View Full Version : Firearm Platforms That Never Made Any Sense To You...
For me it was select fire, sniper rifles, both from HK.
So the first one I sorta get, the G3-SG1...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3281/3013887739_6e5c7633b4_b.jpg
You select G3 production rifles that are particularly accurate and install a set trigger group and add optics, which results in the most accurate G3 package you can put together without reinventing the wheel. This was largely a response to Munich a proved a capable platform when messing with Baader Meinhoff / RAF types.
But since they took the time to redesign the trigger group with a set trigger option, why keep the select fire option at all? If you do go "full auto" you are going to dramatically shorten the "inherently accurate" aspects of the rifle in question.
The comes the MSG90, sniper rifle.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/hkusa/20140509151532/HK-MSG90A1xX.jpg
And it's a "designed as" sniper rifle with a tuned trigger, reinforced receiver and optics but it's still a swing down lower. And while most, especially A1 variants have a 0-1 trigger group, you can swap in a standard G3 or even a G3-SG1 trigger group resulting in yet another select fire sniper rifle. I think I even recall early MSG90s with SEF groups.
Just seems odd. The PSG1 for example will NOT accept a swing down trigger group, so no way to have a select fire PSG1, which would make sense. But still has most of the other benefits of the G3 such as accepting 20 round standard magazines.
Then reading Chris Kyle's book, apparently he used to take his Knights M110 upper and drop it on his standard issue M4 lower. Now clearly he was an effective shot, but why on earth would you do that? The M4 stock is pretty much agreed on to be a less accurate platform than a fixed stock and it really only makes sense on a carbine type rifle.
And there are a couple other examples that existed in the 80s and 90s that were sniper weapons but had a full auto capacity. Why? I can't think of two things that have so little to do with each other.
I can see dropping optics on a G3 or FAL and in semi trying to place "your best accurate" shot for something important, but the reverse doesn't seem as practical.
Then reading Chris Kyle's book, apparently he used to take his Knights M110 upper and drop it on his standard issue M4 lower.
That won’t work...
The “Gov’t” profile A2 barrel has always driven me nuts in a WTF were they thinking kind of way. Along with burst, and the A2 stock. I’m also not a fan of under-barrel grenade launchers.
Also, Taurus Judge. Nothing about it makes any sense.
Any modern plastic, striker, double stack pistol in .45 ACP.
Most alternative to 5.56mm chamberings. Many of them manage to combine mediocre BC with mediocre velocity.
INSAS.
Well, supposedly, in Brazil, the judge is strictly a 410 revolver, with a smooth bore, and not compatible with 45 colt at all. Supposedly, it was built for judges to use for defense in the courtroom, and that's how it got its name.
But Brazil does not have batfe, or the nfa, and so, changes had to be made to export them here. If the above is true, there is likely two models, one for export.
Whether that makes any more sense or not, idk.
Yeah, a full auto sniper rifle sounds like an oxymoron.
I don't get pistol caliber AR guns. It would seem to me that the whole point of sacrificing the power and range of a rifle cartridge was so you could get a more compact, light, and easy to carry/deploy weapon package.
If it's gonna be rifle sized and weight, might as well shoot rifle cartridges.
sundance435
02-26-19, 07:41
HK33, G36, any of the "short mag" calibers, any "new" double stack hammer fired polymer gun
HK33, G36, any of the "short mag" calibers, any "new" double stack hammer fired polymer gun
The HK and Beretta offerings are pretty good pistols.
Doc Safari
02-26-19, 08:43
The M14 as a "sniper" rifle. If I understand the weapon's quirks correctly, it takes constant attention to keep the thing to any accuracy standard better than "several" MOA. It just wasn't made to be anything but a grunt's battle rifle and trying to turn it into a sniper rifle is like trying to turn an AK into a sniper rifle.
I also don't get making a "pistol" out of what should normally be a rifle. Only the SBR laws have led to AR & AK pistols.
ramairthree
02-26-19, 09:38
The upper lower combo you mention does not make any sense.
If someone had a 5.56 DM rifle with optics, fixed stock, bipod, etc. running like a Swiss watch,
But then got shifted roles, I could see how they might want to pull the bipod legs and throw it on a lower with an adjustable stock.
ramairthree
02-26-19, 09:43
I am going to step on some toes-
The whole pistol chassis system makes no sense to me.
Not a lick.
Why in the world would I want to dick around with a box of parts that take up as much room as a G26, G19, G17, and threaded barrel MOR G34-
But have to switch a part between them with only one functioning at a time.
Why not just have the four pistols?
AKs and FALs
People who care about them deserve to be on a cross
The MK23 Offensive Pistol.
TheChunkNorris
02-26-19, 10:38
For me it was select fire, sniper rifles, both from HK.
So the first one I sorta get, the G3-SG1...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3281/3013887739_6e5c7633b4_b.jpg
You select G3 production rifles that are particularly accurate and install a set trigger group and add optics, which results in the most accurate G3 package you can put together without reinventing the wheel. This was largely a response to Munich a proved a capable platform when messing with Baader Meinhoff / RAF types.
But since they took the time to redesign the trigger group with a set trigger option, why keep the select fire option at all? If you do go "full auto" you are going to dramatically shorten the "inherently accurate" aspects of the rifle in question.
The comes the MSG90, sniper rifle.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/hkusa/20140509151532/HK-MSG90A1xX.jpg
And it's a "designed as" sniper rifle with a tuned trigger, reinforced receiver and optics but it's still a swing down lower. And while most, especially A1 variants have a 0-1 trigger group, you can swap in a standard G3 or even a G3-SG1 trigger group resulting in yet another select fire sniper rifle. I think I even recall early MSG90s with SEF groups.
Just seems odd. The PSG1 for example will NOT accept a swing down trigger group, so no way to have a select fire PSG1, which would make sense. But still has most of the other benefits of the G3 such as accepting 20 round standard magazines.
Then reading Chris Kyle's book, apparently he used to take his Knights M110 upper and drop it on his standard issue M4 lower. Now clearly he was an effective shot, but why on earth would you do that? The M4 stock is pretty much agreed on to be a less accurate platform than a fixed stock and it really only makes sense on a carbine type rifle.
And there are a couple other examples that existed in the 80s and 90s that were sniper weapons but had a full auto capacity. Why? I can't think of two things that have so little to do with each other.
I can see dropping optics on a G3 or FAL and in semi trying to place "your best accurate" shot for something important, but the reverse doesn't seem as practical.
I chuckled after reading this because you’re 100% spot on. The first time I saw a MSG I wondered the same thing.
The "National Match" SKS variant always got a good laugh out of me
Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk
The MK23 Offensive Pistol.That thing is almost big enough to be a crew served weapon
Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk
That thing is almost big enough to be a crew served weapon
Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk
And yet for some reason it is one of my bucket list guns.
Then reading Chris Kyle's book, apparently he used to take his Knights M110 upper and drop it on his standard issue M4 lower. Now clearly he was an effective shot, but why on earth would you do that? The M4 stock is pretty much agreed on to be a less accurate platform than a fixed stock and it really only makes sense on a carbine type rifle..
How does a M110 upper fit on a m4 lower?
Then reading Chris Kyle's book, apparently he used to take his Knights M110 upper and drop it on his standard issue M4 lower. Now clearly he was an effective shot, but why on earth would you do that? The M4 stock is pretty much agreed on to be a less accurate platform than a fixed stock and it really only makes sense on a carbine type rifle.
I know it's not considered kosher to speak ill of the dead, but Chris Kyle was a notorious lier. The man made several outlandish claims about his life and service that absolutely weren't true. For instance, he told a reporter during an interview that in 2009 he shot and killed two men who attempted to carjack him outside of a gas station in Midlothian, Texas. He claimed that law enforcement declined to investigate after:
He said he gave the responding officers a phone number to call. Presumably someone high up in the government explained to the officers who Kyle was. He said the officers were very understanding, that they didn’t want to drag a just-home, highly decoratated veteran into a messy legal situation that would surely draw a harsh media spotlight. A story which is utterly ridiculous.
https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburner/2013/02/confirmed-american-sniper-chris-kyle-killed-two-men-at-a-gas-station-in-2009/
Then there's the story he told about how he was inserted into New Orleans during hurricane Katrina and sniped looters from the roof of the Superdome.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/30/the-complicated-but-unveriable-legacy-of-chris-kyle-the-deadliest-sniper-in-american-history/
And don't even get me started on his imaginary bar fight with Jesse Ventura.
While I am grateful for Kyle's service, I just don't believe a word that came out of his mouth or from his book. Maybe PTSD is to blame? I don't know, but I know I don't believe him.
The "National Match" SKS variant always got a good laugh out of me
Sent from my SM-J727T using TapatalkOh, well, then, you'd just adore the norinco national match AK.
The MK23 Offensive Pistol.
You have to think of that thing like the Borchardt 93 which led to the Luger. The Mk23 was the first gun with accessory rails for a mounted light, lasers and all that crap. It led to the USP and I think they were both the first ambi mag release handguns and a lot of other firsts.
TheChunkNorris
02-26-19, 16:34
How does a M110 upper fit on a m4 lower?
Nope
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oh, well, then, you'd just adore the norinco national match AK.Actually I think I am mistaken in remembering it to be an SKS. It is indeed the mak-91 national match I was thinking of... and also the only norinco "national match" anything that came up on a quick search. Last I saw one was almost 20 years ago.
Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk
Doc Safari
02-26-19, 16:47
Actually I think I am mistaken in remembering it to be an SKS. It is indeed the mak-91 national match I was thinking of... and also the only norinco "national match" anything that came up on a quick search. Last I saw one was almost 20 years ago.
Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk
I had a milled Polytech "National Match" AK. I believe IIRC that it was part of the Legend series, but I could be wrong about that. It was like the last AK I bought just before the 1994 ban.
It had an extra long barrel that made it look more like an RPK.
I had a milled Polytech "National Match" AK. I believe IIRC that it was part of the Legend series, but I could be wrong about that. It was like the last AK I bought just before the 1994 ban.
It had an extra long barrel that made it look more like an RPK.Yes, that's the one.
A sample came through the shop a few yrs ago, guy brought it in for consignment.
Every time I looked at it, I chuckled a bit.
Nope
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have been informed that it was actually a Mk18 upper on a M4 lower, but I'm pretty sure that isn't what he wrote about in his book.
Taurus judge and the DB’s that say you’re judged when shooting one, tech 9, Mossberg night stick ( a real WTF idea ), AR pistols, Henry Mares leg 30 30 and the .50 Desert Eagle pistols.
I have been informed that it was actually a Mk18 upper on a M4 lower, but I'm pretty sure that isn't what he wrote about in his book.
The Mk 18 CQBR (close quarters barrel receiver) was originally, I believe, an upper half that was placed on the M4(a1) lower half, so that would make sense.
TheChunkNorris
02-26-19, 18:56
I have been informed that it was actually a Mk18 upper on a M4 lower, but I'm pretty sure that isn't what he wrote about in his book.
Isn’t a MK18 already on a M4 type lower?
I had a milled Polytech "National Match" AK. I believe IIRC that it was part of the Legend series, but I could be wrong about that. It was like the last AK I bought just before the 1994 ban.
It had an extra long barrel that made it look more like an RPK.My gunsmith from back in my ft bragg days had one lurking around his shop, but we never did take it out back and shoot it to see if it was worth a hoot. I dont recall if it was busted, a project, or even his or a customers, . All I can remember is the long ass barrel and thumbhole stock.
More recently a semi auto collector friend of mine turned up an older chinese scope he thinks was part of the package or an additional accessory to it. Woohoo lol. I havent heard if he found a rifle for it yet. However if he does Im getting a box of 7.62x39, a pair of clown shoes, my trusty reflective belt, and dragging him to the range
Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk
The folding Glock frame doohickey, Full Conceal. W....T....actual...F?
Business_Casual
02-26-19, 19:23
RPK-74
TheChunkNorris
02-26-19, 19:24
The folding Glock frame doohickey, Full Conceal. W....T....actual...F?
Oh man that’s a great one right there.
My gunsmith from back in my ft bragg days had one lurking around his shop, but we never did take it out back and shoot it to see if it was worth a hoot. I dont recall if it was busted, a project, or even his or a customers, . All I can remember is the long ass barrel and thumbhole stock.
More recently a semi auto collector friend of mine turned up an older chinese scope he thinks was part of the package or an additional accessory to it. Woohoo lol. I havent heard if he found a rifle for it yet. However if he does Im getting a box of 7.62x39, a pair of clown shoes, my trusty reflective belt, and dragging him to the range
Sent from my SM-J727T using TapatalkOurs had this weird side mount, sort of a dovetail thing, with a couple screws through it holding it on.
No scope or mount.
No thumbhole, standard AK stock and pg, wood.
pointblank4445
02-26-19, 22:00
I chuckled after reading this because you’re 100% spot on. The first time I saw a MSG I wondered the same thing.
The MSG90 was never meant to be full-auto. The lower push-pin is long since a casualty of US regulatory bull**** and not exclusive to select fire function. The push pin itself actually holds the lower in place and prevents some of the slop you you will find on 91/93/94 commercial lowers. In that case, it's a victim of circustance...and gets lumped in with the "bad kids".
Think of the G3SG1 and the 33SG1's like the an early parallel to an M27IAR. It's mostly a DMR with a fun switch. In that respect, the G3SG1 wouldn't seem to be getting as much out of the auto function as its 5.56 little brother. A lighter more cost effective option to those that can't swing a scoped 21/21a1/21E perhaps...?
The M14 as a "sniper" rifle. If I understand the weapon's quirks correctly, it takes constant attention to keep the thing to any accuracy standard better than "several" MOA. It just wasn't made to be anything but a grunt's battle rifle and trying to turn it into a sniper rifle is like trying to turn an AK into a sniper rifle.
I tend to agree. I went through a sniper/countersniper course at the USAMU in the late 80's. We shot the M21 system and I plumb enjoyed shooting the rifle.
One of the things that I remember was routinely getting hits on the steel Ivan in the commander's cupola of the BMP mockup they had at 1,000. At the time that was the furthest I'd ever shot.
We weren't allowed to do anything but lock the bolt to the rear and pull patches to clean the bore due to the glass bedding. No doubt the armorers were busy tuning them back up after a class like ours.
I've always had a soft spot for the M-14, the Marines were still using them in boot camp and at the barracks I was stationed at the last couple years before I ETS'd. I only fired the M16 for qual one time during my Marine Corps time.
MountainRaven
02-27-19, 00:08
I believe that both the G3SG1 and the MSG90 were intended as marksman's rifles, so having components that could be swapped out with standard G3 parts would have been a concern.
