SIG M5 Spear Deep Dive: Is This a Good US Army Rifle?

SIG M5 Spear Deep Dive: Is This a Good US Army Rifle?

Show Video

Hi guys, thanks for tuning in to another video on I'm Ian McCollum, and this is the SIG Spear, the M5, the new US Army service rifle. This in particular is one of the semi-auto SIG Spears that SIG released onto the commercial market a little while ago. And I'd like to start this video with a huge thanks to Illumined Arms for providing this rifle on loan to me to try out, along with the ammunition to actually take it out and do some shooting. So, what is the M5, and what role is it going to play in ... the future of US military history? Let's find out. Too impatient to watch the whole video? Let me give you the short version.

It's an excellent rifle, especially when you combine it with the M157 optic that is not yet available to basically anybody on the civilian market. This is a rifle that has tremendous capability and potential. It's soft shooting, it's accurate, and the optic has all sorts of capabilities that are very exciting.

It is heavy, its ammunition is heavy. Will it be the right compromise for the US military? Only time will tell, but it is definitely a compromise that there are good reasons to argue in favour of. So, let's start by taking a closer look at where this rifle came from. This rifle is the winner of the NGSW program. So what the heck is that? That is the Next Generation Squad Weapon. This is a program that was initiated by the US Army in 2017 with the intention of replacing the M4 carbine, the M249 squad automatic weapon, the cartridge that they both fired, and the optical sights that they both used.

To a lot of people, myself included, this seemed like a very tall order at the time, and I never expected that this program would actually lead to the adoption of a replacement for the M4. The joke's on me, because it absolutely did, and that is this rifle. So where did SIG come up with this thing? The other competitors in the NGSW program had some pretty exotic ... developmental technology in their submissions. SIG stuck to something that was much more down to earth, this is essentially a SIG MCX. Which is essentially an improved almost an AR-15/AR-18 hybrid, that has been scaled up from 5.56 or 300 Blackout up to the 7.62x51 scale.

The AR-10 platform size, you could say. SIG partnered this with a hybrid-case cartridge, where the front end of the case is conventional brass, but the case head is stainless steel. And the reason this was done was in order to meet the velocity requirements for this Army trial, they upped the pressure of this cartridge to a quite remarkable, whopping, 80,000 psi. This is 20-30% higher than what we're used to in other typical rifle cartridges of ... this size. So, ... I should backtrack here for a moment.

The whole point of this program was not to develop a long-range rifle. It was to develop a rifle that was primarily capable of defeating current, and presumably near future expected, body armour technology from peer and near-peer adversaries that the United States might face in combat. That's Army speak for Russia and China. They were concerned about Russian and Chinese body armour being ... proof against the 5.56x45mm cartridge.

This has led to some other developments like M855A1, those weren't really deemed suitable. And the Army went looking for ... a wholly new cartridge and rifle to meet particularly this body armour penetrating requirement. There is talk out there about this being a long-range rifle, about it being specifically for designated marksmen.

That's not the case, this is going to be the standard issue infantry rifle. SIG has a contract to produce something on the lines of 120,000 of these rifles for the Army close combat force. Those are the "tip of the spear" actual fighting troops. Support troops, everyone else, will continue to use the M4 for the indefinite future. Could these plans change? Yes, they could, we'll talk about that later on.

Let's talk about the ammunition for a moment. SIG is releasing this cartridge on the commercial market. They are releasing other rifles that use it, namely the SIG Cross bolt-action rifle as well as civilian versions of the MCX Spear. The cartridge they have designated as "277 SIG Fury", and there are two types of ammunition that are currently available on the market.

This is the training ammunition, which is what you see almost everybody shooting right now. This is a hunting round, it's a slightly heavier bullet, 150 grains, and it uses the hybrid-case technology that SIG used to win this contract. So the base of the cartridge here is stainless steel, where the body is typical normal brass. The reason that the stainless steel is used is that at an 80,000 psi operating pressure brass is not strong enough to withstand the pressure at the case head. And reloaders will know this: primer pockets at this pressure will deform, primers will blow out, you have the potential of the case head rupturing where it's potentially not supported by an extractor, that's the weak point. By replacing this with stainless steel, you can pump the pressure in this cartridge up substantially higher without a safety issue.

