Mega Rad Gun Thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
BikeLock said:
It really is retarded what everyone but Glock has to do to get around Glock's patents of their very simple design.
Click to expand...
dude there was so much of that in the early breech loading era from about 1851-1880. So many goofy revolvers to get around colt patents or the rollin-white patent. with shotguns there were hundreds of action types that were specifically designed to avoid infringement on the Scott-spindle toplever (1865) patent and the patent on the Purdey double under bolts (1863). as soon as those patents ran out in the middle 1880s almost every shotgun was made with these designs. to this day. Any SxS or O/U gun you can buy new today will have a scott spindle toplever and purdey under bolts. Every single one.

It was a very interesting time. many of these guns were actually built very well and worked just fine but were overly complicated.
 
World Famous Quasi Payer said:
The M14 would have made a great civilian rifle. However it was a terrible combat rifle for the simple fact it was obsolete before it was even issued. That a bunch of combat veterans didn't take one look at the STG rifles, and go "everyone needs one of these!" Is the most mind boggling facts of history
Click to expand...
Combat veterans dont matter.

Its senior officers who never spent time kicking in door after door or patrolling half the day that are making the decision with what rifle to go with. The massive draw backs of weight, length, ammo capacity are meaningless facts to them as its all words on paper, not something theyve genuinely experience.
 
Martys_not_smarty said:
Bit of a dumb question but does a out of the box 870 that comes with a +1 cap on it have the dimples removed from the tube? The mom and pop shop by me had a witness protection tac14 and off the bat i'd want to replace the follower with something that isn't a coke bottle top.
Click to expand...
the only ones NIB without dimples were Express models with the extension from the factory, the Police models, and specific Wingmaster and Magnum (3.5" chamber) models. all others since 1955 had dimples either punched or impressed.

the WP Tac-14 has dimples from the factory. if it has a +1 extension, then they were likely removed after market.
 
Last edited:
Friedrich Hayek's Ghost said:
My assumption about the M14, based on vibes and literally nothing else, was that it's probably a perfectly fine military rifle, but not well-suited to the places it got fielded. It also always seems to be that whenever the military adopts a new rifle, the logistics to properly support them always seems to roll out just enough later that it sours the infantry's opinion on the rifle, and the M14 was only in service for a few years, at least as the main issue rifle.
Click to expand...
The M7 will turn out the same way. It is a rifle explicitly designed for the combat environments of the Middle East and Afghanistan getting fielded right as land wars are returning to Europe.

The funny thing is that the M4 (and AR15 platform in general) that it’s replacing was explicitly designed for those European battlefields.
 
DoNotFeedTheSneed said:
The funny thing is that the M4 (and AR15 platform in general) that it’s replacing was explicitly designed for those European battlefields.
Click to expand...
thats actually wrong. The M4 was bought to replace the aging fleet of M1, M2 and M3 carbines (and pistols as a primary arm) in use by rear line troops and vehicle crews. the M16 was bought because the troops needed a controllable rifle in close quarters combat in indo-china.

Really the last rifle explicitly developed for use in Europe (specifically the north German plain) was the M14. The combat was expected to be fairly long range across large farm fields etc.

The M7 was developed for Afghani mountain warfare where the M4 proved inadequate at long range vs insurgents armed with PKMs and other full size rifles. often these engagements exceeded 600 yards and US troops only way to respond was use of the M240, M2HMG or artillery/air strikes. That was the goal when the programs started. the AP requirement was mission creep.
 
Romulus augustulus said:
The M7 was developed for Afghani mountain warfare where the M4 proved inadequate at long range vs insurgents armed with PKMs and other full size rifles. often these engagements exceeded 600 yards and US troops only way to respond was use of the M240, M2HMG or artillery/air strikes. That was the goal when the programs started. the AP requirement was mission creep.
Click to expand...
So the army wasted money to make a rifle that literally every off the shelf semi-auto .308 can do?
 
Friedrich Hayek's Ghost said:
The cartridge they developed for it might live on as a MMG/GPMG round, at least, but it's going to have severe first-mover issues as they very publicly demonstrate all of the issues with their design so everyone else can copy their homework.
Click to expand...
.277 sigger is basically .270 winchester's retarded, stunted brother. MMG/GPMG's are already heavy fuckers, why not just go with the tried and true long action .270?

rifle cartridges were pretty much a solved problem by 1950 at the very latest. by that point there was a tried and true cartridge in any caliber you'd like. Everything since then has just been marketing consumerist bullshit.
 
Romulus augustulus said:
thats actually wrong. The M4 was bought to replace the aging fleet of M1, M2 and M3 carbines (and pistols as a primary arm) in use by rear line troops and vehicle crews. the M16 was bought because the troops needed a controllable rifle in close quarters combat in indo-china.

