Talk:CQBR

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Firearms; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page where you can find a list of open tasks. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (general topics): Military technology and engineering task force Weaponry task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): United States military history task force

FWIW: NSWC-Crane has shopped out orders for complete CQBR and uppers to Colt. I believe that I've mentioned this to you before in the thread at Militaryphotos.com. --D.E. Watters

Contents 1 Ammunition ? 2 other photo... 3 Source 4 An M4 buys you 10 or 100 Kalasnikovs?

[edit] Ammunition ?

There is no piece of information about the CQBR ammunition : is it 62-grain SS109 (US M-855) or 77-grain Mk.262 Mod 0/1 widely used by Special Forces ? (and is it possible to use 6.8mm Remington SPC ?

OK I have seen the main page ; thanks !

I removed the bit about using Mk262Mod1 -- aside from heavier (additional stopping power), I can't understand why a match round would be used in a dedicated CQC firearm -- and naturally the 262Mod0 is unacceptable due to the lack of cannelure.

Please don't remove unless you have evidence otherwise. The Mk 262 cartridge is indeed used for the reasons D.E. Watters stated. Look at the Ammo Oracle[1]. Black Rifle II on p. 118 also states:

As of this writing a large percentage of the 5.56 ammunition being utilized by SOCOM in their M4/M4A1 carbines, CQB carbines as well as their Mk 12 Mod 0 and Mod 1s in Afghanistan and Iraq consists of Mk 262 Mod 0 cartridges.

Pettifogger 03:43, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

It is possible to modify the gun to use the 6.8mmSPC catridge, would require basically a whole new addon upper and modified magazines -- it wouldn't exactly be an Mk18 anymore. The other issue that would face should likely is the added impulse of the 6.8 -- fully automatic fire would be difficult to control, and potentially undesirable on missions such as VBSS

02:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)TehLlama

Mk 262 Mod 1 has a lower threshold velocity for reliable fragmentation than does M855 Ball. The CQBR's short barrel length cuts velocity enough that M855 has a very limited range before fragmentation ceases. The use of Mk 262 Mod 1 in the CQBR allows for fragmentation at longer distances. This is handy if you are caught out in the open while trying to reach your objective. --D.E. Watters 19:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] other photo...

I found another interesting photo of yhe Mk.18 : [2]. Used by Deltas in protection of afghan president Hamid Karzaï, on september 5, 2002. But it's copyrighted. Do you think it's a good idea to put un link on the main page ?

No, I don't think so. It's copyrighted. It's a small image. The current images are already representative enough. Pettifogger 21:55, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but it is kind of evidence of Delta's CQBR usage... Rob1bureau

Those guys were claimed by the US Navy as members of Navy Special Warfare (Seal Team 6). They are not Delta Force. -- Thatguy96 18:01, 11 July 2006

[edit] Source

Do you have any sources or Links?--Sanandros 15:59, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] An M4 buys you 10 or 100 Kalasnikovs?

It is reported each new M4 as issued to a GI Joe in Iraq or Afghanistan costs US taxpayers 4000 dollars (four thousand USD). That looks like insane. What is the true price? A new AK-47 can be had for 40USD or a barrel of corn some places in Africa. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.70.32.136 (talk) 10:51, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

How is this relevant? Koalorka (talk) 06:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Just say "Wikipedia is not a forum" and move on - Thatguy96 (talk) 12:32, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Are we allowed to remove this kind of crap? Koalorka (talk) 14:27, 28 March 2008 (UTC)