There is of course added cost to making a two-part case like this, and the Army is perfectly willing to accept that. Now, what makes this interesting to me is SIG is also marketing a totally brass cased version of the cartridge. Which we know for a fact is not operating at 80,000 psi, because physics can't be completely evaded, and this cartridge would blow itself out at 80,000 psi. Now it appears that the military plans are to use plain brass-case lower-pressure ammunition like this as the training cartridge. It's less expensive, it's less wear and tear on the guns, it's less wear and tear on the shooters, it's much more gentle shooting.

SIG advertises this particular ammunition, which is a 135 grain FMJ, that's the same bullet weight as the military cartridge, as at 2,750 feet per second out of a 16 inch barrel. The SIG Spear does not have a 16 inch barrel, the SIG Spear has a 13 inch barrel. So we're talking 20% less barrel length, this velocity is going to be lower than actual Army rifle performance using this training ammunition. This contributes to the rifle being very pleasant to shoot, having a relatively soft recoil. I have not run this on a chronograph, but I would anticipate a velocity of probably about 2,600 feet per second out of a 13 inch barrel.

And that's going to give you energy that is in fact less than 7.62 NATO. And I think that's part of why this rifle handles like it was shooting something lower powered than 7.62 NATO. My suspicion, my hypothesis, and this is totally without basis in fact, is that the plans are for the Army to use primarily this training ammunition. This will increase the longevity of the barrels in the rifle, it will be less expensive to procure ammunition. And then in case of actual combat use they will switch out to the hybrid-case full-pressure ammunition.

And at that point there's no real concern about barrel life of the weapon. Because in a true modern military conflict, as we are seeing in Ukraine at the time of this filming, pretty much all of your equipment is ultimately disposable, it has a relatively short service life. Nobody cares if you can run 10,000 rounds without the barrel erosion being too bad with full pressure ammunition. Because the chances of you running more than a thousand or two rounds through any given rifle without it being damaged in service, pulled out of service, destroyed, lost, the soldier becomes a casualty.

This is not particularly important. The actual lifespan of equipment in modern combat is short. So by sticking with training ammunition that is cheap, that is lower pressure, that will have less wear on the barrels, you can maintain the lifespan of the rifles in peace time. And in wartime you don't care about the lifespan.

Now it's also worth pointing out that this hybrid-case hunting cartridge, it's a 150 grain bullet here, this is still lower pressure than the military ammunition. To the best of my knowledge there is no actual military spec ammunition available on the civilian market. Nobody that you have seen shooting these rifles in private hands has been using the military ammunition. I can't speak to, what people are using if they're shooting under direction of SIG or of the Army, those guys presumably do have access to full power ammunition. But when you see this out on civilian ranges, when you see people with the commercial semi-auto M5 rifles, they're using the training ammunition.

Now let's take a closer look at the rifle itself. Starting off, magazines are AR-10 pattern magazines. ... SIG uses Lancers, 20 and 25 round. That's a 20. But all standard AR-10 pattern mags will fit.

One of the really interesting elements of the NGSW program to me is the idea that every one of the guns, both rifle and machine gun, will be issued with and used with a suppressor. This is a fairly revolutionary step for the US militaries. Not something they have done before on this scale. And it has a number of implications, both tactical and administrative. So on the administrative side you have a lot less potential hearing damage for soldiers.

I think we've, all seen those ads about ... class action lawsuits against hearing protection manufacturers from veterans, because the hearing protection was crap. Well, that's a lot less relevant if you actually have suppressors on all the guns. This doesn't make them strictly hearing safe, they are still supersonic cartridges, but this is a huge step forward. And from a tactical application perspective this makes communication on the battlefield far easier.

You can actually hear what people are ordering you to do, you can move when ordered to. You can redirect people much more easily than if everyone's ears are ringing from dumping belts of machine gun fire. SIG also developed the suppressor that's used on both this and their machine gun submission.

And it's very easy to attach, we just have a locking ring here. So I switch that from lock to unlock, and then it unscrews. And it's a very short thread, so it's just a couple of rotations.

The can comes off, we have a little stubby three-prong muzzle device there. ... Which is totally covered in chunky caked-on carbon because it presumably hasn't been cleaned in a while. The suppressor that SIG developed for this and the machine gun portion of the NGSW program is really cool. It is completely made with additive manufacturing technologies.

