Which is a better LMG?

Firepower! · March 3, 2010, 08:33 AM

Among the following three which LMG do you like better and why?

FN MINIMI 5.56 Nato
HK MG42 7.62 Nato
PK 7.62x54R

Thanks

Skans · March 3, 2010, 08:42 AM

FN Minimi. Better design. Modern weapon. Lighter weight. One man can operate it and carry the ammo. Becaue it's 5.56, you can carry more ammo.

Although I see no purpose for the 5.56 round in semi-auto AR rifles, outside of shooting wild dogs and rabbits, it has a lot of utility in full-autos because of capacity. I.e. I'd rather face and enemy with a less powerful machinegun and more ammo than a more powerful machinegun and significantly less ammo.

M4Sherman · March 3, 2010, 01:30 PM

the 249 has some jamming issues but it is the lightest of the three.

the MG-3 (.308 MG-42) is a great gun but it is heavy and has a very high R.O.F

The PKM is a big bulky fun gun with a decent R.O.F and very cheap ammo.

If you have to carry it the 249. if it is a stationary fun-gun the PKM (cheap ammo).but if you have money to burn the MG-3

Shahzeb · March 5, 2010, 04:48 AM

I think the M249

w_houle · March 5, 2010, 10:19 AM

Why not consider an M240B?

johnwilliamson062 · March 5, 2010, 02:43 PM

Uncle Firepower,
You have been adopted. When can I come and visit you?
-John

Ridge_Runner_5 · March 5, 2010, 03:11 PM

M60E3

m.p.driver · March 5, 2010, 04:58 PM

M60 got a bad rap from mostly those who have never shot one.I've put maybe 200,000 rounds through them and if you keep them clean and oiled they run like a champ.Why not a Bren too?Mag fed but that old dog is still soldiering on.

The Canuck · March 5, 2010, 06:43 PM

... only the M249 is an LMG.

Which I have only seen have a stoppage once, but boy was it a doozy to fix.

The other two are GPMGs.

**JohnKSa** · March 5, 2010, 10:05 PM

Do any of the others besides the M249 have contingency feeding methods? I always thought it was very clever of the designers to allow the M249 to feed from a standard M-16/AR-15 magazine in addition to the normal belt feed. Seems like it's a very useful feature.

Crosshair · March 5, 2010, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Do any of the others besides the M249 have contingency feeding methods? I always thought it was very clever of the designers to allow the M249 to feed from a standard M-16/AR-15 magazine in addition to the normal belt feed. Seems like it's a very useful feature.

My cousin, and others that I have read, say that the mag feed is more of a gimmick than anything practical. It's never used outside of training because the gun is unreliable feeding from AR mags, mag can't feed rounds fast enough, and they often tear up the mags.

**JohnKSa** · March 5, 2010, 10:23 PM

I knew it tore up the mags, my understanding was that was more or less an unavoidable consequence of resorting to the contingency.

I hadn't heard that there were issues with feeding from the mags. That's very interesting--thanks for the information.

David Hineline · March 6, 2010, 01:18 AM

Of the ones you listed I would take the PKM.

I love the M60 and if looking at a transferable that is the one to go with.

I have a UK59 and it makes me wonder why anyone would want to carry a pig.

Crosshair · March 6, 2010, 08:55 PM

Quote:

I hadn't heard that there were issues with feeding from the mags. That's very interesting--thanks for the information.

Yup, because the gun doesn't have to pull a belt when feeding from a mag, the cyclic rate increases significantly.

AR-15s often have the same problem when running with a suppressor. More back pressure, higher cyclic rate, mag can't keep up.

kaylorinhi · March 6, 2010, 09:02 PM

I carried a SAW for a longtime, you will have problems if the mags are less than top shelf, old or loaded to thirty rnds, stick to 25-28. I really loved the option of shooting from a mag, after all "If you die we are splitting up your gear" works well when you are out of drums. I believe we should drop the rate of fire to a more weight friendly 500-600 rpm but I am not a 'smith so that is the smart kids in Aberdeen's area.

**JohnKSa** · March 6, 2010, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Yup, because the gun doesn't have to pull a belt when feeding from a mag, the cyclic rate increases significantly.

Sounds like they need a third gas setting to slow the cyclic rate when using the mags.

kaylorinhi · March 6, 2010, 09:11 PM

Amen, to a third gas setting! I would and hopefully will get one as my second NFA gun, 1st being the original Squad Automatic Weapon!

Crosshair · March 6, 2010, 10:33 PM

Quote:

I would and hopefully will get one as my second NFA gun, 1st being the original Squad Automatic Weapon!

Cool, I always loved the Lewis gun.

Firepower! · March 16, 2010, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Uncle Firepower,
You have been adopted. When can I come and visit you?
-John

anytime.

The reason for lisiting the three is obvious...availability.

FN Minimi is harder to find here and more expensive. I do like its magazine option, because that makes it easier where the paperwork is concerned.

