LWRC’s Multi-Mission Battle Rifle
Today’s new lightweight, automatic warfighter!
THE NEW IAR: Testfire & Evaluation
The right hand side of the magazine well features a UID (mil-standard 130M) marking required for all DOD-approved weapons. The aluminum parts are anodized in the SOCOM approved Flat Dark Earth finish.
I shot the LWRC IAR at a recent carbine class. All of the operating controls are in the same locations and it is fully compatible with any piece of equipment that works on the existing issue M16/M4. When I settled down behind the trigger I was immediately impressed with the accuracy of the system. Making hits at 150 meters on a 6-inch by 6-inch steel plate with the EOTech optic was no challenge. I then rotated the selector to OBA (open bolt automatic) and fired off a few bursts.
There were two things that were immediately noticeable as great improvements over the M249 SAW. One was that it was perfectly controllable and didn’t try to climb off target. Because of the greatly reduced mass of the operating components, the weapon does not buck and gyrate in your hands as it is firing. The second thing I found to be unique was that the beaten zone was very small and tightly centered around the target. This has become a very important consideration due to the restrictive ROE (rules of engagement) that our troops operate under.
The automatic weapon suppressive-fire role has changed from that of large cone of fire/beaten zone against massed advancing troops to that of surgical suppressive fire on a window or door—the LWRC IAR reflects that. Collateral damage is reduced and “hearts and minds” are won. Nearly 1,500 rounds fired in a two-hour period, mostly on OBA. A fairly small sample size to be sure, but there were no reported stoppages and the weapon was not cleaned or lubricated in any way.
May 16th, 2011 at 10:56 pm
Okay we got it. Stop berating the writer just because he has a great job testing weapons whereby your day job consists of boring, mentally challenging work that includes a two hour commute per day…so stop hating and write something original.
Who is more deadly a 2nd Para French Foreign Legion Soldier with a knife or a pistol wielding Marine?
September 9th, 2010 at 11:04 pm
Correction: It was German soldiers of World War *I* (not II) that coined the term ““Teufel-hunden” or “Devil Dogs”" for US Marines.
It allegedly emerged after the Battle of Bellau Wood; but this is apocryphal.
See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Belleau_Wood#Aftermath
June 5th, 2010 at 2:19 pm
This review is equal to kicking the tires of a NASCAR race car, then driving it around the block, and then concluding and declaring that it is worthy of competing in a real NASCAR race. The weapon seems competent, but a casual and minor shoot around demonstrates nothing and provides a zero basis for any battlefield related conclusion or extension towards a conclusion.
August 7th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
There is a mistake in the article. It was during the Battle of Belleau Wood during WWI, NOT, WWII that the Germans gave the Marines the nickname Teufelhunden, or Devil Dogs
December 5th, 2008 at 10:33 am
There is a MAJOR MISTAKE with YOUR COLUM! It was DURING WWI NOT WWII that the GERMAN TROOPS GAVE THE USMC the NAME “DEVIL DOG”.
July 23rd, 2008 at 6:20 pm
Stephen Hilliard does a fantastic job. I look forward to reading more of his work.
July 17th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Id hit it.
July 17th, 2008 at 10:26 am
That author is amazing. Uses words like blunt instruments… thrilling. I can’t wait to buy the magazine and learn more!