Which is a fancy way to say 3D printed. It does not have to be welded, it does not have individual baffles inside that are machined. So it's got some geometries inside that you could not conceivably make using traditional machining technology, which is really cool. This is a technology (additive manufacturing) that we have been predicting would ... have major implications, especially for complex designs like suppressors.

And here we have evidence of that ... actually being adopted by the Army. One of the other elements of this suppressor is the Army was very specific about requirements for it to have minimal out-gassing at the ejection port. So one of the traditional problems with putting suppressors on rifles is that you increase back pressure in the gun, and propellant gases come out of the ejection port and hit the shooter in the face. And for the Army I think this is largely an administrative health and safety thing. They're concerned about the toxic nature of those propellant gases, and they want to minimise the exposure of soldiers over the long term to that propellant gas. It's one thing if you have some Special Forces guys who occasionally put on suppressors for special missions.

It's a different thing when every front-line soldier is always using a suppressor. And SIG knocked it out of the park on that requirement. While shooting this over the course of a couple of days, I got absolutely no gas in the face. And as a left hander that's really unusual for me. I don't think I've ever actually had a suppressor that didn't at least hit me with a little bit of eye-watering, obnoxious, propellant gas. This - absolutely none. To the point that I forgot it was even an issue for a while.

Like, "Oh right, suppressors do that." Because this one just didn't. So bravo to SIG on that, that's really cool. I do have to say that this rifle really in a way reminds me of a gym bro who skips leg day, every day. It is a front heavy rifle, there's a lot of weight in the barrel. There's typically the suppressor hanging off the end, that's a pound and a half out there. And the stock on this is a little skinny wimpy lightweight stock.

Normally that's fine, and it's perfectly strong, it's just there's so little weight at the back end, and there's quite a lot of weight hanging off on the front end. ... This rifle is both heavy, which we'll talk about in a moment, and it's also specifically front heavy. So it balances out here, which takes some getting used to when you're out actually shooting. One of SIG's goals was to make this as recognisable as possible for soldiers who are used to the M4. And so the controls are virtually identical to AR-15 controls, with a few modifications to make them fully ambidextrous. We have mag release, bolt release, which we'll talk about in a moment when we take this apart. The selector lever, typically it would be three position.

This is a semi-auto version, so it's just two position: fire and safe. It has a forward assist, it has a case deflector. The case deflector, by the way, is of marginal utility. Cases still come back at a very steep angle, and will hit some left-handed shooters in the face.

However, that's with the brass-cased training ammunition. And I can certainly see the full-power military ammo having a different ejection pattern because of the different pressure, the different bolt carrier velocity that it's going to generate, and all of those ... little details. So not necessarily totally worthless, but this ... doesn't appear to have been designed with the training ammo in mind. It has an AR-15 style charging handle, which is ambidextrous.

You can pull on either side to unlock it. And it also has a non-reciprocating side charging handle. Rumour is that it originally had only this handle, and in early troop trials guys were simply used to grabbing for the T-handle up here. And it was not confusing, but a little bit awkward, for them to then have to fumble around and go back to the side charging handle. And so SIG simply added the top handle as well as the side, so that it was just easier for everybody. And then we have the rest of our regular controls.

So there's your ... ambi mag release, your standard bolt release, your standard right-hander safety lever. Note that the actual extension lever on this side is a little bit longer than the version on the opposite. The stock is both collapsing, you've got 6 different lengths that you can set it to, and it is also folding, so you have a release button here. Push that, lift up on the stock, and it folds over.

There's no specific locking mechanism once it's folded. And honestly, this is one of not a lot of complaints that I have about it, this doesn't seem particularly secure to me. The shorter you have it, the more it sticks out from the side of the rifle. When it's all the way collapsed in like this, I think it's just asking for stuff to get caught in here and flip the stock out. If you have it extended all the way it's a bit more secure, but there's still not very much tension holding that thing down.

There is a gas regulator out here (which we'll take apart in just a moment), which has two settings. One for "Normal", which is the current setting. And one for "Adverse", and you can just flip it back and forth like that. If the gun gets totally crusted up with carbon or it's just too hot, you can use a cartridge as a lever to do that as well.

Now let's go ahead and take it apart. We've got two pins here that hold the lower to the upper. Pop those out, and I'm just going to use a cartridge to push them the rest of the way through, because they're a little bit tight. These are both captive pins, so pull them out and they stay in place. I can lift my lower off. One of the big differences from the standard AR-15 to the MCX platform that this evolved from, is that there's no buffer. And there is no recoil spring in the stock, which is why the stock can be folded.