The M110's upper couldn't be put on an M4 lower... however, there are some Mk12 SPR variants that use a carbine receiver extension, often with with a SOPMOD stock. Why? Because the A1 or A2 stocks the fixed stock SPR variants come with are less than ideal to use with armor under certain conditions. Tying into the first bit, the first Mk12s were made with M16A1 lowers - partially because they were available and partially because, IIRC, the full-auto trigger had a more consistent trigger pull than the burst triggers in M16A2/4s and M4s.
Someone else mentioned the HK33 - at the time it came out, there weren't many options for 5.56mm. You had the M16, the FN CAL, the Stoner 63, the AR-18, and the HK33. The M16 was pretty much at the height of its teething/QC issues. Nobody was making the AR-18 (and frankly, the gun wasn't that good). The Stoner 63 is super cool, but also ridiculously complicated. And the FN CAL was ridiculously expensive. Given the alternatives, I cannot fault anyone for choosing an HK33 over the competition at the time. And if I were buying a 5.56mm rifle in 1970, while I know now that the M16A1's teething issues were behind it, I don't know that I'd know that then. So I'd personally probably have chosen an HK33. In 1970, without the benefit of hindsight. (With the benefit of hindsight, I'd take the M16A1 if money was no object - and the HK33 if it was.)
As for what gun doesn't make sense to me: The Mini-14. Ruger took the worst US service rifle of the 20th Century, shrunk it down for 5.56mm, simplified it, cheaped it up, and actually expected to get military sales for it. Even more insanely, there were some militaries that bought the damned things! In a world where you could get M16A1s, AR-18s, FNCs, AUGs, HK33s, Galils, why anyone would think a dwarf M14 was a good idea is beyond me - and whoever thought it was a good idea to buy them for their military probably should have been made to take a piss test.
I believe that both the G3SG1 and the MSG90 were intended as marksman's rifles, so having components that could be swapped out with standard G3 parts would have been a concern.
Look again, the SG1 trigger group already has a F setting and pretty sure the first MSG90s did as well.
MorphCross
02-27-19, 01:59
SA80 aka L85A1.
SA80 aka L85A1.
Much as they suck, if you look at the EM-1/EM-2 in .280 they really were onto something before we forced all NATO countries to go with the 7.62x51. Granted that gave us the FAL / L1A1, but the original concept was decades ahead of everyone else.
You have to think of that thing like the Borchardt 93 which led to the Luger. The Mk23 was the first gun with accessory rails for a mounted light, lasers and all that crap. It led to the USP and I think they were both the first ambi mag release handguns and a lot of other firsts.
The CZ 82 and 83 have ambi mag releases (and safeties) and pre-date the Mk23.
Large blowback .380 (or .32 ACP) pistols never made sense to me.
Andy
I think Steyr meant the Mk 12 upper with a regular M4 lower as in no fixed stock, two stage deal
I have been informed that it was actually a Mk18 upper on a M4 lower, but I'm pretty sure that isn't what he wrote about in his book.
MK12?
The Beretta 92FS is the answer to a question no one in their right mind should've ever asked. :(
The Beretta 92FS is the answer to a question no one in their right mind should've ever asked. :(
Interesting.
Government profile, easily slicked up trigger, wide ejection port.... checks a lot of boxes.
No it isn’t a Glock but most importantly it isn’t a Sig which is pure AIDS
ramairthree
02-28-19, 01:53
The Beretta 92FS is the answer to a question no one in their right mind should've ever asked. :(
At the time of evaluation non tier 1 SOF, let alone the military in general, had 1911a1s with no new frames since 1944, beat to piss magazines, and guns that keiterally rattled in you hands with poor reliability and dismal accuracy.
One other pistol at the time matched it for off the shelf accuracy and reliability. At least that was available in the US for testing and submitted.
Sure, it was designed about 50 years ago.
Busting on it now is sort of like saying the 1970 LS6 Chevelle SS, RAIV GTO, Buick GSX, or W30 442,
That crushed all brand new production cars in 1984 they went up against totally suck because a new 2019 Camaro SS, Mustang GT, or Challenger 6.4 all handle, brake, 0-60, and quarter mile better with better mpg, convenience, and reliability are available.
The Steyr AUG..... :p
You joke but I think they are neat. Stuck in the 80s, but interesting. And not a Tavor or MDR which is important.
You joke but I think they are neat. Stuck in the 80s, but interesting. And not a Tavor or MDR which is important.
Oh trust me I want one because Karl reasons. But bullpups just don't make much since to me other than to get as compact as possible weapon without having to get a stamp. I just don't see why some armed forces use them when other systems are available that can fill the need for compactness.
Oh trust me I want one because Karl reasons. But bullpups just don't make much since to me other than to get as compact as possible weapon without having to get a stamp. I just don't see why some armed forces use them when other systems are available that can fill the need for compactness.
Because Mk. 18s weren’t a thing back then. The original XM177 had some issues and needed ironing out. And nobody uses the AUG anymore really. I know New Zealand uses LMTs and I think Austria and Australia use 416s now or are about to.
But of all the bullpups, the AUG was a huge success and actually worked. The SA80 just didn’t.
For its time the AUG was ahead of the curve: Integrated optic, balanced weight, quick change barrel, simple maintenance.
That said, a CAR-15 or a Colt M16 Carbine with an optic would destroy it.
The Beretta 92FS is the answer to a question no one in their right mind should've ever asked. :(
Blasphemy! Seriously. Italian made 92 series pistols are fantastic, elegant, aesthetically pleasing and reliable. I personally find the 92 to be one of the best looking pistols ever made.
The Steyr AUG..... :p
More blasphemy!
- Best QD barrel design of any small arm, rivaling those of most LMGa.
- Highly reliable and vetted.
- Durable parts that rarely need replacing.
- Highly innovative (for the time) integral optic, now completely modular with the M1.
- Option to use the excellent translucent 30 or 42 round AUG mag or M16 mags.
- Multiple barrel length options.
- 9mm conversion kits available. Costly, but available.
- Plentiful spare parts (albeit costly) for those who like to hoard. These have been continuously available since the 80s, and now more widely available than ever.
- 27” OAL with 16” barrel, pull the barrel and its 22” which will fit in a small backpack or large courier bag. All the while not NFA and no need for a pistol brace on a short barreled pistol pseudo SBR.
Yes it’s a bullpup. Yes the trigger isn’t great. If you can get over those two attributes, it really is a great rifle.
Agreed. Before Glocks, Berettas were the high speed gun and arguably beat out the 226.
Agreed. Before Glocks, Berettas were the high speed gun and arguably beat out the 226.
Did as well as the 226.
The price for a 226 was cheaper than the Beretta, but the price for the 226 plus requested accessories was higher than the price for the Beretta plus accessories. And the Navy still went with the 226.
Oh trust me I want one because Karl reasons. But bullpups just don't make much since to me other than to get as compact as possible weapon without having to get a stamp. I just don't see why some armed forces use them when other systems are available that can fill the need for compactness.
3 second barrel changes for the win.
Did as well as the 226.
The price for a 226 was cheaper than the Beretta, but the price for the 226 plus requested accessories was higher than the price for the Beretta plus accessories. And the Navy still went with the 226.
Did as well? I dunno. The main gripe was that the slides broke. Yet the 226 has frames that crack.
If 92G-SDs happened in the late 70s there would be no 226s ever.
I’d argue that the Beretta suppresses better too.
Averageman
02-28-19, 17:22
The Ruger Mini 14.
Everything that made the original platform M14 inaccurate in a 5.56 platform.
Plus Bill was a dick which didn't help when you wanted 30 round magazines.
