Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32

Thread: 75th Ranger Regiment Armory in Afghanistan

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by TGS View Post
    No idea on that piece, but it certainly makes sense. The M249 grip is so oversized that I can't imagine putting more mass around the circumference, making it even bigger.

    @JRB, @03RN
    Yup to add some traction. We were doing the same thing in Helmand in 2010. Also helps avoid the black furniture baking in the sun

  2. #12
    Member Wake27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Eastern NC

    75th Ranger Regiment Armory in Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by VT1032 View Post
    The newer collapsible stocks aren't bad. We have them on our 240's and 249's and they might not be quite as stable as the original, but being able to collapse them down helps when wearing an IOTV. The original seems like it would probably be the best for accuracy, or shooting off a tripod or ring mount, but might be a bit hard to maneuver with, sort of like the M16 stock. I've only shot a few rounds through a 249 with the old style stock and it wasn't with armor on, but it wasn't bad. I don't have any experience with the true para stocks, but they look less than ideal.
    I’m super surprised 3/75 was still using the original stocks in 2019. My old IBCT converted 249s and 240s over a while ago.

    The eotechs mentioned are 553s, which are inline CR123 models and have also been in use for some time. Again, surprised they don’t have never stuff that I know some of RR got.

    Between the ACOG, CCO, Elcan (1-4x), and either model EOT, I prefer the Elcan and am glad we have them.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #13
    The Nostomaniac 03RN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Never put rubber bands on mine but might help with keeping a good grip.

    I definitely prefer the fixed stock to the para stock. I always kept my hand on top. SOP so you can get a good cheek weld. Using thoughs elcans must be interesting.

  4. #14
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    ABQ, NM
    With the rubber bands, it's funny how that kind of stuff just turns into a cultural thing within a unit. I'd bet that some respected squad leader or Platoon Sgt with a couple prior deployments did it that way, and his joes followed suit just because. I am almost always wearing gloves when I'm carrying an issued weapon so the black grip in hot sun thing isn't really a problem, but it is a handy place to keep some rubber bands. I tried it a couple times and by creating a small 'ball' in the grip, it makes your 'hand-weld' (for want of a better term) very consistent no matter how quickly you're grabbing that weapon or from what angle. Works a lot better if you've got some big ass mitts though.

    Same for the OG buttstocks - I'd bet that every SAW gunner there is a hoss and 6ft1in+ so the smaller stocks could actually be a disadvantage to them. Perks of being in the cool units like that, SAW gunners are actually picked based on their ability to be a good SAW gunner, not because they're the sad sack E2 or E3 in a rank heavy unit and nobody else wants to carry it.

    I really like the old M249 clubfoot stocks myself, but the newest iteration of adjustable stock finally won me over. There's a cheekpiece that's removable so you can still do a hand-over style grip, but I prefer a hand-under sort of grip. No matter what, I vastly prefer the longer barrels - the short Para barrels look racy and awesome but the additional muzzle blast and loss of velocity is noticeable, you have to hold a bit higher than the BDC at 500M+ in an ACOG or M145 ELCAN. I really like both of those optics on a LMG. I haven't gotten to try the newer ELCAN's though.

  5. #15
    Site Supporter Coyotesfan97's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Phoenix Metro, AZ
    One of my friend’s sons is in the 2nd and he’s currently in Ranger School getting his tab. His second son has a Ranger contract when he graduates. RLTW!
    Just a dog chauffeur that used to hold the dumb end of the leash.

  6. #16
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    America
    I tried to talk my son into a ranger contract; he is a senior in high school and is not interested. Youth is wasted on the young

  7. #17
    Glock Collective Assimile Suvorov's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Escapee from the SF Bay Area now living on the Front Range of Colorado.
    EoTechs!

    Don’t they know those will git em kilt in the streets?

    On a side note - I’ve had the pleasure of “meeting” two 2BN 75th “veterans” in the pas couple months. One was a hotel shuttle van driver and the other an Uber driver. None of them looked like rangers (though one did have a ponytail - so he might have been in the Nam in a previous life). So I guess those boys have some pretty good career expectations upon ETS-ing. Maybe it is a Lewis thing????

    It’s funny - there are more support and combat service support soldiers in the Army than there are combat arms guys (hell there are more cooks in the Army than there are Rangers) yet every single dood on the street tells me they were a snake eater.

    I don’t want to be the asshole pilot going all stollen valor on them but sometimes it is hard.

    I’ve reached the point that if I ever met a guy claiming he was a cook - I’d probably think he was Delta for reals.

    Sorry - had to get that off my chest.

    Now back to our regularly scheduled gear analysis.

    Hooah.....

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Wake27 View Post
    I’m super surprised 3/75 was still using the original stocks in 2019. My old IBCT converted 249s and 240s over a while ago.
    I think part of it is I would bet those are MK46's, not big army 249's. It's hard to tell from that angle, but I know they get a lot of their weapons procurement through socom, not big army. They may not have been retrofitted with the new stocks when big army fielded them. All the MK46's I've ever seen had either the original or the para stocks, not the collapsible ones.

    My brother is with 2/75 so I've gotten to see some of his issued toys and they are all socom guns. Last I knew, he was running a suppressed mk17 with an elcan and his unit got G19 gen 4 mos's with rmr's and x300's a while back.


    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  9. #19
    Member TGS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Back in northern Virginia
    I was thinking the same thing, @VT1032. Doesn't look like they have some of the standard M249 features, such as the M16 mag well.
    "Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer

  10. #20
    Member Wake27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Eastern NC
    Quote Originally Posted by VT1032 View Post
    I think part of it is I would bet those are MK46's, not big army 249's. It's hard to tell from that angle, but I know they get a lot of their weapons procurement through socom, not big army. They may not have been retrofitted with the new stocks when big army fielded them. All the MK46's I've ever seen had either the original or the para stocks, not the collapsible ones.

    My brother is with 2/75 so I've gotten to see some of his issued toys and they are all socom guns. Last I knew, he was running a suppressed mk17 with an elcan and his unit got G19 gen 4 mos's with rmr's and x300's a while back.


    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
    Yup, completely blanked on the likelihood of those being 46s, also unsure if that may be the reason.

    Regarding the potential stolen valor stuff, my general rule of thumb is that if they’re talking about it to randos, it’s probably false. Though I could see plenty missing it and wanting to tell everyone that’ll listen so it really just depends on what they’re saying. It’s usually pretty obvious.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •