Project Reality Forums

...yeah, what is it?

Seems like the barrel is a tad shorter and it looks a little different in terms of where the carrying handle is and stuff, but can someone enlighten me?

Apparently, according to Wikipedia, aside from some minor tweaks, they are the same:

The M249 version of the MINIMI was adopted by the US military in 1982, and since 1984, production is carried out entirely in the US by a local subsidiary - FN Manufacturing LLC in South Carolina.

As part of the US military's M249 Product Improvement Program, the M249 was updated with: a new synthetic stock with a modified buffer assembly; a single-position gas regulator; a “birdcage” type flash hider/compensator from the M16A2; a polymer barrel heat guard; and a folding carry handle. As a result, the weapon’s weight increased to 7.47 kg (16.5 lb). Many of the PIP upgrades were later adopted by FN for the MINIMI Mk2 variant.

hope that helps.

Don't think there is that much, the SAW and minimi can both be configured with different barrel lengths, think that the SAW/m249 is just the US armies official designation of the minimi, i'm sure parts from both weapons are interchangeable.
Don't quote me though I’m not in the army, got rejected on a medical

According to my Jane's guide, there are a few small differences:
First of all the obvious addition of the heatshield around the barrel.

Minimi ROF= 700-1000 RPM
M249 ROF= 750 RPM

Minimi barrel length= 466 mm
M249 barrel length= 523 mm

There are several versions of the FN Minimi, the one posted in the DEVs Journal is the PARA version with collapsible stock and a shorter barrel.'

Modern Firearms - Machineguns - FN Minimi / M249 / Mk.46 mod.0

I knew that M249 is the US callsign for it, didn't seem like it has any other name to call it though since it was different to any other production models...

So basically it's the para version of the original minimi and the SAW is a full scale slightly modified version.

According to Fabrine National Herstal The Manufacture of MINIMI...

The only Difference between them is the effective range...

F.N.H. wrote:The Para model.

Compact with shorter barrel and sliding buttstock.
A conversion kit to and from standard model is available.
Conversion takes less than 30 seconds.

F.N.H.Technical Data wrote: Std Model | Para model
Effective Range : 1000M | 800M
Cyclic Rate of Fire : 700-1000 | 700-1000 RPM

There also a 7.62MM version, working EXACTLY the same as the MINI-Mi(trailleuse)

So when will i beable to load my m16 magazines in my SAW?
For lol reasons.

Out of curiosity, does anyone know the mechanism for adjusting the Mini-mi's rate of fire?

BloodBane611 wrote:Out of curiosity, does anyone know the mechanism for adjusting the Mini-mi's rate of fire?

I think its Gear setting... you can tight it to slow rate or lose it for accelerate...

May be im wrong at all i dont know lol

Magazines just tend to feed faster than belts, which is why it can get to a higher ROF.

I posted this in the Dev Journal thread, but it still has that "wait for moderator approval" thing.

--

As you are modelling the Minimi, does this mean that the vBF2 SAW model will be replaced as well? (maybe after some small modifications to the Minimi model if necessary)

I'll consider it, but we didn't have any plans to.

Only a guess but I presume like most machine guns (light or not) it would depend on how long you hold the trigger down. I think the preferred burst is 2-5 seconds, dont quote me on that though.

Jesus uninformed christ

1. Saw can be just as short as a minimi with the short barrel + para stock.

2. Firing from the magazine port is a good way to get a guaranteed jam. Its not even practiced anymore.

3. You change your firing rate on a minimi by turning the gas regulator just like on a M240b. It changes the amount of gas let through which changes how often the bolt cycles. Its primary purpose though is to blow out the carbon that builds up after a while. This is not possible on a SAW as the gas regulator is fixed in 1 position.

WNxKenwayy wrote:Jesus uninformed christ

1. Saw can be just as short as a minimi with the short barrel + para stock.

2. Firing from the magazine port is a good way to get a guaranteed jam. Its not even practiced anymore.

3. You change your firing rate on a minimi by turning the gas regulator just like on a M240b. It changes the amount of gas let through which changes how often the bolt cycles. Its primary purpose though is to blow out the carbon that builds up after a while. This is not possible on a SAW as the gas regulator is fixed in 1 position.

1. M249 can be change in Para version they're a convertion kit, its the same weapon... like M4 and M16... all part fit on the other...

2. Who wants to use 30 rounds mag when you can use 200 rounds chain ?

3. TY for the info, i suppose the regulator of M249 is "fixed" cause Army decide it...

well, if you are inside of a building, you will not need suppression fire, so a lighter 30 round mag could be a good alternative, also when your short on ammo you could get a mag from a rifleman in your squad

Maxfragg wrote:well, if you are inside of a building, you will not need suppression fire, so a lighter 30 round mag could be a good alternative, also when your short on ammo you could get a mag from a rifleman in your squad

Like Kenwayy said, it's a guranteed way to get a jam. The port is there to put it in, but that doesn't mean you should. I think it would interfer with your shooting too since the magazine would be sticking out and probably rest right under your forearm.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:Like Kenwayy said, it's a guranteed way to get a jam. The port is there to put it in, but that doesn't mean you should. I think it would interfer with your shooting too since the magazine would be sticking out and probably rest right under your forearm.

It's true that the mags do cause jamming pretty often, but I have found it to be mostly due to the fact that a magazine can't feed the rounds as fast as a belt can be pulled through. I have had to personally use magazines before, but only a couple of times. Still, I can see how it is very helpful if it comes down to it.

And in regards to the box mag being too bulky for CQB, that is why we use the 100-round cloth bag instead.

Regarding the comment about if it interferes with shooting, when the M16 (STANAG) magazine is inserted into the M249 it really doesn't get in the way any more than the box does. The box actually takes up much more room, as the magazine comes out to the side and not downwards. This keeps the feed direction the same as the belt. I found a photo online, not easy to do because they look a bit ugly and this is not one of the main selling features of the weapon.


In the below photo you will see two "slots" to the side of the weapon below and just behind the carrying handle. The upper slot is the feed slot for the belted ammunition. The slot below that is the magazine insertion point. As you can see, the mag point angles outwards and only slightly downwards. This is the original M249 model as first issued, please don't vomit at the pure horror of the image.


I remember when we were first issued the M249, before the PIP version. I must say it was fun, but that little ******* gave me some migraines too. I loved the PIP version though, and I kept mine for over a year. Weapon Number 124, I miss you so.

Hotrod525 wrote: 2. Who wants to use 30 rounds mag when you can use 200 rounds chain ?

The person who has run out of said 200 round belts but has a friend with a spare 30 round mag, perhaps?