- Reaction score
- 16,902
- Points
- 1,260
I see (and I forgot about this topic for a day)
The Mk48 does have parts compatibility with the Mk46 (about 40% IIRC) however in keeping the weight down they have made a gun that does not do well under Sustained Fire situations.
It will not mount in our (well Brit) SF kits (I admit this is a poor reason as they are prety much toast now anyway).
The Mk48 came out of a USSOC desire to have a lightweight 7.62mm - the Mk43 (M60E4 variant) and other shorty LW 7.62mm guns have been tried and this was FN's responce.
However while you can sit down and put out 12K from a C6 in one afternoon ;D The Mk48 will simply self destruct (like the C9 in those situations) The savings in weight is done at the expense of part robustness.
The Mk48 does have parts compatibility with the Mk46 (about 40% IIRC) however in keeping the weight down they have made a gun that does not do well under Sustained Fire situations.
It will not mount in our (well Brit) SF kits (I admit this is a poor reason as they are prety much toast now anyway).
The Mk48 came out of a USSOC desire to have a lightweight 7.62mm - the Mk43 (M60E4 variant) and other shorty LW 7.62mm guns have been tried and this was FN's responce.
However while you can sit down and put out 12K from a C6 in one afternoon ;D The Mk48 will simply self destruct (like the C9 in those situations) The savings in weight is done at the expense of part robustness.