And by the way, the gun can be fired and otherwise manipulated with the stock folded. If we look down inside here we have essentially AR-15 fire controls. The ambidextrous bolt release is essentially the same mechanism as the PDQ lever. So that's what you've got going on there, pretty easy. We do have a QD sling attachment point on both sides at the back of the lower receiver. I should say there's also a sling slot on the back of the stock itself.

And then there are QD slots on ... both sides of the handguard. As well as all of these slots being M-LOK compatible slots. So you can add whatever sort of sling attachment points you want there. The recoil spring has to be in the upper receiver, and it has been placed right here. To get this out ...

we're going to push this tab in, lift it up, and then it's going to come out. It is under a lot of compression ... there's a lot of recoil spring inside there. And of course this is a short-stroke gas-piston operated gun, this is not a Stoner sort of direct impingement style. So if we pull our bolt carrier out. ... We can then also pull the charging handle out, just like you would on an AR. So this tube acts as the home for the recoil spring.

That's going to sit all the way inside there. We have a short-stroke gas piston right up in the front here. That piston is going to hit the front of this operating rod, which pushes the whole bolt ... mechanism back. That op rod is held very simply onto the carrier by just a semi-circular lug. So you can pull it off the sides, take it out.

We have a firing pin safety built in here, so there's this lever on the back of the bolt carrier. When the hammer falls it pushes that lever up and out of the way, which then allows it to hit the firing pin. That lever is actually locking onto the firing pin when it's down.

So if you press on the firing pin without lifting this lever, the firing pin will not protrude through the bolt face and you can't fire. Once you do hold that out of the way, then ... the firing pin will come all the way out of the bolt face. Anyway, we can continue disassembly, this is pretty AR standard, we're just going to push this cross pin out. That is also captive, which is good.

And then pushing in the little hammer safety, I can drop ... the firing pin out. We do have a firing pin return spring. I can then pull the cam pin, and the bolt head. Now taking this apart I was curious how it compared to an original ArmaLite AR-10 bolt and carrier. So this is off of a Portuguese AR-10.

I actually weighed the reciprocating components of both. So on this gun it's this assembly. For the SIG Spear (or M5) it is all of these parts plus the operating rod. The Spear is actually about 10% lighter in terms of reciprocating mass than the early AR-10s. Which I found a little bit surprising, but that's how it came out.

With those two screws removed, the handguard will slide off the front. Give it a little tap to start it there. And there are actually a pair of rails right here on the rail extension that comes forward from the upper receiver.

And this handguard is fairly snug on those. We also have a lug down here. That is screwed into the bottom of the handguard. And this pin actually locks into the lower receiver pin as well, so that's going to help hold it in place. And now we come to the last element, which is barrel removal. The MCX was developed specifically, among other things, to have very easily changed barrels.

So I just have two screws here to loosen. When those two screws are tight, we have these two brackets that hold the barrel in place. Once they are loose, pop them like that, and then the barrel just slides right out very easily.

Note that we have two recesses, right here, that hold the barrel extension in place. This is marked with its torque requirements, which is 60 inch pounds of force, tighten number 1 then number 2. And here is our barrel assembly. One of the neat things from a manufacturing and engineering perspective on the MCX is that the barrel extension is actually a separate part that is threaded onto the barrel itself. This also means that the barrel extension can be made from a different material specification than the barrel.

And if you want particular hardness requirements, say you want to design this so that it can survive a lot of use of something like M855A1, you can do that and have a different set of material specifications for your feed ramps than for your actual barrel. At the front end out here we have that adjustable gas piston. If I push this button in I can rotate it upside down, and pull it out. So there are your two gas ports. And then this is your short stroke piston. So when the gun fires, that piston is going to get pushed back.

It is going to press on this operating rod, which pushes the whole bolt assembly backwards. It's also worth pointing out that we have this steel insert screwed into the receiver. This is basically the cam ... lug track on the inside of the receiver. This is an area that potentially would get rather worn with a steel camming lug in the bolt carrier rubbing against an aluminium receiver. So that has been made a steel insert so that if there is excessive wear it can be replaced. And it can also be hardened such that it won't need replacement quite so much.

