M-240G vs. M-60E3

[Echo-3-Niner]

I was wondering about something, when I was in, the 240G was just coming in to replace the 60's. So all the 31's were 60 guys, they hated the 240G. I'm wondering, how has it fared in the years since?

Do the younger 31's like it better?

Reason I ask, we had 60's keep firing until the barrel was translucent, you could actually see the bullets going thru the barrel. The barrel was trashed afterwards, but it kept firing.

I had heard that 240's couldn't do that, but again, it was 31's who loved the old 60, so they were biased.

So, what do you young pups think?

[yellowwing]

Maybe these new young bucks will answer up with comparative details.

But as for me, my philosophy is what is the most efficient way to supress the enemy? The weapon, the fine training, or the latest and greatest that the Militatary Procurement machine hands out to us poor USMC step children?

Ellie has an nice story of a veteran combat aircrewman on an ancient 50 cal supressing 4 enemy AA guns that were moments away from making his last 20 seconds in Iraq very hot and painful.

Through immediate, aggresive action and superb training he saved many lives and the aircraft.

By faith and a stout heart did David slay Goliath. No doubt David was a cut from the same material as our Marine Corps!

Sheet, taken the center route to Baghdad up through fortified Al Basra and Al Nasiriyah, we still beat the Army group who was making an un-oppossed left flank maneuver. And the Army still had the freakin' gaul to ask us to slow down!

We stilll beat them to tear down THE STATUE of Saddam in THE CENTRAL SQUARE.

Give our young 0331s an 240g, M-60, or Mk2 .50, and they'll get the job done. The old salts have trained them well enough to do with what they have.