Talk:Bushmaster ACR

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / North America / United States

This redirect is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Firearms

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles

Masada merge

Interesting development for the rifle. Masada article should be merged here. Koalorka (talk) 21:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I have just full-protected this article to freeze things while I review how to accomplish the merge / move properly. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 21:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um, the 2 pages are virtually, if not, identical. Same wording, layout, etc. Redirect the Magpul Masada page to the Bushmaster ACR page.--Davidwiz (talk) 04:10, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but if they are merged simply like that, all of the edit history will be lost. Instead of a whole new page being created, the old one should have been moved (renamed). Hayden120 (talk) 05:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Originally, the Masada page was redirected to the Bushmaster ACR page. Wouldn't that accomplish the goal of saying the Masada's page edit history? Instead, someone deleted the redirect and created a whole new page for the ACR.--Davidwiz (talk) 15:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The picture needs to be changed; the rear-positioned charging handle shows that the gun in question is a prototype: i.e. the Masada. The ACR places the charging handle far forward on the receiver. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.208.132.212 (talk) 03:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

agreed
Mullhawk (talk) 02:09, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Accuracy

anyone knows about its accuracy (measured in MOA) ?? 115.74.173.217 (talk) 03:04, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Remington ACR

Found this link. [1]

Should we change the name to Remington ACR or will a section featuring it should be done in the article? Ominae (talk) 04:20, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would say wait until there's an official referenceable press release. What we have now is pre-release marketing info - essentially, questions whether the brand (of the parent company) which will release the ACR is (now) Remington vs previous Bushmaster. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to various posts on AR15.com, Remington is handling military/LEO sales, Bushmaster "civilian" sales.--Davidwiz (talk) 02:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually made it on the main Remington site, is that notable enough? (http://www.remingtonmilitary.com/acr.htm) Syncopate (talk) 18:45, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It has been confirmed that Remington will handle ALL Military and Law Enforcement variants, whereas bushmaster is Civilian variants only. That being said, we should change this page to "Remington ACR", not "Bushmaster ACR" [[2]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.251.28 (talk) 01:37, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Should the title simply be changed to "ACR", or "Addaptive Combat Rifle" since it appears it will be built by two manufacturers for different markets? --Williamsburgland (talk) 21:30, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replace M4???

If I could just ask for clarification, the articles for both the FN SCAR and the Bushmaster ACR make the statement that the respective rifles "will replace the M4 carbine". Not sure if it's supposed to be one or the other and someone's got their wires crossed, or is it both of them to replace the M4 in different services or something? I'm sure I'm missing something.Andrew's Concience (talk) 05:30, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The US Army is in the early stages of a competition to replace the M4. The ACR and the SCAR are both expected to be entered in that competition, when it moves to the testing stage. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 09:58, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks for your indulgence. It still seems a little wierd that they would consider the Bushmaster ACR over the SCAR when the SCAR is already entering limited service. Surely from a cost point of view it would be cheaper to buy large quantities of one type than smaller quantities of two types. Or is it a case of separate budgets buying separate weapons? Andrew's Concience (talk) 02:53, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Namesake

The article states that "the rifle was originally named after the Siege of Masada". Shouldn't it rather say "named after the fortress of Masada"? Spartan198 (talk) 07:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HK416 relevance

I see the HK416 is linked to in the "See also" section. The HK416 isn't mentioned in the article, so what's the relevance here? Might want to remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.239.85.50 (talk) 01:41, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably listed there due to it being a "comparable" weapon. Spartan198 (talk) 22:08, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

in a game

heeeeeeey...wasnt the masada in Modern Warfare 2? or am i wrong... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.200.151.210 (talk) 04:42, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're right. The Magpul Masada appeared in Modern Warfare 2 under the erroneous name "ACR" (take a look at the in-game weapon and you'll see it has the standard Masada handguard with rails simply bolted onto the sides of it instead of the actual ACR rail system and the old style Masada folding stock instead of the actual folding, collapsible, and height-adjustable ACR stock). But as far as this article goes, the Masada's inclusion in the game isn't relevant. Spartan198 (talk) 10:04, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Navy SEALs usage?

I heard some rumors that the Navy SEALs are beginning to adopt the Bushmaster ACR...is this true?--Rollersox (talk) 22:43, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Special Forces will buy a few of anything (or be given some) to evaluate them. What they're planning to buy and use in quantity is less clear. They've been ramping up fielding of the FN SCAR for the last couple of years, but what they use in the field next year? They may not even know. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:08, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SEALs aren't Special Forces, Special Forces are Special Forces. At any rate, the above poster is correct. While they may not have as much leeway as black ops units like Delta Force and DEVGRU, the SEALs can get a bit of what they themselves want to use (SCAR, HK416, ACR, etc.) without much difficulty. But that's pretty much hearsay unless you can find a reliable source documenting the weapon's use by them. Though that's likely to be pretty tough to do considering that most of the operations undertaken by US Special Operations Forces (not just the SEALs) are highly classified. Spartan198 (talk) 09:51, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Remington ACR which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 03:17, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]