PK is just awesome with raw 54r power and cheap ammo. I believe its also low maintenance.

MG is also a good option for me because the x51 ammo is made locally, thus cheap. Since this is made under HK license in Pakistan, it is cheapest in cost.

March 3, 2010, 08:33 AM	#1
Firepower! Senior Member Join Date: February 3, 2008 Posts: 2,109	Which is a better LMG? Among the following three which LMG do you like better and why? FN MINIMI 5.56 Nato HK MG42 7.62 Nato PK 7.62x54R Thanks

March 5, 2010, 10:19 AM	#5
w_houle Senior Member Join Date: March 29, 2007 Location: Raleigh, NC Posts: 1,391	Why not consider an M240B? __________________ How could you have a slogan like "freedom is slavery" when the concept of freedom has been abolished?

March 5, 2010, 06:43 PM	#9
The Canuck Senior Member Join Date: August 13, 2006 Location: Calgary Alberta, Canada Posts: 307	... only the M249 is an LMG. Which I have only seen have a stoppage once, but boy was it a doozy to fix. The other two are GPMGs. __________________ "If you put one in the snot locker, it doesn't matter what calibre it is".

March 5, 2010, 10:05 PM	#10
JohnKSa Staff Join Date: February 12, 2001 Location: DFW Area Posts: 24,972	Do any of the others besides the M249 have contingency feeding methods? I always thought it was very clever of the designers to allow the M249 to feed from a standard M-16/AR-15 magazine in addition to the normal belt feed. Seems like it's a very useful feature. __________________ Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?

March 5, 2010, 10:23 PM	#12
JohnKSa Staff Join Date: February 12, 2001 Location: DFW Area Posts: 24,972	I knew it tore up the mags, my understanding was that was more or less an unavoidable consequence of resorting to the contingency. I hadn't heard that there were issues with feeding from the mags. That's very interesting--thanks for the information. __________________ Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?

March 3, 2010, 08:42 AM	#2
Skans Senior Member Join Date: November 20, 2008 Posts: 11,132	FN Minimi. Better design. Modern weapon. Lighter weight. One man can operate it and carry the ammo. Becaue it's 5.56, you can carry more ammo. Although I see no purpose for the 5.56 round in semi-auto AR rifles, outside of shooting wild dogs and rabbits, it has a lot of utility in full-autos because of capacity. I.e. I'd rather face and enemy with a less powerful machinegun and more ammo than a more powerful machinegun and significantly less ammo.

March 3, 2010, 01:30 PM	#3
M4Sherman Senior Member Join Date: February 15, 2009 Posts: 408	the 249 has some jamming issues but it is the lightest of the three. the MG-3 (.308 MG-42) is a great gun but it is heavy and has a very high R.O.F The PKM is a big bulky fun gun with a decent R.O.F and very cheap ammo. If you have to carry it the 249. if it is a stationary fun-gun the PKM (cheap ammo).but if you have money to burn the MG-3

March 5, 2010, 04:48 AM	#4
Shahzeb Junior Member Join Date: March 5, 2010 Location: Lahore, Pakistan Posts: 1	I think the M249

March 5, 2010, 02:43 PM	#6
johnwilliamson062 Junior member Join Date: May 16, 2008 Posts: 9,995	Uncle Firepower, You have been adopted. When can I come and visit you? -John

March 5, 2010, 03:11 PM	#7
Ridge_Runner_5 Senior Member Join Date: February 8, 2008 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 1,925	M60E3

March 5, 2010, 04:58 PM	#8
m.p.driver Senior Member Join Date: January 25, 2009 Location: Ohio Posts: 552	M60 got a bad rap from mostly those who have never shot one.I've put maybe 200,000 rounds through them and if you keep them clean and oiled they run like a champ.Why not a Bren too?Mag fed but that old dog is still soldiering on.

March 6, 2010, 01:18 AM	#13
David Hineline Senior Member Join Date: December 23, 1999 Location: South Sioux City, Nebraska Posts: 704	Of the ones you listed I would take the PKM. I love the M60 and if looking at a transferable that is the one to go with. I have a UK59 and it makes me wonder why anyone would want to carry a pig.

March 6, 2010, 09:02 PM	#15
kaylorinhi Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2010 Location: The brown eye of america Posts: 463	Belt and Mag I carried a SAW for a longtime, you will have problems if the mags are less than top shelf, old or loaded to thirty rnds, stick to 25-28. I really loved the option of shooting from a mag, after all "If you die we are splitting up your gear" works well when you are out of drums. I believe we should drop the rate of fire to a more weight friendly 500-600 rpm but I am not a 'smith so that is the smart kids in Aberdeen's area. __________________ Buy your guns by Yardline, Not Looks.

March 6, 2010, 09:11 PM	#17
kaylorinhi Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2010 Location: The brown eye of america Posts: 463	Amen, to a third gas setting! I would and hopefully will get one as my second NFA gun, 1st being the original Squad Automatic Weapon! __________________ Buy your guns by Yardline, Not Looks.