You can see the same ... sort of thing here in the deflector. Instead of just being an aluminium deflector, it's an insert. So that if it gets worn over time, you can just punch that roll pin out and replace it. To me the most interesting technical question about this rifle is how does it handle the extraordinarily high pressure cartridge that it has been designed around? What did SIG have to do specifically to this rifle to allow it to handle that cartridge? Like, why can't we just put this cartridge in any rifle? And to answer that question, we have to look at first what parts of the gun are actually being subjected to that pressure.

I think ... there's a misunderstanding, and there's a likelihood that people are going to assume that a lot more is going on under high pressure than really is. So the bolt, for example, does not have to weigh more than, for example, the original AR-10 bolt.

Because this bolt is not necessarily moving at any greater velocity because it's a high pressure cartridge than it would be if it were running standard .308. The bolt velocity is determined by the chamber pressure when the bolt unlocks, how much force is actually pushing the bolt back at that point. What SIG has done is put a gas port on here that is relatively far forward. It presumably has a relatively small actual gas port in the barrel. They've regulated the amount of gas that's going to come through here to push back on the bolt. That is going to contribute to the opening velocity of the bolt.

And then by choosing where they set the gas port, they can determine how much pressure is actually going to be left in the barrel, and how much force is pushing backwards here when that bolt opens. So that's why we see the bolt being the same weight as an original AR-10 bolt. The recoil spring is nothing particularly special as far as I can tell, because it doesn't need to be. The operating velocity of this bolt is pretty normal, unlike the operating pressure of the rifle.

Now the only [three] pieces of the gun that have to withstand that high pressure are these ... three, the barrel, the barrel extension and the bolt. This has to withstand pressure while it's locked together (let's see if I can, yeah). So this is going to lock in position right there, that's got to hold that full 80,000 psi.

So you need the locking lugs to be able to stand it, you need the chamber area of the barrel to be able to stand it. And if we take a look at the original AR-10, we'll find some interesting details. Here's an original AR-10 upper (that is a Portuguese contract gun made by the Dutch ArmaLite). Here is our SIG M5 barrel. I don't know if it quite shows on camera, but this has a massively thicker barrel than the original AR-10s.

You can see on the AR-10, right here, it's relatively thick right at the chamber area, and then very quickly drops off to a lighter profile barrel. Some of that is because they wanted to minimise barrel weight, but this is also dependent on chamber pressure. You can only make it so thin before you risk rupturing the barrel because of the chamber pressure. On the M5, we have a much thicker barrel, even right here at the chamber. And then it remains a lot thicker for a much longer distance, the whole barrel is heavier than the AR-10.

And that's something that is relevant to withstand very high chamber pressure. The other thing that I found very interesting when I compared these two were the locking lugs. Looking at them from the front, you'll actually notice that the AR-10 locking lugs (this guy here on the right), actually look bigger than the M5 lugs. Which is surprising, that's not what I expected. But when we look at them in profile, that's where the difference is. And you can see that on the M5, the lugs are nearly double the length of the AR-10.

And what that does is provide a lot more material to actually withstand the shear force coming backward from the chamber. And so this I think is probably the most critical element in making this a rifle that can withstand the level of pressure that this cartridge generates. So fundamentally what we have here is a locking system that can withstand that 80,000 psi pressure.

Once it can do that ... then you're managing bolt velocity by determining how quickly the bolt is going to open, which is largely determined by placement of the gas port here on the barrel, as well as the size of the gas port itself. Too much gas and you will open the bolt faster and increase bolt velocities, which we want to avoid. That's the sort of thing that puts wear and tear on other parts of the gun. Well there you have the SIG Spear, aka M5, fully field stripped.

To put a little bit of perspective on this, this entire kit, plus the standard XM157 optic that ... has been adopted for use with this rifle, the whole thing is going to weigh in at about 14 pounds including a loaded 20 round magazine, that's about 6.4 kilos. So this is a relatively heavy system. The question is: is it worth it? So where does the M5 and the NGSW program go from here? Well the US military is, as I've said, serious about making this the next standard infantry rifle. Its actual issue is going to be largely based on ammunition availability.

The Army timetable at the moment has the first units being fully equipped in quarter four of 2023, so a little over a year from now. SIG has a contract to manufacture ammunition. But the Lake City ammunition factory is in fact building a new building specifically for 6.8x51mm ammunition. And that to me says a lot about how serious they are about really making this the next thing.

