Check out an interview with Chris Barrett on the 240LW development here: smallarmsreview.com/the-interview-chris-barrett-part-ii/ And Miles Vining’s article on the LWS variant here: sadefensejournal.com/barrett-240-lws/
@@MightyRedWolf i feel you brother. I mean for us machinegunners a lighter tripod would be much more comfort, but lets be honest, in a firefight, a hefty stury tripod is just the best to lay down some accurare suppressive fire.
@690409 just let's them send it! AB's and AT's were always thought to carry the brunt. Nah, AG's carry the most. 100x 7.62 weighs roughly 7 lbs, plus your tripod, plus your actual kit, spare barrels, and for my unit being a team lead. God lbs added fast.
It was sincerely a delightful surprise bumping into you at the petrol station last week! Many thanks for the wonderfully informative content and for being a huge voice in UK firearms history!
@@jonathanferguson1211 Hello again! Yes indeed (well remembered!), that would be superb please! Something on the gunmakers making "London Best Guns" and the pinnacle of craftsmanship, artistry, and innovation prior to the First World War (when, sadly, most of the gunmakers and engravers were lost to The Great War and the quality of materials available post 1918 declined), would indeed be most greatly appreciated! Some of the London gunmakers made a handful of revolvers in the smokeless era too, I believe Purdey & Holland both made some very rare pieces, but I’ve found it very difficult to find much in the way of information on the subject. Many thanks again and warmest regards Ben
The milling reminds a lot of the isogrid used in space applications. It's used because it has an incredible strength and stiffness for the weight, far more than something like a honeycomb structure. Whilst it's obviously far less rigid with the very shallow design used here, it's likely still a great weight vs performance given the depth limits imposed on practical military firearms use. The drawback is the extreme expense which limits it to space applications - likely substantially lower in this design but I'd be shocked if it's not still a very expensive process.
@@papercartridges6705Do you think that 4 inches of barrel makes a difference? I'm not convinced the M4 stock would survive extended combat service either.
@@zoiders honestly, another 6 inches off the length wouldve been awesome in Afghan, the Bravo is just too long to shoulder comfortably without choking up on the gun, and blocking the ejection port
I'm surprised no arms manufacturer ever machined an isogrid into their receivers. It's a technique from the aerospace industry where a tiling of equilateral triangles is machined away except for small ridges in between the triangles. Greatly reduces weight without much loss of strength and rigidity.
As one of the larger blokes in the platoon I'm often carrying the Gimpy, a lighter one would be lovely, but probably not gonna happen within my service lifetime.
The M240L was my favorite weapon the best rate of fire accuracy was amazing with the perfect beating zone she was heavy still but was the perfect weight Rakkasan
The PKM is still better. It also proves theres no need for GPMGs to be so heavy. Im hoping to see NATO armies get lots of 6.8 and .338 calibre lightweight machine guns with recoil management systems built in. The sigs are a start
@@urdnotdank2642 is seem to remember the poles made an MG that was a mix between the 240 and the PKM in 7.62 NATO and with rails. Id love to give it a go.
I want to see Jonathan at Finnish Brutality. I'd say Desert Brutality too, but I feel his temperate Scottish genes might explode in the southwest heat.
Love this weapon it looks so good, the machining must have substantially upped the price but it looks so professional. With the increased price in the UK’s case I couldn’t see it being purchased for anyone other than Special Forces though. With more use of titanium and a little more machining they could have reduced the weight a little more possibly but that would have pushed the cost higher still for a minimal weight loss so I can see why they didn’t do it. Great video just wish here in the UK we could have access to firearms even if just at ranges.
I believe the British Army was also in on the overall project (not the Barrett one) for titanium receivers, not certain but don't think they do that, or declare it in any way when they work on SF projects
My uncle had both in his collection And got to shoot both at CFB border while I was a army cadet with the Queens Own Rifles It took me a week to stop thinking and smiling You have one of the most assume jobs in the world So jealous Thank you for sharing God bless Just saying
I don't know, if the museum even has it, but I always been interested in why the M85 machine gun was such a failure, although I've read that it was due to unreliability. it was originally developed as a smaller and lighter alternative to the M2 Browning for use in tanks, while still using the same ammunition. according to Wikipedia the UK at least tested it. nevertheless it's kind of funny that the venerable M2 has survived to this day, while its replacement didn't and tanks went back to using M2s very much like in the Second World War.
There are some pretty good interviews with either some engineers of the time or maybe guys from the trials/adoption process... I wish I could remember where I watched that... They basically laughed about how it was designed and how awful it was because of certain issues that continued to be worked around instead of redesigned... Or maybe it was the designers complaining about the manufacturing changes for cost/ease of production? 🤔 It's been a few years since I watched it, but it was very enlightening on why it was so bad... I believe Ian at ForgottenWeapons also has either a specific video on it or covered some of the issues in another .50 cal video. But I too would like a Jonathan review/background of the system... I could watch the same weapon reviewed by both Ian and Jonathan without ever getting bored or losing interest 😉👍 Maybe just try searching it on youtube and you'll find the video I'm referring to, Although if I remember correctly they covered a few different designs during that video, I wish my memory was better so I could be more helpful! 😒
Well, that’s a sexy beast, I must say! Got to try out the Swedish version of the FN Mag, the KSP58, during my conscripted military service back in the 80’s. Was a fun gun to shot and especially fun at one particular exercise where we as the enemy (lede fi) did a mounted assault from a beach landing. I operate the KSP58 from the top of the vehicle (4x all terrain) to mimic a BMP. I think I used up a couple of hundred blank cartridges that day. Great fun until the evening when you had to clean it in the field!😂
USMC is going down a very different path. Everyone in the squad with the same rifle, magazine fed. Down to the same barrel size, some magazine, same sight, bipod and grip. Everyone on the same piece of equipment. It's got some interesting implications. At least if I remember the document in question.
Handguard??!! We never seemed to need one of those! Bipod fitting looks very much like the later Parker Hale type that was sort of styled after a BREN and was used on early L96A1 sniper rifles.
Don't know about the receiver specifically, but the FN 240L weighs just about the same as this one. They're within 1 pound of each other depending upon barrel and buttstock configurations.
The FN Mk48 filled the role the "lightweight" 240's were meant for. The titanium 240's had a ridiculous price tag, IIRC, they were close to 90,000€ each.
I feel like the Maximi would also be a bit more ergonomic than this M240LW, and cheaper to make in large quantities than both of the 240s, being largely stamped. _PS_ If this 90 grand figure is true, that's utterly ridiculous. Given that Barret considered the competition rigged, I would strongly suspect large kickbacks going the way of the US procurement officials.
@@F1ghteR41 apparently the welded titanium Barrett's were around $90k, the FN US Army contract 240L's are about $50,000 USD, while a 2023 baseline 240B is only $6,600 USD. A Mk48 is around $13-15k USD, is 3.5 lbs lighter depending on BBL length, and has a 70% parts commonality with the M249 and Mk46. Logistically, I'd take six Mk48's over one M240L any day. But the M240L is considered crew served (2 guys) and is meant for fixed positions, while the Mk48 is man portable with a single operator. Even then, the M240L does seems a bit pricey vs both a 240B and a Mk48.
@@2805662 the Aussie Maximi version is sweet , it reminds me of the L2A1 SLR. Perhaps a Mk48 in titanium would do the trick? However, if money isn't a factor, the SIG M5 in 6.5x51mm hp stainless cased, is lighter than a SAW, and hits farther and harder than 7.62 NATO. Hopefully there'll be a video about that soon.
11:07 he says fluting on the barrel will help with cooling. I understand this conceptually but has anyone got numbers or a test report on how much it actually changes?
I think this is probably better. While the milling seems bit more expensive, titanium is that much more expensive. So overall I think this is probably superior.
NGSW is not a replacement for M240. It is a notional replacement of M249 for the close combat force. M240 will be soldiering on for some time as there is currently nothing that can replace it credibly. Also the USMC as adopted the M240L and they are currently fielded. The former PM for the program is a friend.
