Talk:Stoner 63

message: Okay, lets be perfectly clear about this.  Its not the M2's tripod, its the M2 tripod (more accurately: Tripod, M2).  The M2 tripod is for use with .30 caliber machine guns, such as the M1919A4, M1919A6, M60, and even the M240.  The M60 and M240 require their relevant T&E and the proper tripod adapter.  The M2 machine gun uses the Tripod, M3, a heavier version visibly similar to the M2, which was also used with the Mk 19 40mm machine gun.
There is no reason why the tripod should link to any machine gun. -- Thatguy96 18:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The M2 tripod was a component of the M1919 Browning system.  The later M122 used with the M60 is an aluminum (IIRC) version of the steel M2.  I changed the link because it was originally pointed at the M2 Browning machine gun (which uses an M3 tripod) and felt that, if someone was really looking for a picture of the M2 tripod they'd at least find a picture, eh?  Deathbunny 22:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Found someone actually has an article for the M2 tripod and recreated link to point to it.  What you find on wikipedia...  Deathbunny 22:55, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: M2 Tripod

message: Did this weapon inspire the MINIMI LMG? 121.218.25.164 (talk) 10:42, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the Minimi was designed to fulfill a similar task, but they share no commonality. Koalorka (talk) 02:57, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: MINIMI?

message: The Mk 23 mod 0 is the designation for the Heckler and Koch SOCOM pistol. Is this a case of same name problem or is there a mistake here?
:Both the US Army and US Navy systems technically incorporate a category as part of the complete full designation.  Each category starts at 1 and increases abitrarily as new systems are adopted within the category.  There is no mistake and the designations are not technically the same.  The Stoner 63A in the Commando configuration was designated Machine Gun, 5.56mm, Mk 23 Mod 0, while the H&K OHWS was designated Pistol, Caliber .45, Mk 23 Mod 0.  There are hundreds of other examples of such confusion, such as Pistol, 9mm, Mk 24 Mod 0 (Sig P226) and Submachine Gun, 9mm, Mk 24 Mod 0 (S&W Model 76).  This comes from the fact that the full designations are rarely spelled out in common usage, and are often unknown to the majority of people, including users.  -- Thatguy96 (talk) 16:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Mistake?

message: In February 9, 1966, representatives from the Marine Corps Landing Force Development Center and Cadillac Gage brought 9 Stoner LMG and 1 rifle in a visit to the 3rd Marine Division in DaNang.  These were then issued to the 3rd Reconnaissance Battalion and used in combat during Operation Taut Bow.  The Stoners were then to be passed on to the 3rd Marine Regiment at the beginning of March. --D.E. Watters (talk) 11:53, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Found an earlier USMC combat evaluation

message: Any objections to remove the Pop Culture section per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Firearms#Pop_culture?  Neither references appear to be even remotely notable.--Surv1v4l1st (Talk|Contribs)  03:37, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and removed it.--Surv1v4l1st (Talk|Contribs)  01:21, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Pop culture references....

message: Is it just me or is that actually an M60? the gas tube is definitely underneath the barrel whereas its on top on the Stoner. Plus the ammo feed looks a lot more like an m60...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.205.73.164 (talk) 22:04, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The gas tube is only above the barrel in the rifle, carbine, and survival rifle configurations.  In the LMG, MMG, FMG, Auto Rifle, and Commando configurations, the receiver is inverted compared to the other configurations, and has the gas tube below the barrel. -- Thatguy96 (talk) 23:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Image of SEAL with Stoner LMG

message: I changed the AR description to read that it fires from an "open bolt" instead of the "closed bolt" which is an error. I own one and know this as is my webpage is used for reference in this article. Mongo  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.198.82.221 (talk) 07:47, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  AR Mistake 

message: However, due to its complexity and high maintenance requirements (especially when compared to the new M16), the design was rejected
Can someone flesh this out? Why would this weapon have higher maintenance requirements, as they appear to be very similar weapons. And why is an LMG being compared to a rifle? Maury Markowitz (talk) 22:27, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone provide details about this? 

message: The archive link in reference 10, " Watters, Daniel E. A 5.56X45mm "Timeline". The 5.56 X 45mm: 1967-1969 Archived 2007-05-04 at the Wayback Machine.. Access Date: 21 February 2008", the link links to Watters, Daniel E. A 5.56X45mm "Timeline". The 5.56 X 45mm: 1974-1985  furthermore a "1967-1969" does not exist, only "1967-1973"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cap Camouflage Pattern I (talk • contribs) 08:01, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect Reference

message: I suppose it was for the early 5.56x45 cartridge, not the later 5.56x45NATO cartridge, which de facto necessitated a different twist rate of the barrel rifling  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.56.23.224 (talk) 22:49, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  5.56x45NATO