Published 9/30/2020
LMT Defense, America’s premier weapons manufacturer, is pleased to announce that they have been selected to provide grenade launchers to the U.S. Army.
The $17,031,520.00 award is a firm-fixed-price contract to order M203/M203A2 grenade launchers and spare parts. The estimated completion date is Sept. 18, 2025. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Detroit Arsenal, Michigan, is the contracting activity (W56HZV-20-D-0107).
Karl Lewis, President and CEO of LMT Defense stated, “LMT Defense is very proud to provide the U.S. Army M203/M203A2 grenade launchers. Enhancing mission effectiveness for our soldiers on the battlefield is our number one priority.” Lewis added, “LMT has made over 15,000 grenade launchers in the last 10 years. We have supported many allied nations, law enforcement, the U.S. Navy, and several other U.S. federal agencies. Every component of the grenade launcher will be manufactured at our 80,000 square foot facility in Eldridge, IA.”
Why are we ordering M203 grenade launchers still? I thought they were phased completely out?
Could be supplying them to other services or foreign customers. Regardless, there are still 203s on MTOEs for service and support units, and believe it or not, they’ll continue to buy new ones until they are completely gone.
The few guys I’ve talked to about it prefer the 203,, especially weapon mounted- wouldn’t surprise me if people hang on to them as long as possible.
Amen. I don’t know who would look at a mounted M320 and think it’s a good idea.
It was built to integrate with the G36 and M8 and looks like it does so quite well with those weapons’ geometries. Simply looking at pictures, it looks to integrate pretty well with the L85A2, also. But with the M4? Not so much.
Like many, I’ve carried an M203 and I never had any problems loading and shooting parachute flares or star clusters or the non-lethal rounds. I don’t know what long rounds can’t be loaded, but if the capability is really needed, a swing out at the end of travel like the Mk13 feels like it would be a better option. The M203 profile just sucks into the AR15 profile much better, almost like it was made for compatibility and integration. 😉
The concept of having a m320 rail mounted is dumb, it’s obviously a superior solution to have a light rifle and a stand-alone 40mm launcher.
So if the opinions on the m320 come from having it mounted to an M4, no wonder people don’t like them…
completely agree.
The M320 is best deployed as a stand alone platform. Adding a forward mounted launcher to the AR15 pattern rifle (or any other rifle/carbine) is an encumbrance.
I agree with Lasse, it seems to be a better option to not add pounds to the end of your rifle, and to deploy a stand alone launcher.
just my .02 cents…
The weapon mounting thing probably comes from the Idea of having fewer separate items for someone to loose, and hopefully will fade with time.
For the 320 and different round compatibility, the LMT has a longer throw than standard and can handle most of the rounds including 9″ smoke and less lethal IIRC. However looking at potential future capability, systems like the PIKE and grenade launcher loitering munitions/drones I can clearly see the advantage of a side loader.
these PIP’d rail mounted m203’s are sweet action compared to the HK diveweight.