Talk:Heckler & Koch XM8

message: Hi, has the US military finally made a decision on their new Assault Rifle?  Anyone have an external link that talks about what they are up to now?  Thanks. Green Squares (talk) 21:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Try reading the article. It says so clearly there. --Nukes4Tots (talk) 23:37, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Nope! Green Squares (talk) 23:01, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep! --Nukes4Tots (talk) 23:18, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Do either of the last two editors have any kind of proof to support their answers? Spartan198 (talk) 01:08, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: XM8

message: The XM8 has the same cocking handle, similar carry handle and optics, and similar ambidextrous controls as the G36. Is that all that is the same or are the respective actions the same?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shortstack2012 (talk • contribs) 21:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Both guns are the same inside, they use the same mechanics, only the wrapping is different. 85Pando (talk) 20:06, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

text: Basically just a G36 in a different shell, yes. Spartan198 (talk) 14:30, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Because without a valid source to back it up, such a statement would probably be flagged as POV and removed from the article. Spartan198 (talk) 12:54, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Similarities to H&K G36 

message: Why did they cancel the program? It seems quite okay to me. Why does it need to be a metal magazine anyway? Okay, well I guess it's just a qualification, but still...--Rollersox (talk) 02:35, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It was canceled mostly because it couldn't handle the harsh desert conditions, like Iraq and Afghanistan. Thegreene2010 (talk) 14:08, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's just speculation on your part unless you have a citation to verify that. As far as I know, there's no concrete reason for why the rifle was canceled. ScienceApe (talk) 23:52, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it didn't provide enough of an advantage over the current system to justify the cost of replacing hundreds of thousands of up-to-spec M16s and M4s. That, and replacing your standard service weapon in the middle of two wars is likely to cause all kinds of logistical problems for in-theater combat units. Spartan198 (talk) 14:36, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's just your rationalization. Truth is congress denied funding for reasons unknown. --87.152.118.13 (talk) 00:12, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll leave you to play the "blame Washington" card. I prefer to base my "rationalization" on the merits of the weapon itself rather than politics. Even with a piston and the Starship Troopers-style look, the XM8 is just another 5.56mm carbine and wouldn't be anymore effective in combat than an M4 or G36K already is. Spartan198 (talk) 12:52, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Special Operations are subject to logistical complications just like regular forces. And the fact remains that any advantage the XM8 provided over the currently issued and battle-proven M16 and M4 is negligible at best. Not enough to waste hundreds of billions on a new "cool-looking" weapon when those same negligible advantages can be had with much cheaper M16/M4 receiver upgrades. As far as the US military goes, the XM8 is dead. Spartan198 (talk) 13:33, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

text: I wasn't aware the XM8 was battery-operated... :P Spartan198 (talk) 12:52, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The XM8's built in scope is battery powered..... -.-. Sorry i didn't make my statement clear but i thought a smart person such as you could have notice that.(Steve4529 (talk) 20:53, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why? 

message: "The exact reason why this happened is a matter of debate; some combination of the aforementioned technical issues, funding restrictions, and outside pressure being involved."
Without a valid source to back it up, that statement is no more than speculation. Spartan198 (talk) 14:46, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, scratch that. I misread the sentence. My bad, sorry. Spartan198 (talk) 15:04, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opinion 

message: I removed the pop culture trivia section, per the firearm project guidelines. The guidelines say that pop culture trivia sections should be avoided in firearm articles. Only highly notable pop culture information should be noted; for example, Dirty Harry's use of the Smith & Wesson Model 29 was highly notable because it made that revolver extremely popular. A source that establishes the notability of the appearance is needed. For example, this source, which says that Dirty Harry's use of the Model 29 made it extremely popular. ROG5728 (talk) 22:06, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Videogames 

message: This question appeared at the Science Ref Desk: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science#Why does the M16 have a higher muzzle velocity?.  I have reverted the most recent change to muzzle velocity info in the article, but that still doesn't help here.  Is there a good source for it?  Is there a well-sourced answer to the question, if indeed the M16 rifle does have a higher muzzle velocity, all else being equal?  WikiDao ☯ (talk) 20:21, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: M16 barrel is 7.5" longer than the XM8 barrel. Longer barrel = higher muzzle velocity. Spartan198 (talk) 12:52, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Why does the M16 have a higher muzzle velocity?" 

message: Nothing here on the railed version used by Malaysia? Information on it's pretty thin on the ground, I'm not even sure what they call it or how they got it. Herr Gruber (talk) 11:32, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If some version actually went into production the article should focus on it, not on the hypothetical capabilities of a proposed weapon system. It'd be good to get more information on the Malaysian contract. Rezin (talk) 21:36, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Malaysian use 

message: XM8 was the US military designation... they name all prototypes with an 'X'. We know the US didn't accept it, but other countries have, ie: Malaysia, which means H&K is producing it. But, is H&K calling it the XM8? Is Malaysia? Any other users? What I'm asking is, does this rifle have any other name than XM8? (an official one) I'm primarily asking out of curiosity, but perhaps this article is improperly named. (in which case, that stupid 'wp:commonname' policy will somehow come up, I'm betting...) -  theWOLFchild 21:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on XM8 rifle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20050827001951/http://www.pica.army.mil:80/PicatinnyPublic/warfighter/archive/03-18-04.asp to http://www.pica.army.mil/PicatinnyPublic/warfighter/archive/03-18-04.asp
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060819082409/http://hksystems.com.au/xm8.htm to http://www.hksystems.com.au/xm8.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:49, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Heckler & Koch XM8. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://news.gpwb.gov.tw/news.aspx?ydn=026dTHGgTRNpmRFEgxcbfdIqFnzB9aVI4ooMjsJjzE7nF%2FB8Zoq46mHk2om5r5rtr5MpYgyiakLZLBYFA4KCF4TDr0jjZZda8GJhkWP%2F9d8%3D
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150427143200/http://news.gpwb.gov.tw/p/b_F0101/20150321/2320781.jpg to http://news.gpwb.gov.tw/p/b_F0101/20150321/2320781.jpg
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140905220007/http://www.malaysiandefence.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/044_Snapshot.jpg to http://www.malaysiandefence.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/044_Snapshot.jpg
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:49, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified