Mega Rad Gun Thread

Duke Nukem said:
Hopefully the legislature will prevent him from doing so if his attempt to steal the election through fraud succeeds. Not holding my breath but damn it people should have already grabbed the shit they wanted, they had four years. Certainly won't prevent him from attempting to go full Gestapo on everything but the president ain't a king.
Click to expand...
I agree people should have stocked up. I remember laughing at everyone panic buying in 2008, and was grateful that I had gathered what I wanted years in advance. I also remember watching Colt 6920s sell for insane amounts of money.
 
White Devil said:
The FAL and G3 aren't total pieces of crap, one would think that doesn't need to be said.
Click to expand...
I would like either one, or maybe one of each. They are both great, but I hear the HK G3/Cetme might be harder to charge. G3 magazines are still cheap even now, $5 a piece if that. Many people say they prefer the FAL though, but mags cost more and the FAL is generally longer and heavier, if you go with a Cold War era model at least. Handled an HK-91 at the shop and it's nice but the $3000 price tag makes me want to go elsewhere.

MrJokerRager said:
All three gun stores in my area are sold out of 22lr.
Click to expand...
Same, a few hunting calibers but no 5.56, pistol, or even .308 anymore.

Molester Stallone said:
I agree people should have stocked up. I remember laughing at everyone panic buying in 2008, and was grateful that I had gathered what I wanted years in advance. I also remember watching Colt 6920s sell for insane amounts of money.
Click to expand...
Colts are probably the better AR types, I'm just amazed that no one has the foresight to at least purchase parts and 80% receivers, considering they're a potential target for banning. I prefer non-AR types though but that's personal preference. Plus I prefer to tinker and build things instead of buy, you can't put a price tag on making your own and having it finally work!
 
someone in my family got an old 870 wingmaster, complete with an extended tube and i'm ecstatic for him. i'm trying to get this piece of shit at some point, but once i do i'm sure i'll wish i didn't. i just really like the idea of an 870 taking saiga magazines.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: An Account
Got really bored and completely stripped and reassembled my 1911's frame. Kind of fun just digging into the guts of it.
 
White Devil said:
Not a whole lot of parts in a 1911, iirc there's under 50.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/304310/World_of_Guns_Guns_Full_Access/ this game is fun for disassembly autism.
Click to expand...
I got the full version of that game on sale. Really fun if you're a sperg who likes taking shit apart and putting it back together. I just had nothing else to do and justified it as 'hey if I ever wanna do any work on the trigger or something it'd be good to know how to disassemble and reassemble it going in."

I've also done polishing work on my S&W 637's internals. I still have an arkansas stone sitting in my toolbox waiting for my autism to act up again.
 
I understand. I've been bored enough to do full detail strips of my guns before and clean them, it just takes a whole lot.

And yeah, I've had that game for years, it really is amazing how much of a technical resource it is.
 
1605981296433.jpg
 
  • Lunacy
  • Islamic Content
Reactions: Thornforg and Particle Bored
Cristobal’s Colon said:
Even Asian languages with consonant endings still append -u, -eu or -o. As for the Japanese, sometimes they use their own words. 機関銃 ( kikanjuu) means machine gun for example.
Click to expand...
Do you know what the literal translation for that is? I'd assume that their literal word for "gun" would be based on the Dutch version of the word (or possibly "musket", "firearm", or "matchlock"), and that it went through a few iterations before arriving there. In a similar vein, would "machine" translate in the same way we say it, or specifically refer to industrial-era machinery, distinct from simpler shit like water wheels?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: spiritofamermaid
A_Callow_Youth said:
Do you know what the literal translation for that is? I'd assume that their literal word for "gun" would be based on the Dutch version of the word (or possibly "musket", "firearm", or "matchlock"), and that it went through a few iterations before arriving there. In a similar vein, would "machine" translate in the same way we say it, or specifically refer to industrial-era machinery, distinct from simpler shit like water wheels?
Click to expand...
The first two characters mean roughly "machine-linkage" and the last simply "gun." They also had specific names for certain firearms. Tanegashima is both a place name and the name of the type of arquebus used in the eponymous battle.

The character for "machine" was probably adopted in the fourth century, but also appears in reference to CNC machines and the like.

