Fantastic Firearms Part 2

[Bean-O]

[b]Original thread:[/b]
[url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=735485[/url]
[highlight]It was was closed for being too long.

Also, before diving in to the good bits read this first. Or else.[/highlight]
This thread was made in the wake of the Weaboo Weaponry Megathread. Which can be found here:
[url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=660793[/url]
That thread has run it's course, I covered every subject I can think of and many more besides which were suggested by various users. But in the end I was scraping the bottom of the barrel, the articles were getting worse, even my grammar began to slip. For better or worse I've left it at 101 articles.
The purpose of that thread was to discuss Weapons/Tactics that were overused and abused in anime/movies/comics/games/media/etc.
The purpose of this thread is basically the opposite.
Here I will be discussing weapons, primarily firearms that changed the world. Weapons that are influential and effective, or in spite of being neither of these things, prolific. This is a thread about weapons and perhaps tactics that are widely used, it's written to the best of my knowledge and at the request of other users. I might get things wrong here and there, if I am, don't be afraid to point it out. I will try to fix as many mistakes as possible. If you have an idea for something that should be added to the list, feel free to do that as well.
This thread may not be exactly like the last one, but it will be written in a similar format. It will start with 10 articles to which I will add one article every day (unless for some reason I can't or I don't feel like it). New articles will be posted within the thread and moved to the front page after a day (to allow peer review). The articles will be limited to 10-20 per post because FP has a glitch where it's possible to put too much text into a post causing all of it to disappear when it's posted. That happened once and it was a huge pain in the ass to fix. The articles aren't written nor posted in any particular order.

[highlight]The Original Content:[/highlight]
Just look it up in the old thread.
[url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=735485[/url]
[b]Check this list before requesting stuff.[/b]
1)AK-47
2)Colt 1911
3)G3
4)M16/AR-15
5)Browning M2
6)Ruger 10/22
7)Glock
8)SKS
9)Mauser 98
10)UZI
11)Remington 870.
12)M1 Garand.
13)M-1 Carbine
14)M14/M1a
15)Mini 14
16)M79 Grenade Launcher.
17)STEN
18)SMLE
19)MP5
20)Mossberg 500
21)Dreyse Needle Gun
22)PPSH-41
23)Mosin Nagant 91/30
24)Steyr AUG
25)MG-42/MG3
26)FN Fusil Automatique Léger (FAL)
27)Maxim Gun
28)P08 "Luger"
29)Walther P38
30)M203
31)Galil
32)RPG-7
33)FN Hi-Power.
34)Dragunov SVD
35)Coach Guns/Side-by-Side Shotguns
36)SIG SG-540.
37)BREN
38)Makarov PM/PMM
39)PK/PKM
40)Webley MK I-VI
41)Remington 1100
42)Thompson SMG series.
43)Walther PP/PPK
44)S&W M29
45)H&K USP series.
46)Mauser C-96 "Broomhandle/Box Cannon"
47)TT-33
48)BAR
49)FN MAG
50)Beretta 92/96
51)Remington 700
52)DP/DPM Light Machine Gun
54)FN FNC
56)Benelli M4
57)Winchester 1200/1300
58)Henry Rifle
59)Sharps Rifle

[Performuley]

shit thread

[highlight](User was banned for this post ("What are you doing?" - ventilated))[/highlight]

[highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Alt of a permabanned user." - ventilated))[/highlight]

[psot]

psot

[highlight](User was banned for this post ("What are you doing?" - ventilated))[/highlight]

[veryniceman]

[QUOTE=Performuley;15803359]shit thread[/QUOTE]

Agree'd.

[highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Gimmick account." - ventilated))[/highlight]

[ArcNova]

[QUOTE=Performuley;15803359]shit thread[/QUOTE]

Yeah I agree

[highlight](User was banned for this post ("What are you doing?" - ventilated))[/highlight]

[psot]

arc happy canada day bro

[XxKitsunexX]

[QUOTE=Performuley;15803359]shit thread[/QUOTE]

this
Bean-O is trying too hard

[Bean-O]

I'm just trying to continue the old one.

[highlight]New Content:[/highlight]
60)Spencer Rifle
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/93/Spencer-rifle.JPG[/img]
Around the time when everyone and their uncle was designing rifles that used self-contained cartridges Christopher Spencer built his own as well.
He designed it around 1860 and founded the Spencer Company to sell it. It is slightly different than your average lever-action if you can call it that. It uses a falling block opened by pulling the trigger guard down, but rather than feeding one round in at a time like the Sharps you had a tube magazine of 7 rounds that went backwards into the stock. Similar to that of a modern-day shotgun only backwards. The action limited the length of any caliber the Spencer was chambered in to about 1 3/4 inches long. Thus the fist caliber it was chambered in (called the 56-56 Spencer Rimfire) was very wide.
It had about the same punch as a musket to make up for its lack of range in comparison to rifles such as the Sharps. Originally the 56-56 didn't use smokeless gunpowder so if you were standing in the same place and shooting it for a long time you'd be blinded by your own smoke pretty quickly. And this is before they developed proper tactics for taking the most advantage of this firepower. It was still, like all guns that fired self-contained cartridges were at the time, a quantum leap in accuracy and rate of fire. It sold pretty well too.
Spencer found an audience with Abrahan Lincoln himself and as a result of a brief exhibition his company landed a contract with first the US Navy and then the Army. The rifle proved itself on the battlefields of the civil war, with about 200,000 in service on both sides. Again, it could outshoot anyone with a musket ten times over but no one ever utilized its full potential. It would often pop up in skirmish lines whereas it should have been used in flanking operations where the added rate of fire would be indispensable. Supply lines of the ammunition also had a tendency to run short, leaving the few that had this great rifle with no ammo to shoot out of it.
After the war The Spencer Company was bought up by Winchester which briefly continued to manufacture them before switching completely to their own line of lever-actions. Surplus Spencers found their way to France where they were used to fight against the German Empire in one of the countless scuffles between the European powers for scraps of land on their continent. Similar to the Sharps, a small company with little relation to the original called Spencer Rifle Co. still makes replicas and replacement parts today.

61)Colt Navy
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3d/Coltnavy.jpg[/img]
When Samuel Colt first patented his Paterson revolver it was a far cry from the various six-shooters we are now fimiliar with. It was originally .28 caliber, cap and ball (no self-contained cartridge) that you had to disassemble to painstakingly reload. The trigger had no guard and slid into the gun when it wasn't in use. This gun wasn't a huge success but it was the first revolver ever made. It was Genesis and Sam Colt's patent gave him a temporary monopoly on the revolver market.
But he had to come up with something better. For one thing he had to fit an underbarrel hand-operated (insert dick joke here) bullet seater in order to reload the gun without taking the whole thing apart. He also wanted a bigger caliber and he stuck with .36.
Eventually he took that design and refined it into the Colt Navy. It was still cap and ball. You had 6 shots. After that you had to painstakingly spend a long time reloading each individual chamber with loose powder, a bullet and a percussion cap. But it was quite a bit faster. It also had a proper trigger, a proper hammer, everything you'd expect to see on a revolver. In fact an old Navy can shoot almost as well as any other revolver today, provided you don't have to reload it. That gun was initially offered in 1851 It was aggressively marketed within the US and in Europe where it found contracts in the US military as well as that of Britain. In fact Colt built a factory in England to supply Europe's demand. Britain, Russia, Austria and Poland used them. Larger than life characters such as Wild Bill and Robert E. Lee carried the Navy. Wild Bill was known for unloading and reloading his ever day in order to verify that everything was ready to go and in fully working order.
During its lifetime 250,000 navy handguns were manufactured and distributed. Used on both sides of the Civil War by officers and cavalry. If you had one you had a much higher rate of fire than anyone around you, although reloading under battlefield conditions is impossible. Once you're out of ammo you're out of luck. Either way thousands were used during that conflict on both sides.
But Colt wasn't by itself.
They had to compete with an upstart company which was manufacturing an almost identical design and they were charging less for it. Remington had the Model 1858 which could be reloaded slightly faster and came in the same caliber (plus a .44 variant similar to the Colt Army). The Colt struggled against such competition but because it was standard issue for numerous troops thousands upon thousands were used. Because of government contracts and a larger production line Colt did outsell the venerable and reliable Remington and in the process created a rivalry which has been boiling ever since. After the Civil war many of these revolvers were retrofitted to fire self-contained cartridges by various gunsmiths (with inconsistent results), but their popularity still waned and they were eventually withdrawn from production in the 1870's. Even so the occasional character (such as Wild Bill who I mentioned earlier) continued to use the old cap and ball revolvers for one reason or another, mostly out of nostalgia.
Today the old ammunition and percussion caps are still being manufactured for a reasonably large group of nostalgic shooters. Originals are (like all guns that old) rather prized by collectors although replicas are more popular for actual shooting. Since on a firing range you're in no rush you can actually get to enjoy the intricate process of reloading an old gun like this. Of course most people just aren't that patient. Even by modern standards it is very accurate, granted the .36 ammunition with a standard measurement of powder offers pretty much the same ballistic performance as .380 ACP.

62)Colt Army
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ca/Colt_Army_Mod_1860_Fluted_Cylinder.JPG/800px-Colt_Army_Mod_1860_Fluted_Cylinder.JPG[/img]
Around 1860 Colt's Navy revolver (although it must be noted that both the Navy and Army designations were actually created by collectors) was pretty successful. But Colt wanted to take it and make it better still.
One of the problems plauging the Navy was the caliber. It wasn't exactly piss-weak and given the medicinal practices of the day if you took a solid hit you were a deadman either way. But it still had about the stopping power of a .380 ACP. Ideally, if you have only 6 shots, you want a guarantee that if you hit someone with that one shot their ass will go down and stay there. The solution was to take essentially the same frame, beef it up a bit and rechamber it for .44 caliber. It was still a loose powder, bullet and percussion cap ordeal. The only convenience offered in this regard was a pre-set ammount of gunpowder in a paper cartridge but of course that exised for the Navy as well.
Another innovation sought to fix a recurring problem of jamming. The rod built in under the barrel that packed gunpowder into the cylinders would occasionally pop loose because of the recoil and jam imto the cylinder, blocking it from rotating. That issue was fixed with a new "creeping" loading lever that functioned on a cam interface. Another distinguishing feature was a round barrel, as opposed to a hexagonal one.
So essentially we have a further improvement on a popular bit of technology.
The best part of the whole deal was that here we have a newer and better gun intoroduced in 1860. The timing is simply perfect. In 1861 as we all know the Civil War broke out and everyone started buying up guns. Naturally US army bought 125,000+ of the things. It still had the commendable accuracy of a Colt (50-100 yards whereas a musket could to 50 tops), it was lighter than a rifle, it held 6 times the ammunition and now it had power to boot. They were even issued with an attacheable shoulder stock. So like any gun of the era it proved itself on the battlefields.
Also like any gun of the era its popularity continued to grow after the fighting was over. It followed manifest desitny across the plains (at least in the hands of those who knew how to use it). Like the Navy it faltered when self-conatined cartridge guns were introduced although they were sometimes retrofitted for the new, significantly handier ammunition that could actually be reloaded mid-battle.
Originals are quite sought after today. Also like the Navy a number of replicas and the necessary ammunition supplies are still available for recreational shooting.

