View Full Version : General Purpose Machine Gun.
October 30, 2011, 12:40 PM
How does the M60 rate against the FN MAG.
My opinion the FN MAG is a far superior weapon.
October 30, 2011, 01:51 PM
Well, having been a MAAGist in the IDF, I can tell you the Mag58 is reliable and fun to shoot, but heavy. I have seen lots of pics of M60 gunners firing from the shoulder, not any easy thing to do with the Mag. I think I would still take the Mag.
October 30, 2011, 02:21 PM
I have used the FN MAG but not the m60. I think the FN MAG is arround 2 kg heaver.
The barrel change on the m60 was a problem.
October 31, 2011, 12:12 AM
I used (and repaired) the M60 in the mid 70s. The only personal experience I had with the Mag 58 was as the M240 coax machine gun, just coming into service as I was leaving.
The M240 is a better gun.
October 31, 2011, 04:57 AM
...But, the M-60 was noticeably lighter (and I think, shorter), which made it a good infantry gun. It had good ergonomics, but was not "soldier proof", and had various quirks. As a patrol gun, I think I'd rather have "the pig", but the MAG is generally recognized as the more reliable design.
October 31, 2011, 11:27 AM
I've used both and in my experience, the MAG is much more reliable. It also is now made in a 'light' version which has titainum parts to lighten it. They shorten the life of the weapon but are loved by the men humping up and down mountains in the 'stan. I have gone to the factory where both versions are made several times (it's in Columbia, SC) as part of a military advisory team and the manufacturing is top notch.
The ones I've seen have problems in the field are either broken or have the gas set on the wrong setting. If these guns are properly maintained, they are simply awesome.
The M60 is a great weapon and I'd feel very comfortable going to war with it (as some National Guard units still do) but I'll take the MAG any day.
October 31, 2011, 02:11 PM
The barrel change on the -60 was fairly simple, but awkward. The bipod is attached to the barrel, along with the piston cylinder, resulting in a heavier unit. There is also no handle, so handling a hot barrel was problematic (an asbestos glove was provided for the purpose).
The actual barrel change was facilitated by a simple lever, which worked well, but if the gun was on the bipod, the gunner had to cradle the gun while the a-gunner did the change.
The barrel itself was heavy enough and chrome-lined, so it held up pretty well, but I was never in a situation that required sustained fire.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.