ProTact by Haartz

NGSW Rifle Redesignated As XM7

NGSW Rifle gets new name

PICATINNY ARSENAL, N.J. – The Next Generation Squad Weapons (NGSW) Rifle has been given a new designation, the Army’s Project Manager Soldier Lethality here has announced.

The Army originally chose the designation XM5 as the name of the new rifle in March.

Since then, the service learned that the M5 name is used by Colt Industries for one of its 5.56mm carbines.

As a result, the NGSW Rifle will now be called the XM/M7.

The NGSW Automatic Rifle will continue to be known as the XM250/M250, PM SL said in a short press statement.

 PAO, PEO Soldier

23 Responses to “NGSW Rifle Redesignated As XM7”

  1. Andy Marksyst says:

    They actually changed the name to XM7 because they didn’t think 2 charging handles was enough, so they added 5 more.

    You will now be able to charge the weapon with your toes doing a handstand. Lucky number XM7!

    • Yawnz says:

      Oh man, because making transitioning to a new weapon easier by taking advantage of muscle memory is bad.

  2. Howard says:

    IMHO, it should have been the M17 Rifle, then when the inevitable shorter version comes out they could have called the M5 Carbine.

  3. No1_Important says:

    I’d like to see how that female solider performed shooting full power 6.8×51 at 80,000 PSI with that shooting stance compared to the male in the second picture. Since the XM7 is destined to replace the M4 I think the ARMY would do well with some transparency to the public taxpayers. The one video I’ve seen of a female firing the XM7 full auto has been Lena Miculek who is a world renowned professional shooter and even she had to take an absurd stance to brace against the recoil of the rifle…video below if allowed.

    • Bob says:

      Imagine being this triggered by a PR photo.
      And also ignores that female soldiers have been doing very lethal duty in Ukraine.

      • Mike says:

        It’s not triggered – it’s an observation of a realistic issue. The ex-Army guy on the YouTube channel Task And Purpose also had to lean into it, and you could see the recoil. Of course women can be soldiers, but if the equipment is X% harder to use due to its weight and recoil, 80-90% of women will be more affected than the average male soldier.

        • V.I.V. says:

          Well, this would be a good way to disuade females from going into combat arms in the US Army, and I am all for that. Maybe they will keep using the M4 but frankly inclusion of women in combat arms has been a DISASTER.

  4. tm says:

    The first photo seems like a camera pose or the shooter not yet ready to engage, not an effective shooting stance (otherwise they need some retraining). But what are you going for here? Female 11Bs can’t handle the XM7? Who’s going for accuracy or trying to engage anything but a close-range target with full-auto from the standing position?

    • No1_Important says:

      tm- Female 11Bs can’t handle the XM7

      Correct. If the XM7 is going to be replacing the M4 then I highly doubt females will be carrying it in combat, they will be dragging it behind them like an oversized 12lb purse. When she has to return fire on the Russian or Chinese solider firing at her she very well might panic, switch to full auto and ride the lightning hoping she hits them, if she actually aims the XM7 lets hope she has the optic on 1 power and not 8 for that close range engagement and that she doesn’t think half way through how she’s supposed to auto range the target…

      Listening to reports from Ukraine Foreign Legion the average engagement is 50 yards or less so, yes it will probably be full auto panic mode or bursts if lucky.

      • tm says:

        You’ve exposed more of your agenda, but let the reader decide. Thank you sir or ma’am for your input.

  5. Nick says:

    There are those steel mags that Sig was talking about making.

  6. Chuck says:

    Even with only the xm157 this thing is a BIG CHUNGUS. Throw an NGAL, Surefire, and fore grip on there and it looks like you’re approaching 13-14 lbs. I think I’m starting to agree with Jeff Gurwitch that the Army is looking at overmatch the wrong way.

    • ThatBlueFalcon says:

      Ukraine is providing excellent evidence that for all our want of ‘overmatch’ it turns out that 5.45, 5.56, and 7.62 (both x39 and x51) all work pretty good enough.

    • Cuvie says:

      In theory, you don’t need an NGAL/PEQ-15 with the XM157 because it has it’s own set of lasers built into the rangefinding module on top of the scope.

      How well that works in practice remains to be seen, but that part is decided to be swapped out so that improvements can be made.

    • Tom says:

      There was only one reasonable way to get the performance the Army wanted, bullpup and composite ammo. The Sig offering is a turd: heavy, big, and recoils like a mule.

  7. Ben says:

    I object to Colt’s commercial AR-15 with an ambi lower having any bearing on what a military adopted rifle is called.

    • Mr. Bond says:

      It matters for the purpose of trademark and copyright. Not even the Armed Forces — or a private industry contracted manufacturer — is immune to that.

      • AbnMedOps says:

        Actually, when Colt attempted to slap a trademark on the military designation “M-4”, a Federal court pounded it back up their a$$.

  8. Frank says:

    I’m sure the name of the prototype is the most important aspect of the development of a new weapon. Perhaps they should wait until they get something that will definelty fill the requirement, and is wanted, before naming it.

  9. Chris says:

    I would put a lot of money down that the M7A1 will not have the dual charging handles.

    • SSD says:

      The M7 may not have a folding stock. The Army has considered eliminating it to cut the length and weight.