It originally meant loom lol
 
  • Informative
Reactions: MidUSA, A_Callow_Youth and spiritofamermaid
Cristobal’s Colon said:
The first two characters mean roughly "machine-linkage" and the last simply "gun." They also had specific names for certain firearms. Tanegashima is both a place name and the name of the type of arquebus used in the eponymous battle.
Click to expand...
Ah, so it would be roughly "belt-fed gun", then, though perhaps not exactly, given the Type 92. Linguistic quirks and firearms are two things I greatly enjoy, so I tend to nerd out a bit when they combine.

For instance, one of my favorites is the differentiation between a machine pistol, a submachine gun and an assault rifle. In the trenches of the First World War, it was quickly found that rifles were insufficient for attacking enemy trenches due to their bulk, rate of fire and magazine restrictions. Pistols solved two of these issues, but were still severely hampered by magazine capacity in most cases and reload times for exceptions like the C96. A machine gun would have provided adequate volume of fire for the task at hand, but the machine guns of the time were far too heavy and bulky to haul across no man's land. Thus, most of the powers on the Western Front began experimenting with pairing a machine gun action to a carbine-size platform, where it quickly became apparent that battle rifle cartridges were unsuitable for fully-automatic shoulder fire. The end result were several varieties of pistol-caliber automatic weapons, the most successful of these being the German Machinenpistole 18, or "Machine Pistol, (model of 19)18". Thus, in most European languages this convention stuck, such as the Italian "machinipistoli". However, in the English-speaking world, a US Army officer by the name of John T. Thompson had been working on his own prototype, dubbed the "Annihilator". When the war ended, he instead turned his attention to the US domestic market, but needed a less, eh, soldier-y name for the weapon, settling on selling his invention as the "Thompson Sub-Machine Gun". Thus, in English, there is a distinct difference between a "machine pistol" (a pistol capable of fully-automatic fire) and a "submachine gun" (a carbine-sized weapon chambered in a pistol cartridge capable of fully-automatic fire).

In a similar vein, during the Second World War, it was discovered that while SMGs were great at door-kicking, they struggled to make any noticeable contribution to firefights occurring at distances of 200-300 meters, and so a new weapon was needed. The Germans were once again one of the first ones out the gate with a functioning and successful design: a weapon firing a cartridge of rifle diameter, but of shorter length, once again with full-auto capability. This weapon was originally designated the MP 44, but the name was changed (according to legend by Adolph Hitler himself) to Sturmgewehr 44, literally translating as "storm rifle" (as in to storm the walls, the same root as "sturmtruppen". However, in English-speaking militaries, the word used to describe the same action is "assault", and so when some translator got asked what that funny new German word meant, he said "Assault rifle, sir", thus cementing the notion of an assault rifle as being largely the same thing as an SMG, but utilizing a different type of cartridge that afforded it a longer range.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MrJokerRager, Cristobal’s Colon and spiritofamermaid
A_Callow_Youth said:
Ah, so it would be roughly "belt-fed gun", then, though perhaps not inherently, given the Type 92. Linguistic quirks and firearms are two things I greatly enjoy, so I tend to nerd out a bit when they combine.

For instance, one of my favorites is the differentiation between a machine pistol, a submachine gun and an assault rifle. In the trenches of the First World War, it was quickly found that rifles were insufficient for attacking enemy trenches due to their bulk, rate of fire and magazine restrictions. Pistols solved two of these issues, but were still severely hampered by magazine capacity in most cases and reload times for exceptions like the C96. A machine gun would have provided adequate volume of fire for the task at hand, but the machine guns of the time were far too heavy and bulky to haul across no man's land. Thus, most of the powers on the Western Front began experimenting with pairing a machine gun action to a carbine-size platform, where it quickly became apparent that battle rifle cartridges were unsuitable for fully-automatic shoulder fire. The end result were several varieties of pistol-caliber automatic weapons, the most successful of these being the German Machinenpistole 18, or "Machine Pistol, (model of 19)18". Thus, in most European languages this convention stuck, such as the Italian "machinipistoli". However, in the English-speaking world, a US Army officer by the name of John T. Thompson had been working on his own prototype, dubbed the "Annihilator". When the war ended, he instead turned his attention to the US domestic market, but needed a less, eh, soldier-y name for the weapon, settling on selling his invention as the "Thompson Sub-Machine Gun". Thus, in English, there is a distinct difference between a "machine pistol" (a pistol capable of fully-automatic fire) and a "submachine gun" (a carbine-sized weapon chambered in a pistol cartridge capable of fully-automatic fire).