Thanks for covering the history of the M240LW and its design, I was hearing about this gun for a long time, but not in such detail. 0:19 Given that the gun has a KeyMod, and Barret started advertising it about 2007, I would say that there's a typo in the card here. 1:52 Is it though? Titanium is both expensive in its own right and hard to work with, and by going to stamped steel construction one can get a better weight reduction. Barret's approach here makes sense if production volume is expected to be low, but this seemingly was not the case for the FN. But ultimately this story once again shows that you can't design to win a rigged competition. 4:06 Still, about the weight of the Darne machinegun from the 1920s or '30s. Given that a MAG is basically a belt-fed BAR, these would be contemporary designs in their origins. So much for eighty years of evolution. And it still pales in comparison to the more modern designs like the PKM (not to mention the FN Maximi and the likes), which are significantly lighter still. 4:38 There is research showing that even with modern technology there are limitations to the reduction of the barrel length, but arguably machineguns firing from the open bolt are the last to see these detriments play any significant role. 7:47 What would be the benefits of pivoting it forwards? 9:36 I'm not sure how one should grip it for better control. Also, it seems to lack a folding shoulder rest, another useful feature for a machinegun. 10:15 I find it quite amusing that some manufacturers like HK keep pushing it, despite the results of the US comparative trials of a few years past, which clearly favoured M-Lock. 12:08 By the way, could anyone enlighten me on how the M60 bipod was considered by its users? As I recall, that gun had a lot of ergonomic detriments. 14:50 That's in no small part why I'm watching this series: you manage to find interesting pieces from any and all periods and help broaden my worldview on gun design & evolution, so to speak.
0:19 Yes, unfortunately there was a misunderstanding there. This gun was completed in 2019! I've asked for a correction. 7:47 Patent WO2017027072A1 covers this (page 31 and fig. 42 - I'll ask the team to put the link in the description but you can find it with that number).
@@jonathanferguson1211 Thanks a lot for providing a patent number, it's easily searchable, and page & illustration numbers are a great help too (besides, 42 is an answer in and of itself😉)!
The second I heard "Titanium" I knew it was going to be an expensive gun. Titanium itself is expensive and working with it is a pain in the ass, I've never welded it and I never want to.
Someone in the comments here claims that M240L is worth about 90,000€, which is utterly ridiculous if true. Given that Barret considered the competition rigged, I would strongly suspect large kickbacks going the way of the US procurement officials.
@@F1ghteR41 I doubt its 90,000 considering the original M240 was closer to 7k, I can't find a source for that 90,000 figure, there was a deal with FN to procure a number of the M240L variant for 50 million but they don't specify how many.
@@WarlordEnthusiast Well, the original M240 wasn't made out of Ti, which, as you rightly mention, is both expensive on its own and hard to work with. There ought to be a significant price increase due to that alone, the question is just how big.
@@F1ghteR41 It would be more expensive but I highly doubt 10 times more expensive especially if they're being made in large batches. I would take their comment with a grain of salt.
I've never welded titanium, but I know a guy who has on the regular and he says it's a pain too. Not so much the actual welding, but it's very environment sensitive. One little leak in the chamber and (according to him) it's porosity city. That said, with additive manufacturing _today_ I suspect you could bring the price right down. Easier to 3D print titanium than to weld or machine it.
As a GPMG gunner in the late 80's. Apart from tabbing, there wouldn't have been a great difference with a few pounds reduction in weight when it came to fire and manoeuvre with it.
This gun is basically the same weight as an M60E6 with the longer barrel option. The UKM-2000 is lighter. Unless you're looking to match to existing training on the FN MAG or want some parts commonality with it, you're probably not going to gain enough in longevity/performance to make this a better buy.
There's yet another way here: you can go for the FN Maximi, which is also quite light, and is claimed to have about 70% part compatibility with the Minimis you already have, and the same goes for training. UKM-2000 is also suboptimal due to it using the MG.42-derived feed system, which adds receiver length and thus weight. Negev NG-7 is lighter and might be compatible with mounting solutions that are of greater interest to the US military.
I love the B and then the L. Plenty of lube and it will keep running. The only 2 things I didn't like. The B is a heavy SOB. The inability to shoulder fire like the M60.
Damn 6 and a half pounds I bought a British army jungle knife (the big chungus thicc survival knife) today and thats a good few pounds.(for a knife its unreal heavy, makes the Glock FM78 and the Ka-Bar feel like toys) To think they could take away 2-3 big chonk knives worth of solid steel from a gun is insane
MAG was designed to be basically a belt-fed version of the FN Model D (a demand which was, as far as I know, already expressed in the '30s), itself a modification of the BAR of 1918 vintage, so it's no surprise that it came out to be very bulky and heavy. It's better to think of it as a sort of an M1919 than a gun that came out 15 years after MG42, despite it using the latter's feed system.
