I like the geissele handguards a lot, hopefully they will have a 308 line pretty soon.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Geissele MRGG-S adopted by USSOCOM in 6.5 CM.
- Thread starter ut755ln
- Start date
Its hilarious when nobody loser faggots talk shit about people they A. Don't know and B. Give a TON back to the community. One of the nicest dudes out there.
I believe FN , LaRue, SIG and LMT.... and apparently others.
Given the effort from those companies.. maybe ( ?) we could see those released to the public ?
https://soldiersystems.net/2022/05/10/mdm-22-fn-america-mrgg/
https://soldiersystems.net/2023/10/11/ausa-23-sig-medium-range-gas-gun-sniper-program-submission/
https://lmtdefense.com/contracts/lm...elivery-to-ussocom-mrgg-s-down-select-trials/
https://static.larue.com/media/downloads/4467e1379ab54e47ba33719ff8274342.pdf
Last edited:
Bizarre sense of humor
That you 2 were the joke? Just guessingLol, what do you think?
It sounds like a multi point failure and within a small team environment there would likely be some history and loyalty unless it was a multiple repeat.
Apparently, even Aero "dabbled" in it as well.
And if you'd like to watch a full auto 6.5CM being fired.
And if you'd like to watch a full auto 6.5CM being fired.
Didn't they miss out on the Brit contract that LMT won for the L129 from a silly mistake (brought wrong guns/barrel length or something)?... Def not the first time KAC missed out; maybe hire some rabid fanbois/cloners with OCD level attention to detail?
(Though IIRC, didn't Robbie Reidsma from HK get called out for personally delivering ambi-safety levers that got left off a contract entrant so they wouldn't get bumped for that technicality?)
I’m going to say this while trying not to sound insulting, as I’ve had my fair share of screw ups in both the mil and civ work environment.
But as an engineer who has worked a number of DoD proposals and test events, that is a very easy-to-avoid error. I hope processes, to include checklists and requirements verification, have been updated. I’m guessing I’m stating the obvious and KAC has already implemented lessons learned. But regardless, I appreciate the openness.
In the DoD research realm, that is the vast majority of program requirements. MOEs and MOPs. The non-performance based requirements usually only crop up when hardware or software needs to be designed a specific way for integration reasons into existing systems.
No, I did not see it as a sufficient reason to terminate employment for those involved.
It was a combination of errors mostly due to a compressed timeline with several other projects happening at the same time. Definitely not an excuse for those at fault, but a contributing factor on why the "normal" process was not followed.
It's my job to bear the brunt of the fallout from a failure, but just as I did not see it reasonable to terminate good employees that made a mistake (that they certainly learned from), my value was seen as greater then the failure of a program that falls under my portfolio.
The L129 disqualification was due to a miscommunication between our then UK rep and the sales team here in the US. A 20" M110 SASS was requested, when a 16" rifle was desired. This (MRGG-S) was the first time since I have been here (2012) that something like this has happened. Attention to detail is a defining requirement for folks that work in this environment, and the only criticism of the project that I can accept of my team is that my personal involvement should have been higher in the final stages.
Yes, an avoidable error that disqualifies a submission from competition does not pass quietly into the darkness to be forgotten. Things like this normally fall entirely under my direct involvement. While not a desired situation, the lessons learned by the personnel involved have ensured that they never repeat the same, and will be proactive on problem identification early in the process.
I am not going to make this post any better but I have brought products to market and as a manufacturer you have to recoup your development cost. I searched for Geissele patents and counted at least 11 separate patents that went into this rifle. There is no telling how much money they have spent on the hardened BCG and the steel formula for the barrel. No idea how much money they spent changing the throat of the barrel to help stop erosion, how much they spent on tuning the gas and recoil system.
While I understand that once you develop a product, in this case a rifle that you may have a production cost that is significantly lower then MSRP. That production cost does need to reflect you recouping your development cost. Once that has occurred, you have the ability to improve production efficiency and lower cost.
I have really been impressed with some of the things that Geissele is doing. I like their super duty rifles in 5.56. Their 6 ARC submission and adoption again came with them being creative and solving problems and adding value added new technology just like they did with this program.
I have known Kevin since before I came to KAC, Kevin is a friend of mine, and I have nothing negative to say about Kevin.Hire Kevin Boland back. He will get shit sorted out
But I don't find that comment helpful.