Really the last rifle explicitly developed for use in Europe (specifically the north German plain) was the M14. The combat was expected to be fairly long range across large farm fields etc.

The M7 was developed for Afghani mountain warfare where the M4 proved inadequate at long range vs insurgents armed with PKMs and other full size rifles. often these engagements exceeded 600 yards and US troops only way to respond was use of the M240, M2HMG or artillery/air strikes. That was the goal when the programs started. the AP requirement was mission creep.
Click to expand...
Even in the mid 1950s the full power rifle cartridge was obsolete in the average rifle as 7.62x39 existed as did the .222 Remington from 1950, which was beefed up to .223 in 1957.

After WW2 the US army figured out that most infantry combat is 300 yards/ meters or less
 
I'd much rather carry around an M4 over the M7, simply due to the fact that the M7 looks like it would feel like carrying around an industrial printer after 3 days of being stuck with it in theater. Then again, we used to play rock, paper, scissors to see who had to carry the M9 on stateside training sorties, so I'm probably not the person to ask lol.
 
World Famous Quasi Payer said:
So the army wasted money to make a rifle that literally every off the shelf semi-auto .308 can do?
Click to expand...
Or even, I dunno, an AR rifle with a barrel longer than 14.5 inches, like maybe 16 or 20 inches. Thats crazy talk though, its not like the US military has a bunch of ARs with those barrel lengths, or like the cartridge (5.56) was specifically designed for a 20 inch barrel.
 
Among Us Gaming said:
Or even, I dunno, an AR rifle with a barrel longer than 14.5 inches, like maybe 16 or 20 inches. Thats crazy talk though, its not like the US military has a bunch of ARs with those barrel lengths, or like the cartridge (5.56) was specifically designed for a 20 inch barrel.
Click to expand...
Why all the crazy talk?
We have taxpayer money to spend damnit!
 
Among Us Gaming said:
Or even, I dunno, an AR rifle with a barrel longer than 14.5 inches, like maybe 16 or 20 inches. Thats crazy talk though, it’s not like the US military has a bunch of ARs with those barrel lengths, or like the cartridge (5.56) was specifically designed for a 20 inch barrel.
Click to expand...
I’m a fan of 5.56 but it is certainly not comparable to 308 at distance.
 
+P+ 9mm fires out of a sub2000 with minimal issues, that being the receiver slamming back with disturbing force and the receiver being stuck in battery once. Kinda spooky. Never fired overpressured ammo before. Unless you count "bear load" 185gn .357's out of a 90's Taurus 608 to be more concerning.
I'm not doing it again so I'm unsure what to do with the extra underwood rounds other than pull them and see what kinda powder it uses. And what design the bullet is. I honestly would have expected them to crimp the case.
 
gildersleeve said:
+P+ 9mm fires out of a sub2000 with minimal issues, that being the receiver slamming back with disturbing force and the receiver being stuck in battery once. Kinda spooky. Never fired overpressured ammo before. Unless you count "bear load" 185gn .357's out of a 90's Taurus 608 to be more concerning.
Click to expand...
The primary failure point of the Sub2K is the hinge and plastic surrounding the hinge, I'd take a very close look for hairline cracks.
 
WhoBusTank69 said:
The primary failure point of the Sub2K is the hinge and plastic surrounding the hinge, I'd take a very close look for hairline cracks.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info. Wasn't aware of that. I've put quite a lot of ammo through it so it'll be time to look. The breech and bolt face didn't look damaged afterwards. So that's all I looked at.
 
Pretend To Imagine said:
I’m a fan of 5.56 but it is certainly not comparable to 308 at distance.
Click to expand...
Not comparable, but somewhat serviceable. US army itself states that with a rifle (20" barrel) the max range is 600 yards for a single target, and 875 yards for area targets, whereas the carbine (14.5" barrel) has a max range of 650 for area targets.

Comparable to 308? No.
Serviceable? Should be with a 20" barrel.
 
gildersleeve said:
crimp the case.
Click to expand...
high pressure rounds with a crimp leave little shavings in the bore. low pressure / long OAL it's preferable to crimp to maintain consistent placement of the bullet square to the shoulder for headspace.

also ngl a fixed DMR-style M7 in .277 Fury might be a nice replacement for the old M14 DMRs we still have kicking around. the mk 20 is expensive and limited in ammunition selection due to OAL issues, and the M110 is obnoxious when you have to lug around the entire kit since it doesn't easily fit in a backpack without displacing your sustainment gear. a "short" barreled DMR with folding stock, integrated suppressor and dedicated AP ammo that can handle barrier penetration and point targets at range and share ammunition with a new lightweight GPMG sounds like a decent idea. air assault, paratroopers, and mountain units already have enough gear to deal with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom