Новая винтовка армии США M7A1 признана избыточно тяжелой и дорогой

In November of 2025, in The M7A1: a rifle by committee, I reported on the rough time the military’s new M7A1 rifle was having when tested by troops. The prototype was more than battle rifle heavy, and included a two-pound optic that tried to do everything but write home to mother. It had a suppressor that rapidly overheated, a folding stock, and two separate (?!) charging handles. Why a new rifle? The Pentagon decided a new rifle with far greater range and striking power was necessary, despite the fact that the last war in which long-range marksmanship was regularly necessary was WWII. An excerpt from that article: Getting that kind of range and power required a hybrid cartridge with a brass case mated to a steel base/washer. So great is the chamber pressure—80,000+ psi—barrel life is dramatically reduced, and damage to the barrel was unavoidable. Worse, accuracy has been iffy. The cartridge comes in a reloadable all-brass case—the .277 Fury--but even that cartridge costs 4X more than a .5.56 round. The hybrid version costs a bit less than 10X more, and both are nearly impossible to find. Advertisement Graphic: US Army. Public Domain. The M7—depicted above—is a full-bore battle rifle, far heavier than the prior M14, which was eventually abandoned in part because of its excessive weight—9.4 pounds--and the weight of its ammunition, which limited how many cartridges soldiers could carry into battle. No soldier has ever wanted less ammo on the battlefield. I went into much greater detail on the M7’s problems at my home blog. Suffice it to say, the rifle was far heavier, far less troop-friendly, and its ammunition was 4X more expensive than the well-tested .5.56mm. Worse, the rifle had only a 20-round magazine, and the new 6.8 x 51mm caliber cartridge is so large and heavy it substantially reduces troops’ combat ammo loadout. The brass don’t often listen to the complaints of troops when military procurement is involved, but the outcry and obvious flaws of the M7 were apparently too obvious to ignore, resulting in the XM8: Graphic: US Army. Public Domain. It’s still a heavy battle rifle, just a slightly lighter and shorter battle rifle with the same “features:” Graphic: X Post The XM8 is said to have a softer recoil pad to help soak up the recoil of the same insanely powerful cartridge in a slightly lighter weapon, and the two separate cocking handles that were such a problem in the M7 appear to have been retained. The military, and Sig, the manufacturer, are engaging in shameless, cheerleading promotion of the XM8: "The XM8 carbine's improved balance, felt recoil, and ergonomics expand soldier maneuverability while delivering the same level of incredible lethality as the M7 rifle," said Tory Mazzola, vice president of global communications at Sig Sauer. The XM8 shares the same 6.8x51mm caliber and general action as the M7, so ballistic performance is comparable. The ergonomic and weight improvements appear to have driven the Army's preference shift. Yeah. Not so much. The rifle is supposedly 7.33 pounds empty without the suppressor, which weighs 1.31 pounds, which is 8.64 pounds without any optic, which is necessary because the design has no “iron” sights. Add the new 25-round magazine, and the XM8 is easily heavier than the M14, and that’s without any optic. The Vortex XM157 optic weighs two pounds. Add that, and the XM8 is easily a 12-pound rifle, far too heavy for all but our very strongest troops and an example of a rifle made by a committee. The XM8 has only a slightly over 10” barrel, due to the necessity of mounting a suppressor. The M7’s barrel was only 13 inches long for the same reason. Compare that to the M4’s 16-inch barrel. The shorter the barrel, the more bullet velocity one loses, which results in less long-range accuracy, though current cheerleading claims that the XM8 is more accurate than the M7, despite giving up around 200 FPM in velocity. And about that 25-round magazine: The XM8 ships with a 25-round magazine. Twenty-round mags from the M7 remain compatible. That directly addresses one of the louder complaints in Army Capt. Braden Trent's May 2025 assessment of the M7, which called the 20-round capacity a liability. As TFB covered when the Army type-classified the M7 and M250, both the Army and SIG disputed Trent's findings. Regardless of how you scored that debate, the XM8 has answered at least that piece of the critique. So, our military has opted for a far-too-heavy rifle with an incredibly expensive cartridge with such high pressure that it rapidly damages barrels, plus an optic that is far too heavy and doesn’t work as advertised. The Marines, as usual, do more with less. They're keeping their 5.56mm rifles. There might be a lesson in that. Become a subscriber and get our weekly Friday newsletter with unique content from our editors. These essays alone are worth the cost of the subscription. Mike McDaniel is a USAF veteran, classically trained musician, Japanese and European fencer, lifelong athlete, firearm instructor, retired police officer, and high school and college English teacher. He is a published author and blogger. His home blog is Stately McDaniel Manor.