TheChunkNorris
02-28-19, 18:01
The Ruger Mini 14.
Everything that made the original platform M14 inaccurate in a 5.56 platform.
Plus Bill was a dick which didn't help when you wanted 30 round magazines.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190228/f35ec8de5030e56256fe472c01acef01.jpg
My AC556K is accurate and the newer Mini’s are better than you’d think. 30rd mags are easy to find now a day.
Did as well? I dunno. The main gripe was that the slides broke. Yet the 226 has frames that crack.
If 92G-SDs happened in the late 70s there would be no 226s ever.
I’d argue that the Beretta suppresses better too.
I think you are confusing the XM9 trials with later issues where SEALs were feeding their 226s +P+ subgun ammo, which of course didn't work very well and would have also wrecked a Beretta.
MountainRaven
02-28-19, 21:43
I think you are confusing the XM9 trials with later issues where SEALs were feeding their 226s +P+ subgun ammo, which of course didn't work very well and would have also wrecked a Beretta.
I believe the entire reason the Navy bought the SiGs was because they were breaking Berettas with their stupid over-pressure ammo.
So apparently, *if* the Army had gotten SiGs, the Navy would have gone to Berettas.
In any event, today, Berettas are cheaper and have better QC than SiGs.
I believe the entire reason the Navy bought the SiGs was because they were breaking Berettas with their stupid over-pressure ammo.
So apparently, *if* the Army had gotten SiGs, the Navy would have gone to Berettas.
In any event, today, Berettas are cheaper and have better QC than SiGs.
But I don't think the Navy ever went with Berettas at all.
At the end of XM9 the Army and Marines went with the M9, but the Navy went with the SIG. And the Army used the right ammo in their M9s without issue really until we took them into desert environments where that wide open slide top seemed to be a black hole for blowing dust and sand. Had we ended up fighting wars someplace in Europe like we expected the Beretta would have performed brilliantly.
The Navy being the Navy rarely shot their SIGs except for the NSW guys who regularly shot at everything all the damn time. And they didn't have time for two different kinds of 9mm so they regularly forgot to pack their 124 gr. 9mm pistol ammo and just used that +P+ stuff that seems to work great in the MP5s in their SIGs as well with predictable results. But they are busy shooting people in the face and don't have time to listen to the difference in two 9mm loads. The Navy also fielded the HK P7M13 to a lesser degree.
hotrodder636
03-01-19, 05:49
We had many M9s onboard during my time. The only people who didn’t have the Beretta were the pilots (Sig) and the SEALs and they had whatever the they wanted. That said, when I would shoot with them, they did have M9s in their bag of tricks.
But I don't think the Navy ever went with Berettas at all.
At the end of XM9 the Army and Marines went with the M9, but the Navy went with the SIG. And the Army used the right ammo in their M9s without issue really until we took them into desert environments where that wide open slide top seemed to be a black hole for blowing dust and sand. Had we ended up fighting wars someplace in Europe like we expected the Beretta would have performed brilliantly.
The Navy being the Navy rarely shot their SIGs except for the NSW guys who regularly shot at everything all the damn time. And they didn't have time for two different kinds of 9mm so they regularly forgot to pack their 124 gr. 9mm pistol ammo and just used that +P+ stuff that seems to work great in the MP5s in their SIGs as well with predictable results. But they are busy shooting people in the face and don't have time to listen to the difference in two 9mm loads. The Navy also fielded the HK P7M13 to a lesser degree.
I will never be a Navy SEAL but speaking for myself I have used both Sigs and Berettas and you couldnt give me a Sig
TheChunkNorris
03-01-19, 07:46
I will never be a Navy SEAL but speaking for myself I have used both Sigs and Berettas and you couldnt give me a Sig
I feel that way about US made Sigs. I’m a fan of their OG Germany counterparts though.
Doc Safari
03-01-19, 08:52
Let's not forget the M1 Carbine. It was neither fish nor foul. It was too big to be a pistol and too weak to be a rifle. It was designed for "non-shooters", i.e., cooks, engineers, etc., who were on the front lines but didn't shoot for a living. As such it really was the gun that couldn't decide if it was a big handgun or a puny rifle.
I feel that way about US made Sigs. I’m a fan of their OG Germany counterparts though.
I’m including German Sigs as well.
I was against Berettas forever until I got to use some Berettas for a while and they were awesome all day.
Do please tell me more about that Mini 14 in the EBR stock. It looks so wrong yet oddly so so right
Let's not forget the M1 Carbine. It was neither fish nor foul. It was too big to be a pistol and too weak to be a rifle. It was designed for "non-shooters", i.e., cooks, engineers, etc., who were on the front lines but didn't shoot for a living. As such it really was the gun that couldn't decide if it was a big handgun or a puny rifle.
It was the 40s.
Let's not forget the M1 Carbine. It was neither fish nor foul. It was too big to be a pistol and too weak to be a rifle. It was designed for "non-shooters", i.e., cooks, engineers, etc., who were on the front lines but didn't shoot for a living. As such it really was the gun that couldn't decide if it was a big handgun or a puny rifle.Actually it kinda makes sense. Given to people who probably don't need a rifle but if pressed into a fight have something better than a handgun. It was light, handy, quick handling, and carried more than 7 rounds.
TheChunkNorris
03-01-19, 09:13
I’m including German Sigs as well.
I was against Berettas forever until I got to use some Berettas for a while and they were awesome all day.
Do please tell me more about that Mini 14 in the EBR stock. It looks so wrong yet oddly so so right
It left Ruger as a K Folder. Sage made these stocks for another company and really the best stock for the AC556(Registered MG). I love it, shoots well and is reasonably accurate in semi auto. 2-3 MOA on 62 grain M855 on a bench was the best I was able to achieve.
The German guns didn’t have the QC issues the US guns have and the last of the hand fit Sigs that weren’t the P series X-Line.
I cant believe I didnt think to throw the old school single shot rifle-pistol under the bus! Totally a retarded idea!
Lets see, we require a rifle sized caliber but somehow do not need the rifle like ergos that are helpful with accuracy. A gun for the fudd who overthinking fudd. Want to hunt with a pistol? Find a big wheelgun and get your Elmer Keith on with some dignity
Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk
I will never be a Navy SEAL but speaking for myself I have used both Sigs and Berettas and you couldnt give me a Sig
I love the action on the Beretta, but the SIG trigger is amazing. As a result I shoot SIGs better than Beretta's so that's what I carry. I also prefer the decocker to the slide mounted Beretta safety system. So I prefer 92Gs.
Let's not forget the M1 Carbine. It was neither fish nor foul. It was too big to be a pistol and too weak to be a rifle. It was designed for "non-shooters", i.e., cooks, engineers, etc., who were on the front lines but didn't shoot for a living. As such it really was the gun that couldn't decide if it was a big handgun or a puny rifle.
Lot's of guys who were "shooters" ended up with M1 Carbines, especially in the Pacific. I seem to recall seeing more than a few on D Day as well.
Doc Safari
03-01-19, 15:35
Lot's of guys who were "shooters" ended up with M1 Carbines, especially in the Pacific. I seem to recall seeing more than a few on D Day as well.
Yes, it ended up being even a front-line rifle. Just look at a lot of the old film clips. It was never intended to be but a lot of the soldiers liked it because of the light weight.
Yes, it ended up being even a front-line rifle. Just look at a lot of the old film clips. It was never intended to be but a lot of the soldiers liked it because of the light weight.
That coupled with capacity and quicker reloading (for most). I wonder how many of them opted for head shots due to the inferior ballistics?
That coupled with capacity and quicker reloading (for most). I wonder how many of them opted for head shots due to the inferior ballistics?
Audie Murphy killed a lot of Germans with an M1 carbine , including snipers.
Five_Point_Five_Six
03-01-19, 17:39
The Ruger Mini 14.
Everything that made the original platform M14 inaccurate in a 5.56 platform.
Plus Bill was a dick which didn't help when you wanted 30 round magazines.
Agreed.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190228/f35ec8de5030e56256fe472c01acef01.jpg
My AC556K is accurate and the newer Mini’s are better than you’d think. 30rd mags are easy to find now a day.
Even with all that modernizing, it still doesn't hold a candle to an AR.
Five_Point_Five_Six
03-01-19, 17:56
Let's not forget the M1 Carbine. It was neither fish nor foul. It was too big to be a pistol and too weak to be a rifle. It was designed for "non-shooters", i.e., cooks, engineers, etc., who were on the front lines but didn't shoot for a living. As such it really was the gun that couldn't decide if it was a big handgun or a puny rifle.
It served a purpose at the time. If my Dad was still alive he'd have to disagree with you about it being for non-shooters. He stacked a bunch of dead Koreans and Chinese up with an M1 Carbine during his time in the Korean war. He preferred it to the Garand, as did a lot of other guys he served with. His reasons for preferring it was the higher capacity, lighter, ability to carry more ammo with less weight, easy to reload even with cold frozen fingers etc.
SeriousStudent
03-01-19, 18:02
I love the action on the Beretta, but the SIG trigger is amazing. As a result I shoot SIGs better than Beretta's so that's what I carry. I also prefer the decocker to the slide mounted Beretta safety system. So I prefer 92Gs.
If you ever get down here, you are welcome to shoot my Ernest Langdon tuned 92G Vertec. It's got the Level II tune up, and an Elite II barrel. It's trigger is a dream, and is disturbingly accurate. It would make an epileptic look like a good shot.
I was in Tom Givens' Rangemaster Advanced Instructor class last fall. (And passed - woot! :cool: ) Both of the top shooters were running Landgon-tuned Beretta 92's. We are talking guys who routinely clean the Vicker's 300 with their pistols.
Police call those things "clues".
If you ever get down here, you are welcome to shoot my Ernest Langdon tuned 92G Vertec. It's got the Level II tune up, and an Elite II barrel. It's trigger is a dream, and is disturbingly accurate. It would make an epileptic look like a good shot.
I was in Tom Givens' Rangemaster Advanced Instructor class last fall. (And passed - woot! :cool: ) Both of the top shooters were running Landgon-tuned Beretta 92's. We are talking guys who routinely clean the Vicker's 300 with their pistols.
Police call those things "clues".
Honestly, I don't shoot well enough for tuned triggers. But I shoot well enough that I shoot SIGs, HKs and Beretta's fine. I happen to be a more consistent shot with a 226 than with any of my HKs (except the P7) or Beretta's
So that is why I carry SIGs. If I was a competition shooter, I'd probably be more interested in tuned triggers and race guns. My proficiency with the SIG probably also has a lot do with the fact that I've been shooting them since '85.
sundance435
03-04-19, 10:52
Let's not forget the M1 Carbine. It was neither fish nor foul. It was too big to be a pistol and too weak to be a rifle. It was designed for "non-shooters", i.e., cooks, engineers, etc., who were on the front lines but didn't shoot for a living. As such it really was the gun that couldn't decide if it was a big handgun or a puny rifle.
It may not have been meant as a front-line rifle, but enough guys liked them that it became one. Ballistics of any FMJ bullet are a problem - plenty of accounts of through-and-throughs with 30.06 and 8mm that didn't knock guys out of the fight. I think it's a brilliant little gun.
I love the action on the Beretta, but the SIG trigger is amazing. As a result I shoot SIGs better than Beretta's so that's what I carry. I also prefer the decocker to the slide mounted Beretta safety system. So I prefer 92Gs.
I never got what people liked so much about Sig DA/SA triggers. Throw a "D" hammer spring in a 92FS or G and it feels the same to me as a Sig. The only DA/SA gun I would own anymore is a Beretta 92, but I don't, because I hate DA/SA.
Doc Safari
03-04-19, 10:55
I do think the select-fire M2 Carbine may have softened the resistance of the old school military Garand-loving diehards toward a true assault rifle. IMHO that and the order placed by Curtis LeMay for AR15's to guard Air Force bases may have been the two things that broke the ice on M16's as a service rifle. Just my belief.
I love the MK23! Long sight radius, threaded barrel, and if you run out of ammo you can club the bad guy to death with it! So what if you can't conceal it in the middle of a Minnesota blizzard!!!
The one I can't understand is the Tavor. Or really any bullpup. When you switch shoulders to clear the opposite side corner, your hot shells will be hitting you in the face. The guy at the IMI booth at the SHOT show a few years back was very proud to show me how easy it was to switch the ejection port to the other side for a left handed shooter, but when I asked about having to switch from one corner to the next when clearing a building he was dumbfounded. Didn't this ever occur to anyone else?
I love the MK23! Long sight radius, threaded barrel, and if you run out of ammo you can club the bad guy to death with it! So what if you can't conceal it in the middle of a Minnesota blizzard!!!
The one I can't understand is the Tavor. Or really any bullpup. When you switch shoulders to clear the opposite side corner, your hot shells will be hitting you in the face. The guy at the IMI booth at the SHOT show a few years back was very proud to show me how easy it was to switch the ejection port to the other side for a left handed shooter, but when I asked about having to switch from one corner to the next when clearing a building he was dumbfounded. Didn't this ever occur to anyone else?
A lot of them eject forward of your face. I think Military Arms Channel did a review on the Tavor and he shot it left hand set up for a right had without issues
MountainRaven
03-04-19, 17:17
The one I can't understand is the Tavor. Or really any bullpup. When you switch shoulders to clear the opposite side corner, your hot shells will be hitting you in the face. The guy at the IMI booth at the SHOT show a few years back was very proud to show me how easy it was to switch the ejection port to the other side for a left handed shooter, but when I asked about having to switch from one corner to the next when clearing a building he was dumbfounded. Didn't this ever occur to anyone else?
To be fair...
Israeli SOF use ARs. British SOF use ARs. Aussie SOF use ARs. I don't know about Austrian SOF or Irish SOF, but they're the only countries I can think of whose SOF may not use traditionally-configured rifles (I think Austrian SOF use G36s and Irish SOF use ARs, but I don't know).
And the average grunt or cop (likely) isn't going to be doing shoulder transitions in the real world, so the ability to do it isn't relevant for your average joe.
TheChunkNorris
03-04-19, 18:27
To be fair...
Israeli SOF use ARs. British SOF use ARs. Aussie SOF use ARs. I don't know about Austrian SOF or Irish SOF, but they're the only countries I can think of whose SOF may not use traditionally-configured rifles (I think Austrian SOF use G36s and Irish SOF use ARs, but I don't know).
And the average grunt or cop (likely) isn't going to be doing shoulder transitions in the real world, so the ability to do it isn't relevant for your average joe.
I’ve worked with the Austrian SOF and I think they used SCAR 16’s but please don’t quote me on that. We intermittently were tasked to them but they were not on the base we were flying from.
Lot's of guys who were "shooters" ended up with M1 Carbines, especially in the Pacific. I seem to recall seeing more than a few on D Day as well.
