Army infantry officer calls new XM7 ‘unfit for use as a modern service rifle’
BY Herschel Smith
15 hours, 12 minutes ago
An Army infantry officer has made a series of criticisms of the Army’s Next Generation Squad Weapon rifle, which is meant to replace the M4A1 carbine.
The Army introduced the XM7 rifle and XM250 light machine gun — both of which chamber a 6.8mm round — partly due to concerns that modern body armor could stop the 5.56mm rounds fired by the M4A1 and M249. The bigger round is also meant to give the XM7 an increased range based on lessons from Afghanistan.
But Army Capt. Braden Trent presented his research into the XM7 at the Modern Day Marine exhibition in Washington, D.C. — research he claims shows that the rifle is inferior to the M4A1.
As part of his research, Trent said he visited the 1st Brigade Combat Team “Bastogne,” 101st Airborne Division, which was the first active-duty Army unit to receive the XM7. Trent said he interviewed more than 150 soldiers and disassembled 23 XM7 rifles.
His 52-page report on the subject, which included testing with experts, ballistic research, and input from soldiers, concluded that the XM7 is “unfit for use as a modern service rifle,” Trent said on April 29 during his presentation at Modern Day Marine.
Trent said his research has shown that soldiers equipped with the XM7 in a live-fire exercise quickly run out of ammunition because its magazine only holds 20 rounds. He also said that gouges and scratches can form in the barrel after firing more than 2,000 rounds, the rifle’s weight makes it hard for soldiers to maneuver.
[ … ]
“The XM7 is a tactically outdated service rifle that would be better classified as a designated marksman rifle, if that,” Trent said during his presentation. “This rifle is a mechanically unsound design that will not hold up to sustained combat on a peer-on-peer conflict.”
Designated marksman rifles come in all sizes and calibers, including 5.56mm, .308, etc. The round isn’t relevant for consideration of a DM rifle (although barrel length is).
We discussed the solution to this problem many times: the 6mm ARC, which would involve a change of barrels, a change of BCGs, and a change of magazines.
The 6mm ARC would easily let shooters reach out and touch targets 600 meters away or further, while letting the DMs use other rifles.
But some general or group of generals got wealthy “consulting” to Sig on this boondoggle, not to mention the cash flowing into Sig.
On May 6, 2025 at 11:01 pm, dave in pa. said:
back in 1978, I was part of a team testing the Carl Gustaf 84mm rocket launcher.
it was hands down way better than anything we had. smaller, easier to handle and use.
iron sights to back up the optic too. and close to 10 or more different rounds you could fire or use out of it. on “show day” with army and Marine generals watching, we put it thru the paces and fired a lot of different rounds. the 3 army generals didn’t even watch or seem to care. the 2 Marine generals did. they even got down in the dirt and fired it themselves.
they took out note books and asked us what we thought of it. and they took notes too(???)
we all thought it was a easy win. really, we did. it was and is a great weapon system.
but the army bought the Dragon instead. we figured someone got paid off to pick that POC.
so, image how I felt years later watching the news on the GWOT and seeing SF troops using the Carl G in the sandbox and saying how great it was for the job at hand.
so, seems like not much has changed. the army is still buying crap instead of getting tools/weapons that work. but someone made a shitload of money out of this mess.
On May 7, 2025 at 6:14 am, Joe Blow said:
The MIC controls the product pipeline, and approvals. That was one comment Hesgeth made early on, and has maintained, that the way The Pentagon buys things has to change. This would merely be the latest example! Wasn’t the M4 completely disregarded as a suitable rifle in Vietnam? Thing got dirty and jammed constantly, and you’re fighting in a rain-forest jungle environment? Well, if the soldiers would only keep the rifle clean enough, it’s far superior to …. SMH. Give me a Garand in 308! BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM PING!!!!
On May 7, 2025 at 6:16 am, mike said:
The Dragon was the worst POS to ever come down the pike. I can remember being tasked with employing it tactically, and how unsuited it was to being used in most woodland environments. All you really had to go on was what you read in the manual or were told about how the weapon would perform in use if you found yourself tasked with stopping a Soviet tank. The training simulators were useless as well. It was so expensive that most soldiers never got to fire one in their entire career. isn’t that great, a weapon no one has ever fired being carried around like it is a serious tank stopper,
I did get to witness a live fire up close once for an assigned Dragon gunner selected for the honor. He was so startled by the boost phase ignition out of the tube that he tried to stand up and drove the missile into the ground only 30 meters downrange. Many of us standing aside on the firing line were showered with gravel that was thrown up by the blast. About what I always expected for a result. I always wondered why the USMC was not saddled with this junk. All the Marines I knew knew nothing about it. Now I know,
On May 7, 2025 at 9:24 am, Georgiaboy61 said:
Once, I was young and naive enough to believe that the purpose of the Pentagon/DOD was to secure the best weapons at the best price for our forces. Maybe that was its intent at one time, but it has morphed into a giant racket whose actual function is to keep the gravy train running, and delivering those mountains of taxpayer funds into the maw of the MIC.
Simple-and-cost effective solutions to problems do not accomplish that as well as complex-and-costly solutions, which is why the mandarins so seldom choose the first option. Can’t get promoted or get that next bump in salary that way, nor can Daddy Warbucks the Congressman get those fat campaign fund donations. And being frugal with the taxpayers dollar is certainly no way for the MIC to keep stock prices high on Wall St.or CEO salaries topped out.
On May 7, 2025 at 11:21 am, Latigo Morgan said:
@mike – My actual MOS was 11B-C2 – Dragon gunner. I was so impressed by the system that when I got to my permanent duty station, I asked if I could have the M60 machine gun, and the current gunner was only too happy to give it to me. I never touched a Dragon again, the rest of my enlistment, even though I’d qualified Expert with it.
I also didn’t want to be responsible for the daytime sight ($10-$12 thousand) I’d have to carry around and never use. Let alone the thermal night sight ($25,000) that I’d have to drag around and never use.
I would have rather had a 90mm recoiless or better yet, a Carl Gustav.
On May 7, 2025 at 12:23 pm, mike said:
@latigo They did issue the 90 RR to the Ranger Battalions instead of the Dragon. I think they used one on Cuban BRDMs at the Grenada airport. Evidently you get real weapons if you have a high likelyhood of being in combat. The rest of the army was obviously expendable.