while you install the pins. It’s the little things.

Trigger: Geissele SSA-E
If you thought I was going to put a stock trigger in this gun, you should go play in traffic. I like Bill Geissele’s triggers, and his SSA is pretty much my go-to trigger. I went with the SSA-E for a little bit of match-ness. I might go with a more competition trigger once I get a feel for this one and run it. That trigger might be the Geissele SD-E trigger, or maybe the Hiperfire 24C that I’ve heard so much about. I’ll keep you posted.

There she is, though she still needs a name and an optic. And then it’s off to the range! Watch this space for more details.

Oh, and in case your curious, she weighs 5.975 lbs unloaded, with no optic. A hair under six pounds is pretty good, I thought. Especially because I didn’t get too obsessive.

1.) Technically, I could also have gone with no muzzle device. But that’s just silly. If you seriously considered this, then you’re dumb. Or too weight obsessed. Possibly both.

The FBI Selects Glock!

Posted by

The FBI has announced the results of their 9mm handgun solicitation a few days ago. Their choice is Glock!

Let’s look at some history, and see how we got here. The last time the FBI issued 9mm handguns, they were S&W 459s. These were issued to FBI SWAT men; regular agents got revolvers. J. Edgar Hoover liked revolvers. Revolvers were what cops carried. But let’s talk about the semiautomatics. The 459 had a 15 round, double-stack magazine, aluminum frame, adjustable sights, and a frame mounted safety/decocker. Trigger was a double action trigger, and it also came with a magazine disconnect, which was popular with police forces. Pretty typical 1970s-designed wondernine.

Of course, then came the 1986 Miami shootout, and the FBI decided that 9mm semiautomatics1 didn’t have enough stopping power. So they upgraded to the big 10mm Auto cartridge, in a new gun, the S&W 1076. This gun was another double action semiautomatic, again with a frame-mounted safety/decocker. But because the 10mm was much bigger, it only held nine rounds in a single-stack magazine.

The big 10mm round had no complaints about stopping power to speak of, but agents who weren’t very experienced, especially those of smaller stature, had trouble shooting the brisk-recoiling 10mm load. So the FBI went from the original Norma loading2 to the “FBI lite” load. Less recoil, more hits. And it’s the hits that count. Then someone realized that if you were happy with less powder in the cartridge, you could shorten the 10mm Auto round a bit and get something with a similar case length as a 9x19mm Luger round. Which would help a lot with having smaller agents, especially women, get a good grip on the gun. Plus, you could get back to that double-stack magazine goodness.

The result was the .40 S&W cartridge. You get double-stack magazines with slightly reduced capacity when compared to 9mm Luger, but still way better than guns chambered for 10mm Auto or .45 ACP. Great! Plus, you get a pretty hot round that’s got plenty of stopping power. So the FBI adopted this new round in a new S&W semiautomatic.

Or, you might like to think that. It would make sense. .40 S&W. They’re name’s in the cartridge designation! But no, they had their thunder stolen by that great new Austrian gunmaker, Glock, specifically the Glock 22 (full size) and Glock 23 (compact).

See, Glock actually managed to beat S&W to market with a .40. And polymer-frame Glocks are cheaper to make than S&Ws, and the guys at Glock are very effective marketers. Plus, the striker-fired trigger on a Glock only has one kind of pull, rather than the two of a double action3. So that’s what FBI agents carried.

Until now. See, bullet design was improving too, and by 2014, 9x19mm Luger hollow points weren’t giving very much up to .40 S&W or .45 ACP hollowpoints. A well designed 9mm hollowpoint4 actually performs about the same as a .40 or .45 hollowpoint in ballistics gel testing. And several police departments5 have had great results for years with well-designed 9mm hollowpoints in officer-involved shootings. And switching to 9mm means a couple more rounds in a magazine, plus less felt recoil. Less recoil means better qual scores. Everybody shoots a 9mm better than a .40, all else equal.

But the FBI could not simply ask for a different model Glock. Other companies would get upset. There would be legal challenges. So the FBI wrote a solicitation for a new 9mm handgun. And asked for a couple things they didn’t have in their current Glocks, specifically no finger grooves and an ambidextrous slide release.

The full RFP was for a Full Size gun (at least 16 round capacity, 4.26-5.2″ barrel) and a Compact gun (at least 14 round capacity, barrel length 3.75-4.25″), plus simunition and dummy training models. They wanted a beveled magwell and a lip on the front of the magazine baseplate to assist in forcibly removing a magazine from a jammed gun. Trigger pull weight between 4.5 and 6 lbs. Only striker-fired pistols were permitted.6 No grip safeties were permitted. A trigger safety was only permitted if it was in the trigger bow. Magazine catch was explicitly requested to be the pushbutton, 1911 type. No HK-style paddle releases were acceptable. No external manual safeties were permitted.7 Trijicon HD sights were preferred.

Out of the box, the SiG P320 met all of these requirements. S&W would have to change their trigger design, and probably tighten up the QC on their 9mm models. HK would need a longslide version of the VP9, longer grip for 16 or 17 round magazines, and a new mag release. Glock would have to add an ambidextrous slide release and get rid of the finger grooves. Not really insurmountable for anyone.

Of course, the 800 lb. gorilla in the room was Glock. Glock had the previous contract. And this contract wasn’t just for the FBI. A number of other government agencies would be allowed to purchase the new pistol under the new contract. Plus, a bunch of other, smaller agencies would inevitably follow the FBI’s lead. Why do a whole bunch of expensive testing yourself when the FBI has done some pretty elaborate testing of their own?

And here we are, eight months later. Not a bad turnaround time for a federal evaluation. And Glock has kept the contract. Good for them. Well, more than good for them. Great for them. I’m a huge Glock fan, so I’m thrilled in that totally irrational, ape-brain pleasing way. Someone with elaborate testing protocols has validated my purchasing decisions. Not that I had anything to do with the gun design or the testing, but yay all the same.

Cheerleading aside, what does it mean? Well, the FBI was pretty darn sensible for once. They’ve been happy with their Glocks, have plenty of armorer training for Glocks, and in general just wanted some in 9mm. And they even got a bunch of minor changes they wanted. Glock gets the big fat FBI contract, and tons of agencies will keep buying Glock.

As for you, the shooter, well if you remember my Striker-Fired Pistol Battle Royale, I told you to wait for the FBI to choose which one they liked best. Why? Because that one would get more accessories and holsters developed for it, since there’d be a guaranteed significant market share. And they chose Glock.

Of course, 65% of law enforcement agencies already carry Glocks. Glocks are already super popular. The only gun that has more accessories and things available for it than a Glock is a 1911. And none of that is changing any time soon with this contract. Glocks are still going to have giant market share, tons of accessories, and all the weird, wacky, and sometimes wonderful new things first. Glocks are still the right decision for striker-fired pistols, despite all of the new ones that have come out in the past couple of years. Here’s the one that made them popular. It’s got a phenomenal track record for reliability, and the trigger is pretty good.

So yeah. Pistol Roundup? To hell with that. I’ll have what Mr. Foxtrot, Mr. Bravo, and Mr. India are having: a Glock with Trijicon HDs. Make mine a 19.

Of course, I did pick it from the lineup first.

1.) And .38 caliber revolvers.
2.) 200 grains at a speed of 1,260 feet per second from a 5″ test barrel. Real magnum stuff.
3.) One heavy double action pull and one light single action pull. If you’ll notice, I’m not writing DA/SA, or double-action/single-action. Because it’s self-evident to any idiot who knows what double-action is that if I’m not saying double-action only then there’s a single-action mode of operation as well. DUH.
4.) If you’re looking for recommendations, my two favorite hollowpoint loads are the Speer 124 grain +P Gold Dots and the Federal 147 grain HSTs. Yes, they both pass all FBI gel tests, including the very important four-layer-denim test.
5.) The NYPD and the LAPD are two such examples. Both issue the 124 grain +P Gold Dot.
6.) Sorry Fishbreath.
7.) Sorry, again, Fishbreath. Maybe you should come over to the dark side. Join the 21st century. We have cheap magazines, plentiful sights, and slide-mounted red dots.

The AR-15 You Should Buy: The Colt 6920

Posted by

A common question I hear is “What AR-15 should I buy?” This might come from a gun owner new to the platform or someone looking to get more ARs. But fear not! Parvusimperator is here to answer this question for you. For both the new gun owner, and the guy looking to expand his collection, the right answer is the Colt 6920.

Why Colt? Why this old-school looking gun? Why not something cheaper like a DPMS? Why not something with more features people want these days like a ‘mid-length gas system’ or ‘mile-long handguards’?

We’ll get to those. First, a brief bit of background. Don’t worry, it’ll be relevant, I promise. Eugene Stoner developed the AR-15 as a follow on to the AR-10, a lightweight competitor that lost out to what would become the M-141 in the US Army’s competition for a rifle in the new 7.62x51mm caliber in 1957. The AR-15 was designed to use a small-caliber high-velocity round to maximize controllability when firing fully automatic and to be easy to aim across the ranges that infantry combat was generally expected to take place at.2 Anyway, both designs were cooked up while he was working at Armalite, hence ‘AR’, which stood for Armalite Rifle. Armalite was a small company out of Hollywood, California, and it was made to apply the latest high tech aerospace3 materials, like forged aluminum and fiberglass, to the firearms industry. The AR-15 was developed for a contract for the US Air Force’s airbase security forces, but Armalite didn’t have much in the way of manufacturing capability on their own. So they sold the design and the rights to it to Colt, who had plenty of arms manufacturing capability.

This means Colt has what’s called the Technical Data Package, or TDP. It’s the plans for the gun in the sort of nauseating detail that only engineers can appreciate. Materials list, dimensions, and crucially, tolerances. Colt has been forced to send this TDP out to other manufacturers for the process of making M4s for the US Military, but those other manufacturers are contractually forbidden from using the TDP to make guns for civilians. So only with Colt are you getting everything as you’re supposed to be. This is most important with little things involving tolerances. Everyone else can reverse engineer the dimensions, but tolerances are harder to come up with if you don’t have the plans. Which means Colt rifles are going to have a correctly sized gas port,4 among other things.