Yep. My grandfather carried a Thompson, M1 Garand, and M1 Carbine during WWII. He fought in North Africa and Italy. He chose the M1 Carbine and was pleased with its performance.
I love the MK23! Long sight radius, threaded barrel, and if you run out of ammo you can club the bad guy to death with it! So what if you can't conceal it in the middle of a Minnesota blizzard!!!
The one I can't understand is the Tavor. Or really any bullpup. When you switch shoulders to clear the opposite side corner, your hot shells will be hitting you in the face. The guy at the IMI booth at the SHOT show a few years back was very proud to show me how easy it was to switch the ejection port to the other side for a left handed shooter, but when I asked about having to switch from one corner to the next when clearing a building he was dumbfounded. Didn't this ever occur to anyone else?
You can do it with the AUG so long as you keep your face behind the ejection port. I saw one guy use a technique where he went left hand only, put the buttplate against his left chest and his chin on the top of the back of the buttstock and pretty much still hit everything he was shooting at.
If you had a M1 Carbine in a paratrooper stock in WWII, you were fighting light and fast.
You can do it with the AUG so long as you keep your face behind the ejection port. I saw one guy use a technique where he went left hand only, put the buttplate against his left chest and his chin on the top of the back of the buttstock and pretty much still hit everything he was shooting at.
As the thread title said, the platform doesn't make sense to me. I'll keep my AR. :)
You joke but I think they are neat. Stuck in the 80s, but interesting. And not a Tavor or MDR which is important.
Any and all Bullpup designs........ WTF were they thinking? Might as well do a mag change with a AK, which is smoother (and that is just sad) ....... nothing smooth about it.
Any and all Bullpup designs........ WTF were they thinking? Might as well do a mag change with a AK....... nothing smooth about it.
But but Die Hard
But but Die Hard
Go with the Beretta.......... It wins. :)
But but Die HardYou leave my Christmas movie out of this!
MountainRaven
03-05-19, 14:55
If you had a M1 Carbine in a paratrooper stock in WWII, you were fighting light and fast.
The fixed stock was better.
I'm not saying that because, "Hurrdurr, fixed stock more stable," so much as because the folding stock for the M1 carbine was dumb. Probably the worst folding stock design I've ever seen. Worse than a coat hanger AK stock or an underfolder. I cannot think of a worse folding stock design, right now. The M1A1's stock is so horrible that the US Army developed the underfolding M1A3 Carbine to replace it (and I'm finding lots of pictures of dudes with Screaming Eagle patches rocking M1 Carbines in late '44 and '45).
So I guess I'll put that on the list: M1A1 Carbine.
Dudes can jump out of an airplane with a 44-inch long Garand or a 32-inch long Thompson. But a 36-inch long M1 Carbine is too long.
Go with the Beretta.......... It wins. :)
I have an AUG A3, sir. It’s fun. Not my first choice but not my last either. It’s charm is that it is stupid simple to maintain. In a way almost like a Glock.
But a toy nonetheless.
I like my beretta too. F a sig.
Per paratrooper stock M1s. They aren’t comfortable for me but everyone was midgets back then.
Sometimes I want an M1 carbine because they are fun and mom God Apple pie but then I think “nah, I’m good”
Ten pages into a thread titled Firearm Platforms That Never Made Any Sense To You... and not one post is about a firearm platform.
Let me start with The MagPul Microbus-
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/f4/f1/b6/f4f1b6a5deda3223e5eb20ca9fe68a13.jpg
It has charm, it's cool in a California Beach Bum kinda way, but it lacks even the thinnest armor. Even a Humvee would be a more practical choice to mount a minigun to.
To be fair, it is intended to be an attention getting publicity stunt and no other firearm platform has a Hula Girl armed with an AR on its dash
http://tooldtowork.com/files/2013/05/IMAG0214-1.jpg
Any and all Bullpup designs........ WTF were they thinking? Might as well do a mag change with a AK, which is smoother (and that is just sad) ....... nothing smooth about it.
You have to know the secret handshake.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXvUtvC7nxs
You have to know the secret handshake.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXvUtvC7nxs
Like I said.... slow and awkward......
Like I said.... slow and awkward......
Looks like a lot of work. I got tired just watching that video.
Like I said.... slow and awkward......
Considering that it was designed for a conscript army that would be a mere speedbump to Soviet troops; you could do worse.
What it got right: Reliable polymer mags, compact, winterized trigger guard, progressive select fire(hence why it is so heavy), quick change barrel, stupid easy takedown, integrated optic, built in VFG, 5.56 ammo
What it got wrong: being a bullpup, the progressive trigger limits options for lighter trigger, no way to fire left handed without modifications, you are kinda stuck with that integrated optic, and slow reload.
You could do worse but you could do better.
I ran mine through a patrol rifle class with an eotech and it is as nimble as an SBR indoors and vehicles as long as you keep it right handed.
For the era, anything SBRish was highly immature. The original CAR15s had fleas until they worked out the kinks. Really, it could be argued that short ARs weren’t 100% until the ‘00s. They existed in some iteration but not perfect. Like the LaFrances and the first Commandos. Like...H and H2 buffers weren’t born yet.
So in the paradigm of the late 70s/early 80s they were much better than a FAL or AK and a good consolation if no ARs could be had.
Reloads aside, they are just fun to shoot. The squat nature of it really feels better than an AR and the main reason I love my SOPMOD stock is that it is AUGish.
My dream pig AR is a Mk 18 or short MRP with a SOPMOD and a vert grip so that way I could have a real 80% nimble gun. I just haven’t gotten round to it yet.
Dudes can jump out of an airplane with a 44-inch long Garand or a 32-inch long Thompson. But a 36-inch long M1 Carbine is too long.
Well... the Thompson is and always was a bloated Pig of an SMG and an M1 rifle had to be broken down into 3 pieces to be jumped. The fixed stock carbine is undoubtedly a more ergonomic weapon but I dont think it would wholey fit in a griswold jump case either, so this paratrooper thinks the M1A1 is a win for this application in its time. Not to mention Its nowhere near as uncomfortable to shoot as an AK or FAL folder.
Doubters of the M1 carbine must recall that it was never meant to be a primary infantry arm... but the infantry chose to do otherwise and take it into harms way for many years. If anything that places it into a category that is polar opposite of this threads topic
Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk
Everyone thinks that I am on acid but the only SMG that ever made sense to me and never made me angry at some point is the UMP.
Sure, it’s best fired semi auto but it just felt right to me.
MP5s angered me. Colt SMGs were okay but the mags kinda suck. P90s are trash and only work in anime.
The fixed stock was better.
I'm not saying that because, "Hurrdurr, fixed stock more stable," so much as because the folding stock for the M1 carbine was dumb. Probably the worst folding stock design I've ever seen. Worse than a coat hanger AK stock or an underfolder. I cannot think of a worse folding stock design, right now. The M1A1's stock is so horrible that the US Army developed the underfolding M1A3 Carbine to replace it (and I'm finding lots of pictures of dudes with Screaming Eagle patches rocking M1 Carbines in late '44 and '45).
So I guess I'll put that on the list: M1A1 Carbine.
Dudes can jump out of an airplane with a 44-inch long Garand or a 32-inch long Thompson. But a 36-inch long M1 Carbine is too long.
Agreed on not being the best wire stock, but when folded it's a neat little package of moderate firepower. The pic below is of my youngest son and West Point Cadet with an M1a1:
https://i.imgur.com/CccsLOqh.jpg
Cool pick but I always thought paratrooper M1s looked weird unless they had a 30 round mag.
