What would you love to see on an Ultimax 2.0

last SG · 2011-03-23T21:43:45+00:00

Hope weight doesn't increase with bullpup. Actually no one has noticed how the SAR-21 looks like the QBZ-95. The QBZ is quite light though with a barrel only...

Underpaid SG

I think many of us here agree that, while good, our old SAF SAW can probably do with a bit of updating. The constant-recoll is a given, so that's fixed. Same with the 5.56, otherwise it won't be classed as a SAW/LMG but other than that, what would YOU love to see on our SAW?

My love list :)

1) P-rails to bring it to international standards.

2) 1.5x scope

3) a magwell for SAR mags

4) Plastic sliding trigger similar to the SAR. Helps stop people from "jerking" the trigger upwards with every shot.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Optional

1) Bullpuping the thing, so that the trigger is brought further forward. This can allow for the removel of the buttstock and the shaping of the rear of the SAW into a stock like structure, making the SAW even shorter. It's not like the butt-stock serves a functional purpose other than a cheekrest, if we can do without it, why not?

2) A higher capacity mag in the 50-75 round range. Got an idea for a J-mag with the SAR-21 catch, but if used straight, it might get side heavy, so sideloading where the J sits on the top of the SAW? Side benefit that it might be usable with the SAR, though the side heavy problem will remain.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My "please keep these" list:

1) The bayonett-just in case

2) The bipod

3) The front grip

These are still useful.

alize SG

M-4 style stock (debatable for those who like left-hand-on-top LMG stocks)

Better bipod (than mk1)

Machined metal instead of folded metal receiver construction

davechng SG

better magazine system! the U100 I use in NS is good in all ways but the magazine system Do not work! that 2 hole cheapy tool thing is really bad ! not the say the drum is any better .. IN our platoon live firing so much jamming that we end up using our mouth to shoot instead of the live rounds. I've seen articles about the new Mark 5 that can take beta mags ! that might help! but the U100 defeintly need a new change over for a better mag system .

the Bi pod seems very fragile!

a goodpicatinny rails for accesories!

I would mount a Elcan or ACOG on the system is I have one!

1/7 tiwist barrel

maybe higher Rate of fire! I think the M249 fires so much faster than our U100! but I guess this factor is debatable since we cannot belt fed the U100!

DaveC

alize SG

I want tumbling disintegrating hollow tipped flechette rounds with white phosphorus core.

alize SG

Woke up not good mood today.

touchstone_2000 SG

the Bi pod seems very fragile!

a goodpicatinny rails for accesories!

I would mount a Elcan or ACOG on the system is I have one!

1/7 tiwist barrel

maybe higher Rate of fire! I think the M249 fires so much faster than our U100! but I guess this factor is debatable since we cannot belt fed the U100!

DaveC

The magazines have been fixed. in mk IV model. Personally I would prefer better quality in manufacturing. Rust proofing, blueing etc. Ever see an Ultimax that is not brown somewhere?

alize SG

The magazines have been fixed. in mk IV model. Personally I would prefer better quality in manufacturing. Rust proofing, blueing etc. Ever see an Ultimax that is not brown somewhere?

My understanding from a specialist in Ordnance is the low weight is the price of using that folded sheet metal construction (with paint finish). This is the same chippy finish applied to SAR-80, SAR-88 and M-16S1.

Move towards machined parts and the weapon will approach M-249 weight. He doesn't know if the alloy used is lighter but more prone to corrosion.

Underpaid SG

Ok, so to date we have

1) M-4 stock.

2)Better/sturdier bipod

3) Better metallagy/rust proofing

The 1:7 twist has been fixed, the magwell has been suggested.

I rather not raise the ROF, any faster and it becomes uncontrollable. You tried M-16 on rock and roll? I totally couldn't keep it steady, and it was 600 rpm only, the knockback recoil was terrible.

And one of the major weight savings of the SAW wasn't the metal, it was the removal of the ammo-feed system that the -249 needed to feed in the belt. Without it, using mag springs only, it saved a lot of weight. But I do agree the metal could have been better. 4% chromium next time?

Anything else?

alize SG

Aforementioned rounds

Arisaka style bayonet for me to add emphasis to my cussing

Wooden stock to carve kill notches

Bipod- adjustable height so that gunners can prone as low as riflemen

Darkness_hacker99 SG

we need m249.... :(

mancha SG

How about a digital counter.

One glance and you can tell whether you have four, three, or two rounds left.