Colt makes M4s for the Army, and given the desire to not fuck up this crucial contract, they’re going to make them right. So they’re going to make your rifle right too, because it’s not worth the trouble to set up a whole new production line. What does this mean for you? Well, it means that all the critical fasteners, specifically the castle nut and the screws for the gas key are going to be properly staked. Staking is deforming a little bit of metal to prevent something from backing out. You could “just use loctite” on the castle nut, I suppose, though those threads are a trifle fine and not really suited to it. Loctite won’t work on the gas key screws though, since that’s where a ton of heat is going. And if those screws come undone, you’re gun is junk. And fine, on the range, that’s just annoying. But it could mean you’ve lost a match. Or, if you’re using the gun professionally, you could end up deader than Elvis. Don’t end up a dead loser. Stake your gas key screws. Which Colt does for you.

You’re also paying for that US Military grade QC with Colt. Which means a Colt rifle is less likely to have out of the box issues. They build their carbines right and inspect every one.

All that said, there are some downsides. The 6920 has exactly two differences from an issue M4. First, it’s got a 16″ barrel to comply with the damnable NFA laws about barrel length. Second, there’s no burst fire/autofire functionality. Those are the only differences. This means the stock is pretty basic, the pistol grip is that infernal A2 jobber that I hate, and you get boring round handguards. Fortunately, the stock and pistol grip are easy to swap out, and that’s fine, because those are intensely personal choices. The handguard contains two heat shields, as is right and proper and standard issue. But it predates all those cool accessories, and it’s not free float5. You also get a fixed front sight block. On the one hand, that’s good, because it’s held in place with two pins. It isn’t going anywhere. On the other hand, that’s going to get in the way of all kinds of handguards you might like to mount.

So even though I’d caution that the stock handguards handle heat of a good extended shooting session very well, and you probably don’t need to attach a ton of crap to your carbine, and that the free float obsession is silly, and that the money spent on a fancy handguard might be better spent on ammo or a class or a good optic, you’re still gonna want one. No problem, I’ll enable you and tell you how to make it work. You’re almost certainly going to need to remove the stock barrel nut, or at least the delta ring and handguard cap, which is going to entail removing the FSB among other things. No problem. When you’ve removed the FSB, you can actually cut the sighting portion off with a hacksaw, file/dremel it to fit under your new handguard without spoiling the gas-collecting bit, and then refinish it with some grill paint. It’s so easy a caveman can do it. Seriously, it’s super easy. Don’t worry if it doesn’t look professional, it’s going to be under a handguard anyway. Make sure it fits, don’t cut the gas part open, and you’re fine.

Colt even will oblige you by doing this from the factory on the 6920 OEM2 model. This rifle ships with no stock, no handguard, no delta ring, no handguard cap, and no trigger guard, so you can swap these parts out yourself. The gas block is cut down and reparkerized from the factory. (This is a nicer way to do it than using grill paint, but grill paint is way easier and cheaper for the amateur). The OEM2 model still has the A2 handguard, because that holds in the spring and detent for the safety, so it has to ship with something there.

As for midlength gas, I don’t get the fuss. The rifle and carbine length gas systems are proven with an absolutely ridiculous number of rounds. It will work. Always. Midlength seems to work too. It’s not as proven. It might be “softer shooting”, but that’s very subjective. Plus, we’re talking about 5.56mm here. This is not an elephant gun. This is an easy rifle to shoot. Really. It is. And just in case, you can always add a comp to reduce muzzle rise that little bit.

So, what have we learned today, class? Stop overthinking it. Stop worrying about it. Just buy a Colt. And ammo. And quality mags. And get some range time.

1.) It’s still probably the best battle rifle of the era on a technical basis, but that’s another story.
2.) For more on small caliber high velocity rounds and why they’re great, see here.
3.) Armalite was funded by Fairchild Aircraft. Back in those days, California manufactured actual things like airplanes, and not just stupid.
4.) Colt does not drill out a giant gas port so that your gun will function correctly with crap ammo. The US army doesn’t use the worst reman and lowest quality dumping ground ammo. Maybe you shouldn’t either.
5.) Insert loud sigh here. I don’t understand the obsession with free floating for 95% of rifle shooters. Most people shoot at a range of 100 yards or less, with at best milsurp M855 or M193 ammo, or possibly that underpowered crap I mentioned above, at targets rather larger than a man’s torso, but god forbid their handguards touch the barrel. Seriously, it doesn’t matter. There are more important things to worry about and bigger fish to fry, like proper technique and practice. And if you’re sitting on a bench trying to split a gnat’s ass at 100 yards with your entry-level carbine and cheap chinese knockoff optic, you’re also being dumb. Get off your butt.

Meet Maryanne, a Product Improved SCAR 16S

Posted by

So I’ve spent some quality time shooting my SCAR 16S, which has been named Maryanne.1 And the more I shoot it, the more I like it. There are a lot of good things here, and some that I’ve changed, because I can’t not tinker with something. So let’s go through what I’ve found, what I’ve changed, what I’ve kept, and what might change in the future.

The more I shoot Maryanne, the more I like that charging handle. No, it hasn’t hit my thumb yet. Still not sure how that keeps happening to other people.2 Anyway, as I mentioned earlier, locking the bolt back for a right handed shooter is super easy. Grabbing the charging handle, palm-down, and pulling the charging handle back puts your support hand thumb in perfect position to hit the bolt catch. Easy. This makes administrative handling and malfunction clearing3 a breeze. There are a bunch of aftermarket charging handles out there, but I don’t see myself buying one. I haven’t scraped my knuckles on anything yet.