63)Colt Single Action Army/Peacemaker
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/97/Colt_SAA_US_Artillery_RAC.jpg/800px-Colt_SAA_US_Artillery_RAC.jpg[/img]
Unless you have been living under a rock since 1874 you have probably heard of this little number.
It is perhaps the most iconic firearm of American history. A gun that has defined an era. It is without a doubt THE definitive cowboy gun. In truth it wasn't the only successful revolver and the exact extent of its popularity had been blown out of proportion but to call it a success would be a vast understatement.
It wasn't a success, it was a triumph.
The story of its development is pretty straightforward. In the early 1870s the US army was seeking a replacement for their cap and ball Colt Army revolvers. They were powerful and accurate but too slow to reload in combat. So they turned back to Colt. Now Colt knew what the Army wanted. They were well aware of all the various new rifles chambered in self-contained cartridges and they adapted the idea to their revolver.
It was simple, but very effective.
By today's standards the SAA is still slow to reload. Rather than swinging out the entire cylinder you must rotate it and insert one round at a time. This is still leaps and bounds faster than dealing with loose ammunition and powder, packing that down with a little rod. Slow as it was you COULD reload the gun during a firefight, whereas before once you had fired the last shot you were shit out of luck. It was also still single action, which means you have to cock it before each shot.
One tactic was to carry 5 shots rather than 6. You see, this gun lacked any safety and when uncocked the hammer rested on the primer. An inconvenient bump could put a bullet strait through the unfortunate user's boot, or worse. So they had 5 shots and the hammer rested on the empty chamber. They were also frequently modified with added weight in the back or the front for better balance or accuracy. Another common (if less wise) modification would have been a more sensitive trigger. Or no trigger at all. The slow rate of fire often encouraged "fanning the hammer" where the shooter holds down the trigger while slamming down on the hammer repeatedly to shoot faster. It may indeed shoot faster that way, but with very poor accuracy unless the user is abnormally skilled. Competition shooters like Bob Munden can fire off multiple shots in this manner within a fraction of a second and with surprising accuracy but few people possess that degree of skill today or then for that matter.
The .45 Long Colt ammunition turned out to be an ideal choice. As is typical of any caliber from that time it is somewhat slow, but packs a ferocious punch which is matched by few handguns even today. In fact it is still used in the numerous SAA copies manufactured today as well as other revolvers, even a number of rifles. It may no longer see widespread military service but it is a very popular civilian caliber. But in its time the choice to stick with .45 turned out convenient for Colt for another reason. At the time the Army adopted it they had already bought another revolver made by S&W that also fired a .45 bullet. But a shorter one. This incompatibility created huge logistical headaches until it was found that the SAA could fire both. For several years the Army used both guns and the shorter S&W ammunition before it switched completely to the Colt.
It came too late to see any service in the civil war but the Peacemaker was used in vast numbers throughout the various Indian conflicts, the seemingly endless bloodshed all over the frontier as well as the Spanish American war. Famous characters such as Wyatt Earp and Bat Masterson were known to carry an SAA. The legacy of such frontier heroes created an American icon but they weren't the only ones packing a Peacemaker. Patton was known for carrying one as well as Lawrence of Arabia.
But the legacy isn't only in the gun's image. Because like any truly successful firearm it fathered more offspring than I can count. Ruger makes a series of single action revolvers based off the SAA. Uberti, Cinnamon, STI and U.S. Fire Arms Mfg. Co. to name a few make their own direct copies. This is on top of Colt which still makes the old design and has by now probably made at least half a million, counting all the copies probably well over one mil (although I couldn't find the actual numbers, I'm just guessing). They are still popular for target shooting, self-defense (including self-defense from dangerous game) and collectors greatly prize the originals which can go for quite a hefty sum. Especially if they are engraved.
You know it is a successful gun when you don't know exactly how many (counting the copies) were made but you know it's near or over a million. And this can only count the actual number of guns. There is no way to ever truly recognize the amount of impact that such a gun has made on the public psyche. Few firearms such as the AK-47 could ever reach this status where it is the very definition of a household name. I bet you couldn't find one person who doesn't know what a Peacemaker or Colt .45 is.

64)Remington 11-87
[img]http://world.guns.ru/shotgun/rem1187pol1.jpg[/img]
One of the big, new things to hit the world or shotgun shooting like a wayward clay pigeon to the skull is a new shotshell. The most popular shell used is the 12 gauge 2 and 3/4 inch with a variety of loads. That means it is 12 gauge in diameter and 2.75 inches long. This number has been around forever. But now that the 3 inch has being introduced everyone wants their gun to be able to fire it as well. Essentially a 3 inch is the same 12 gauge shell only .25 of an inch longer. In layman's terms it's just more powerful.
While it doesn't take much effort to retool a pump-action shotgun assembly plant to make it so that the new guns can fire a slightly more powerful load, semi-automatics are a somewhat more complicated manner. The problem lies in the gas system. It is fine-tuned to function like clockwork based off the recoil given by a standard shell. If the shell is less powerful, the action won't cycle properly and you will have to cycle it manually. If it is more powerful, it can damage the weapon.
This is where the Remington 1100 has a slight problem.
It can fire 2.75 inch shells and only 2.75 inch shells. In order to fire the bigger shell it was taken, the gas system reworked to accommodate a bigger round and then marketed as the 11-87. But there's more.
They could have never gotten away with selling a gun that only fires 3 inch shells. The 2.75 is still more popular. Thus the 11-87 has the gas system tweaked such that it will function without any user adjustment between 2.75 and 3 inch loads. You can cram the tube with a random handful of the two and just fire them off. But as a result of all this tweaking part compatibility between the 11-87 and 1100 (and by proxy 870) is somewhat skewed. The barrels, as well as numerous other components can not be swapped between the two.
Because of this flexibility the sales of the 11-87 have surpassed that of its older brother (which is still available). Much like the 1100 it is marketed towards both civilian and law enforcement sales where it has a very healthy share of the semi-automatic shotgun market.

65)CZ-75 series
[img]http://world.guns.ru/handguns/cz75b.jpg[/img]
There have been a number of combat handguns that were so successful that they became household names. While the CZ-75 series may seem obscure to some, it is actually a phenomenally successful design.
Czechoslovakia has had a very long history of firearm development and even as a soviet bloc state it retained an air of independence from the various other socialist republics. This became apparent in one case when the state-owned CZ firearm company decided to build a handgun for export sales. They decided to put the Koucky brothers on the job and by 1975 they were finished with their masterpiece.
It is simply a wonderful handgun, one of the very first wonder-nines. It borrowed the idea of the double-stacked magazine from Browning's Hi-Power as well as it's safety. That manual safety allows the user to carry the gun with a round chambered and a hammer cocked safely, which is somewhat rare even today. But there is something odd about the CZ, something distinctive. Rather than having the slide locked to the outside of the frame, it rolls along rails built facing inwards. This is why that slide has such a slim profile. The idea behind that came from Switzerland's P-210, which is the most accurate 9mm handgun ever made. Having the slide run along grooves on the inside of the frame rather than the outside helps keep the barrel in place and helps improve accuracy. Perhaps the only flaws were the grips, as with many eastern-bloc firearms ergonomics were initially a secondary concern at best.
But damn did this gun sell.
CZ claims that it is in use with more government agencies, from armies to police departments than any other handgun. While I'm not sure exactly how true that is the numbers don't seem to lie. It is a damn successful design. CZ alone claims to have made over a million CZ-75s and variants in their factory. And there are a lot of variants. There's a compact, a subcompact, a .22LR, an ambidextrous variant called the CZ-85 even a select-fire version that went nowhere. It mainly sees law enforcement service in countries such as Finland, Poland, Lithuania, Slovenia, Iran, Honduras and it's native Czechoslovakia. It is also copied by Norinco in China where it sees some use and some have been sold to North Korea.
Of course China isn't the only country to make copies.
Sudan locally produces the CZ-75 in both 9mm and .32 ACP. That variant sees use with both it's army and police. Turkey and Chile manufacture them under license as well. But that's just a drop in the bucket. The REAL flood of clones comes from the civilian market within the US and Europe. Switzerland makes the Sphinx 2000 and 3000 series, An Italian company called Tangfolio makes copies as well. Israel makes the IMI Jericho which may look like a Desert Eagle but it's also based off the CZ-75.
But the real treasure trove of civilian copies is naturally in the United States. Springfield makes a copy called the P9, Armalite makes the AR-24 and if you've ever seen Miami Vice you may remember the 10mm Bren Ten, that's a CZ-75 clone too. (By the way there are rumors that the Bren Ten will be put back into production soon, if you're a 10mm/.45ACP fan)
In fact there are so many copies available within the US that when CZ found an importer and imported their updated CZ-75B (which has better ergonomics and a firing pin safety) they struggled to compete against their own copies at first. Today the relatively low cost (roughly 400$-500$ per gun) coupled with excellent quality has made all of it's variants a huge success. In fact with the popularity slowly catching up to other designs the prices are creeping upwards.
This is a trend seen around the world. The robust, reliable, accurate and pretty damn beautiful nature of this gun's design coupled with highly competitive prices have made it a real world-beater in the wonder-nine market. It isn't a comeback though, because this gun has been here for years and it isn't going anywhere any time soon.