It's not just for designated marksmen, this is not going to be just a Special Forces rifle. This is the standard infantry rifle in the coming years for the US Army. It's actually interesting this ... brings up a really interesting, to me, historical comparison in that the Sturmgewehr in World War Two, its adoption mid-war ... the expanse of its use was largely dictated by ammunition supply. The Germans at the time were limited in how much ammo they could actually make for these guns.

And people tend to underestimate how much is actually necessary to support full units using rifles like this. So of course the US military isn't going to pull people's M4s until they have a sufficient stockpile of ammunition on hand to cover actual military deployment eventualities, whether that's likely in the short term or not. So that's the future of the M5. The optics that are going on it, I think are just a fascinating subject on their own. The XM157 made by Vortex is a really interesting optic, and I think I'll probably do a short video just about what it is in basics. ... At some point I'd love to get my hands on one to demonstrate it, but I don't know when that will actually be feasible.

The most interesting question to me at this point is whether this is the right rifle for the US Army. I came into this experience, this opportunity to handle and shoot the M5, ambivalent with ... being a bit dubious about how good this thing really was going to be. And in terms of just evaluating the rifle itself, I've come away very impressed with it. I think SIG has built an excellent rifle. In my experience here, granted, just a couple of hundred rounds, but the rifle has been very pleasant to shoot, very accurate, completely, literally 100% reliable, and comfortable, like it's a good rifle. But what it represents is a fairly fundamental shift in small arms philosophy for the US Army.

And that is a shift from focusing on the infantry force having ... an intermediate cartridge, to focusing on it having a machine gun cartridge. There has always been the two choices of ... do you give everyone weapons with a smaller cartridge that's better for the rifle, which is to say 5.56, where it's very controllable you can use that rifle in full-auto effectively, at least in limited circumstances. But your machine guns in 5.56 are limited in their range and their effectiveness, and you generally then also issue like a company-level machine gun. Which in the case of the US is the M240, the FN MAG.

Or do you take the opposite approach, which was more common in prior decades, where you base the infantry cartridge on what's best for the machine gun. Which is to say it's a full power rifle cartridge. Accepting that when you issue that ... cartridge to the individual riflemen, you're going to be giving them a weapon that is basically overpowered for what they need. And as a result it carries less ammunition, and everything is heavier. Well, we've been in the small calibre ... camp for 50 years now with 5.56.

And the M5 represents a shift back to the full power cartridge. Now I know it's 6.8mm which isn't full 7.62, but in terms of energy this thing is bigger than 7.62, this is a more powerful cartridge. And what we're going to see is I think the machine gunners are going to love it, because the M250 is, I think, going to be a substantial improvement over the M249. And it will be massively lighter weight than the M240. This will render the M240 in many ways obsolete, I suspect.

We'll see how long it takes for this to actually be issued out and in large numbers in the military force. But your riflemen are going to have less ammo. They're going to be carrying more ... weight just in the rifle,

which means less of everything else they can carry, all else being equal. I can't say if that's the right choice. How important will the ability to penetrate modern body armour be? On the one hand, if we never get into a war with a near peer adversary it would be easy to look back on this adoption and say that it was clearly a bad idea because it gave us no actual benefit.

Of course, if we do get into a war with a country like that, we may be very grateful that we have a rifle with this level of capability. Only time will tell I think. But I am happy to see that at least the rifle itself looks like a really good choice. Having not had a lot of visibility personally into the ... NGSW program, some of the other contenders in that program looked really sketchy in terms of being practical for full-scale infantry adoption.

And I think SIG's approach with essentially taking a known good MCX, and adapting it to a high pressure cartridge that's still being done with relatively standard technologies, that was absolutely the right way to do it. There is far less risk in adopting a rifle like that than something that's more revolutionary. So time will tell.

Again a big thanks to Illumined Arms for giving me access to their SIG Spear/M5, giving me the opportunity to disassemble it for you, and take it out and shoot it. And speaking of taking it out and shoot it. Tomorrow I am going to be taking it to a two gun match, paired with of course, what else, a SIG M17 pistol. So stick around for tomorrow's video, and we'll see how this rifle actually handles in "a" field. It's not "the" field, there's not going to be anyone shooting back at me. But it will be out in the hot desert sun, on the clock, against fairly difficult targets.

So let's see how it does. Hopefully you guys enjoyed this look at the M5. Thank you very much for watching.

2022-06-07 13:12

Show Video

Other news