Also, the reciprocating charging handle makes it easy to tell if the gun has stopped firing because of a malfunction or because the mag is empty, without having to rotate it for a chamber check. And, if you like a forward assist, it’ll do that job too. Reciprocating charging handle can stay.

I also like the safety, which is a 45-degree jobber, as opposed to the 90 degree design of a regular AR. I like it better because it’s a bit faster, and indulges some laziness. There are aftermarket safety levers available, but I haven’t bothered with any of those yet, because I can’t tell how they improve upon the factory part. What am I getting with my money besides a tiny bit that says “MAGPUL” on it?

I haven’t touched the factory stock either. Again, I don’t see the point, the factory unit works great as it is. It even has an adjustable riser. And it sits against my shoulder, and it’s adjustable for length of pull, and it folds. Great! 5.56 doesn’t need much of a recoil pad. Also, alternatives tend to be even uglier, so why bother? Maybe if someone made a shoulder thing that goes up for it, I’d get one so I can have another feature to make the antigunners pee their panties, but no one has made one yet. I’ll have to settle for collapsible and folding, as opposed to collapsible, folding and “goes up”. Oh darn.

You’re probably wondering what the devil I have changed. Well, the pistol grip for starters. I hate the A2-style pistol grip. It’s too small and has a nub in a stupid place. Stupid cheap thing. I’ve replaced it with a TangoDown BG-17 grip. This grip is curved and large, for those of us with big hands. It fits my hand great and is comfortable. Plus it puts the distance to trigger in a great spot. It’s a more traditional grip angle though. I don’t understand the ‘vertical style’ that a lot of newer ARs have, but maybe that’s because I’m not kicking doors with an SBR. Shrug. The important thing is that I have a grip I like.

I also replaced the stock gritty trigger with Geissele’s fancy Super SCAR trigger. Trigger replacement on the SCAR is a bit of a pain, but I got there eventually. The end result is a lighter, crisper pull. It’s not too light, and it makes shooting the gun more fun. I’m a civilian. I get to enjoy luxury triggers. This thing is now totally awesome. It feels a lot like my other Geissele triggers, which is fine by me. Mr. Geissele does good work.

I’ve played around with rail covers and the like on Maryanne. I’m currently running Magpul XTMs on the side rails and a Magpul AFG2 on the bottom rail. I’m not sure about this setup. I haven’t shot the rifle to get a feel for how much I like the AFG2 on the handguard, and the XTMs are a pain to work with. I might replace them with the Tango Down rail covers or something. I don’t know yet. It’s easy enough to mess with.

I have not gotten an extended rail yet, because I don’t see the point. Maybe it’s because I don’t have ape-arms, but I haven’t figured out why people like to grip the gun super far out on the handguard yet. Plus, there’s plenty of room for a light if I need to mount one. No extension means I don’t spend money on that and the weight doesn’t go up, woohoo.

The iron sights on Maryanne are really well done. I’m not a big iron sight guy, but these are as good as the high-end KAC sights you might put on your AR if you’re into fancy builds. Range adjustable and everything. Of course, I went optic, because duh. Right now, I have an Aimpoint Comp M4S on there in a Larue QD mount. The Comp M4S is Aimpoint’s flagship red dot. It’s got a 30mm tube, is basically unkillable, takes AA batteries, and has a battery life of about a hojillion hours on a medium setting. I don’t turn it off, and change the battery every few years, if I have to, I guess. It’s easy to adjust brightness, super quick like all red dots, and works great for the generally short ranges I find myself shooting at. Especially in wintertime, I’m stuck on short indoor ranges. Plus, I really don’t like sitting on a bench like a loser and trying to get my groups to be the size of a dime at 50 yards. I have better things to do than carbine masturbation, thanks.

Red dots are simple and cool. We’ll see how it shakes out at some multigun or carbine classes in the near future. I might also get fancy and get an Elcan SpecterDR 1x/4x for it, get some magnification for target identification and those longer shots. I love the 1.5x/6x that I got for another gun project, and the 1x/4x is a little lighter and a little cheaper. Also faster on the low end, because actual 1x. The SpecterDRs some prisms to switch magnification from low to high super fast, because intermediate magnification levels are barely used on most low power variable optics. So, we’ll see. The SpecterDR is a bit heavy, but the mount is built in, so it’s weight is pretty competitive with equally-tough conventional low-power variable optics. I will keep you posted on how the red dot does and if I do go Elcan.4

1.) Yes, I know Fabrique Nationale de Herstal is a Belgian company. And yes, final assembly was completed in Fredricksburg, VA because US firearms import laws are stupid. I do not care. Her name is Maryanne. Feel free to argue with the business end.
2.) If you know how this is happening, please mail a picture of your support hand grip technique to:
c/o I’m a dumb idiot who can’t be arsed to run my gun properly
Ste. 213
82 Stupid Moron Drive
Sewickey, PA 15143

3.) Maryanne hasn’t malfed on me yet, but I’ve done some drills to learn the full manual of arms.
4.) Quick, possibly helpful note on Elcan. Elcan is short for Ernst Leitz Canada. You might Ernst Leitz GmbH as Leica, super awesome camera company. So Elcan makes some phenomenal glass, even though they’re not actually in Europe. They also make the SpecterOS, which is like an ACOG with way better glass. They’re what happened when the Leica guys didn’t want to work for the Soviets after the Second World War. Unlike most optics companies that you’ve heard, they’re a military contractor first and foremost, and are a subsidiary of Raytheon. They’re not known for super crazy long warranties or fabulous customer service. Sorry. Not that you’ll be able to kill a Specter without explosives or shooting it.

