M240B

dihappy · Post by **dihappy** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 10:59 am

I wanted to share a funny pic my buddy sent me.

I think he said it was an M240B but i forgot.

You guys say a prayer for him if you get a chance.
He's in Kirkuk.

AEA · Post by **AEA** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 11:12 am

What caliber is that thing??????

I cannot make out the markings on the ammo can on the shelf.

txinvestigator · Post by **txinvestigator** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 11:20 am

AEA wrote:What caliber is that thing??????

I cannot make out the markings on the ammo can on the shelf.

7.62 NATO

AEA · Post by **AEA** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 11:43 am

Thanks TXI.....

Wondering now the difference in the rate of fire as opposed to the M60?
Looking at that thing I would think that it is much heavier than the M60, although I do see a carry handle on it (which may or may not also be a barrel handle for change out).

dihappy · Post by **dihappy** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 12:00 pm

I found that it weighs about 24lbs and costs $6700 :)

I think only a tad heavier than the M60.

As for ROF, i found this:

The rate of fire may be controlled by three different settings. The first setting allows the weapon to cycle at 750 round/min. The two remaining settings increase the rate of fire by 100 round/min per setting â€” second setting being 850 round/min and third setting, 950 round/min). These settings are changed by dismounting the barrel, removing the gas regulator collar and turning the gas regulator to allow more or less gas to move through the weapon system. It is generally performed before missions, as changing the setting is distracting at best under field or combat conditions.

Jungle Work · Post by **Jungle Work** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 12:02 pm

The M240 is the replacement of the M60
Its funny that the Military only took 30 years to realize that it was a better gun than the M60. The last M60 my team had, I left a thermite grenade on the feed tray when we were extracted and reported it as a combat loss.
This is before it got me or one of my men killed.

Jungle Work

AFJailor · Post by **AFJailor** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 2:31 pm

When I was going through tech school they orignally trained us on the m60 but then the air force decided for sure to switch to a m240 and man am i glad they went with the 240, the field strip is a LOT easier.

WarHawk-AVG · Post by **WarHawk-AVG** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 3:15 pm

Yah...its called the 240G (golf) well for the USMC anyway

7.62x51 NATO

I got slated to carry one while in the USMC..quite heavy but could handle anything you could do to it...its a Belgian design, actually i've heard that its modeled after that BAR (browning automatic rifle of WWII) but the action is flipped upside down...ultra ultra reliable!

M240 machine gun

txinvestigator · Post by **txinvestigator** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 3:26 pm

It is actually made by FN here in the states. It is a version of the FN MAG

AFJailor · Post by **AFJailor** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 3:59 pm

Unless im mistaken (too lazy to look it up) the M240G has a different buttstock/spring assembly but other than that its the same gun.

austin · Post by **austin** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 4:33 pm

My two fondest memories of the M60 are:

Sneaking up on an ambush site right at sunset and finding 100 guys lined up looking over logs for us, then opening up on them from 50 yards from behind with the 60. They jumped about 6 feet in the air and ran around in a panic in the huge blasts and flash coming from the 60.

The other - running through the woods to flank about 50 cadets and their green beret advisors who had ambushed my PLT, getting into position stacking them, then the M60 breaking in two pieces as I made my run across their position.

Leaf spring!!

The 60 weighs about 23 lbs vs 27 for the 240.

The weight of the 240 is not the issue. Its the ammo. I usually carried 200 rounds which is close to 70 pounds plus a belt of 30 rounds or so in the weapon. With that and the weapon, plus my other gear including M16, I had over 100 pounds on me.

Its not so bad when its cool, but try over 100 degrees humping up hill.

When the 240/60 talks, people listen!!

USMC-COL · Post by **USMC-COL** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 4:36 pm

The M240G started to replace the M-60 during the 90s. It is a much more reliable/durable weapon. The replacement should have happened earlier. I think I replaced the ones in my command during the mid to late nineties.

Nazrat · Post by **Nazrat** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 9:32 pm

We used the 240's as our coaxial gun on the LAV 25 during Operation Desert Storm. That MG is the second only to the M2 .50 in ease of use and effective operation IMO.

Nazrat (Sgt. USMC 1989-1995)

cyphur · Post by **cyphur** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 10:42 pm

The M240 finds it's home on two mounts on the Abrams tanks as well. One for the loader, and another as the gunner's secondary weapon. They are super easy to take care of, a lot of fun to shoot, and they are fairly accurate.

However, when mounted in an Abrams, you can quickly push one to almost melting, since nobody physically touches it. I've seen several times during Gunnery, where one will enter a state of uncontrolled fire(release the trigger - it keeps firing). Although, I always wondered if that was just as much to blame on the tank's firing interface to the weapon as anything else.