Both are equally good saw.Originally posted by tankee1981:The SAF uses the Ultimax series as SAW in an infantry section. The US uses the FN Minimi M249. I read from a wedsite: (http://www.phoenixcommand.com/Ultimax100.htm) which states that our SAW is a contender together with the Minimi for US Army's SAW contest ,however the Minimi is chosen before the Ultimax can be perfected. My question is how is our latest model of Ultimax compared with the current Minimi which the US is using? If theirs is superior then will we be changing any time soon?![]()
You are assuming they retain the bolt and other mechanisms inside the SAR21 for the LMG variant?Originally posted by spencer99:I think that having a SAR version of the SAW is a step back in terms of firepower. I can't imagine how a weapon designed to be a rifle can have the capability of a machine gun. there has to be some compromise like greater wear and tear... limit on the rpm etc....


Originally posted by SpecOps87:Any Ultimax gunners here?There was this ad. which also says that the Ultimax has the lightest recoil and allows the firer to rest the butt against his nose which when doing so wth other SAWs will result in the firer getting a bloody nose!Is this true?
TVdog,Originally posted by tvdog:The Ultimax is a really good weapon.
It is of course not without faults. The drum magazine feed has its advantages and disadvantages. I have argued for the Ultimax drum/mag system against the Minimi or Negev belt/mag system with people in other forums before.
The Europeans, Israelis and Americans pointed out that the weight and recoil of the Minimi (or the Negev for Israel) is no problem for them, and that a 100-round belt for the Minimi weighs the same or less than a 100-round drum for the Ultimax. And they pointed out that after firing off the 100-round drum for the Ultimax, you still have to carry the empty drum, which you don't with a belt system.
And they say that changing a belt or carrying belted ammo is no more difficult than the Ultimax 100-round drums, which is also quite unwieldy to carry and change.
Finally, they pointed out that a 100-round drum cannot compare to a 250-round belt in terms of firepower.
My argument was that out Ultimax was designed for a more mobile assault role in mind. Therefore a mag feed to easier to handle during an assault. And that you don't want to be running and shooting from a weapon that has a 200-round weight. And because the Ultimax is light, it is more suitable for the assault than a belt-fed Minimi or Negev.
So it became a matter of belt vs drum. Most foreigners felt the belt system was better.
The Minimi and Negev SAWs are both "sized-down" GPMGs.
And then there is another form of SAW is the "up-gunned" assault rifle like the M16-HB or the SA-80 LSW.
Only the Ultimax is a "pure" SAW design right from the start. It follows in the footsteps of both the magazine-fed WW2 SAW like the US BAR and British Bren - but with a big magazine capacity of 100-rounds.
Most of the world now use the first option which is the "sized-down" SAW. The rest of the world use the "up-gunned" assault rifle.
Britain now uses an up-gunned version of their SA-80 bullpup rifle. This poor-excuse for a SAW can only use 30-round mags. To me, this is the worst SAW solution. As someone put it, it has a built-in stoppage every 30-rounds - when you have to change magazines.
And with the mag situated at the rear, it is difficult to change mags especially in awkward positions. And being the automatic weapon, you would be changing 30-round mags very often. So if SAF decides to go this route with the SAR-21 then they are making a very serious mistake.
If the Ultimax cannot use SAR-21 magazines then it is a very simple thing to come up with a model that can. But I think the ONLY solution is to make the SAR-21 use M-16 mags. That the SAR-21 cannot use M-16 mags is a serious logistical and tactical flaw.
That the SAR-21 cannnot mount a bayonet is the next idiotic thing, but that's another topic.
ABOUT THE ULTIMAX'S "LEGENDARY ACCURACY"
That the Ultimax is very accurate is really relative. It may be more accurate compared to the M-16 firing auto or other similarly lightweight SAWs but to say that it is very accurate is an overstatement.
I've fired the SAW in semi (at the range) and the results were very good. Then I fired it in very short bursts and the results were quite good.
But in my reservists unit, when the men were at the range, the SAW gunners produced horribly poor results. Most of them were told to squeeze short bursts but still, some gunners NEVER hit the window-sized targets AT ALL!
Yes I did that, and it never touches my nose, the recoil is so much less then a M16. very controllable, you can shoot a straight line and cut the whole target.Originally posted by SpecOps87:Any Ultimax gunners here?There was this ad. which also says that the Ultimax has the lightest recoil and allows the firer to rest the butt against his nose which when doing so wth other SAWs will result in the firer getting a bloody nose!Is this true?
On the contrary.....Originally posted by storywolf:TVdog,
Yes as you say it is used for special mobile assualt, then your argument is correct.
But SAW = section Automatic Weapon, that mean is every infantry section squad auto weapon. They are more likely to be use in very defensive position or fire support. Then the case of belt magzine is advantage ! In prolong engagement, you can clip on a new belt when the existing is running short. You cannot do that for Ultimax 100, in fact what the logic of someone having to carry a extra tools just to load a 100 rds mag ? think they rather carry an extra belt of ammo.
100 rounds?Originally posted by GenX:anyway if u guy have practical experience with the SAW 100 rounds drum mag, you will know that it is not practical too, reason? The damn mag can only be machine loaded for it to be full ,you try loading it manually and it can nvr go beyond 40 plus rounds.So to say that current SAW really has 100 rounds capability is a slight misnomal as you will not have ready logistic support whenever u need to reload the thing,ending up u will still be stuck most of the time in using the 30 rounds mag.
Well this is my personal experience as well as all the people i know who handle SAW b4.If any of you guys really have experience loading a full 100 rounds into the drum manually then i have nothing to say.
sar21/m203 is going to replace the m-16/m203 comboOriginally posted by southpark2000:On the contrary.....
Let's say you are in a section and ammo runs out for M-16. You can strip the rounds off your SAW drums and pass them to the grunts. It's difficult to do that for M249 belt.
If SAW needs more ammo, hand over some M-16 mags to the SAW gunner.
The current situation is awkward but likely to be temporary. Becos of the SAR-21 introduction, section now cannot share std 30-rd mag. Also, note that the SAF is still using the M16/M203 as opposed to a SAR-21 based version. And as you all know, the mags are not-exchangable.
The fact that both the SAW and the M203 are not replaced suggests three things:
- Stupid commanders and politicans? (can't be based on track record)
- Phased-in replacement of SAW and M203 --> SAR-21 based (ouch! poor choice)
- New products on the horizon?
Southpark
The Dude
i used the saw for 6 months when i was an OCT but i remembered saw magazines are different from m16 being e fact that saw magazines need to have 2 holes punched cos e saw magazine housing holds onto e magazine by those 2 holesOriginally posted by southpark2000:On the contrary.....
Let's say you are in a section and ammo runs out for M-16. You can strip the rounds off your SAW drums and pass them to the grunts. It's difficult to do that for M249 belt.
If SAW needs more ammo, hand over some M-16 mags to the SAW gunner.
The current situation is awkward but likely to be temporary. Becos of the SAR-21 introduction, section now cannot share std 30-rd mag. Also, note that the SAF is still using the M16/M203 as opposed to a SAR-21 based version. And as you all know, the mags are not-exchangable.
The fact that both the SAW and the M203 are not replaced suggests three things:
- Stupid commanders and politicans? (can't be based on track record)
- Phased-in replacement of SAW and M203 --> SAR-21 based (ouch! poor choice)
- New products on the horizon?
Southpark
The Dude