BREXIT!

Posted by

The sun has risen on a new day for my friends in the UK. I would like to congratulate them on choosing independence, control, and self-determination over pie-in-the-sky notions and an unseemly, obnoxious bureaucracy.

It is good to see democracy triumph. Congratulations!

WS-2: Heavy Rocket Artillery

Posted by

The Russians have done a good job reminding everyone (or at least, everyone watching/paying attention/sending observers like good military intelligence types) that rocket artillery is awesome, and those “icky” cluster warheads are super effective. Even if the hippies hate them.

But of course, if you are worried about the Russians, say, or anyone else, you might want some rocket artillery of your own. And you might want to buy from the Russians, but they might be whom you are worried about, and supplies might be problematic in the event of war. And BM-30 is dreadfully expensive. You might try buying American, but they only make HIMARS these days, which is half an M270. More problematically, they won’t sell DPICM cluster munitions to any new customers, and it’s questionable if they’ll keep selling the stuff to old customers. You could buy guided rockets with unitary warheads, but they are dreadfully expensive. And then you’d want small caliber rockets like the old BM-13, so you could get more than six on a truck.

Ugh. Terrible options. Fortunately, artillery rockets aren’t all that sophisticated weapons, so we could source them elsewhere. Throw in a bit of licensed production and we’d be all set. There are several countries that make their own rocket artillery setups, but today we’re going to go to China.

Ordinarily, we might be a little wary of dealing with China in such matters, but since we’re buying, it’s not like they’ll be able to copy our stuff. Plus, they might be very threatening to Japan and South Korea, but there’s a convenient Russia between us and them. Quite the buffer. Let us see what they have, shall we?

Enter the WS-2. The largest multiple rocket artillery system in the world. It might even be classified as a short range ballistic missile. But shut up, you can get a truck-launcher that holds six missiles, so it’s totally an MRL. They’re just really, really big rockets. They’re 40 cm in diameter and 7.3 meters long. The standard version has an inertial guidance system and a range of 200 km, and a version with GPS/inertial guidance and 350 km range is also available. Perfect for bombarding Taiwan from across the Strait of Formosa. Or pounding enemy concentrations.

What warhead types are available on these monsters? It carries a 200 kg payload, which is quite a lot of high explosive. And HE/Frag and HE/Frag/incendiary unitary warheads are available. But CEP is 600 meters, and that’s not very good unless you’re trying to level Taipei. Or Grozny. So let’s talk things that will make hippies cry.

Warhead option one is the small bomblets. Sino-DPICM, if you will, though these are a bit larger. Each bomblet is a HEAT/Frag munition, rated to penetrate 85mm of RHA steel armor and having a lethal frag radius of seven meters. 540 bomblets are carried in each rocket.

Option two is the bigger, anti-armor bomblets. They still have a fragmentation shell, but add an incendiary component good for a four meter radius. The shaped charge is much bigger, being rated for 180mm of RHA steel armor. I’m not sure if these are guided or not, but it’s easy enough to modify these to work like SADARM/Bofors Bonus/etc. 61 are carried per rocket.

Option three is a unitary thermobaric warhead. It’s good for 29 psi of overpressure at a distance of 25 m from the warhead detonation.

So it’s a big, cool system. Note the obvious shortcoming of a rather large minimum range of 70 km. Also, there are no mine dispensing rockets as of yet, but I’m sure we can work something out. Probably oughtn’t be the only rocket artillery, but it’s a nice oversized, long-range shotgun for the battlefield commander all the same. We’ll probably mount the launcher on a truck chassis that’s already in our inventory rather than add a new one for this.

Resurrected Weapons: Sprint ABM

Posted by

Suppose you were to take on the challenge of defending against ballistic missiles. The big ones, mind–intercontinental ones with thermonuclear warheads. You might conclude that you’d need a layered defense, with different missiles to attack the ICBM in flight. Of course, the trickiest interception problem is the goaltender’s, i.e. the last line of defense. How to intercept a missile when your shot is the last one is a really tricky problem, and one such solution is the topic of today’s resurrected weapon post.

Behold, the Sprint antiballistic missile system!

It was a relatively short ranged system, with a claimed operational radius of 40 km, and a flight ceiling of 30 km. But that’s to be expected. It’s supposed to be the last attempt to stop an incoming warhead. Of course, since other missiles were to have had the first go, the incoming warhead was beginning its decent. In order to stop it, Sprint had to be mind-bogglingly fast.

The Sprint missile was a two-stage affair, which accelerated at 100 Gs. This sustained acceleration would turn any human passengers into paste. Good thing it doesn’t have any. Sprint would go from zero to Mach 10, or 3.4 kilometers per second, in under five seconds. Given this tremendous velocity, it would intercept a target it’s maximum interception altitude of 30 kilometers in less than fifteen seconds.

In order to make this speed work, Sprint had a number of interesting features for the time. It was cone shaped, and was sheathed in an ablative coating to withstand the extreme1 temperatures generated by the missile. The silo doors were blown off by explosive charges, and the missile was kicked from its silo by a second set of explosive charges, pushing a large piston. Once clear of the silo, the first stage burned for only 1.2 seconds before dropping away.

Sprint had a novel and rather dirty way of defeating incoming warheads. Sprint’s payload was a W66 enhanced-neutron warhead. This low-yield warhead was designed to spray high-energy neutrons, to disable the electronic systems of the incoming warhead, or to cause the warhead to fizzle2 prematurely. Of course, this neutron blast, and the resulting possible fizzle, is not exactly clean, so Sprint was intended for use as a terminal defense system for ICBM silos.

Guidance of Sprint was also a difficult challenge. To keep fragile electronics out of the missile, a large and powerful radar set was emplaced on the ground, and a radio command guidance system was used. At the speeds Sprint traveled, it would be enveloped in a plasma sheath, which would make radio communication difficult. To get around this, the radio beam was made very narrow and very powerful.

So what do we think? As is, it’s kind of specialized. But there’s a market for ABM systems these days, and it bears some further testing with a more conventional fragmentation warhead, and possibly more capacity for maneuvering at speed.

Verdict: Project approved for further research funding by Borgundy Air Force Procurement Board

1.) About 3,400 degrees Celsius or so. Very hot. That speed comes at a price.
2.) A technical term in this case for a subcritical nuclear reaction.

Parvusimperator reviews the T-15 HIFV

Posted by

Fishbreath wrote an excellent bit defending the BMP-3, the traditional, rather lightly-armored IFV. You should go read it here. In it, he’s replying to my discussions in favor of heavy APCs like Namer, and my own design sketch for a heavy IFV. But I can hardly leave it there. I should reply to him, because argument is interesting and fun. Plus, recent developments bear some pondering.

As you are no doubt aware, the BMP-3 is Russian. Duh. It’s from a similar school of thought as the previous BMPs, heavily armed, cramped, lightly armored. It’ll float. It’s easy to move. Splendid.

Or is it?

I’ve mentioned before the Russian experience in Grozny, but it bears repeating. It was a bloodbath. BMPs were deathtraps. Poorly trained conscripts sent in died in droves because Chechen fighters had thought carefully about urban warfare tactics. Fuel is stored in the egress doors on the BMP-1 and BMP-2. This fuel is supposed to be the first used, but that didn’t always happen. So if the rear was hit, fuel would get sprayed all over the dismounts. And it was likely on fire. Not fun. Plus, given that there’s so much ammo in the BMP, basically any penetration of the turret armor or the forward section meant that the ammo gets hit by the shaped charge jet and blows up too. So, soldiers took to riding on the outside.1

This defeats the purpose of an enclosed vehicle. If they’re just going to ride on top, why not have something like the Sd.Kfz. 251, which had no roof. Of course, that leaves infantry vulnerable to machine gun fire and artillery fragments. Plus, that cold. I hear Russia has a miserable winter. They could suck it up and enjoy their superior deployability. A BMP-3 can float, you know.

This brings us to the T-15. It’s built on that same Armata combat platform as the T-14, except the engine is at the front now, where it belongs for vehicles that carry troops. Two things are of note. First, it’s got an unmanned turret, second, it weighs about as much as the T-14. That’s tank-level protection right there. The Russians have agreed with the Israelis–if you have a vehicle that’s going to get shot at like a tank, it should take hits like a tank. Even outside of urban areas–the Donbass is hardly suburbia. Like most modern armies, the Russians have become much more casualty sensitive2, and shooting an ATGM–even an old one–at a BMP is a great way to inflict casualties.

Armor on the T-15 is typical Russian–a reasonably thick steel and composite structure under a lot of ERA. The reactive armor is a new type, of course, but it’s not clear how good it actually is, because no one has had a chance to shoot it yet. Still, it should be good, since they have lots of experience, and overall protection should be on the order of the protection level of the T-14 given the weight, layout, and the remote turret which I’ll discuss in a moment. Further protection is provided by a hard-kill active protection system, the Afghanit. This system is also in use on the T-14, though again it hasn’t been tested. Not being a fluent reader of Russian, and with the Russians generally keeping things quiet, I don’t know how it compares to other Western competitive systems. I’d guess it’d be similar in performance to Trophy as far as reaction times go, but that’s speculation. They do have a reasonable number of tubes per side, unlike so many western designers who think two per side is enough (it isn’t).

On to the turret. The T-15 has an unmanned turret, just like the T-14. It’s all contained above the turret ring, because a traditional turret basket removes space for dismounts, and carrying dismounts is the T-15’s primary mission. The T-15’s turret is well thought out, and I’m a big fan. It’s got a 30mm cannon with 500 rounds split between a 160 round box and a 340 round box to accommodate the double ammunition feeds. The autocannon is capable of high angle fire, perfect for hitting top-floor rocket teams. The coax gun is in the usual 7.62x54R caliber, and there are 2,000 rounds available. Four tubes for Kornet-EM ATGMs are provided, two on either side of the turret. Kornet-EM has a tandem-HEAT warhead with further improvements, plus automatic command line of sight (ACLOS) guidance, which is an improvement over the usual SACLOS. The gunner has thermal and day sights, plus a laser rangefinder. The commander has his own independent sight which appears to be a duplicate of the gunner’s.