MountainRaven
03-05-19, 19:43
Well... the Thompson is and always was a bloated Pig of an SMG and an M1 rifle had to be broken down into 3 pieces to be jumped. The fixed stock carbine is undoubtedly a more ergonomic weapon but I dont think it would wholey fit in a griswold jump case either, so this paratrooper thinks the M1A1 is a win for this application in its time. Not to mention Its nowhere near as uncomfortable to shoot as an AK or FAL folder.
Doubters of the M1 carbine must recall that it was never meant to be a primary infantry arm... but the infantry chose to do otherwise and take it into harms way for many years. If anything that places it into a category that is polar opposite of this threads topic
I've never shot an M1A1 Carbine, but I have shot FALs and AKs with folding stocks and both of the latter mechanisms were far, far more solid than the M1A1's. Neither was uncomfortable. Although with the mild recoil of the 30 Carbine, the comfort of the stock wouldn't likely be an issue - although I maintain that the stock was and is a poor and exceptionally flimsy design.
And while it's a TV show, and therefore intrinsically inaccurate, I remember there being a scene in "The Replacements" (Band of Brothers, episode 4) where SSgt "Bull" Randleman instructs one of the new guys in how to jump with his Garand ready to fight. And riggers added, "snouts," to the jump bag to allow the Garand to be cased assembled while jumping. (Further surface-level research indicates that there were a number of, "good idea fairy," ideas launched on American paratroopers prior to D-Day. And most of these good ideas went the way of the dodo bird by the time of Market Garden. Disassembling your M1 rifle and storing it in a separate bag to jump with it was one of them.)
I've never shot an M1A1 Carbine, but I have shot FALs and AKs with folding stocks and both of the latter mechanisms were far, far more solid than the M1A1's. Neither was uncomfortable. Although with the mild recoil of the 30 Carbine, the comfort of the stock wouldn't likely be an issue - although I maintain that the stock was and is a poor and exceptionally flimsy design.
And while it's a TV show, and therefore intrinsically inaccurate, I remember there being a scene in "The Replacements" (Band of Brothers, episode 4) where SSgt "Bull" Randleman instructs one of the new guys in how to jump with his Garand ready to fight. And riggers added, "snouts," to the jump bag to allow the Garand to be cased assembled while jumping. (Further surface-level research indicates that there were a number of, "good idea fairy," ideas launched on American paratroopers prior to D-Day. And most of these good ideas went the way of the dodo bird by the time of Market Garden. Disassembling your M1 rifle and storing it in a separate bag to jump with it was one of them.)
Indeed true on modded jump cases, they still have to mod cases for new weapons to this very day. The M1A1 was concieved in 1942 before any of this took place. Last batch made in 1944. Make a few jumps with a full length rifle tucked under your harness sans case then come back telling me the M1A1 is a "what the heck were they thinking" weapon.
Because unlike on TV there is rhyme and reason as to who had an M1A1 and it wasnt for hero shots and "because I want one" it was for guys who already had plenty of important heavy ish to carry/jump
Note, not disagreeing on its overall flimsy design, but consider its contemporaries and its role, definitely not too shabby.
Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk
Cool pick but I always thought paratrooper M1s looked weird unless they had a 30 round mag.
Original GI 30 round mags are sometimes hard to find in good shape. We've got a few and they work fine. In fact the only mags we use in the M1 Carbine and the M1a1 are surplus GI mags from the 40's. You can still find them new in wrapper. I have not had good luck with the after-market or Korean mags.
My collection includes the rebuilt Inland M1a1 and a fixed stock Quality Hardware from 1943 and Underwood from 1944. Fun to shoot, but I would like something with a little more juice for personal defense.
MP5s angered me.
Please explain.
Like I said.... slow and awkward......
No slower than a AK, SIG, FAL or lots of others. ARs seem to be the fastest magazine change on the planet, but that doesn't necessarily make everything else slow. Also, everything is a trade off. You want a short platform 20" barrel, well you are going to have to learn how to do mag changes differently.
Please explain.
Well first off manipulating the safety. If you have to do quick on and off for work it is awkward. I have probably the longest hands on the whole of M4C unless Manute Bol still posts here. And still had to do a work around.
The gun IS smooth on auto', but coukd be hard to mount optics for. You either went irons or you used an ARMS mount. The stock came in only two flavors: Fixed or Military. Fixed was fine for me as I am larger but the military stock was uncomfortable. There are more options now but not in the day.
Mag changes a little awkward. You gotta use the flapper. If the button was a liiiittle closer it wouldnt be so bad.
They also could be ammo picky but then again these were early 80s guns c. early 00s
And cleaning was a chore, to me anyways. I dont mind as much with my HK 91 because everything is larger but scaled to 9mm its a chore esp if you have to clean it. The weight is good and bad alomg with diopter sights. Good and bad.
They are cool looking and you feel like a stormtrooper with one. But when you actually are responsible for one, they become less fun.
Not saying it was "bad" in the cosmic sense like an UZI or something. Just thst there were days when I was cussing over an MP5.
Contrariwise, the Colt was just like an AR only 9mm but the magazines could be problematic.
Unpopular opinions but just my deal.
No slower than a AK, SIG, FAL or lots of others. ARs seem to be the fastest magazine change on the planet, but that doesn't necessarily make everything else slow. Also, everything is a trade off. You want a short platform 20" barrel, well you are going to have to learn how to do mag changes differently.
To quote Ricky Bobby, "If you ain't first, your last. "
Black Rifle Coffee has them beat with the M61 Prius:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzLNC-strf0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aflx7nRZuRY
Can you say "Arms Race".
Ten pages into a thread titled Firearm Platforms That Never Made Any Sense To You... and not one post is about a firearm platform.
Let me start with The MagPul Microbus-
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/f4/f1/b6/f4f1b6a5deda3223e5eb20ca9fe68a13.jpg
It has charm, it's cool in a California Beach Bum kinda way, but it lacks even the thinnest armor. Even a Humvee would be a more practical choice to mount a minigun to.
To be fair, it is intended to be an attention getting publicity stunt and no other firearm platform has a Hula Girl armed with an AR on its dash
http://tooldtowork.com/files/2013/05/IMAG0214-1.jpg
To quote Ricky Bobby, "If you ain't first, your last. "
Sure. And I think that is why most of us would go with an AR first. But lots of people dead because of AKs and it isn't because they can do fast mag changes. Skill in ambush is probably way more important than ease of mag changes as are many other factors.
How you carry and access spare magazines is probably more important than how magazines on the rifle are removed.
And just so we are on the same page, I don't think I'm telling you anything you don't already know. I'm not trying to contradict or dispute your experience.
Well first off manipulating the safety. If you have to do quick on and off for work it is awkward. I have probably the longest hands on the whole of M4C unless Manute Bol still posts here. And still had to do a work around.
The gun IS smooth on auto', but coukd be hard to mount optics for. You either went irons or you used an ARMS mount. The stock came in only two flavors: Fixed or Military. Fixed was fine for me as I am larger but the military stock was uncomfortable. There are more options now but not in the day.
Mag changes a little awkward. You gotta use the flapper. If the button was a liiiittle closer it wouldnt be so bad.
They also could be ammo picky but then again these were early 80s guns c. early 00s
And cleaning was a chore, to me anyways. I dont mind as much with my HK 91 because everything is larger but scaled to 9mm its a chore esp if you have to clean it. The weight is good and bad alomg with diopter sights. Good and bad.
They are cool looking and you feel like a stormtrooper with one. But when you actually are responsible for one, they become less fun.