In a similar vein, during the Second World War, it was discovered that while SMGs were great at door-kicking, they struggled to make any noticeable contribution to firefights occurring at distances of 200-300 meters, and so a new weapon was needed. The Germans were once again one of the first ones out the gate with a functioning and successful design: a weapon firing a cartridge of rifle diameter, but of shorter length, once again with full-auto capability. This weapon was originally designated the MP 44, but the name was changed (according to legend by Adolph Hitler himself) to Sturmgewehr 44, literally translating as "storm rifle" (as in to storm the walls, the same root as "sturmtruppen". However, in English-speaking militaries, the word used to describe the same action is "assault", and so when some translator got asked what that funny new German word meant, he said "Assault rifle, sir", thus cementing the notion of an assault rifle as being largely the same thing as an SMG, but utilizing a different type of cartridge that afforded it a longer range.[/url]
Click to expand...
Yeah, that would be a salient example. The Japanese also produced SMGs but only issued them to their Marines.
They preferred rifles and bayonet-fighting (even affixing them to the aforementioned SMGs). Same with the Chinese. In a pinch the Japanese would use captured Garands, and they eventually managed to reverse-engineer one but never produced semiautomatic rifles in any mass quantities. I don't know if the Nationalist Chinese received any MP40s though they had other German arms and equipment. It seems East Asian armies during WW2 were stuck in the 1910s.
addendum: I remember a dumb argument for classifying the AR-15 as an "assault rifle" because the Garand in its heyday supposedly played the same role.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: A_Callow_Youth
Cristobal’s Colon said:
Yeah, that would be a salient example. The Japanese also produced SMGs but only issued them to their Marines.
They preferred rifles and bayonet-fighting (even affixing them to the aforementioned SMGs). Same with the Chinese. In a pinch the Japanese would use captured Garands, and they eventually managed to reverse-engineer one but never produced semiautomatic rifles in any mass quantities. I don't know if the Nationalist Chinese received any MP40s though they had other German arms and equipment. It seems East Asian armies during WW2 were stuck in the 1910s.
addendum: I remember a dumb argument for classifying the AR-15 as an "assault rifle" because the Garand in its heyday supposedly played the same role.
Click to expand...
SMGs? Hell, they stuck that shit on their fucking LMGs:

Type 96.jpg


In all fairness, however, the Americans were really the only ones to achieve ubiquity with semi-automatic weapons. The Soviets messed around with them (SVT/AVT-40), as did the Germans (Gweher 43), but it wasn't really until the SKS and the FN FAL that semi-auto infantry rifles became the norm, and were swiftly replaced by assault rifles.

There is, however, the question of doctrinal thinking. The Russians were trying to arm a million men as quickly and cheaply as possible, so expensive cutting-edge tech was in many cases out of the question, while Germany didn't have the industrial base to properly equip its armies at the start of the war, much less once the strategic bombing campaign started. Only America had the trifecta of industrial capacity, R&D budget and "bullets are cheaper than lives" philosophy to make the Garand work. So, then, what was the roadblock for the Japanese? Probably the industrial one, given how many crazy prototypes of all sorts of things they got around to making, possibly combined with an unhealthy dose of bayonet romanticism, US Marines-tier marksmanship obsession and/or an over-reliance on the machine gun as the volume of fire producer for the squad. If there was any army that really needed semi-auto rifles, it was the Japanese, what with their usage of magazine-fed machine guns meaning that the weapon is going to have a lot of downtime, so I suppose I should do some looking into why they didn't pursue that avenue.