The turret does not appear to be well armored. Since support fires appear to be a secondary tasking, the lack of protection and ease of knocking out the turret is probably not a major issue. I’m fine with this overall, for weight and cost reasons. The IFV’s weapons are much less critical than those of the MBT. For similar reasons, I’m more willing to accept an unmanned turret on an IFV, since any loss of effectiveness is to a secondary mission. Plus, it allows for more hull protection and a full load of dismounts.

The 100mm gun is gone from the T-15. It’s not really needed, as the T-15 has proper, modern ATGMs, and the extravagance is just going to take up turret room which is better spent on more 30mm.

The T-15 carries nine dismounts, plus a crew of three. I do not know enough about Russian tables of organization to know if this is a full squad, but it’s reasonable. It would hold about any current western squad I can think of. This is very good, and is a lot easier than trying to split squads across vehicles.

So what do we think of the T-15? I love it! No, really. Here’s a vehicle that’s on my side in an argument with Fishbreath, and it’s even Russian! They’re replacing their BMP-3s with something much more to my liking. Further, its capabilities aren’t really available anywhere else. We might be able to get close with some modifications to the Namer, but that’s a project for another time. Out of the factory, this is the only HIFV game in town. And I’m a huge fan of the concept, even if I might prefer some minor tweaks. I would prefer missiles with a top-attack profile, and possibly some alternative sensors depending on the particulars. But those are relatively minor points.

 

1.) Russian and Ukranian troops are doing this in the Donbas now too. BMPs are still deathtraps. They were deathtraps in Afghanistan, deathtraps in Grozny, and they’re deathtraps in the Donbass.
2.) Though the Russian Army is still a conscript one.

The K2 Black Panther: A South Korean MBT

Posted by

The Leopard 2 is a really solid tank. So far, it’s gone into a battle royale with the Leclerc, Challenger 2, and M1A2 Abrams, and come out the winner. It’s also bested the famous Merkava Mark IV. It also has tremendous export success. But, seeing as I love tanks, I can’t resist examining more in detail. Maybe today’s opponent will be able to unseat the reigning champ, the Leopard 2E.1

The K2 Black Panther is South Korea’s second indigenously produced tank. The first, the K1, is basically a licensed M1 Abrams variant. You’d be hard pressed to tell the K1A1 from an M1A1 at a distance. Interestingly, the K2 bears a strong resemblance to the Leclerc in terms of overall design. I don’t know if that’s happenstance, or deliberate reverse engineering, or if Hyundai had some quiet deals with GIAT.

The K2 weights about 55 tonnes, and has a conventional layout, with driver forward, a two-man turret in the middle, and an engine in the back. Like the Leclerc, the hull is relatively short, thanks to a compact engine. It’s a conventional diesel though, the 1,500 hp MTU 883 (or a locally made equivalent engine) rather than the hyperbar V8 on the Leclerc. Leclerc might get better acceleration, but the 883 is more fuel efficient and likely more reliable. Also cheaper. Everyone’s going diesel these days. The Russians are pretty much all-diesel, and the Leopard 2 has a diesel, and that’s our super-popular benchmark. I’m not sure whether the K2 or the Leclerc has better acceleration, but they can both probably get going faster than a Leopard 2E because of the superior power/weight ratio on the K2.

The K2 also uses an autoloader. It’s a bustle-mounted, conveyor-type autoloader, just like the one on the Leclerc. Interestingly, though the Leclerc’s autoloader holds 22 rounds, the one on the K2 only holds 16 rounds. This is comparable to the Leopard 2 (15 ready rounds) and the M1 (17 ready rounds), but notably lower. I’m not sure what the reasoning is here, or if there’s some issue with sources. There aren’t many that talk about the K2, and fewer still in English. It’s curious either way. Perhaps a retrofit later. 16 ready rounds is good, but we’d love to sacrifice some extra turret stowage compartments or something for 22 ready rounds. Plus, that would give an overall capacity of 46 rounds rather than 40 in the K2.

The K2’s gun is a 120mm L55, licensed from Rheinmetall. The best tank gun in the world. The Leclerc has a 120mm L52 model, which is good, but not quite as good. Same gun as the Leopard 2E. So this is a tie overall. However, the Koreans have developed a top-attack munition for their tanks, which follows a ballistic trajectory to attack the roof armor with a 120mm HEAT round. This is going to do awful things to even those tanks that have plenty of roof armor. I don’t know of a reason that the Leopard 2E couldn’t mount this, but it currently doesn’t. Both are able to mount the Israeli LAHAT gun-launched ATGM. When the South Koreans designed the K2, they were strongly considering the 140mm gun. While it was not selected, it can be installed without significant modification to the turret.

The K2 has a 7.62mm coaxial machine gun with 12,000 rounds of 7.62mm ammo stored and a roof-mounted 12.7mm HMG for the commander with 3,200 rounds stored. I do not know how many of these are ready rounds, though I suspect they use standard 200-round boxes for the HMG. The Leopard 2E has a 7.62mm coaxial machine gun and a second 7.62mm machine gun mounted on the roof. Interestingly, the Germans mount that by the loader’s hatch, not the commander’s. The Leopard 2 carries 4,750 rounds of 7.62mm to be split between both machine guns. Again, I don’t know the ready capacity of the coax gun. The K2 seems to be showing some American design influence in the quantity of machine gun ammo carried. I approve. Neither tank mounts these weapons in a remote weapons station, though this is changed in the Leopard 2A7 variant. Not a big deal though, it’s an easy enough thing to change for either.

