M249 SAW apparent recoil

[IXLR8]

I don't have a class 3 license so I depend on others for my weapons to try. We were in Las Vegas, and I had a chance to compare an M4 to an M249 in full auto. Both shoot the same rounds, right?

I did OK with the M4, pretty tight groups at 25 yards. I was pretty impressed with the ability to stay on target. Next I shot an M249 SAW with a bipod, first as a couple of short bursts, and then about the last 20 rounds I held the trigger down and let it rip. The apparent recoil was much greater than the M4 for ammo dump.

The M249 is heavier and I did not expect the impressive recoil that t generated. Why would the M249 seems to have more recoil?

For those that have never tried it, go to The Gun Store in Vegas and choose from a wall full of auto's.

My wife, who does not shoot very much tried an MP5, MP40 (my favorite) and the M4. Her favorite was the M4. She was most accurate with the MP5.

Thanks in advance...

 

[Dawico]

Were you laying down or sitting behind the SAW? What about the M4? Position can play a big part in recoil, and also the weight of the moving parts in the gun.

 

[codygjohnson]

Lots of differences in the weapons. The M249 doesn't share the same bore axis, you have energy tranfering back at a different spot (higher) on your body than the straight back recoil of the M4. The M249 uses a piston instead of DI, which equals more reciprocating mass and therefore, recoil. The M4 could have had a rate reducer or heavier buffer bringing the cyclic rate down to a more managable level 600-700 rpm, the M249 was probably spitting rounds out at close to 1000 rpm. Cyclic rate will definately make you feel more recoil on a weapon.

Excuse poor grammar and spelling and total nonsense (it all made sense in my head...), I'm on a few rum and cokes tonight...

 

[Renegade]

Stoner 63 FTW.

 

[IXLR8]

Thanks for replies. I was shooting in lane standing with bipod on the bench. They told me to put my free hand on top of the stock. After further consideration I think the M249 was closer to 1000 rpm, and the M4 was around 700. I had an advantage with the M4 by using a foregrip to absorb the recoil. It was a lot fun, and I would do it again in a heartbeat...

 

[Dcav]

After using and carrying the 240B the SAW sucks in comparison. While we did not use the SAW familiarity training made me dislike it immediately. The rate of fire made it very hard to control at long range. Not sure if it is the same for the SAW but the 240 series has an adjustable rate of fire.

 

[Silenced America]

After using and carrying the 240B the SAW sucks in comparison. While we did not use the SAW familiarity training make me dislike it immediately. The rate of fire made it very hard to control at long range. Not sure if it is the same for the SAW but the 240 series has an adjustable rate of fire.

Agree. After using and carrying the M249 for a little stretch, the SAW really sucks. On the older SAWs, you were able to adjust the gas block just like the 240. On the newer versions, they have a fixed gas block. The SAW is awesome for civillians and I agree that it is a ton of fun to shoot. Carrying the damn thing with a few thousand rounds sucks.

On a personal note, I would love to have a SAW and I am thinking about the Daewoo K2.

 

[Acera]

Some of us did not have the luxury of comparing the M249 to the M240B. I served when the SAW was the only thing available. They were still relatively new when I was in, and loved it. (late 80's to early 90's)

We did have the M240C as a coax mount on our tracks, and some older M-60's sometimes, they were pretty old and beat up. It was top dog then. Never had any issues with the ones I was issued.

 

[Mongo]

The M249 is a very abusive machine gun for the cartridge size. As Renegade mentioned above the Stoner 63A is much smoother and a world of difference. Putting 3 round burst on man sized target at 300 yrds is easy with the Stoenr but the M249 you will be lucky to get more than one round on the target during a burst. The Stoner 63A is 11 lbs lighter than the M249 and is still much more controllable. Several of the dealers have them at our shoots and when they compare them to the Stoner 63a they become very disappointed with their M249s.

Video of my 12 year old nephew shooting my Stoner 63a. You can see he has no problem controlling it. He still needs to work a little bit on his technique but he can hit the targets pretty well and is in control of the weapon. I am not sure I would let him shoot a M249 unless really closely supervised due to the increased recoil.




In this video you can see the tracers and how controllable the gun is. The main problem was seeing the 300 yrd steel in the low light conditions.

 

[Burt Gummer]

I never thought about the SAW recoil. Most of my experience with it was in the prone position. I was an M60 gunner for a few years so shooting the SAW
was a nice break. I could look through the sight of a SAW and empty a 200 rd drum into it without losing sight of my target. That never happened with my
M60, you would just put sights on target and send your 6 to 9 rds and hope some of them hit.
Never got any trigger time with the Daewoo, Ultimax, or Stoner so I guess I have no 5.56 comparison.

 

[Texas1911]

If you want impressive recoil for the caliber ... shoot a blow-back 9mm or .45 ACP carbine. They punch you every time you pull the trigger (moreso the .45), compared to the Uzi or MP5 it's downright abusive. The MP5 can be controlled by a 5 year old.

Reciprocating mass plays a huge difference in recoil pop. The AK is a classic example of that, but it has a nice long spring to dampen it.