BeltFeds LLC 5.56×45mm NATO Conversion Kit for the M60 GPMG

[Christopher Wang]

During the mid-2010s, BeltFeds LLC ( https://beltfeds.com/ ) advertised the 5.56×45mm NATO conversion kit for the M60 GPMG. The below YouTube video dated September 14, 2015, shows a short-barreled M60 machine gun being tested with the 5.56×45mm conversion kit installed:

Despite online interests, nothing came out of it and the conversion kit quietly disappeared from BeltFeds' website. As of August 2023, BeltFeds LLC is still in business providing parts and accessories for the M60 and other machine guns.

 

[Rickshaw]

The M60 was and is a piece of rubbish. I used one for 10 years in the Australian Army. It was chosen as a political decision in 1960 and was replaced in 1987 by the GPMG which defeated it back in 1960, the L7 FN-MAG GPMG. It often had stoppages, it's trigger group often broke free and fell off and it was replaced in the end because the frames kept cracking as SFMGs.

It was replaced for about 2 years by the Vickers MMG until the Army woke up to how expensive the ammunition was because it had sold all the filling plant to India back in the middle of the 1960s. I knew one of the WOs who was recalled to the Infantry Centre at Singleton to rewrite the training pamphlets for the Vickers, he had been one of the last soldiers to undergo training on it way back in 1959.

 

[Christopher Wang]

More information and pictures on the 5.56×45mm NATO conversion kit for the M60 GPMG can be found below:

[Aaron in Mohnton PA]. (2020, January 11). WTS: JRW .223 M60 Feed Tray / .223 Extractors [Online forum post]. Sturmgewehr. Retrieved from https://www.sturmgewehr.com/forums/index.php?/topic/16279-wts-jrw-223-m60-feed-tray-223-extractors/

[Aaron in Mohnton PA]. (2018, April 5). .223 M60 Parts - A closer look [Online forum post]. Sturmgewehr. Retrieved from https://www.sturmgewehr.com/forums/index.php?/topic/10161-223-m60-parts-a-closer-look/

 

[Heatloss]

That's fascinating. The later models of M60 are phenomenal in service. Better weight and better weight distribution when compared to the FN MAG. I wonder what could be done with a modern 5.56 or 6.8 adaptation of the E6.

 

[Scott Kenny]

The M60 was and is a piece of rubbish. I used one for 10 years in the Australian Army. It was chosen as a political decision in 1960 and was replaced in 1987 by the GPMG which defeated it back in 1960, the L7 FN-MAG GPMG. It often had stoppages, it's trigger group often broke free and fell off and it was replaced in the end because the frames kept cracking as SFMGs.

When did you have your 60? I'm guessing 1977-1987? So after ~10 years of combat usage?

The 60 was always a life-limited thing. Good for 10-15k rounds, then the receiver has stretched too much to be safe. Throw it away and buy a new one. Or rather, strip the old receiver of the feed tray, buffer, and trigger pack; then throw it away and replace with a new, stripped receiver.

In combat, that works out to needing to be replaced every year or two.

Everyone who had a new 60 loved them. Everyone who had a shot to hell 60 hated it. I got a new 60E3 to play with while I was in the Navy, it was very nice.

 

[Rickshaw]

When did you have your 60? I'm guessing 1977-1987? So after ~10 years of combat usage?

The 60 was always a life-limited thing. Good for 10-15k rounds, then the receiver has stretched too much to be safe. Throw it away and buy a new one. Or rather, strip the old receiver of the feed tray, buffer, and trigger pack; then throw it away and replace with a new, stripped receiver.

In combat, that works out to needing to be replaced every year or two.

Everyone who had a new 60 loved them. Everyone who had a shot to hell 60 hated it. I got a new 60E3 to play with while I was in the Navy, it was very nice.

That is not how the Australian Army operates. It purchases a weapon expecting it to have a life of at least 15 years and more than likely, 25 years. Our M60s lasted us 15 years at most but were expected to last 25 years. We had Bren guns for over 20 years and they were still functional at the end to enable them to be remanufactured into L4a4 LMGs and lasted another 20 years.

 

[Scott Kenny]

That is not how the Australian Army operates. It purchases a weapon expecting it to have a life of at least 15 years and more than likely, 25 years. Our M60s lasted us 15 years at most but were expected to last 25 years. We had Bren guns for over 20 years and they were still functional at the end to enable them to be remanufactured into L4a4 LMGs and lasted another 20 years.

I don't know who told Oz that an M60 has a 25 year life, it's always been known in the US that the receiver is round-count limited.

I mean, if you only fire 400 rounds a year through it you might get one to last 25 years...

 

[Rickshaw]

I don't know who told Oz that an M60 has a 25 year life, it's always been known in the US that the receiver is round-count limited.

I mean, if you only fire 400 rounds a year through it you might get one to last 25 years...