Armorwise, the K2 is at a disadvantage by virtue of being newer, since I don’t have as much discussion on it. The 2E is a known commodity, with very thick frontal armor, substantial roof armor, and optional side armor kits for the turret and skirts. In terms of frontal armor, the 2E is very good against KE, being comparable to the M1A2 against KE threats and much better against HEAT. Neither is as well armored as the Challenger 2 on the turret face.

The K2 has more modern composite armor construction, and has a “stepped turret” with reduced-height turret faces, and then a higher middle portion to accommodate the gun’s desired depression angle. So we’d expect a thick and tough face. Looking at it and doing some back-of-the-envelope calculations tells us that it’s no worse than the Leopard 2E or M1A2, and likely better. It’s probably going to end up being comparable to the front armor of the Challenger 2, or possibly a trifle less good. It’s a very modern armor array, with not a lot of frontal area and plenty of thickness to work with. It’d be easy to play with lots of modern metallurgy and composites to get something really good here.

Side armor is rather less thick. It does include ERA, as does the roof over the crew compartment. The turret hatches also have ERA modules. I don’t know much about this ERA, but it indicates some likely good resistance to HEAT rounds or RPGs on the side. Improved side skirts and possibly additional turret side armor might be warranted in urban combat scenarios, but the Black Panther is well-suited to conventional warfare as-is.

The Black Panther also includes a ‘soft kill’ active protection system right from the factory. It has a radar-driven missile approach warning system, and can automatically fire visual/infrared screening smoke grenades in the direction of the threat. This will also make it easier and cheaper to add a ‘hard kill’ system, since we only need to add the effectors. No additional sensors are needed.

Both the K2 and the Leopard 2E have modern thermal sights for the crew. Fire control on the K2 is significantly better, with automatic target tracking capability and integration of the radar system. It can also hold fire momentarily if the gun is jostled by a large bump. The Leclerc has a similar system, but as far as I can tell, the Leopard 2E does not. The K2 has a battle management system, one is available for the Leopard 2E, but it’s not fitted standard.2 The K2 also has a datalink system for sharing targeting data, but the Leopard 2E does not.

Due to the rough mountainous terrain on the Korean Peninsula, the K2 has a hydropneumatic suspension system that is adjustable for ride height or to tilt the tank, like on a low rider. It’s cool and useful, since it deals with harsh terrain or lets you make best use of available cover, and no other current tank has it. That said, it’s overkill in the plains of Central and Eastern Europe.

So how does it shake out? Is the K2 better?

Yes. The K2 is a more advanced tank than the Leopard 2E, and crucially, it has more growth room. Remember, early versions of the Leopard 2 weighed 55 tonnes, and armor augmentations have driven that up, putting extra strain on the suspension and powertrain and reducing acceleration performance. The K2 is the best western tank on the market today.

And now, the other question you’re wondering: would we buy them? That depends strongly on price and politics. The K2 has a reputation as the most expensive tank in the world, but quoted figures aren’t awful. They’re actually quite competitive with those of the Abrams, which is a decent apples-to-apples comparison. The Leopard 2E includes native production licensing and spares. So we’ll see. As for politics, Germany is closer and a NATO member. But South Korea actually spends money on defense these days and doesn’t have ideas in its head for an EU army of stupid. So we shall see. But given the cost of the 2E package and the 2A7 offered to Saudi Arabia, the K2 looks like a good buy.

What about the T-14 Armata I reviewed last week? Now it gets interesting. Both are very new,  very advanced tanks for about the same price. Again, we’ll set aside politics for you to keep this technical, where you want it, lest the K2 score an easy win. Both tanks are very new. Neither tank has a ton of information available about it. The T-14 has better survivability from complete crew/ammo isolation. The K2 has the better electrics, with lots more features being confirmed, including the important battle management system and third gen infrared sights, and South Korea has a much better track record of good electronic systems. Both have excellent guns. The K2 can be easily upgraded to a 140mm if desired. The T-14 is rumored to be upgradeable to a 152mm gun, but no such gun exists yet3. The T-14 has a smaller engine, but the K2’s engine is more proven. Both should have plenty of room for future upgrades. The T-14 comes with a hard-kill active protection system, but we might be able to find a better one if we shop around.

In the end, the greater survivability of the T-14 outweighs any disadvantages from the unmanned turret and the Russian electronics. The better base platform is the one to choose, and that’s Armata. Electronics are easy to upgrade, engines and transmissions are easy to change out, and there’s a long tradition of export buyers putting French electronic systems in Russian vehicles, but ammunition stowage and crew safety is relatively permanent. So the Armata is our overall champion, with the K2 a close second best.

 

1.) I’m choosing the 2E because it’s a known commodity, and I actually have successful sale prices (to Spain, and it’s similar to the one sold to Greece). The 2A7 adds a lot of modifications for urban combat, which isn’t really my bag. Plus, it hasn’t been sold yet, and the prices on offer to the Saudis were really high, though support and spares is likely increasing it.
2.) It’s another thing included in the 2A7 upgrade kit. This is totally my bag.
3.) I would actually expect something in the 130-140mm range here, but that might just be projecting. I don’t know what supergun the Russians have under development.