The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

yayarx7 · February 8, 2005, 01:54 PM

First of all, a bit of background for you.
I am a proud member of my Air National Guard Wing’s Base Marksmanship Team, and I recently made it on a light machinegun team.

We normally fire very nice M240Bs and I cannot extol the virtues of this weapon enough, although it is a pain to clean.
So as I said I made a machinegun team and we were going to the Adjutant Generals state match this last weekend. I show up zero-dark-thirty on Friday to learn that the Air Force has nixed the use of the M240B on a safety issue.

We got a hold of one Army National Guard M240B and the number one team was going to use that. The rest of us were now going to use M60s borrowed from another Army NG unit.

So we get to Camp Swift and offload and draw our weapons. They then tell us ammo is scarce and we only get 100 round belts to zero in the 60s.

So my gunner and I get behind the weapons and zip out our rounds and beg 100 or so more rounds to play with a brand spanking new (to us) weapons system. We hit some stuff, but we had a real problem with the longer range (550 + yards) stuff, especially on the bipod. So we were not feeling good.
They then tell us that disassembly/assembly will be one of the competitions, as well as a fun match with dual SAWs (which was very cool). We all practiced breaking down the 60s that evening and the next.
Observations were that the M60 is easier to mount to the tripod (the 240 uses the same tripod as the 60) and much harder to get the T&E mechanism on. With the 240 targets out to 800 yards are dead, the 60 is much harder to tighten up and near impossible on the bipod. Our 60 was 100% reliable, the others on the line had some problems. I know one of the Army teams had major issues and I saw one of the Marine 60s have all sorts of problems during the match.
The 240 is easier to disassemble, although the 60 is not hard The 60 has the larger gun beat as far as ease of cleaning. The 60 is marginally lighter, but the ammo is the same so who cares. Barrel changes are so very much easier on the 240, and that stupid glove for the 60 is cumbersome. :barf:
It helps to put together the M60 correctly, as they do not function well otherwise, and if you have them, bring plenty of spare parts. They can be shot well, just not as well as the 240.
Overall I have to say that the M240B is a much better weapons system. More accurate and more reliable, the rest really does not matter. I would not feel inadequately equipped in the field if I got a M60 that was in as good shape as ours was, I am just glad we did not draw one of the weapons with problems.

And if you were wondering, I finished third individual overall, and took home 1st in novice.

The 10 Air National Guard shooters on my team took the top 10 individual spots. The top 2 shooters were our number one team and they took First Team, another of our Air Guard teams took second, and a Marine team took third. Not bad for a new gun, we must have a solid training program in place to accomplish that feat.

February 8, 2005, 01:54 PM	#1
yayarx7 Member Join Date: December 2, 2002 Location: Abilene, TX Posts: 46	Thoughts on the M60 (competition). First of all, a bit of background for you. I am a proud member of my Air National Guard Wing’s Base Marksmanship Team, and I recently made it on a light machinegun team. We normally fire very nice M240Bs and I cannot extol the virtues of this weapon enough, although it is a pain to clean. So as I said I made a machinegun team and we were going to the Adjutant Generals state match this last weekend. I show up zero-dark-thirty on Friday to learn that the Air Force has nixed the use of the M240B on a safety issue. We got a hold of one Army National Guard M240B and the number one team was going to use that. The rest of us were now going to use M60s borrowed from another Army NG unit. So we get to Camp Swift and offload and draw our weapons. They then tell us ammo is scarce and we only get 100 round belts to zero in the 60s. So my gunner and I get behind the weapons and zip out our rounds and beg 100 or so more rounds to play with a brand spanking new (to us) weapons system. We hit some stuff, but we had a real problem with the longer range (550 + yards) stuff, especially on the bipod. So we were not feeling good. They then tell us that disassembly/assembly will be one of the competitions, as well as a fun match with dual SAWs (which was very cool). We all practiced breaking down the 60s that evening and the next. Observations were that the M60 is easier to mount to the tripod (the 240 uses the same tripod as the 60) and much harder to get the T&E mechanism on. With the 240 targets out to 800 yards are dead, the 60 is much harder to tighten up and near impossible on the bipod. Our 60 was 100% reliable, the others on the line had some problems. I know one of the Army teams had major issues and I saw one of the Marine 60s have all sorts of problems during the match. The 240 is easier to disassemble, although the 60 is not hard The 60 has the larger gun beat as far as ease of cleaning. The 60 is marginally lighter, but the ammo is the same so who cares. Barrel changes are so very much easier on the 240, and that stupid glove for the 60 is cumbersome. :barf: It helps to put together the M60 correctly, as they do not function well otherwise, and if you have them, bring plenty of spare parts. They can be shot well, just not as well as the 240. Overall I have to say that the M240B is a much better weapons system. More accurate and more reliable, the rest really does not matter. I would not feel inadequately equipped in the field if I got a M60 that was in as good shape as ours was, I am just glad we did not draw one of the weapons with problems. And if you were wondering, I finished third individual overall, and took home 1st in novice. The 10 Air National Guard shooters on my team took the top 10 individual spots. The top 2 shooters were our number one team and they took First Team, another of our Air Guard teams took second, and a Marine team took third. Not bad for a new gun, we must have a solid training program in place to accomplish that feat. __________________ Scott.