Last edited:
@Jack_L I know I and many others really appreciate someone at a tier one firearms company with lots of government contracts spending their time on this forum and sharing their insights like you did on this thread, so please just ignore the reddit style nonsense that was posted earlier.
I agree with you, but if you end up working in a big corporation when you hang up the spurs you better get ready to see some colossal shitbags get away with years of incompetence, and then usually promote out. Meritocracy has been all but killed by DEI and fucking HR lawyers.
Back on topic
I’m curious how these rifles perform long term. I say that in the vein of how different more current users think about the generations of the SR25s as compared to early GWOT shooters. Will this new rifle follow a similar path? Guess we’ll see.
KAC was dug in tight with the unit since the 90s. Its nice when a big part of your R&D is the best funded special operations unit in the world, with their own huge R&D budget and operations. We can in large part thank KAC and Delta for the reinvention of the large frame AR in the 90s and the development, advancement and standardization through the 00s and 10's. I think with the K2 generation of guns, we kind of hit peak performance and it wasn't until some radical changes (such as phased gas array and a barrel that can shoot that tight for that long) that we see improvement with the large frame.
The other thing is the advancements in the small frame with calibers like the 6 and 22 arc, are really taking away the advantage of a large frame AR, unless you need the energy downrange. They are much smaller, lighter, standardized, easier to shoot and have way more options for build out. There are going to need to be serious advancements with the large frame to make it worth it. But the funny thing is all the advancements that make the MRGG so great, are being rolled into the GFR small frame.
If It was my money, today, I would buy a 6 ARC GFR or wait for the 22arc that's currently being tested to roll out.
The other thing is the advancements in the small frame with calibers like the 6 and 22 arc, are really taking away the advantage of a large frame AR, unless you need the energy downrange. They are much smaller, lighter, standardized, easier to shoot and have way more options for build out. There are going to need to be serious advancements with the large frame to make it worth it. But the funny thing is all the advancements that make the MRGG so great, are being rolled into the GFR small frame.
If It was my money, today, I would buy a 6 ARC GFR or wait for the 22arc that's currently being tested to roll out.
Your a class act and have demonstrated some impressive leadership skills
In my prior company I sold slings to KAC for many years and loved the people I dealt with
My career was full of that a boys and very few of shits. Thankfully not many that would remember an of shit are still with us but I still recall every oh shit because it was a learning experience
My 16 inch 6 ARC (LMT MWS with Proof barrel by Wilson) shoots softer and with less mill adjustment at 1k yards then my 308 which is 4 pounds heavier.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but that FN is gorgeous! I wonder if the lower is compatible with the SCAR-H. Needs to get rid of that Vortex optic though. Someone from FN probably had a freebie from a trade show or gas gun competition lying around.
Alas, the 17S DMR 6.5 CM is the MRGG-S I have at home.
Adjustable cheek piece in the field?
WTF
They know what they’re doing over there in Titusville and they know when a program is designed to fail so they submit it the way it should be and let some other crew put their name on a money pit.
I was issued a LOT of trash during my time in the service, but if they handed me an Aero I'd just quit and go AWOL.
Has anyone heard anything about potential release dates on this one? I have called but they won't give any insight.
I was walking around with a gas mask that could never seal properly. I'll take any functional gear I can get.
Friends, remember this day. Tis’ the day this dude stepped on his winky with one of the big dogs at KAC. He then attempted to obviously walk it back with the whole, “it was a joke, relax…” bullshit and then proceeded to further rectify his winky-smashing by blessing us all with a soliloquy on how KAC changed the large frame world.
It’s okay, guy, Ray Charles can see you’re not long for nuance out in the “public.”
Ray Charles can also see that DBD has been banned, so what’s the point of directing comments at him?
What in the boomer comment bullshit is this? We all know several things that apparently you don't. First is, Ray Ray can see that DBD is still reading these posts. Secondly, Ray Ray can see that 99% of my comment was directed at everyone except DBD. Thirdly, Ray Ray can see what a VPN is.
"The optic package on this MRGG-A is a Gen 3 Vortex Razor 1-10×24 in a Badger C1 mount and Leupold Delta Point Pro back up sight." That may have been the FN specific trial rifle. Not sure if all of them are using the same setup.
Link to MRGG submission setups
Vendors did not submit with optics.
Optics used in these programs are from previous and ongoing optics programs, such as S-VPS (NF 1-8X ATACR).