Between thr FN Mag, the m240B , the M240L, the M240LW, the minimi, then the MAXimi. It feels like there are 7 different paths of the MAG being made lighter then heavier again. Reminds me of the MG08 and its ilk
It's an FN MAG derivative. You'd end up with a whole different gun trying to use thinner stampings for the receiver. To oversimplify the parent design in a bunch of plates riveted together. It makes for a long lasting gun that can be repaired extensively at the price of being a chunky boy.
Because it's marketed as a MAG upgrade, and MAG itself was basically a belt-fed version of the FN Model D, itself a modification of the BAR. So in its core it's a 1917 design made (aside from the barrel) with 1930s manufacturing standards at the latest, basically outdated before it came out in the fifties and now reworked with modern technologies to compete with the guns that weren't like a century old.
@@F1ghteR41You are obsessed with one obsolescent machine gun because you are a creepy white supremacist with a Nazi fetish. Meanwhile back in reality everyone who fights actual wars buys the MAG58. 14:30
Some UK dealers can basically deal in anything, various reasons for this, I knew one 30 years ago who had the required permits so that when private vessels (usually yachts) came into UK waters he could store their weapons for them until they left UK waters, one large yacht arrived with multiple SMG's on board normally carried by the owners bodyguards
@@louissanderson719 yeah seen that, they have bren guns and rifles too I think Link if anyone is interested ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-agMgt_boi8o.htmlsi=9jE1iVuYz0vTdC-d
That feeling when you realize an old Soviet gun of wood and steel matched the US Army's low-weight requirements since the 1960s (PKM comes in under 10kg), while FN and Barret have to charge countless thousands of dollars using ludicrously expensive advanced materials and machining technology to make an MAG do the same. 😄
You do know the MAG, as originally conceived and fielded, was also a cheap gun for use by massive conscript armies? PKM has a long service record affirming it is plenty reliable, durable, and effective in the hands of conscripts and professionals alike. The only difference is that PKM started at under 10kg because it didn't need to be heavier, while MAG has a mechanism that is quite dense and doesn't lend itself well to weight-reduction without expensive tricks. Which brings me back to the irony that a Soviet gun of the 1960s pretty much does everything the US Army wants and is spending a fortune to achieve with the MAG. That said, I am not saying the MAG is a bad gun or the PKM is the perfect gun. They are both good weapons. If anything, I am mostly amused by the US Army never seeming to have a solution to problems that doesn't involve throwing a LOT of money at it. @@aaronleverton4221
@@genericpersonx333 The US actually considered adopting the PKT in the mid-70s (not only as an armour machinegun but also as a GPMG), given the redesign for push-through feed of 7.62×51 from the M13 links and some minor changes to better fit US manufacturing and maintainance practices. Given the time period, there simply weren't funds available for it, and an off-the-shelf solution was adopted in the form of the M240. The same happened to the SAW programme at the same time, when promisng American designs were ultimately canned in favour of the Belgian gun that was more or less readily available - to much cursing of its future users.
@@jonathanferguson1211 ahh I must have missed the gun you were talking about, when you said cutaway, I thought you meant like the gag. and the star thing wsas cause I was thinking of the SMLE when I wrote it. Also, have you done a video on ArmA 3 guns?
Why does this arouse me 😅….I think I was dropped multiple times on my head as a baby and ate to many leaded paint chips as a kid watching the original GI-Joe and looney toons series
Great video, as always just one thing where in the UK give out the silly American weights if you want please give it in kilograms for everybody else who has no idea what that weight means in pounds as we do use kilograms in the UK
Umm I think you will find we also have the option of using pounds weight in the uk, not that it will help as British the pound weight is different to the US pound……….
While I am entirely with you on the subject of not using imperial as its a bit backwards and not something taught in British schools in Jonathan's defence I will mention that when it comes to the soldiers burden when on a forced march known as a combat fitness tests the army have always used pounds. They may have updated it by now of course but a lot of the infantry training manual predates 73 when we went metric. Soldiering doesn't change much. Beasts of burden.
@@zoiders I stand corrected on that point but still reserve the right to us Lbs or Kg as I see fit😉( Lbs is a measure of weight whereas Kg is a measure of mass)😊
Jesus Hellion Christ, still, carrying a 21lb light mg arounda battle field would create a monster, this person would no longer be a man….that requires many 5 meals a day
I'm only going to say one thing Go to the range and shoot it Assume But that being said Right after you do go and shoot the Stoner LMG You will never forget the difference And I would challenge you to get the smile off of your face ❤👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻🇨🇦😁 Just saying