PedoBear SG

???

bayonets?

play too much call of duty issit?

Underpaid SG

Darkness, hell no, the 249 is totally unsuitable to our terrain, canting it past 60 degrees, like firing it up a stairwell causes the belt to tumble in the pouch and jams when the feed tries to load a twisted belt in. Not to mention almost 2x as heavy and with a kick like a mule. Our physical stature can't take too much of that.

Digital counter. Hard to make one that reads the amount of rounds left. Maybe if you assume you'll always load a full mag, that makes it easier to count, reset to max then count down, but I can't see how it can be made both small and able to read a half loaded mag.

Pedo, we really need that bayonett, the SAR is without one, take the SAW one away and we won't be able to do mine clearing/escape drills anymore. Unless it's the hard way. Not to mention at VERY close range, the one with a bladed close combat weapon has the advantage. The kind of situation likely in MOUT. Which is our defensive operating terrain. Remember, in WWI trench terrain the biggest killer wasn't a pistol or rifle, it was the shovel, so I can see how close combat physical weapons still have it's place.

alize SG

The belt feed system isn't substantial enough to make the difference between 4.8kg and the 7-8kg of a MG-4/M-249/K-4. The difference will mostly come into loaded weight. Maybe these weapons are for more mechanized users. For them, you might want to consider belt feed as it is more reliable than high cap mags.

The Ultimax is a very good midpoint between an AR-upsize and an MG-downsize (more like a heavier AR-18, with better cooling and changeable barrel). But our doctrine primarily employs 30 around mags, I wonder why they don't just issue an AR derivative.

I'm all for weight reduction, especially when it comes to MOUT. Maybe the 2.0 could be an AR-upsize for issue only to light infantry gunners. Make a 3.0 with belt feed and give it to the AI. Every kg counts towards spinal and ankle injuries too.

I suspect SAF will not be so much against the guns, as against producing a linked 5.56 variety.

HITMAN 2011 SG

the ultimax cant be modified anymore.suggest design n build another weapon....triple rotating barrel...light and small.

alize SG

the ultimax cant be modified anymore.suggest design n build another weapon....triple rotating barrel...light and small.

You carry it, Rambo.

Underpaid SG

I loled at that. He wants to lug a mini-gattling. Must be his company's CSM.... (Company Sado-Maso). :)

"But our doctrine primarily employs 30 around mags, I wonder why they don't just issue an AR derivative."

Because the H-BAR they tested in the 70s sucked big time.

Though I was also thinking along the lines of what you were thinking alise. The AI isn't too in need of new MGs though, they got the GPMG and the 40/50 to back them up, and if it gets worrying, there's always the 35mm and Mr 105mm. It's the poor pure infantry that's a bit short on stopping power. Backpack ammo-ed 7.62? Another design for another day, now is Ultimax.

davechng SG

for the Ultimax being in the LMG role !it still have to be able to do a sustain firing ! the current 30 rd ain't gonna cut it! tha drws down to the faulty 100 rd drum or the betaC mag! which has some jamming issues in the sandbox...I guess another reason the U100 was kick out of the US Marines LAR project! and last we heard the HK and LWRC got the contract!

SO sad ST did not do their part to get such exposure. we have a good system but no western armies uses it!

DaveC

alize SG

Because the H-BAR they tested in the 70s sucked big time.

My dad is one of the original AR-15 HBAR gunners. But that's 1967 tech. If a barrel is exposed instead of shrouded in handgrip, and bolt is heavier duty, it won't overheat. This is implemented in the RPK. SAF doesn't issue a high cap mag anyway.

In the XM-8, the long barrel is the same for LMG and designated marksman versions. This is a good way to add firepower to a section without adding more men. In practice, I'm not sure if barrel wear will matter.

Backpack 7.62? SAF tried this in the 60s. They had a tripod back then. One guy WORE it, he bent over, the gunner mounted the weapon on him (pun intended) and fired away. Imagine the hot cases falling on his tight temasek green blouse. Sian.

Underpaid SG

Didn't know about the backpack 7.62. Guess they really WERE testing everything.

Dave, the IAR project didn't use 100 round mags for any of the contenders, so how can you say it was that lack that disqualified the U100? Shouldn't ALL the entries be disqualified then?

As for the 30 rounds... well.. we can make do with rapid reloading, though the gunner will curse and swear. The ROF will be constant enough, not like it's totally a 10 second pause where you can go for a quick toilet break. Besides, I already mentioned the possible improved mag in the original post.