M240 Bravo: America Replaces the M60 

I never served and still have herniated discs so I think you got the better deal lolol

VA be like "not service related"

Angriest man on patrol, happiest in a firefight

@@brosefmalkovitch3121 I was a M249 and M240B gunner. My ankles, knees, and back are all jacked up seeing as how machine gunners typically carry more than their body weight. Then yep VA is like yeah we don't see how making you carry in excess of 150‐200+lbs all the time would hurt you like that... so my issues are not covered at all

I've always wondered how do you keep zero on optics when swapping between barrels? Or you just don't? Also how many rounds do the nylon pouches hold?

Oh it gets weirder, Browning + Fabrique Nationale = a big chunk of the World. 😄👍

St. John Moses Browning -- patron saint of machine gunners all over the world. Seriously, the man was a firearms genius, far ahead of his time.

And everyone else uses Kalashnikov.

Well they've moved away form the M4 now. I think the DGI operating system whilst being the most accurate and elegant design possible is now obsolete due to the military using silencers.

​@@andrewallason4530 most of them don't. The AKM clones you see outside Warsaw Pact states are usually chinese guns. Some of them in fact original ones.

Keeps crayons from melting to the barrel.

Joke's on you, we took them off immediately!

@@lamberts01 lol

@@lamberts01 Ahhhh, *there's* the Marines I know and love!

@@lamberts01 > we took them off immediately! And then used them as protective cases for your crayon boxes so the cardboard wouldn't get creased (which would only unnecessarily piss off your DI and result in easily avoidable extracurricular physical activity), I presume? *_;-)_*

Doesn't make it better but makes it more classy.

@@1982rrose classy is better.

+10 to the cool stats. It not a shown stats because if you have to ask then it’s not cool.

Technically it is not a M240B if it's got wood....

There’s something about wood furniture guns with rails. An AK-74 with wood furniture and a railed dust cover looks similarly cool.

5 jump chump leg 240 team leader here. 100% agree, when in doubt 240 out.

What?!? You don't miss CQ or pulling PMCS on your vics in January in freezing rain, Sarn't? Dehydrated Pork Patty MREs? No? How about idiot butterbar ROTC 2LTs who honestly believe they're smarter and better at running your team than you - you *must* miss that! :P

I saw a guy jumping with the 240 during training 20 years ago. Short guy, basically the shortest guy in the chalk. And fully assembled, just strapped to his side somehow. The thing was almost as long as he was tall. I was flabbergasted wondering how the hell he was gonna land safely with that monster strapped to him. Then we jumped and it was every man for himself lol

H-MINUS

I feel like a stiner would work much better for this

Came here to say this, unless we had our 240s vehicle mounted the tripods were always present.

The real ones know.

Yeaj

We tied a pack off to the end of a belt and it pulled the thing towards the tripod. Amazingly reliable feed system.

As much abuse as these guns get, it’s wild that it function flawlessly

I carried a C6 which is Canada's version of the mag it was a heavy bitch but I loved her all the same.

0331 all the way brother

@@rbrick3685 I've seen this gun described as "slightly less durable than a brick of adamantium"

@@SonicsniperV7 in my experience I could keep fire up sustainably on the C6(canadian FN MAG). On the C9(canadian FN MINI) it would start to jam up at around 75 rounds, I absolutely hated the C9.

Same with the loader's skate-mounted M240, although they so rarely gave us any rounds so it was easy to forget it even _took_ a belt...

@@superhakujin it's more useful as a spare coax anyway

1:00 Ian: "1977 ... as a vehicular mounted gun" ... me: as a 'coax' [coaxial] for the M60s and M-1 tanks, and M-1 loader's skate rail - not a 0:42 'cupola ... ' (that was a .50cal). Ian barely says the word 'coaxial' but cupola is wrong. The M-73 and M-219 (7.62mm, not .30cal) were mounted on the M48A5 and pre-1978 M-60 series tanks as a coax gun. The cupola M-85 .50cal was on the M60, M60A1, M60A2, M60A3 tanks - and the LVTP-7.

@@N_Wheeler The only one of that era of vehicular guns that was worth a damn was the M85, and then ONLY if it was turned upside down. Otherwise the thing would jam like a cheap printer. The M73 and M219 worked a little bit better if you poured cherry juice over the ammunition in the banana box.

240c is such a pain in the butt to mount and load in a Bradley.

There are multiple designs of gas plugs, for different uses. On armoured vehicles etc.

I was on an 240 team and can confirm, we cranked the gas regulators up to max as well. More is better. Especially when you have to carry the ammo.