Not saying it was "bad" in the cosmic sense like an UZI or something. Just thst there were days when I was cussing over an MP5.
Contrariwise, the Colt was just like an AR only 9mm but the magazines could be problematic.
Unpopular opinions but just my deal.
The plastic SEF trigger group was absolutely 100% a pain in the ass and required actually force to click into different positions. For this reason I always used a metal SEF trigger group (similar to the 90 series but push pin) and never really had any problems. I know guys who also popped out the selector lever and ground that detent down a little bit. When in low ready I kept my thumb on the selector and would manipulate it as I drew it to my shoulder and it was never a problem. My MP5 stayed on E or F until the shooting was done "for sure."
I never treated the MP5 like it was an AR. I used only the flapper magazine and pushed it into the magazine with my thumb while giving the magazine a slight tug, my hand was on the replacement magazine before the dumped one hit the ground in most cases. This was really only a problem if you were running a HK 94 and then you had to use your left hand index finger to push the magazine release button while holding the magazine.
The collapsible stock was one of the worst stocks on the planet, added lots of weight and had a horrible cheek weld that was only surpassed by the Uzi and underfolder AKs. I always ran an fixed stock.
Cleaning was detailed because you couldn't flip it open like an AR. But I remember some guys who simply soaked their guns in a 5 gallon bucket of mineral spirits for 10 minutes, fired a 5 round burst and called them "clean." Of course those SWAT guys didn't have to come out of pocket for their MP5s.
The Uzi was the king of SMGs until the MP5 came along. First shot placement changed everything. I can also comfortably use a Colt SMG. My biggest problem is magazine changes (for me) aren't as fast as 90% of my personal experience is with the MP5. The magazines kind of suck and if you drop them on a hard surface they will spill ammo. The sights on the Colt SMG were pretty terrible as they were A1 rather than A2. That said, I always wanted and still want a DOE model.
One thing you forgot about the MP5 is the sling options were terrible. That 3 position mouse trap was horrible. We always had to build our own slings with the HK hook until better options started being offered by Blackhawk and such, and even then that front sling attachment point is in a terrible position if you need to run the charging handle fast. As soon as single point slings were available we all went to that.
ramairthree
03-06-19, 19:11
A lot of these arguments against different platforms were not an issue an issue in their heyday.
Something reliable and reasonably accurate with the unit or department footing the bill for expensive magazines and parts.
Now, with a ton of civilian ownership, cost, ease of maintenance, availability of parts, magazines, etc. are bigger factors.
And with training, evolution of tactics, gear, and accessories, the speed of manual of arms, ergonomics, efficiency, etc. have allowed some to rise while others fall by the wayside.
A 1972 Javelin AMX with 4 speed manual transmission and a 401 was something to contend with in a road/TA type course 30 or 40 years ago. And still fun ass hell.
But a ginormous new Hemi Challenger with auto transmission would crush it, let alone some lighter, smaller new cars that would crush that.
The AMX, like many legacy platforms has fallen by the wayside, just like an Uzi or HK is not going to be a winning platform in USPSA PCC or 3 gun. Other stuff has risen to dominate.
No reason to hate them or not own, use, and enjoy them.
The AMX, like many legacy platforms has fallen by the wayside, just like an Uzi or HK is not going to be a winning platform in USPSA PCC or 3 gun. Other stuff has risen to dominate.
No reason to hate them or not own, use, and enjoy them.
Interestingly enough, at Knob Creek MG shoots M-10s w/ Lage uppers win all the time. Part of that is probably because they are the most common entry level SMG. But they are hardly the cutting edge of modern PCC/SMG platforms.
I forgot how much the three point sling on the MP5 sucked. Thanks for the reminder, SteyrAug.
I forgot how much the three point sling on the MP5 sucked. Thanks for the reminder, SteyrAug.
If Vickers Tac Slings were available in 1990 I probably could have sold them for $100 each.
A lot of these arguments against different platforms were not an issue an issue in their heyday.
Something reliable and reasonably accurate with the unit or department footing the bill for expensive magazines and parts.
Now, with a ton of civilian ownership, cost, ease of maintenance, availability of parts, magazines, etc. are bigger factors.
And with training, evolution of tactics, gear, and accessories, the speed of manual of arms, ergonomics, efficiency, etc. have allowed some to rise while others fall by the wayside.
A 1972 Javelin AMX with 4 speed manual transmission and a 401 was something to contend with in a road/TA type course 30 or 40 years ago. And still fun ass hell.
But a ginormous new Hemi Challenger with auto transmission would crush it, let alone some lighter, smaller new cars that would crush that.
The AMX, like many legacy platforms has fallen by the wayside, just like an Uzi or HK is not going to be a winning platform in USPSA PCC or 3 gun. Other stuff has risen to dominate.
No reason to hate them or not own, use, and enjoy them.
Bro, just go out and get an AMX for Christ sake...... ;)
ramairthree
03-23-19, 11:56
Interestingly enough, at Knob Creek MG shoots M-10s w/ Lage uppers win all the time. Part of that is probably because they are the most common entry level SMG. But they are hardly the cutting edge of modern PCC/SMG platforms.
I bought a SWD M11 9 back in the early 90s when they were 400 bucks.
A few years ago I looked at get a Lage upper, looked at a friend’s, and he had a bunch of videos on KC subgun narionals on his computer.
I don’t think I saw anyone running a single stage where I didn’t think, Christ, I could have ran that with a semiauto PCC and smoked their time with a lot less ammo.
Instead of investing more in the M11, I ended up selling it.
If I won the lottery, maybe I would have a lot of full auto.
For recreation.
I want a Vietnam War M60 so bad it actually hurts. I know they suck. I know they are problematic. I know a 240 eats its lunch but...
80s kid, bruh. You understand.
If I win the lottery....I am getting an M60 and a Stoner.
The only select fire AR that made any sense to me was a Colt SMG. I always liked that over MP5 just due to muscle memory.
If I get into PCC gaming it is either that with a G go fast trigger or an EVO.
ramairthree
03-24-19, 06:10
Bro, just go out and get an AMX for Christ sake...... ;)
Umm...
On of four classics I have rescued.
I beat it like a red headed rented step mule.
ramairthree
03-24-19, 06:11
I want a Vietnam War M60 so bad it actually hurts. I know they suck. I know they are problematic. I know a 240 eats its lunch but...
80s kid, bruh. You understand.
If I win the lottery....I am getting an M60 and a Stoner.
The only select fire AR that made any sense to me was a Colt SMG. I always liked that over MP5 just due to muscle memory.
If I get into PCC gaming it is either that with a G go fast trigger or an EVO.
My first job at my first unit - 60 gunner.
Compared to the FN,
Yeah, it’s like a 1911A1 compared to a Glock 45,
User skille, train8nf, and maintenance is important.
Umm...
On of four classics I have rescued.
I beat it like a red headed rented step mule.
I helped my dad restore a '68 AMX when I was in High School. That car was a beast.
Business_Casual
03-24-19, 18:00
User skille, train8nf, and maintenance is important.
As with typing. ;)
ramairthree
03-24-19, 18:30
As with typing. ;)
You young bastards thatbgrew up with smartphones and texting that don’t struggle to read and type on one without your reading glasses can go to hell.
How about this:
Custom made AK in 300 blackout. Explain that to me...
TheChunkNorris
03-28-19, 12:34
How about this:
Custom made AK in 300 blackout. Explain that to me...
AK shooters like shooting subs too?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.