We fired several thousand rounds each year through ours. We fired several thousand rounds through our L4a4s as well. The M60 failed after about 20 years of service. The body was found to be cracked. It was condemned and actually replaced in the role of SFMGs by the venerable Vickers MMG. The Vickers however proved too expensive to use, as we had got rid of our .303in filling machines way back in the 1960s. We had originally used the Vickers for over 50 years.

 

[Colonial-Marine]

The M60 sure seemed to have a lot of design flaws despite the long development cycle where the Ordnance Corps had numerous successful designs like the MG42 to examine and work with. Even considering it was of stamped construction I get the impression that parts wore-out and broke faster than they should have. It seems soldiers who used relatively new M60s thought they were okay and were able to devise fixes for common issues. But the soldiers stuck with well-worn M60s years later had nothing but disdain for them.

I'm not familiar with the full story of its Australian service. I thought the Aussies had already adopted the FN MAG when the M60 was adopted just for use in Southeast Asia as a matter of commonality with US forces there. Maybe there were more politics involved than that.

Given all of the 5.56mm light machine guns available by the 2010s I don't know who the 5.56mm conversion kit was supposed to appeal to. The M60 was relatively light for a GPMG but isn't going to compare favorably to 5.56mm LMGs.

 

[Apophenia]

... Given all of the 5.56mm light machine guns available by the 2010s I don't know who the 5.56mm conversion kit was supposed to appeal to...

"Ay, there's the rub." How was an M60 weighing 10.5 kg unloaded meant to compete with a 6.85 kg Minimi or 7.45 kg M249?

 

[Rickshaw]

I'm not familiar with the full story of its Australian service. I thought the Aussies had already adopted the FN MAG when the M60 was adopted just for use in Southeast Asia as a matter of commonality with US forces there. Maybe there were more politics involved than that.

The M60 was originally adopted in 1960 after a competition between it and the L7. The L7 won hands down apparently but then the politicians became involved and the M60 was adopted to ensure "interoperability" with the US forces we were likely to working with in the future. We therefore suffered for next 25 years from a weapon that was barely functional.

It's trigger group used to come loose and fall off until some bright spark worked out that you could reverse the retaining clip and the weapon would still function perfectly well and the trigger group was now secure. The barrel could be changed but only while wearing an asbestos mitten as there was no carrying handle attached to the barrel. If you weren't careful you could end up with a weapon that wouldn't function because you had put the gas piston in backwards when cleaning it We worked out that you didn't need to raise the feed cover to load a belt of ammunition in it. Overall is was an abortion of a gun. After we had got rid of our Brens we got them back as L4a4s, a 7.62x51mm conversion and they were far more popular than the M60.

 

[Scott Kenny]

We fired several thousand rounds each year through ours. [...] The M60 failed after about 20 years of service. The body was found to be cracked.

Exactly.

10-15k rounds max life for an M60 receiver. Afterwards you strip all the old parts out and install them in a new receiver.

The M60 sure seemed to have a lot of design flaws despite the long development cycle where the Ordnance Corps had numerous successful designs like the MG42 to examine and work with. Even considering it was of stamped construction I get the impression that parts wore-out and broke faster than they should have. It seems soldiers who used relatively new M60s thought they were okay and were able to devise fixes for common issues. But the soldiers stuck with well-worn M60s years later had nothing but disdain for them.

The receiver was a little thin, but it'd last for 10k rounds. Then you take all the individual bits out and stick them in a new receiver. Said new "stripped" receiver is about $1000 today, give or take.

Price you pay for the light weight.

Given all of the 5.56mm light machine guns available by the 2010s I don't know who the 5.56mm conversion kit was supposed to appeal to. The M60 was relatively light for a GPMG but isn't going to compare favorably to 5.56mm LMGs.

I'm betting that this was designed for civilian owners of M60s. So they can shoot up cheap ammo and still have fun with their toy.

 

[Kat Tsun]

The M60 sure seemed to have a lot of design flaws

No, it had a lot of users who didn't understand what it was supposed to do or why it was made how it was. It's more light than medium MG. Notice how nobody complains about the M249 despite similar issues. M60 had big shoes to fill (M1919 and M1917 MMG/HMG) and failed, but compared to its contemporaries (PK/PKM), it competed for best GPMG in the world.

 

[Christopher Wang]

The earliest work on a 5.56×45mm NATO conversion kit for the M60 GPMG was designed by the late John Weaver. Sadly, John Weaver died in a motorcycle accident in the early 1990s. Here is a picture of the modified .223 M60 feed tray and extractors designed by John Weaver:

SOURCE: [Aaron in Mohnton PA]. (2020, January 11). WTS: JRW .223 M60 Feed Tray / .223 Extractors [Online forum post]. Sturmgewehr. Retrieved from https://www.sturmgewehr.com/forums/index.php?/topic/16279-wts-jrw-223-m60-feed-tray-223-extractors/