EDIT: regarding that addendum of yours, that would make the AR platform a battle rifle, but the term usually indicates the use of a "traditional" rifle-caliber cartridge, such as .30-06 or 7.62x51 NATO. Semi-auto intermediate caliber rifles sit in a weird spot of not really having a unique name unto themselves, likely due to the aforementioned introduction of the intermediate cartridge alongside the assault rifle, and most semi-auto intermediate caliber rifles in production these days are simply civilianized versions of assault rifles that have had one of the essential qualifiers for being an assault rifle ripped out.

EDIT 2: Ah, shit, we got our asses yoinked across threads.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cristobal’s Colon
A_Callow_Youth said:
SMGs? Hell, they stuck that shit on their fucking LMGs:

View attachment 1744098

In all fairness, however, the Americans were really the only ones to achieve ubiquity with semi-automatic weapons. The Soviets messed around with them (SVT/AVT-40), as did the Germans (Gweher 43), but it wasn't really until the SKS and the FN FAL that semi-auto infantry rifles became the norm, and were swiftly replaced by assault rifles.

There is, however, the question of doctrinal thinking. The Russians were trying to arm a million men as quickly and cheaply as possible, so expensive cutting-edge tech was in many cases out of the question, while Germany didn't have the industrial base to properly equip its armies at the start of the war, much less once the strategic bombing campaign started. Only America had the trifecta of industrial capacity, R&D budget and "bullets are cheaper than lives" philosophy to make the Garand work. So, then, what was the roadblock for the Japanese? Probably the industrial one, given how many crazy prototypes of all sorts of things they got around to making, possibly combined with an unhealthy dose of bayonet romanticism, US Marines-tier marksmanship obsession and/or an over-reliance on the machine gun as the volume of fire producer for the squad. If there was any army that really needed semi-auto rifles, it was the Japanese, what with their usage of magazine-fed machine guns meaning that the weapon is going to have a lot of downtime, so I suppose I should do some looking into why they didn't pursue that avenue.

EDIT: regarding that addendum of yours, that would make the AR platform a battle rifle, but the term usually indicates the use of a "traditional" rifle-caliber cartridge, such as .30-06 or 7.62x51 NATO. Semi-auto intermediate caliber rifles sit in a weird spot of not really having a unique name unto themselves, likely due to the aforementioned introduction of the intermediate cartridge alongside the assault rifle, and most semi-auto intermediate caliber rifles in production these days are simply civilianized versions of assault rifles that have had one of the essential qualifiers for being an assault rifle ripped out.

EDIT 2: Ah, shit, we got our asses yoinked across threads.
Click to expand...
The "Garand is an assault rifle" argument seems to have more basis in video games than reality, and as you mentioned, ignores the role of cartridge. Garands are heavy and have a relatively tiny magazine. The Japanese (and by extension, Asian) preference for bayonets was rooted in tradition. As you know, they also used swords. The Nationalist Chinese did as well.

It was for lack of raw materials and general industrial means that many of their most compelling prototypes (such as the 10-round Garand copy) were never realized en masse. Large-scale changes which were realized, such as the move to a powerful 7.7mm cartridge, came too late and did not address the issue at hand: their main infantry rifle was a glorified bolt-action club.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: A_Callow_Youth
Cristobal’s Colon said:
The "Garand is an assault rifle" argument seems to have more basis in video games than reality, and as you mentioned, ignores the role of cartridge. Garands are heavy and have a relatively tiny magazine. The Japanese (and by extension, Asian) preference for bayonets was rooted in tradition. As you know, they also used swords. The Nationalist Chinese did as well.

It was for lack of raw materials and general industrial means that many of their most compelling prototypes (such as the 10-round Garand copy) were never realized en masse. Other changes, such as the move to a powerful 7.7mm cartridge, came too late and did not address the issue at hand: their main infantry rifle was a glorified bolt-action club.
Click to expand...
I fucking hate CoD: Ghosts, but if there is one damned thing it did right, it was move the semi-auto rifles into their own category. Maybe one day we'll get the word out that guns in video games have as much bearing on reality as driving a car does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cristobal’s Colon
A_Callow_Youth said:
I fucking hate CoD: Ghosts, but if there is one damned thing it did right, it was move the semi-auto rifles into their own category. Maybe one day we'll get the word out that guns in video games have as much bearing on reality as driving a car does.
Click to expand...
Half-Life's depiction of the MP5 is cringe af.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back