A US Army infantry officer has criticized the service’s new XM7 assault rifle, claiming the Sig Sauer-made weapon falls short as a modern frontline firearm.
Chosen alongside the XM250 light machine gun as the army’s Next Generation Squad Weapon (NGSW), the XM7 is intended to replace the aging M4 automatic rifle.
However, Capt. Braden Trent, citing his independent research, argued that the new rifle is inferior to the M4.
Trent claimed to have interviewed over 150 soldiers from the 1st Brigade Combat Team “Bastogne,” the first active-duty unit to receive the XM7.
Soldiers reportedly complained about quickly running out of ammunition due to the XM7’s smaller 20-round magazine — a drop from the M4’s 30.
The rifle’s weight and bulk were also a concern, with some users saying it made maneuvering more difficult, especially on longer missions.
‘Tactically Outdated’
In his 52-page report, Trent detailed several technical issues, including early barrel wear after firing just 2,000 rounds. He pointed to wear marks near the muzzle and gas block — critical areas that could affect both accuracy and safety.
He also criticized the rifle’s charging handle, which he said requires a full rearward pull to operate, potentially slowing down troops in high-pressure situations.
“The XM7 is a tactically outdated service rifle that would be better classified as a designated marksman rifle,” he stated. “This rifle is a mechanically unsound design that will not hold up to sustained combat in a peer-on-peer conflict.”
In one training scenario, Trent said his platoon was tasked with providing suppressive fire using the XM7 but ran low on ammo after just 10 minutes.
Response
The US Army’s Program Executive Office Soldier responded to the report, defending the XM7 and its role in the NGSW program.
“The Next Generation Squad Weapon program provides unmatched lethality to our Close Combat Force,” a spokesperson told Task & Purpose. “The Army is committed to accepting soldier feedback and enhancing weapons for optimal use.”
Sig Sauer, which developed the rifle, also disputed Trent’s claims. A senior director from the company called most of the criticisms “patently false.”
“We are highly confident that we have provided the US Army with a very robust weapon system that is not only safe, but it performs at the highest levels,” he asserted.
