they're both LR-308 variations and differ in accessories and fine details. Diamond Back is like PSA in many ways, and do make major components in-house from forgings and blanks and use typical 7075 and 4150 as their main materials. don't expect frills though. out of the box it's a good semi-auto 308.
why the fuck is the p320 so complicated inside? Maybe I'm spoiled with my older style guns but christ almighty it looks like a raygun inside compared to this:
There’s a picture, which I can't find right now, that caused some headscratching amongst Finnish gun people going around earlier this year of a tanker KP with an actual stock. It had the pistol grip and looked rather well made which got people to wonder was it just a individual modification by an enterprising carpenter or an actual factory mod.
Thay would be if you want to put it in the receiver, what I'm looking for is something that looks like that but would wrap around a sling that you'd remove with velcro, like on a duffle bag that has that padded section on it for your shoulder.
I'm not aware of any off-the-shelf products like that, but you could probably get a roll of adhesive-backed velcro and use that. It'd need to either be a sew-on patch, or have some pretty stout glue, but I think it'd work. A sling made of very stiff fabric would probably work best, so the fabric is less prone to twisting underneath the glue and pulling away from it.
There are slings out there that have Velcro loops material already stitched on like this one (note: I have no experience with this particular model, but it popped up first while searching). Combine that with some shotgun cards and you'd probably be good to go and be able to either load from the cards on the sling or rapidly replace empty cards on your gun from the sling.
Huh....
I might remember wrong, but could've been one of those images that they managed to download from the "modern SA-Kuva" archive, before it was deleted. There were some other gems there too, like this one off prototype of a shortened RK-62:
It just wasn't nearly as good as every other 7.62 battle rifle that came into existence, namely both the FAL and the G3.
I think the better question to answer is that what made the M14 better than any of its contemporaries at the time?
your experience with the FAL is tainted by its recency. The FAL the M14 went up against in the trials was much more evenly matched. It was a magazine fed, open top, stripper clip compatible battle rifle with wood furniture with no good way to mount a optic . . . exactly like the M14.
Most modern striker-fired pistols are like this, but the P320 in particular is a little bit moreso because of the chassis system. They had to design it in a way such that all of the FCU parts don't interact with the frame of the gun, so that it can be swapped into different frames.
My VP9 is literally Kraut Space Magic compared to my USPs. It really is retarded what everyone but Glock has to do to get around Glock's patents of their very simple design. They pretty much figured out the most efficient way to do it right off the bat. What they really got right with the design is the near toolless maintenance, where you can detail strip the entire pistol down with nothing but a punch. This design feature oddly enough is something it has in common with the 1911, as with a mil-spec 1911 all you need to take one completely apart is an empty shell casing for the grip screws. Granted the USP isn't exactly difficult as you will need a hammer to punch a few pins out, but the VP9 has a fucking blind pin in the slide, I have no idea how one would go about pulling it outside of threading a tiny easyout or screw into the roll pin, and then pulling it out (obviously replacing it with a new one).
The Glock performance trigger fixes all my complaints with a stock Glock trigger.