Nah, low setting so you can feel each round in the shoulder 💪😅

There is 2 never ones, the C and the D, the C has options for scope/reddit and the D is the same but a little shorter and lighter, I do not know if every B is modified to C standard, I think the A or more "blank" was the first ones for the 6.5x55, those barrels was used for a long time but only as blank firing, until the 6.5 ammo was depleted in stock, and it only used 7.62x51. The S-Tank (strv 103) had 2 of these mounted coaxial with the tank I think they where at the left side remotely fired. We used it for anti aircraft on the high tripod, and of course on the roof on our trucks 4x4 and 6x6, even the smaller "jeeps" had a mount for it.

"guns sounds like a sewing machine" So he converted his FN mag into a Shilka XD

Ah, the ol' "give the little guy the machine gun" gag. A classic.

I mean, it is a problem. A .30 cal machine gun really doesn't need to be 25 pounds unloaded if you design it right.

@@hjorturerlend I was reading the comments in Ian's video about the Negev about the difference between the 7.62 NATO version and the FN MAG. The Israeli "Negevist" said that while everyone appreciated the lightness of the NEGEV-7...you had to take care of it in ways that one didn't with the FN MAG. That riveted sideplate receiver with its huge front and back trunnion blocks guaranteed it chugging along in a way that its modern stamped-sheet steel cousin just couldn't guarantee.

sorta the same with my M1 garand when i got it at 13.... i thought id NEVER be able to carry it 100s of yards out hunting . today... im 6 foot 5 and 200 pounds..... its a feather . but after using the M1 a lot.... gets close to the end of hunting season..... still got tags to fill i switch to the trusty old Ruger M77 MK2 in 308...... . and man!!! Picking up said Ruger is like.......when you think a cup is full of water.... but its empty.... so you life it WAY higher/faster than you need to like that

I was a dismounted 240B gunner in RC East in 2012-2013. I was mad jealous of the 101st guys that had the MK48 and the 240L’s. They had limas in their guard towers and I was humping a Bravo on missions 6 days a week lol.

Look who it is! I was telling my coworkers about your interview with a warfighter segments. They liked the story where the guy climbed on the tank and yelled "Here's a coconut for you monkeys". I love your channel.

@@themischeifguide Appreciate it brother!

It would be cool if you and Ian did a collaboration video one day

Why am I not surprised to see you here? Ian must be stoked to see your post.

As a former 240 gunner I am certain it also has a special place in the pain in your back lol

The 240B will make any enemy question how much they really want to be in a firefight. Monster of a weapon.

@@jasonmedcalf2707 Absolutely man. I can’t tell you how many times you would hear the 240 talking and it gave you a sense of relief to a degree.

Quite true. Having the mounting built in adds minimal weight and its nice to not need a specialty version for static positions or vehicle mounting.

Everyone hates to carry MG. It's an universal rule.

Lol machine gun team leaders have to carry the tripod And ammo No one on a machine gun team is happy Except the gunner And only during a firefight The ammo bearer probably smiles a little too

Better the MG than the radio with that antenna sticking up saying "SHOOT ME!".

@@XtreeM_FaiL incorrect, as a former gunner. The best job in the platoon is the gunner because all you have to carry is the gun. Everyone else has to carry all your shit.

@@XtreeM_FaiL Can confirm, even carrying our PKM from the SPG to lunch sucked lmao

Mine assured did but this was early 1990's. I used the 240B, 240C and the 240E1 as well as the old M60 (pig).

Yeah, the Army switched to a single gas setting gas regulator during GWOT… I think 2009 timeframe. Too many soldiers were turning it all the way to full adverse setting to get a higher rate of fire (me included). But not enough of those Soldiers were controlling their fire enough and too many barrels were getting destroyed. So big Army removed the option for everyone.

Your experience counts for plenty. 👍

@@pb7087 One of those "this is why we can't have nice things" moments, huh?

@@pb7087 that's the time I was in and I remembered the change over. We kept our adjustable regulators but we also kept then set on the slowest setting. Shooting faster sucks when you got to hump every bullet in.

this little fact just made my day

A few of my older friends were "on the jimpies" as they say, I love that the 249 is called a minimi

In Canada, it is usually referred to as "the Gimpy."😉 While carrying one of these beasts through the boonies is definitely an unpleasant chore, it's also a great thing to have on your side!😉

I love British Army nicknames for their guns. Recently learned that they called the Browing Hi Power the “ nine milley”.

"I am general using this machine gun with a fucking purpose"

Bro the human eye can't even see beyond 30fps, how are you supposed to see at that distance?

@@superdogmeatmeat those extra sights are only really useful when used in conjunction with the tripod. These guns in the SF role are capable of firing rounds indirectly out to at least 2.4km and directly up to 1.8km. Precision isn't that important with machine guns at those distances.

@@burnyburnoutze2nd Wouldn't they mount a scope at that range? I already struggle with irons at 300m

@@superdogmeatmeat Nope. Just the iron sights. In the SF role, you have a 2 person team and your firing points are pre determined by your gun commander and the bearing and elevation for your C2 sights (a seperate optic intended for indirect fire use, hence the coordinates) recorded. The idea being, when you are ordered to, you punch in the target coordinates into your C2 sight (which uses a seperately placed laser post as a reference point), and then you move the gun until the C2 sight meets the laser pointer and the bubble is leveled. This theoretically allows consistent repositioning on multiple pre recorded targets. You pretty much only use the iron sight to get the gun at the correct angle for the distance needed, i.e. you have valley between two hillsides at 1500m away, amd you'd set the sight accordingly before you lay the gun on target and record the bearing and elevation on your C2 sight. This works even at night. Remember, GPMGs are AREA weapons and aren't intended for sniper level precision on individual enemy troops at those distances.

1800 meters with M240 iron sights isn't quite as optimisitc as the 2000 meters adjustment on a Mosin 91/30

Yes. 👌

Benefit of a wood stock in this situation?

@@jon4715 It just looks cool

@@jon4715 Practical reasons? None. Style reasons. Plenty.

@@MrFlyinghellfish As good a reason as any.

Lol👍

Gracias para tu cerveza.

@@SquareHeadSlacker i too am grateful for beer man 🙏

@@eyeamstrongest signome, den katalavenno anglika.

Hated carrying and cleaning it. But accurate gpmg fire when needed is a battle winner

I served in the late 1980s and early to mid 1990s. Had a love-hate relationship with the Pig (M60). When in good condition and properly maintained, they were awesome, and easy to carry. When you got a clapped out old cow, they could tuen into a 23 lbs straight pull rifle, only not nearly as accurate as an 1895 Steyr Mannlicher. 🤣

I carried the Pig in the 1980’s. I loved that damn thing.

You had one in Iraq, I'm surprised they were still in service. What branch an/ or component were you in?

USCG appears to use it on the harbor boats we see in Puget Sound as well.

That "tripod mount" has been used for just about every possible configuration of mounted gun, including coax guns lol

Yup I was a navy gm and we even had dual mounts for these

I've actually seen some pictures of a kind of backpack ammo pack for these, with a sort of sleeve(?) leading from the backpack to the gun, feeding in a belt of rounds. I don't know if that was some kind of experimental thing, but i don't think such a thing was ever adopted

@@gohunt001-5 I've seen that too, the grunts came up with it (obviously), but the problem was that the ammo feed they chose (the "sort of sleeve thing" you mention) was originally from I think a helicopter's door gunner position and we simply weren't making enough of those to be able to field something using them to the regular infantry. Also, as expected, it's the Marines that came up with it. If you want to learn more about it, go look up "Iron man ammunition backpack". I'm personally more interested in what they could do with a 5.56 NATO version of that. Even if it was just combined with an M249 it would be a pretty sizeable force multiplier. But it might be possible to further develop the system. For example, combine it with an XM-214 Microgun (aka "minigun but 5.56 instead of 7.62"). and then add a laser to the gun so you can actually aim it while firing it from the hip, and you would have what's probably the ultimate in mobile suppressive fire. Now, I can already think of 2 things that might kill that idea, but I think I have some solutions to those problems. First problem: Recoil of firing that many rounds that quickly (even if it is "just" 5.56). There's a lot rounds going downrange, and Newton's laws are going to have something to say about that. Second problem: The overall weight of the system might render it incapable of being wielded by a single person unless they're built like Arnold Schwarzenegger (Apparently, in the Terminator 2 scene where he does wield a Minigun, it was incredibly hard for him to keep his footing, despite him "only" firing blanks for movie filming purposes, and IIRC they also reduced the rate of fire of the minigun to make it more apparent that it's a machine gun and not just a laser beam of death, which means that the true recoil force of the M-134 with live ammo must be far superior to what any "average" human could be expected to hold on target). However, I have at least partial solutions to those two problems, as I said above. Step 1, modify the XM-214 from a 6 barrel to a 3 barrel design (this reduces weight of the gun, as well as reducing rate of fire given that the barrel assembly still spins the same speed). Step 2, (if needed) further reduce the rate of fire by using a different motor and/or gearbox optimized to rotate the barrel assembly at a slower speed. This might also allow you to reduce the size of the battery pack needed to spin the barrel assembly as well. Now don't get me wrong, an XM-214 microgun modified in those two ways is still going to be both heavier and higher recoil than any other man-portable firearm currently fielded by the US military, but it does still offer a superior volume of fire compared to currently issued options. The weight problem is I think the hardest problem of those two to solve, but what if the above modifications don't solve the weight problem sufficiently? Well, the US military has been working on powered exoskeleton legs to help soldiers carry around even more weight, we could equip the soldier with that to help bear the load. If you want a nearer-term solution that is probably also more expensive, we could switch many of the parts of the XM-214 to high-strength Titanium alloys to reduce weight while retaining the required amount of material strength (obviously parts that slide against each other can't be made of titanium, but they can be made of titanium with steel inserts to take the wear, similarly to how a Glock pistol has a polymer frame but the slide moves against steel inserts that retain the slide). And if I can think of all this with under an hour's thought on the matter, think of what someone who's actually educated on the subjects involved could do (On top of my high school education and auto repair vocational training, I'm entirely self taught on most of these subjects, IDK how completely I understand the subjects involved, but I know that I don't understand them as well as someone who went to school for them).

@@44R0Ndin can’t believe I actually read all that lol good 👍 comment

@@44R0Ndin With lessons learned in the wars of the 21st century, the military is straying away from volume of fire doctrine for suppression. This is seen with the Marines replacing the M249 with the M27 and M38. They are all equipped with LPVOs or 4x optics as they see a high number of precise shots improving hit probability over high numbers of lead being slung downrange. Plus, I don't reckon the military would ever take a concept where the infantryman hip fires without cover seriously. Its still a fun idea tho.

@@KarsenKeith I can already see it showing up in the next Call of Duty or Battlefield game (if there's another Battlefield game after the disaster that was BF2042)

The gun I did my cadre on in 2008 was from the 60’s.

I carried the Jimpy in GW1 and had the tripod and C2 sight you're describing.

Late '50s.

Those prarrie dogs are dangerous 😁

This gun produces the sound of freedom at 650 rounds per minute. Thanks for your service Whiskey Greg (domestic service counts too)!

My pal had to carry one around bandit country like a rifle for six months. He came back from that tour looking swoll haha

@@1982rrose I mean, they do dig holes that can ruin a herd of cattle. Farmers used to pay us to come out with a .22 and shoot the prairie dogs. We called them Dakrats (dakota rats).

That's funny 😂

what about marine doctrine involves regular tripod use? im curiois

Ah, that pesky 2nd Amendment...

There is,....they call the stuff 'money'. Bring a lot of it if you want this gun!

If only my bank account would agree...

Abolish the NFA and GCA!

@@CurtHowland what do you mean?

We would never leave the bolt back on our aircraft. A little turbulence and it would jump the sear. Thing is meant to be racked when your ready to fire.

@@Spetsnazty you could kinda get away with that with the 240s because youre not exactly shoulder firing it. The SAWs were just used way too much, and we're the main culprits. I've seen it with 240s though.

Civilian here, I would’ve thought the 240L would be more popular since it’s lighter. Would you be willing to elaborate?

@@Michael_OBrian I did enjoy the weight reduction of the M240L, but there is just something about the feel of carrying a big gun around that could ruin someone's day

@@chadedick7911 Thanks!

After seeing an m240l,it just doesn't look right,it looks incomplete.

Literally lighter and same performance. You smoking diks

They switched in the late 2000s to the single setting. But the reason was because Soldiers were turning it to the full adverse setting with a clean gun to increase rate of fire. Too many barrels were burning up.

@@pb7087 the earliest signal setting I seen was late 06 but I’ve heard of that too many burnt barrels thing, but in all the units I was in till the switch over the old breed always stomped on the gunners if they were on the back lines and heard the brrrt. Iraq i remember always running on the middle position.

me too, I even remember the date of my MAG 1963

Never get into a fight with a US section at the end of a patrol because there is a gunner who has been carrying his M240 all day and is more than a bit ornery.

Damned fun to shoot! Even if carrying the SF kit was a bag drive...

Problems with simunitions/blanks?

@@martindinner3621 I never had any. Most of our guns were pretty well used, and they still worked a treat! A good gunner could make them semi-automatic just using trigger control.

@@martindinner3621 yeah, when they switched over from the fully adjustable regulators to the fixed three position regulators it was difficult to get the gun running consistently with blanks. I don't know if they've corrected the problem since I released, but it was basically a problem where you'd end up with lazy ejection or feed problems. If they've fixed it I assume they needed to modify the blank firing adaptors.

In WWI there were not metallic belts. A LMG with a partially spent canvas belt hanging on one side while moving? Bad idea. There are reasons why belt fed LMG weren't a thing still in WWII (and the GPMG concept took decades to impose itself after the war). A belt-fed LMG has MANY problems.

@@neutronalchemist3241 ?Mg42 Browning 1919 so on so fourth?

@@goobcity "There are reasons why belt fed LMG weren't a thing still in WWII (and the GPMG concept took decades to impose itself after the war). A belt-fed LMG has MANY problems." The MG42 was a GPMG. Used as a LMG, it used a 50 rounds belt in a can (the Guttromel). It took way less to change 3-4 magazines tha a single Guttromel. The Browning 1919 was not a LMG either. It was a MMG pretending to be one. It had even more problems with weight and fixed barrel.

Browning had been dead for a long time by then ,but FN probably did and was working on something .

@@neutronalchemist3241 that makes sense