66)FN-49
[img]http://world.guns.ru/rifle/fn49_2.jpg[/img]
Today's rifle is a semi-automatic battle rifle and indeed among the last of it's breed. While it was quite successful and by all means a thoroughly excellent design the timing was somewhat unfortunate, as we shall see.
Back in the late 1930's various semi-automatic battle rifles were seeking adoption around the world. Initial skepticism of the utility of allowing the average soldier in the field a greater rate of fire was waning, governments were becoming interested and numerous designs such as the M1 Garand and SVT-40 were already in development if not already adopted. So FN decided to give it a shot.
Development on what would later become known as the FN-49 began, like I said in the late 1930's. FN turned to Dieudonne Saive, already a firearm designing legend for finishing the late John Browning's Hi-Power concept. This created one of the more interesting riddles of the gun world. The FN-49, operationally is very similar to the Tokarev SVT-40 which was also being designed at the time. There is speculation that Saive had access to such a weapon but because it too was in the prototype stage at the time this is questionable. Either he based it off the soviet prototype or he simply had the same mind as Tokarev. The world may never know.
But it wasn't meant to be.
The war started before he could complete his design. Germany swiftly overran and occupied Belguim. Since the Germans had no interest in continuing a program for a semi-automatic rifle Dieudonne's project was shelved. Once the Germans were beaten back it was finished and swiftly released. It was successful but sadly this design missed the train.
The FN-49, while it was adopted by Belgium, Egypt, Argentina and Brazil to name a few countries missed out on the chance to see service in the most decisive conflict of its time. It was a very successful design, selling well with the aforementioned countries as well as numerous civilian sales in spite of a somewhat steep price tag.
But it was too late.
Semi-automatic battle rifles had come and were already being phased out at that point. While it was offered in 8mm Mauser, 30.06 and 7.65x57mm NATO was trying to adopt a new standard caliber which was 7.62x51mm. By the time they finally made up their minds to do that, FN had already developed the 49's direct descendant, the FAL. It was thus rendered obsolete.
Well, not entirely.
While FN no longer made this rifle they made enough that they still saw service in some countries up until 1988. Many Argentinian rifles were converted to .308, sometimes with removable 20 round magazines. They were also used as sniper rifles and the like, sometimes in their original calibers. What made it better is the fact that by any standard the 49 is an excellent design. It is impeccably well-made, supremely accurate and reliable as well as packing the solid punch of the 7.62 NATO round, which is if the person on the receiving end is lucky.
A number remain slowly rusting in weapons lockers here and there. The old workhorse along with it's various calibers seldom sees much service today. But this means that numerous surplus rifles ended up on the civilian market around the world for very competitive prices, often having seen very little use. It remains a bargain for hunters or civilian shooters seeking a reliable and high-quality semi-automatic or a handsome addition to many a collector's arsenal.

67)Hi-Point 995 Carbine
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bd/Hp995carbine2.jpg[/img]
While there is much speculation and debate among gun owners about the merits of Hi-Point's pistols there is little debate that their first product, the 995 carbine is an excellent design for its intended purpose.
In simple terms the 995 is an advent of the federal assault weapons ban which was enacted in the 1990's. It lacks many of the various features associated with all the "scary" rifles and comes with a 10 round magazine. In operation it is a 9x19mm semi-automatic rifle with a simple blowback-operated mechanism. Not exactly rocket science.
The real genius is in the way Hi-Point did it.
Since the 995 represents a concept meant to fill the void caused by the then-banned UZI and MAC rifles they could have made it very expensive. But instead of trying to make a whole lot of money for every gun they sell, they adopted a different strategy. Just have a very simple inexpensive gun that works great, cut every possible corner in the production stage and sell it for the lowest price possible while still earning a profit.
But they didn't stop there.
Hi-Point offered and continues to offer a life-time warranty for every gun they make. That means that if you have one and it's b0rked, you send it in for repairs and they'll fix it up for you free of charge. Even if you're not the original owner. This way they tackled some of the skepticism they would expect to be levied against such an inexpensive (and let's admit it, very ugly) weapon.
Predictably this was a recipe for success.
While it was still very ugly, it offered a decent 9mm rifle for often under 200$. There aren't many .22lr rifles that are that cheap. People really liked this thing too. It was swiftly reported to be highly reliable, many claim to have fired thousands of rounds through it with no malfunctions. Many also claim that for a 9mm rifle it is reasonably accurate as well. Overall an excellent range toy or a plinker if you have tons of 9mm ammo sitting around. It also presents an interesting concept for self-defense. Since it fires the 9mm it doesn't penetrate too many layers of drywall or bark like a rifle, but it is still very easy to control. At the same time it has significantly more range than a handgun which is ideal if you have a spacious property. The menacing and ugly appearance also scores a few points in the intimidation department. Overall 200$ for all this and a bag of chips swiftly earned the 995 a healthy following. It sold almost 30,000 rifles in 1998 alone.
But it gets better.
Hi-Point later announced a version chambered in .40 S&W called the 4095. It too sold very well. A series of handguns followed soon after and it was found that although Hi-Point never mentioned it in their marketing the magazines between the .40 caliber pistol and rifle are interchangeable. While the 9mm pistol can take the rifle's magazines but not vice-versa.
In all both guns represent a wonderful bargain and are still widely available to various civilian shooters today. They are prized by their customers for the low price, the wonderful reliability, the unbeatable warranty and as a result of these merits an aftermarket has formed to cater to the numerous 995 and 4095 owners. A company called ATI manufactures replacement stocks that make the gun resemble the Beretta Storm. With the death of the assault weapons ban 15 round magazines have also become available, although Hi-Point still only sells 10-rounders.
On the other side of the coin it was never marketed to either military or law enforcement which would have relatively little use for such a weapon. It has also been seen as a target for occasional firearm legislation due to its appearance which is often mistaken for an assault rifle and due to its prolific nature. There was also much outrage when one was used in the infamous Columbine shooting.
In simple terms it is a cheap, ugly although relatively good knockabout plinker. Nothing more, nothing less. It isn't a world-beater and it isn't a name associated with many romantic notions. But there's no denying that it's a success.

68)RK 62.
[img]http://world.guns.ru/assault/valmet_62.jpg[/img]
Finland has had a very long history of "borrowing" and improving firearms from its Russian neighbors. In fact Finnish variants of Mosin Nagants for instance, are greatly prized by shooters and collectors alike for their excellent quality.
When the time came to adopt an assault rifle in the 1960s the choice was obvious.
At that time, even with incidents such as the winter war relations between the two neighbors were favorable and a number of original milled-receiver AK-47 rifles were submitted for trials. What was ultimately adopted however does variate slightly from the original formula.
Rather than having the under-folding stock the RK-62 (as it was later designated) has a tube.This is somewhat sturdier and at the same time lighter. A wooden stocked variant was issued as well, but it didn't see that much service. The grips were also redesigned. They were made of plastic to reduce weight and the ergonomics are somewhat improved as well. Another tweak was the gas system which is a bit more refined. More importantly the rear sight assembly was moved to the end of the receiver and replaced with a peephole or aperture sight, rather than a notch. This approach more closely resembles the M1 Garand and AR-15 series.
More importantly the worksmanship of each individual weapon is top-notch. The contract to manufacture this gun went out to Valmet and Sako which are renown for supreme quality. This, coupled with the reworked gas system and improved sights means that the RK-62 is not just significantly more expensive than the bog-standard AK, it is also significantly more accurate. In fact some have reported 1-MOA groups at 100 yards which is completely unheard of in any other AK variant chambered in the old 7.62x39mm round.
That is one of the quirks of the RK. It doesn't use 5.56 NATO or 5.45, so it still has a range limited to about 300-400 yards on a good day which the Finns believe to be quite adequate. There are, however export versions in the newer caliber. 5.56 versions were offered for export sales in the 1970s as the Valmet M76. Buyers were at first somewhat skeptical. But today Quatar and Indonesia use them. Various Valmets in both 7.62x39 and 5.56x45 occasionally pop up in conflict zones such as anti-terrorist operations in south-east asia but the high price tag makes many potential customers a tad reluctant.
The most famous variant however is the IMI Galil, which is a direct descendant of the series and has, in fact proven to be even more successful. Recently Finland adopted the RK-95 to serve alongside the older models. It has a stamped receiver to save weight and a side-folding stock borrowed from the Galil. On top of that LMG variants were made in 7.62x39mm for Finnish service and 5.56 and 7.62 NATO for export.
That isn't to say that this is exclusively a military weapon.
Almost from the beginning civilian versions were manufactured alongside their military counterparts in the same factory with the same care and standard of quality. As well as the 7.62x39 and 5.56x45 versions the LMG variants were sold in semi-automatic-only configurations as well. They were widely marketed within the United States. This created one of the more interesting bits of trivia in movie history. Did you know that pretty much every Hollywood movie that has AK-47s in it up until the late 1980s used almost nothing but Valmets? They were constantly used as analogs for Ivan's favorite assault rifle. The LMG variant was also used as a stand-in for the RPK. This is because back then the various Russian-made versions were simply not available on the US market.
So there you have it.
A long military history which continues today, almost 400k rifles in existence, a descendant which is more prolific than the original, plenty of civilian and export versions and a ton of screen-time in old action movies. Perhaps still kind of shaky as far as prolific firearms go, but it deserves a mention nonetheless.

69)SVT-40 (Samozaradnaya Vintovka Tokoreva/Selfloading Rifle Tokarev model of 1940)
[img]http://world.guns.ru/rifle/svt40r.jpg[/img]
People tend to think that Soviet troops were ill-equipped for the second world war. While this is true thanks to the frequent shortages that can't be said of the weapons available to them. Quality control may have been imperfect but just about everything they used was effective.
One such weapon is the SVT-40.
Many people don't know that like the Americans, Russia too was developing semi-automatic infantry rifles in the 1930's. During this time Torarev (the designer of the TT-33) and Simonov (who would later go on to make the SKS) were both trying to make such a rifle. Tokarev was attempting to use a simple recoil system which he could never get to function properly while Simonov made the AVS-36 which used a gas system and was adopted soon after trials. But the AVS was critically flawed and unreliable, so a contract was put out for anyone to make a better rifle. This time Tokarev went for a gas system and came up with the SVT-38 which was adopted and soon after some tweaking put into production as the SVT-40.
The rifle itself is pretty strait-forward. It fires 7.62x54mmR ammunition out of a 10 round removable magazine. It uses a gas system which greatly resembles that of the FN-49. Again, it isn't known if the development of either rifle was influenced by the other. But the internals closely resemble that of the 49 and by proxy the FN FAL.
The reactions of various soldiers tended to be mixed. While it offered a substantially higher rate of fire than the Mosin Nagant the SVT-40 wasn't as accurate. Thus, while about 50,000 sniper variants were made it wasn't as popular for that role as the Mosin Nagant. Riflemen too had a somewhat mixed reaction. They were very quick to dub it "over-complicated", "inaccurate" and "unreliable". However these distinctions were the result of poor training on the part of the user. Not so much the fault of the rifle which was in practice about as good as the M1 Garand, even slightly better when you consider the magazine. Indeed elite troops who carried SVT-40s such as the Sea Infantry (the soviet equivalent to Marines) greatly prized such a weapon and took full advantage of it.
It also proved popular with those who captured it.
SVT-38s were captured in large numbers during the Winter War and used to much greater effect than their original owners could manage. This was helped by the fact that Finland at the time was already using the 7.62x54mmR round. Later on it became greatly sought-after by German troops who would base some of their own (and much less successful) semi-automatic rifles off of this design. Indeed many were captured and re-issued in their original caliber. Sometimes even re-captured by the Soviets. Occasionally one will pop up at an auction that has several re-arsenaling stamps on it, indicating that it has been captured, re-captured and reissued by both sides numerous times during its relatively brief service history.
While it was only used around WW2 it was used in huge numbers.
In all more than 1.5 million were manufactured and used. An impressive sum by any standard. In fact the plan was to have about 1/3 of all riflemen carry it, although this proved somewhat optimistic and the supply often lagged behind. This is because of all the SVT-40s merits it isn't as simple to mass-produce as other war-time soviet firearms. The usefulness and greater simplicity of the PPSH-41 meant that often times arsenals would rather fill out an order of PPSH SMGs twice the size of an order of SVT-40s.
This is what ultimately cut the life of this weapon short. After the war production ground to a halt and most SVTs were stuffed into arsenals never to be seen again. Well, that's not entirely true. A number were sold off to various client states. For instance several thousand found their way to Cuba, just in time for the revolution. Thousands more were sold within Russia to hunters over the years since the powerful ammunition is ideal for hunting game. Many were imported to the United States where they remain sought after by collectors to this day. It also remains popular with shooters due to the inexpensive nature of the ammunition, although SVTs are nowhere near as prolific as other rifles such as the Mosin Nagant and therefore demand a significantly higher price.

70)Springfield 03.
[img]http://world.guns.ru/rifle/m1903-44r.jpg[/img]
The origins of the '03 date back to the turn of the 20th century. More specifically the Spanish-American war. At the time the US army was armed with mostly single-shot 45-70 trapdoor Springfields or bolt-action Krag-Jørgensen rifles. Meanwhile the Spanish had Mausers. Even though the guys with the Mausers didn't win, the effectiveness of that design proved to be significantly superior to that of the Krag which was by contrast flimsier, less powerful, with less range, a lower rate of fire and with no clip reloading capability. So like any good soldier, pretty much everyone in the US army suddenly wanted one.
While the US government was tempted to adopt the German rifle a decision was ultimately made to stick with an American company. Springfield made a prototype in 1901 which was the result of extensive dissections of captured Spanish Mausers. Elements of the Mauser were mixed with the Krag already in service. Indeed, so sure were they that this rifle would be adopted that they started mass-producing parts before any order to make them was sent out. Ironically so many features were copied from the Spanish Mausers that Springfield had to pay a 200,000$ royalty to Mauser.
But it wasn't adopted. A number of changes needed to be made. When they finally implemented those changes (such as a different type of bayonet, at the personal request of Theodore Roosevelt) it was adopted in 1903 as the Springfield 03 along with a new caliber called "30.03". But shortly after Germany patented the sharp-nosed "spitzer" bullet which had superior ballistics. The 30.03 was redesigned with that feature as the 30.06, the rifles meant to fire it had their sights recalibrated to accommodate.
The result of all this hard work was a real gem. It was deadly accurate, even with open sights. But the gun itself had a very short profile. This meant that the cavalry and the infantry could carry the exact same weapon. There was no need for a specialized, shortened version. Thus it was light, accurate, powerful and could be shot quickly enough to be a combat bolt-action.
Although it served well in WW1 production could never adequately meet demand. Still, almost a million were made. A number manufactured before the war had used a flawed metallurgical process in the making of the receiver and there were a number of incidents involving exploding rifles, but this problem was swiftly addressed.
All very good, but there was one more curious chapter in its history before the US army entered WW2.
Learning from the experiences of trench fighting in WW1, the US government began testing what would become known as the "Pedersen Device". The idea was simple. You remove the bolt from your 03, install this thing and suddenly your bolt-action rifle is a semi-automatic .30 caliber rifle. When equipped it fired strait-cased .30 caliber "pistol" bullets out of a 40 round magazine. However this never caught on as problems with the device and its ammunition came up. There are a number of rifles that still have holes cut in the receiver to serve as ejection ports, but most of the devices have since been destroyed. Today they remain incredibly rare and valuable, the ammunition for them isn't much easier to find than the device itself.
In the 1930s the 03 was redesigned with a type "c" stock that had a semi-pistol grip. This was known as the m1903a1. During WW2 the US army was already using the M1 Garand, but a shortage of 03 rifles meant that they wanted to make a few more to adequately supplement the semi-automatics. Remington and the Smith-Corona Typewriter Company were given this task. During production Remington was using tooling left over from WW1. It was severely worn and Remington began to make various simplifications to the design. Many parts were stamped, rather than machined. The rear sights were replaced with simpler peephole sights, similar to that of the M1 Garand. This simplified variant became known as the M1903a3. About the same time a sniper version entered production. It had no iron sights, instead, it had a M73 2.2x scope. This is known as the M1903a4. It is essentially the same thing as the a3 only accurized and shipped out of the factory with a scope for sniper use.
After WW2 most of the 03s became essentially obsolete. The Garand had proved itself. It went on to fight in Korea and while the 03 did follow it, that was only in limited numbers. The longest-lasting variant was the a4. It saw use in Korea and stayed in production and service well into the 1960s, seeing extensive use in Vietnam as well.
With so many of these rifles made and eventually phased out it is little surprise that almost all ended up in the hands of American civilians. It essentially created and popularized the 30.06 as a civilian hunting caliber. Even though it no longer sees military service, the 30.06 is almost as popular a civilian rifle caliber as it gets. Surplus 03 rifles are often snatched up by collectors and shooters alike. Unlike many other bolt-action rifles they often demand a pretty high price, sometimes as much as 1,000$ but it depends on the variant. If it has been sporterized that does hurt the value significantly. The biggest source of these weapons is the US government's Civilian Marksmanship Program which sells them as well as M1 Garands and Carbines to civilians for about 500$. But that isn't to say all of the Springfield 03 rifles saw military service. There are also a number that were built for the civilian market, often with the hunter in mind. They are also still used as drilling rifles, since the overall length and relative light weight makes them well-suited for that purpose.
So it has just about everything. Well over a million made, almost 60 years of service, makes a great deer-killer, tack-driver or collector's item. Really, what more could you ask of a rifle?

71)M1895 Nagant Revolver
[img]http://world.guns.ru/handguns/NAGANT.JPG[/img]
Near the turn of the century the Nagant brothers of Belgium were already well-known within Russia for their part in the design of the world-famous Mosin Nagant bolt-action rifle. When Emile & Léon designed and submitted a design for a revolver it was rather swiftly adopted as the standard sidearm of most of Russia's armed forces.
This decision may have been a bit hasty. While the Nagant revolver had much technical innovation many argue that it was obsolete the moment it was adopted.
On the surface it is actually quite interesting. It held seven shots of 7.62x38mmR ammunition. This ammunition had a very unconventional design where the bullet was inside the casing, rather than protruding from the front of it. This was done to compliment a gas seal system that worked by pressing the cyclinder against the barrel when the hammer is cocked or simply pulled back far enough (since some were double-action). When the cylinder is moved forward the front of the case expands, further sealing up the gap. This process was meant to stop gas from escaping from the gap. This in turn increased the power...
Marginally.
Here you have a revolver that has this complex sealing system in order to increase the power by about 50-150 FPS, which is marginal at best. There is one added benefit however. It allows the revolver to be silenced. But the fact remains that most of the 2 million Nagant revolvers made were never silenced, so there is no real advantage for all this added trouble.
Another problem was the .30 caliber ammunition which was a bit underpowered. It has a pretty good muzzle velocity, but not that much mass. So it lacks the punch of many other handguns. It was done so that the same machines that made rifle barrels could be used to make handgun barrels. Thus easing the strain on what little industry Russia had at the time.
This would have been fine if not for another problem. The Nagant is a gate-loaded revolver. Once you fired off 7 shots you had to reload one by one. This is less of an issue with the SAA since it at least packs a fierce punch to make up for it. So it's a gun that, while accurate, controllable and easy to silence is ultimately the unhappy result of politics and favors rather than it being the best choice available.
But nevertheless it has a service history that would make almost any firearm proud.
In all about 2 million were made. Mostly by Russia which adopted them before the turn of the century. There it saw use through WW1 and the subsequent Russian Revolution. Both the Imperial (White) and Communist (Red) armies used them to great effect. It proved itself to be nearly indestructible. An Imperial Russian officer once boasted that if anything ever went wrong with his, he could fix it with a hammer.
While on the front lines the sluggish reload meant "6 for the enemy and 1 for yourself", in peacetime it became a somewhat dreaded implement of terror. The Bolshevik Secret Police (AKA the Cheka) often carried them and used them to do their bidding. Silenced variants saw much use. In fact numerous such revolvers turned up in the hands of Vietcong agents, usually assassins during the Vietnam war. But there is a role for which it was somewhat more suited. From the beginning it found favor as a police weapon. Variants with cut-down barrels were popular as concealed weapons for plainclothes officers. Which is on top of the previously-mentioned efforts of the Cheka, NKVD and KGB to utilize this weapon's capability of being silenced.
But Russia wasn't the only country to use it. The Nagant revolver somehow found service, at one time or another and in some quantities with countries such as Sweden, Poland, Spain, Norway, Finland, Hungary, Greece and its native Belgium. In fact some turned up as far as countries such as Argentina and Vietnam. Little surprise considering just how many were made.
But what of the Nagant revolver after WW1? What about today?
While it became obsolete with the adoption of the TT-33 in the 1930's it remained in production until the 1950's. Seeing much use in conflicts such as WW2.
Interestingly some are still carried by police officers in Russia, usually in more rural areas or in less important roles. It is not uncommon for the gun to be many times older than the user. But the real rebirth is in the hands of civilians. The soviet state would often present such a gun to various high-ranking officials. Numerous revolvers were also built off the Nagant platform for civilian pistol shooters, sometimes in .22LR and that was still under communism. This coupled with a vast number of handguns released from soviet arsenals to American markets makes it a prolific weapon in the US.
If only it could find more customers. While they present an interesting conversation piece the long-obsolete 7.62 ammunition is simply not available at any affordable price nor in reasonable quantity. The revolver can, however chamber .32S&W long as well as .32 H&R Magnum. Neither are particularly common, but easier to come by than a handgun round which is older than most countries. Original single and double-action Nagants are available for about 100$ while the competition models tend to cost more and be more practical for someone planning to actually shoot them.
Personally I'd buy one just so I can mount it in a display case and feel like a high-ranking communist party member.

72)K31
[img]http://world.guns.ru/rifle/k31.jpg[/img]
Contrary to popular belief the K31 wasn't designed by Rudolf Schmidt Although it was based off the Schmidt-Rubin design which goes back to 1889.
Way back then most armies used single-shot paper cartridge rifles in roughly .50 caliber. For this reason the original Schmidt-Rubin in 7.5x53mm was a real innovation in a number of ways. While the bullets it fired were still in paper cartridges, they fed from a removable 12 round magazine. More interestingly rather than having a conventional bolt-action it featured a strait pull. The inner workings still rotated like a normal bolt-action and the gun still had to be cycled for every shot but the exterior of the bolt was mounted on a rail that rotated it as it was moved back and forth. This means that instead of cycling the action (ejecting the spent casing, cocking the gun, chambering a fresh round) by pulling a bolt up, back, forward and down it was done by simply moving it back and forward. This faster action coupled with the higher magazine capacity meant that this gun had a significantly greater rate of fire than other bolt-action rifles of its time.
But this design and its many variants eventually became outdated. In 1911 a new rifle based on this design was issued to the troops in tandem with a new metal-cased 7.5x55mm ammunition (it has roughly the ballistic properties of 7.62 NATO). While the basic idea behind the rifle was still the same it was essentially redesigned from the ground up. The result was more refined. While it still had a removable magazine which is somewhat rare in bolt-action rifles even today, it held 6 shots rather than 12. A carbine version was made as well.
But that rifle was the K11, not the K31.
Like I said before the original design of the series, Rudolf, had nothing to do with the new 1911 model or many of the 1889's variants because he died in 1898. Likewise he had nothing to do with the K31. It was actually designed by Waffenfabrik Bern. At that time the Swiss got the idea to take the K11, and make a rifle based on that which was as accurate as the full-sized 1911 rifle while being less expensive to manufacture and more reliable (since the strait-pull action occasionally encountered feed problems).
Impossible?
Not at all. in 1931 a rifle was adopted which matched all of those characteristics. Overall it was a refinement of the previous rifle. The stronger action could sometimes survive being fired with a barrel blockage. In fact four rifles fired off 150,000 rounds without any issues at all. Oh, and it still used the 7.5mm round. If it isn't broken, don't fix it. While these rifles cost less than their predecessors they were still made to very demanding standards.
The high accuracy and reliability were prized by the soldiers in the field although ironically this excellent weapon never really saw much fighting. Although roughly half a million were made to equip every man in Switzerland of fighting age no one outside of Switzerland adopted them. These rifles served to intimidate Germany throughout WW2 and like all bolt-actions were essentially obsolete by the time the war ended. They were replaced with the SIG 510 in the 1950's and tossed into arsenals or issued to civilians although a sniper variant remained in service for several years afterwords.
But like many such obsolete rifles rather than rotting in a dank bunker or being tossed into shredders they were sold off and have found a second life in the civilian market. The Swiss greatly prize the history of this rifle which (much like their homeland) never fought any wars, but the sub-MOA accuracy and excellent ballistics of the 7.5x55mm round are a neat bonus.
Not only are they popular within Switzerland where the ammunition is still widely available since it is still in service, they have made it to the US as well. Many have been imported here and sold for way less than they are worth at bargain basement prices. Many were snatched up for as little as 400$. A real steal considering that a rifle of such quality could easily cost well in the thousands today. While these rifles are accurate and their ammunition excellent for hunting they don't see that many sales with shooters since the ammunition is too scarce in the states. Rather they are mostly bought by collectors or simply those who find them interesting.
One neat fun fact is that many have a slip of paper under the buttplate containing the name and contact information of its previous owner. It is not uncommon that these people are contacted by curious collectors. It is also worth noting that while the rifles themselves tend to be in excellent condition and ready to shoot thousands upon thousands of rounds the stocks tend to be severely damaged. This is because during their service they were used as shovels, hammers, boot cleaners and the like.

73)FN Minimi
[img]http://world.guns.ru/machine/m249saw.jpg[/img]
[b]Note: I originally wrote this as 70 but forgot to move it to the front page so I re-numbered to 73.[/b]
When intermediate calibers were first introduced they weren't exactly seen as ideal machine gun ammunition. Rather, due to the limited power and range support weapons chambered in the likes of 7.62x39mm or 5.56x45mm were dubbed LMGs. Even then, they were largely considered ill-suited for serious combat.
If there is one gun that changed that view, it was the Minimi.
Meaning "mini-machinegun", the Minimi was developed by FN in Belgium in the mid 1970's. The idea was to try and make the lightest belt-fed support weapon one can make. The natural conclusion was to use a lightweight intermediate caliber such as the 5.56x45mm, rather than the 7.62x51mm which sees much more use for this purpose. The Minimi itself borrows a lot from FN's MAG and, some argue is essentially a much smaller version of one, although a 7.62x51mm version was made. This was done to fill a US government contract in the 1970's for a new machine gun in 5.56 to compliment the M-16 series of rifles already in service. This program, seeking to develop a S.A.W. (Squad Automatic Weapon) saw little funding at first since high-ranking brass were reluctant to fund such an endeavor, thinking that such a weapon would be inaccurate and underpowered.
Rather than using a cloth to link lengths of bullets together the Minimi uses a disintegrating belt borrowed from an M60 and scaled down for the smaller ammunition. This means that after you fire off a bunch of bullets you won't be dragging a piece of cloth behind you which can get snagged on something. Normally not much of a problem since machine guns don't get moved around that much, but since the Minimi weighs in at about 15 pounds it is much more nimble and therefore the expectation was that it would be moved from one firing position to the next rather quickly. You won't have a long belt of bullets dangling around either. While the most common length of ammunition is about 200 rounds there is a polymer or cloth pouch that attaches to the bottom of the gun which can hold 200 linked bullets. If all that doesn't float your boat, you can simply insert STANAG magazines. Another neat feature is that the gas system can be regulated between about 750 to 1000 rpm. Under normal conditions it's meant to be used at 750, but if the gas system is gunked up or the gun is being used in adverse environmental conditions the added rate of fire could actually prevent further fouling and jamming.
So we have a light gun with a neat feed tray that takes either disintegrating belts or STANAG magazines and it comes in 5.56 so the rest of the squad can easily swap ammo with their machine gunner.
Not surprisingly the biggest and perhaps most well-known user is the USA.
It was adopted shortly after trials in 1982 as the M249. It beat out Colt's M16 HBAR and H&K's MK21 for this contract. Soon FN was mass-producing them to fill the order. In 1984 FN opened a plant within the US to mass produce this variant closer to the customer. The M249 differs from the original Minimi most notably with a heat shield above the barrel. It costs roughly 4,000$ per gun. Soldiers who have used it report that it is highly reliable and accurate, with an accurate range of about 1,000 yards if not more (with a prolonged burst, naturally). This is one reason why Counter-Strike is not to be trusted. The M249 is actually a very accurate and controllable weapon. Recent reports have indicated a large number of malfunctions of M249 machine guns in Iraq. But this is not due to any design flaw or improper maintenance. The guns currently in service have seen roughly 10 years of continuous service from the Gulf War to Just Cause, Mogadishu to Kosovo and Afghanistan/Iraq.
It has proved itself an effective weapon in the hands of Americans, even if it wasn't meant to serve indefinitely.
But Americans aren't the only ones to use them. Belgium still uses it as does France, the UK, Poland, Latvia, Indonesia, Chile, Mexico, Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil and just about everyone else who can afford it. Countries such as Italy, Greece, Australia, Taiwan, Japan and Canada use locally produced copies. China also makes copies, but only for export sales. All of these countries and dozens more use them in vast numbers to compliment 5.56 caliber assault rifles in service.
Naturally with all of these eager customers, there are a whole lot of variants out there. We have the original version, one in 7.62 NATO, the M249, solid stocks, folding skeleton stocks, some variants don't take STANAG magazines, others have different rails and sights. But overall the machine gun that all of these countries use is essentially the same.
However, people still call it an LMG. So what has it changed?
The Minimi has changed the perception of intermediate caliber belt-fed machine guns in general. They are no longer seen as less useful than their 7.62 caliber counterparts because they are lighter, nimbler and handier when part of a squad that uses assault rifles of the same caliber. There are newer designs. Isreal replaced their M249s with their own 5.56 SAW called the Negev. South Africa makes the Mini SS, a 5.56 variant of the SS-77. The success of the Minimi is also the reason why a number of countries make LMG variants of their assault rifles. Britain did it with the SA-80 (called the LSW) and Germany made the MG-36, an LMG variant of the G-36 assault rifle while Austria made it so that in 60 seconds any AUG could be converted to HBAR configuration.
Simply put, 5.56 support weapons wouldn't be where they are if not for the Minimi's success.

74)FN 1900
[img]http://world.guns.ru/handguns/browning1900r.jpg[/img]
Ever wonder who was the first to put a slide on a semi-automatic pistol?
Little surprise that it was none other than our dear friend, John Browning. But it wasn't the Colt 1911. It was the FN 1900, otherwise known as the Browning Number 1.
While it wasn't the first self-loading gun the addition of a slide was a great improvement over other recoil-operated mechanisms. It created a large surface that could be cocked easily which contained all the necessary workings such as the spring, follower and barrel. Because the most important moving part was so large and accessible, it was significantly sturdier and somewhat easier to manufacture than other designs. But the 1900 isn't what one would think of when thinking of a pistol with a slide today. The ejection port for instance is still in the frame, rather than on the slide and the recoil spring is above the barrel. It is also hammerless, being fired from a stiker which is attached to the follower spring. Other than that it is a normal single-action semi-automatic pistol that fires .32 ACP from a removable 7 round box magazine.
Because it combined the speed, efficiency, controllability and accuracy of a self-loading pistol without the inherent flimsiness, unreliability and high cost of other semi-automatics of the time this gun was a colossal success. Even though it was underpowered it is the reason why .32 ACP is so popular within Europe, particularly law enforcement agencies who want a compact weapon for undercover work, a purpose for which the tiny 1900 was ideal.
It was manufactured by FN until 1911 when the popularity of subsequent designs based on the 1900s such as the 1903 and 1910 greatly surpassed it in sales. By that time FN claims to have made 700,000 No. 1 pistols. But they weren't the only ones. Millions of copies and variants of the design were made from the US to Southeast Asia. But like the original 1900 these copies too, eventually fell out of favor due to the encroachment of more refined semi-automatics.
Contrary to popular belief the 1900 is not the gun that shot Archduke Franz Ferdinand, starting WW1. That was an FN 1910. But it was used to assassinate the Russian Governor-General of Finland in 1904. It was adopted by many militaries in Europe and other nations around the world, often issued as a personal defense weapon for officers. It also remained in favor with law enforcement agencies for decades after it was essentially obsolete and out of production. Today civilian use is mostly limited to that of collectors, but because the .32 ACP ammunition which it so greatly popularized is still as popular as ever it can occasionally see some use.

75) Bergmann MP-18.
[img]http://world.guns.ru/smg/mp18-I-1.jpg[/img]
Ever wonder what the very first practical SMG was? It should come as little surprise since you read the title that it is none other than the MP-18.
This piece was designed by Theodor Bergmann in 1916 when he looked at the debate of pistol vs. rifle in close quarters (IE trench) combat. While the pistol offers a higher rate of fire and is easier to manipulate and reload the rifle can function as a club or pike, is more powerful and can be used for a quick pot shot at longer range.
The design is a very strait-forward carbine-type (has a wooden rifle stock) open-bolt SMG. It originally fed from a strait 20 round magazine that fed from the side. But when it was pressed in service during WW1 the army demanded that it take Luger-pattern magazines. Since those are not double-stacked the only way to have a substantially-sized magazine of that pattern without it being to long was to adopt a winding drum system.
But there was a problem with this approach.
These "snail" mags were bulky, difficult to reload and unreliable. The only advantage they offered was that they held 32 rounds and if a gun can take those you could also use Luger magazines if you needed to. You could also hook up the 32 round magazine to a Luger but that is an impractical approach that increases the likelihood of jamming as well as making the gun bulky and difficult to hold.
But it seemed that the snail mag was the only problem with the design. The MP-18 performed sterling service in WW1. Roughly 20,000 were manufactured and at least 10,000 used by the end of the war. It was incredibly effective in trench fighting and it pretty much invented the doctrine of urban warfare with compact automatic weapons that would resurface in places like Stalingrad and is still used today. Essentially the MP-18 is the genesis of the submachine gun and by proxy the tactics by which SMGs are used in warfare as well as the creation of the assault rifle.
After the war, although the conditions of the armistice banned further production about another 15,000 were made. Since the armistice banned pistol magazines exceeding 8 rounds all of the snail mags were destroyed and existing MP-18s converted to the old 20 round box mags. The 15,000 new MP-18 used the same magazines as well. Germany mostly gave them to police agencies which made good use of them during the house-to-house counterinsurgency fights of the early 1920's revolutionary period. The effectiveness of this weapon eventually inspired the MP-40.
But Germany was not alone in pursuing that which served them so well.
Impressed with the overall concept Britain made the Lanchester SMG which served well into WW2 (mostly with the Navy). It is a direct copy. In fact the STEN smg is a simplified version of it. Austria made a copy too, as did the French. China made a variant called the Tsing Tao which was used against the Japanese which were wielding their own copy, the Type 100 in 8mm Nambu. It doesn't end there. Switzerland license-built a version called the SIG Bergmann 1920 in 9mm, 7.62 Mauser and the version they adopted in .30 Luger. The 9mm version was bought by Finland which in turn made the Suomi 31, that in turn inspired the PPD-40 which later evolved into the PPSH 41.
In other words the only SMG used in WW2 that was [b]not[/b] directly based off the MP-18 was the Thompson. When you think of that it's really impressive. Here you have a gun that fathered an entire generation of children which spent the largest conflict in history fighting against themselves in playgrounds such as Berlin, Shanghai, Leningrad, Stalingrad, Budapest, Normandy, Anzio and it won against itself too. Even after all of that was over these kids kept popping up in hundreds of colonial conflicts all over the developing world before eventually becoming obsolete thanks to the assault rifle which is arguably the MP-18's grandson.

76)DShK
[img]http://world.guns.ru/machine/dshk_002.jpg[/img]
It can be said that for every small arm used by the United States, Russia always had an equivalent. The Soviet equivalent to Browning's M2 was the DShK "Degtyaryov-Shpagin Large-Calibre". In 1929 the Red Army issued a request for a heavy-caliber machine gun such as the M2 that could be used as an anti-aircra

[zippydippy]

gay thred guns guns guns no one cares about your counterstrike gun education

[highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Thread Shiting / Asher Roth." - ventilated))[/highlight]

[Mugofdoom]

-snip- huh

[XxKitsunexX]

It's not really one of those threads that need a sequel thread

[vkat]

I endorse this continuation since that thread was going quite well.

Still waiting for your "(G)narly Non-Lethals" thread (which would include Nerf guns).

[Bean-O]

Right now I'm trying to figure out how to properly move everything.

[highlight]Special Edition Update, Special Editions Go Here:[/highlight]

[b]Special Edition 1:[/b] Blitzkrieg.
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fb/PanzerInfantryAdvance.jpg/250px-PanzerInfantryAdvance.jpg[/img]
Remember how in the beginning of the thread I talked about commonly used weapons and tactics? Well this is one of them. In fact so revolutionary of a concept is it that after it was introduced around the WW2 era almost nothing else was used since.
The concept is a little more illusive than it seems, more of an abstract and ad-hoc idea. Simply put rather than rotting in trenches and getting nowhere, when you invade a country you spearhead your attack with armor and aircraft, followed up by rapid deployment of mobilized infantry. It isn't exactly rocket science (in fact it is common sense) but it still took the bitter reality of WW1 to hammer the point home.
A number of historians refuse to accept that it is a real, coherent military doctrine. It lacks any specific conduct of operations. Rather it is just "Keep moving and push through everything before they can scrounge up a good defense." . The term itself was coined by TIME magazine in 1939 during the very rapid and well-executed invasion of Poland. Up until then the German army did the exact opposite, but the effectiveness of that approach led to its use in France and other countries. The Germans didn't even have a name for this tactic. "Blitzkrieg" or "Lighting War" didn't even appear in any of their field manuals, nor was military production structured in any particular way to assist such a doctrine. At the time it existed only as a buzzword for western media. Simply put, it was such common sense that the Germans adopted this tactic without knowing it, as did the Russians and Allies.
The reason it was so effective during the war was because the French were expecting another war like WW1. They had dug themselves in at the heavily fortified Maginot line. But this new tactic of very rapid advances simply allowed German forces to go around those defenses through the Netherlands and Belgium. They did this before the French had a chance to set up any significant defenses at the French/Belgian border. Thus, they carried on their momentum from the low countries strait into Paris, seeing little resistance since the relatively disorganized and immobile French army was holed up in the Maginot Line. Unable to catch up to, let alone repel the German advance.
A similar thing happened in Russia. The only reason the Germans advanced so rapidly at first is because they weren't really expected. The attack was initiated too suddenly for the ill-equipped, understaffed and almost completely untrained and inexperienced Red Army to do anything about it. Once they punched through they simply let the momentum of the initial attack carry them all the way to Stalingrad, Moscow and Leningrad since no sufficient soviet forces could be mobilized rapidly enough to repel the onslaught.
It worked in reverse as well.
After Normandy was taken the Allies made similar rapid advances across France, the low countries and into Belgium between the occasional defensive line (like the purposed Maginot Line, now run by Germans) and the occasional counterattack (such as the Ardennes). Russia hopped from city to city within its own borders and later in Easter Europe in a similar fashion.
Of course the big innovation that made all this possible was the perfection of tanks, cargo planes and trucks that supplied and mobilized such assaults. Something that simply wasn't possible in WW1. You see children, tactics are for fools and knaves, the real masters deal with logistics. You may have a million Chuck Norris clones but they are useless without a steady supply of ammunition. They need to be brought over there, equipped with the proper gear and backed up with artillery, armor and aircraft in order to sweep aside anyone they run into. There is also the issue of food, communications, medical support and everything else that goes into the bloody and sordid affair that is war. Blitzkrieg is really the only efficient way to utilize those resources and simply put the Polish and French didn't have them, at least not in the necessary quantities.
But that is just WW2.
Today, pretty much every war that isn't fought through sporadic guerrilla engagements is fought this way. Mobile, rapid and efficient. Take Desert Storm and Russia's invasion of Georgia. Both were spearheaded by strategic bombings of certain targets (military importance notwithstanding), then troops and tanks rolled across the few scattered and bewildered defenders pretty much as fast as they could drive on paved roads. The name can change as well, America for instance calls it "Shock and Awe" although it is at best just a modified approach to the same old concept with a new name.
Efficient and horrific as all of this may seem it is actually far less bloody that it would otherwise be. The enemy's ability to fight is targeted and eliminated rapidly, the chain of command is severed and hopefully after the defense becomes a number of scattered, surrounded clusters of enemies most will simply surrender. Many soldiers on both sides are never even involved in prolonged fighting. It is (in a best-case scenario) over very soon with a decisive victory for one side or another. It is only when the assault is bogged down or countered with insurgent tactics or a similar counteroffensive that things eventually get bloody. Otherwise it just doesn't last long enough to create the staggering losses and slaughters on both sides that other conflicts such as WW1 have created.

[b]Special Edition 2:[/b]Nonlethal Alternatives part one.

Ventilated first suggested that I do something in regards to some of the less than lethal approaches to otherwise potentially deadly confrontations. It seemed an interesting angle but I wasn't too amused at the prospect of writing about it at first. But the more I thought about it the more I figured I'd give it a go and see what happens.
It isn't uncommon in this somewhat dangerous world of ours that we find ourselves on the receiving end of somebody's aggression. So much so that our lives are in jeopardy but at the same time the person defending themselves must not put the life of the aggressor at risk. There are a number of reasons for taking this alternative. A, you are in the Law Enforcement world where as a rule taking a life is the very last resort. B, you need to defend yourself in a country where killing in self-defense is illegal. C, for moral reasons you would prefer to avoid killing your attacker. D, firearms or more deadly weapons are prohibited, especially for self-defense purposes.
In general nonlethal force tends to be more risky to the person protecting themselves. Hitting an attacker with pepper spray for instance as opposed to shooting them is less likely to stop the attack, but the outcome is far better for both parties. The victim won't be needing a psychiatrist (taking a life can take a toll on one's psyche) or a lawyer for that matter. The perpetrator will be alive, the cops will have less headaches and society as a whole would feel better.
So let's assume you choose (or are forced to choose) this high road.
-A person's first line of defense is to simply use their wits and avoid confrontational situations. For the most part people don't go venturing alone in dark alleys late at night. Common sense dictates that one shouldn't start heated arguments with people either. Most people try to avoid physical confrontations. But let's assume that you are the target of someone who is either on a warpath or seeking to take advantage of you through illegal means.
-Coercion would be the second line of defense. Attempt to negotiate with the hostile individual. If they are simply aggravated, back away while attempting to calm them down. Of course this course of action is human nature and should come naturally. An alternative, provided that you have a weapon at your disposal (or at very least something that looks like a weapon) you could attempt to turn the tables on them. Your objective if you are say, robbed and you have a gun is not to injure the attacker. Your objective is to dissuade them from pursuing their attack on you by making it appear to not be worth it. Statistically well over 90% of the cases in the US where a victim brandishes a firearm in self-defense the sheer sight of it dissuades the attacker. No words need be said, no shoots need to be fired, no one needs to get hurt. Of course if you are (like most people) without a gun your odds begin to decline. Generally, the scarier your weapon looks the better the odds that you will be able to dissuade your attacker. But by the time you are down to your own bare fists I wouldn't bother with this plan of attack, you would simply be provoking them (unless you're ripped or something). Again, the plan here is to make them think that you have an overwhelming advantage and that it isn't viable for them, the attacker, to continue the assault.
-Ok, so let's say that you have not dissuaded your attacker. It's on now.
Let's say that you are unarmed. This is where the essential fight or flight instinct kick in. If you are experienced in martial arts or very physically adept to such confrontations you stand decent odds if you hold your ground. If they are unarmed you could probably kick their ass, if they have a pipe or a melee weapon of some sort you could still probably manage to score a couple solid hits and secure the weapon. If we're talking firearms you better know exactly what you are doing and you better be well within arm's reach. I for one wouldn't try doing something stupid like that. But if you are like me a total weed or they have a gun I'd book it. This is the flight part of that instinct. Get out of there. Just beat it. This is assuming however that you have someplace to run to (as in, you're not cornered), that you can outrun them and that they don't have a gun or a ranged weapon. That complicates the matter drastically. It is possible to flee from a gunman. But very risky. You can weave left and right if you are in an open space making it as difficult for them to line up a shot as possible, you can weave from cover to cover (something they at very least can't see you through) or you could combine fight with flight (as in, hit them with a brick and then run). Just remember [b]never[/b] to run in a strait line away from an assailant with a gun. That makes you a sitting duck.
Now let's assume that you want to stand your ground but you don't want to stick with your bare hands. You have come prepared. This is where the term "less than lethal" goes into effect. There is no such thing as a "non-lethal" weapon. You could kill a person with anything meant for self-defense, the odds of that happening however can be very slim, as intended.
-Clubs have been used since perhaps the stone age for fucking people's shit up. A solid hit on the head can even render the attacker unconscious, allowing you to restrain them if necessary. It ranges from a bewildering array of nightsticks, billy clubs, blackjacks and other professional weapons to a more improvised arsenal of whatever happens to be on hand. Bricks, pipes, hammers, golf clubs, sticks and the like would suffice. The king of such improvised weaponry would be the baseball bat or cricket bat. Not very wieldy, but it certainly packs the necessary wallop. Golf clubs on the other hand aren't something I recommend. You have a very weak metallic rod with a very solid and heavy chunk of metal at the end. That chunk HAS to meet the attacker for the weapon to be effective. If they are hit with the rod it will either do nothing or get damaged, rendering the weapon useless. A solid hit in the skull with a well-placed long drive could also be lethal which is not an ideal outcome. To a degree the same can be said for hammers.
-What about pepper spray?
It can be very effective, but you are still betting your life on a can of seasoning. Pepper spray also doesn't take sides. You spray them at close range and you could mace yourself as well. Also, if your attacker is particularly determined (or very high) they could simply ignore it and continue attacking you while blinded. The inconsistent spray pattern could also mean that it wouldn't hit the attacker immidiately. Mace is still somewhat effective. It is very distracting to say the least, truly horrible to say the worst. The possibility of permanent injury is also slim although there have been rare cases of choking deaths or allergy-related fatalities. So it is very neat and can be very useful but it disorients, rather than physically stopping the opponent. There is a certain "give up" factor involved as well. Sometimes an attacker will stop or flee if maced, but this is not something I'd bet my life on. Rather it gives you the temporary physical advantage or an opportunity to flee. Thus, with time at such a premium in such a scenario it is an indispensable tool.

[b]Special Edition 3:[/b] Nonlethal Alternatives part 2.

Ok so last time we covered means of avoiding confrontation which can be summed up as common sense and we covered some simple self-defense weapons. But now we're getting into the good stuff. What if, say, you aren't very popular in your neighborhood and there is a very angry mob outside your house? What now?
Well the world of Law Enforcement has offered you a number of choices for just such an occasion.
-In the crowd control department we have a little number known as Tear Gas (or CS). It is an aerosol, solid at room temperature and is usually dispersed via pressurized canisters. Everything from hand-thrown grenades to specialized grenade launcher shells has been used as a vehicle to haul it to the ranks of angry mobs around the world. Although it is officially classified as a nonlethal weapon some studies such as one done in 2000 by the FBI have found that if victims are unprotected when the gas is released in a confined space the effects can aggravate existing medical conditions or be lethal by itself. It is known to do significant damage to the heart and liver. But so long as the exposure is temporary and not concentrated it is simply unpleasant rather than fatal.
And boy is it unpleasant.
People exposed to it feel a strong burning sensation on their skin and are soon overpowered by a strong urge to vomit uncontrollably. It is also impossible to keep your eyes open, victims report running noses and horrible dizziness. Provided you can still stand you won't be able to walk much. Happily the effects tend to be short term and they almost completely wear off within minutes. By that time any given suspect or group of suspects could be controlled. The exact effects vary based on the amount of gas, the concentration, the exact chemical used (other variants such as CN, CNB and CNC exist) the way it's distributed (sometimes it is distributed as an airborne powder or as a solution in another chemical) and the victim in question. Interestingly animals seem to be far less susceptible due to less efficient tear ducts and the protection offered by fur.
It remains essentially the default crowd control weapon. Portable, potent and because the cops have gas masks only effective on the unruly peasants. It has also been manufactured in smaller doses for individual self-defense use. It is even occasionally used by criminals. Interestingly, the military isn't allowed to use CS on the battlefield because it is a chemical weapon. The doctrine is that if one country uses CS gas the other will switch to another, more horrendous chemical weapon. Thus the use of Tear Gas on the battlefield is banned by the Geneva Convention.
-Another alternative is a much simpler chemical. H2O. Lots of it. It has no toxic after-effect and it doesn't sound that scary. But when you have a pressurized hose of the stuff from a fire truck or the water cannon of a specialized anti-riot vehicle it can be quite scary. It was an icon of the 1960's in the US where police departments of such cities as Birmingham, Alabama recruited fire engines to hose down rioters. It proved relatively effective since the water would knock anyone down. But it created a less than perfect image.
The use of water cannons while prolific in Europe and Asia is for this reason rare within the United States. But image isn't the only problem. There have been serious health and safety concerns. Pressurized water can rip clothes on victims, cause lacerations and even if pressurized enough it can break bones. The more immediate issue is debris picked up and carried by the stream. In Europe particularly cobblestone streets have been ripped apart, sending chunks of the road at the crowds.
But there is another interesting prospect. In Indonesia riot police occasionally add a pink dye to the water in order to distinguish rioters after the riot is dispersed. Because it is a flexible and effective tool in the crowd control arsenal (if a bit unwieldy and overpowered) it has remained in service over the years.
-Stink bombs and scent-based weapons present yet another alternative. The scent that most such devices try to mimic is that of a Skunk. It is so unpleasant and disorienting that a victim sprayed with the substance will usually submit or disperse in order to begin the tedious process of riding themselves of the smell.
While the concept is simple the delivery systems can vary.
It is sometimes used as an additive in water cannons. Israel in particular is known to do this. Other times it is used as an additive in gas canisters, as a spray, a powder pretty much every delivery system you can think of.
It is effective essentially for the same reasons it works so well in nature. It is just nasty stuff and no matter what you were trying to do before being sprayed with it your attention immediately focuses on trying to get that shit off. They are used as both riot control weapons, occasionally in day-to-day law enforcement duties and for personal self-defense.
-But what if we tried something completely different? Remember Star-Trek? How they had the phasers that could be set to "stun"? Something to that effect is already in development.
A company called Raytheon is developing an Active Denial System which uses what is essentially a huge microwave to burn anyone within the beam's reach. The idea is that if you are within the beam the surface of your skin will instantly reach 130 degrees and you will move away from the affected area. But it isn't perfect. If the victim is stuck in that area for more than a few seconds the "death ray" could actually leave second degree burns.
This weapons is promising but still in the development stage and the aforementioned safety concerns could halt its development. The Japanese were experimenting with a similar weapon in WW2 but they wanted a lethal weapon and they couldn't achieve the necessary range in order for that concept to ever leave the prototype stage.
-A similar idea was done with sound, rather than heat. It is called an LRAD. A Long Range Acoustic Device. It was invented recently by the American Technology Corporation (A nominee for Bean-O's creative company name of 2009 award).
In technical terms it is a 45 pound (20 something Kilo) disc that emits the sound of a smoke detector out to about 300 yards but loud enough to pass the human threshold of pain [b]or even cause permanent hearing damage[/b].
This device has also seen use in military and law enforcement applications around the world. ATC has even sold a number to China because although existing laws prohibit the sale of weapons to China by American companies the LRAD is simply not classified as a weapon.
Where other weapons are forbidden the LRAD has often slipped past the red tape as a "stereo system". Sometimes with the help of a little bribe money but it usually doesn't even take that much. Because of this classification it has found a bit of use in international waters by various vessels that aren't allowed to carry firearms. It was used to great effect against pirates in Somalia. If you have ever seen the show "Shadow Force" which follows a real team of mercenaries in Africa one episode had them using an LRAD off the coast of Sierra Leone where due to UN ceasefire policies the team wasn't allowed to carry any firearms for their own protection whatsoever.

[b]Special Edition 4:[/b] Nonlethal Alternatives part 3.

By now we have discussed various means of crowd control. But of course most of you are probably not too interested in joining the ranks of riot police, or becoming very, VERY unpopular. A more realistic scenario would be the typical dark alley situation. It's you, some guy who doesn't care for you very much and the only route of escape is behind him. So what might there be to help you get past this guy?
-Many people stick with a little number called a stun gun. Simply put It's a small battery-powered device that has some metallic prongs. Stick those into your attacker, push the magic button and ZAP. They won't be able to do much of anything for a few seconds because they will be too busy writhing in pain.
And there is no way to resist getting stunned either. You can't shrug it off.
This is because of the way they work. A stun gun has a very high voltage current which can enter the body, but the amperage is very low (around 3 milliamps), so it's not intense enough to do any damage. This current is meant to interrupt electrical currents within the body that are used by the brain to order muscle functions. In effect it's like what would happen if you were to run a current over your computer's ethernet card. All that current would mix everything up. Thus when the current overrides a human's nerve system he or she will spaz out uncontrollably, no matter how much PCP they might have done that morning.
This method of defense is very popular within the US and in particular abroad, where firearm use tends to be more restricted. Stun guns have also become somewhat feared, with enough voltage to make electricity arc between the contacts people have occasionally reported fending off attackers without even needing to shock them. That distinctive blue spark and zapping noise is the nemesis of many a dark alley denizen. Such a tool is highly popular with the police as well, since it offers a completely effective weapon that has a very minor chance of doing lasting harm.
But it isn't perfect.
The weapon could be a bit too effective if it is, say, raining and both the attacker and defender are wet. In that case the current could travel through the water and hit the user. It is also on occasion not perfectly safe. In rare cases people who were hit with stun guns have died shortly after due to heart attacks induced by the current. People with pacemakers are particularly susceptible. The biggest disadvantage is range. You have to go right up to the aggressor in order to use it, something that puts you within arm's reach and therefore in greater danger.
-But there is a solution for that and it is called a Taser.
Tasers differ from stun guns in that a Taser fires a pair of contacts with wires that run back to the gun. This allows it to be used at some kind of range (at least beyond that of arm's reach, the longest range being 35 feet). But it has to be reloaded with a fresh cartridge between shots. Until one or more of the electrodes (which are designed to penetrate clothes and dig in) have been removed the user can send supplementary shocks in order to subdue the perpetrator.
This weapon is more famous in the hands of the Police than it is in the hands of civilians. The company that makes them (Taser International) mostly goes after the LE market although there have been variants made for both the military and civilians, both of which are reasonably successful. Use of this technology has grown exponentially since the 1990's when it was introduced, with mixed results. Untold thousands of lives were saved where the Taser has made it unnecessary to use deadly force. Millions of criminals who would have otherwise evaded capture were apprehended with the use of the Taser as well (since shooting a fleeing suspect in the back is unacceptable in the modern law enforcement doctrine).
But the public image of this weapon is less than pleasant. With incidents such as the famous "Don't tase me, bro" debacle in the University of Florida where Andrew Meyer was mercilessly tased by campus police the public is very quick to say that cops are a bit too tase-happy now that they have been given a new toy to play with.
There is, perhaps, a grain of truth in that statement. There is a common perception among some cops that while Tasers hurt, they don't do any lasting damage. Therefore they can be used very liberally. While this is the exception rather than the rule, outrageous headlines of cops overusing this indispensable tool aren't uncommon. Never the less it remains just that, an indispensable tool that saves countless thousands of lives every year.
-But what if you don't want to have to count on a battery to be fully charged when you have to defend yourself? What if you have a gun, but you prefer not to kill your attacker?
The crucial element lies not within the gun, but the ammunition.
Bullets made out of anything from rubber to wax to plastic can offer most of the critical punch of an actual firearm, but with a significantly reduced risk of killing the victim. Because the ammunition isn't made of an actual metal the power and accuracy are severely reduced. But you still have quite a bit of power in your hands, plus the menacing appearance of a firearm.
Since you still need a very real gun for this to work, it is rare that civilians have access to or ever use rubber bullets. To a civilian if you're going to go to the trouble to get permission to carry a loaded firearm you may as well be packing lead and since the law usually doesn't differentiate between the ammunition carried by a person this is what people who have the right to carry guns usually do. Rather rubber bullets are mostly used by the police for riot control and handling specific suspects.
-But as far as non-lethal ammunition dispensers go, there is a king of this hill.
The pump-action shotgun.
No other weapon is so flexible that it can fire such a wide variety of reasonably large objects down a smooth barrel at someone who just HAS to go down. That and the pump-action in particular is prized for how easy it is to switch between the different specialty rounds.
Indeed, pretty much anything you can think of that you can cram into a 2 inch tube with the width of a nickel has been crammed in there and shot at something (or somebody). Everything from simple rock salt, to technologically advanced electroshock rounds that function like stun guns on impact have been used to ruin someone's day. There are even such loads as "Dragon's Breath" which shoot a giant fireball, or rubber slugs which can topple a mule, or simple birdshot which lacks the potency to kill people under most circumstances but can still royally ruin someone's fighting spirit.
The shotgun has been the vehicle of choice to deliver just about everything under the sun to just about every scumbag under the sun. One of the most common projectiles is a simple hackey sack. Well, the technical term is a "Bean-Bag round". Because it is a single object it packs a menacing whallop, but because it is flexible it can't break skin, although it can leave bruises or even break bones at point blank range.
Various non-lethal 12 and 20 gauge shells have been offered to civilians, police and the military for many years and they are quite popular with the first two. Cops like to avoid killing suspects whenever possible and so do people who want a shotgun that they want to keep within easy reach somewhere in their house. For home defense there is the added benefit that most of these shots can't penetrate drywall, so it is that much less of a pain to clean up.
-But I am forgetting something.
Why put yourself at risk when you can have someone else kick (or rather bite) their ass for you?
If you want to be really technical the dog falls under the blanket of "Zoological Warfare". And as long as there have been cops, there have been cops who used big dogs to help them catch bad guys.
But naturally it goes back farther than that. Since before the first humans domesticated them, wolves have had the pack mentality that made them ideal for this exact purpose. They have a concept of loyalty which makes them very determined to act on behalf of their master and the wit to know just how to do it, and do it efficiently.
These instincts have been watered down in dogs to make them more hospitable to other humans, but they still persist throughout the canine species. Certain dogs have been bred and trained from an early age to bring out these traits. The dog offers a means of catching up to and (assuming the dog is of decent size) disabling just about any individual. Almost no one can outrun a big dog and this dog will know instinctively just how to time the exact moment of attack as to bring down the fleeing perpetrator quickly and efficiently. Yet they are also smart enough to know how to keep the person occupied while help arrives and how to avoid doing serious, lasting or potentially fatal injuries (unless trained otherwise).
For this reason (and because of their highly tuned senses) dogs are a crucial staple within day-to-day police function. You simply can't outrun a dog, or hide from it. If dogs had working thumbs there would be next to nothing any fleeing suspect could do.
The presence of these instinctive traits, coupled with the territorial nature of the beast makes a dog the default choice for domestic protection. Numerous people keep a nice big dog in their house in order to ward off would-be intruders. Or they just enjoy having a canine companion and the protection offered is a neat bonus. One thing for sure, when burglars look for a house to hit, the one that says "Beware of Dog" is the last on the list.
They are, however not exactly portable. You can't take a dog everywhere with you and you can't simply leave one at home indefinitely. The dogs bred to be small enough to be carried about are virtually useless for protection. Another issue is that some people just don't like them. If you have a dog that is big enough to offer you some kind of protection, anyone with any canine phobias could very well be terrified. And this is assuming that you yourself don't have such phobias. So while they are efficient, fine-tuned with millenia of breeding, they aren't for everyone, you can't take them around with you and naturally you have to take care of them.
Simply put, it is a symbiotic relationship. And one you shouldn't enter into just because you want the dog to protect you.

[b]Special Edition 5:[/b] Molotov Cocktail
[img]http://www.mutineermagazine.com/img/blog/molotov_cocktail.jpg[/img]
While the exact origins of the Molotov remain cloudy, dating back as far as perhaps the Greeks who had small pots of naptha (a napalm-like substance) the origin of the most common name for them is very well-documented.
It starts during the Winter War between Finland and Russia.
During this conflict Russian aircraft dropped incendiary bombs on civilian targets in Finland. But rather than admit to this, Soviet Foreign Minister Vylacheslav Molotov claimed that they were packages of food to feed the starving Finns. In response, with a bit of dark humor the Finns started calling the firebombs that were constantly being dropped on Finland "Molotov Bread Baskets".
When the Finns began employing an improvised incendiary device which was previously improvised and used against Soviet tanks in the Spanish Civil War only a few years earlier it wasn't a very great leap of imagination to apply the same stroke of graveyard humor. Given the nature of the weapon the Finns figured that the Soviets wanted a drink to go with their meal, thus the term "Molotov Cocktail" entered the human lexicon. However other terms such as "bottle bombs" have been used to define them as well.
In a practical sense just about any breakable vessel with a flammable liquid and an ignition source which is attached to it is a Molotov Cocktail. The most common version is simply a glass bottle, preferably a large one such as a bottle of Wine which is corked off with a wick that plugs the top. This wick is doused in a flammable substance (sometimes the same as the substance within the bottle). To use this weapon the wick is simply ignited and the bottle thrown against a surface that shatters it on impact. The flammable liquid (which can be anything from gasoline to homemade napalm to turpentine) spills all over the target as it is ignited by the wick which it is suddenly exposed to by virtue of it being broken. This liquid is also occasionally supplemented with additives such as sugar, detergent, animal blood, and just about everything under the sun that can help the burning liquid stick.
The exact variant used by Finland would have consisted of a corked glass bottle with a wick taped to the exterior which is considerably safer than plugging the top with the rag which is meant to be ignited.
Advantages of this weapon are numerous as are the disadvantages. For starters it is an incredibly simplistic and effective device in nature. Anyone can manufacture one. It takes almost no time or skill. Because it spreads a surface of sticky, ignited flammable liquid it can serve as an effective means of lighting just about anything on fire. Specifically it is meant to be used against tanks where the fire will stick to the exterior of the armor eventually heating up the exterior, potentially burning the occupants or even killing them. It can also be used to close a route for foot infantry if thrown in a strategic position, such as the end of a narrow street in an urban environment. If the effects on armor are somewhat effective the effects on unprotected infantry can be very gruesome. Molotovs are however often used as the simplest and fastest way for one person to do a large amount of damage in situations where the user is in a riot or is simply a deranged asshole who likes running around burning things.
The disadvantages, like I said are also numerous. The nature of this weapon makes it difficult to use in a defensive situation since fire has a tendency of spreading. It can ignite a building or group of buildings that the user is trying to protect. It is also highly unsafe. The user can immolate themselves by not throwing it far enough or by simply dropping it. He also has to throw it hard enough that the glass breaks very violently as to spread the contents. These things aren't very useful if they simply bounce off their intended targets in one piece. Worst yet the simplistic nature allows any yahoo, such as the previously mentioned deranged asshole to manufacture and use them as they see fit. Since it can be utilized pretty quickly with little warning it has found much favor with organizations such as the IRA which rely on ambush tactics.
For better or worse this weapon and the know-how to make and use it are very common knowledge. It is a symbol of both the glorious freedom fighter and the cowardly terrorist. It has fought the Nazis in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of 1944, it has served the IRA in their various (and significantly questionable) efforts and it has been the weapon of choice for the mad arsonist that occasionally pops up and sees fit to ruin or even end the lives of others for mere enjoyment.
But one thing is for sure, having read this you [b]better[/b] not try to make one because I'm not responsible if you immolate yourself if you feel like being a total dipshit.

[highlight]Special Edition 6[/highlight]: Gun Safety.
[img]http://filesmelt.com/Imagehosting/pics/670b94c04a2ddc4bba1a7e437a2750be.jpg[/img]
Picture originally made by Oleg Volk, unless I am mistaken.
Now that I think about it I'm surprised I didn't discuss this sooner.
Firearms in general aren't the safest things in the wrong hands. Just like there are rules you must follow when handling a power drill or driving a car there are rules you must follow when handling any gun. Like that picture indicates:
1)Treat every gun as if it's loaded.
A huge chunk of gun accidents involve people assuming that a gun is not loaded, meaning that they are free to horse around with it as they see fit. The most common mistake is when someone removes the magazine from a firearm and therefore assumes that it isn't loaded, but they forget that a round may be chambered. This ends up getting a lot of people shot. Even if you know it isn't loaded you must follow all the other rules. One exception to this rule is if you are in the process of cleaning your gun and you have unloaded it, verified that there are no rounds chambered and disassembled it. Another is when a ceasefire is declared at the range and the rangemasters have inspected all of the weapons on the firing line, verifying that they are unloaded. You may then proceed in front of the firing line to check your target, having been assured that there are no loaded guns.
2)Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.
Because this rule applies to when a person is actually shooting a gun it is often considered as a secondary consideration, but it is no less important. Bullets, by nature, tend to penetrate objects rather well. In fact much better than people are often led to believe. Therefore when you're shooting a gun it's very important to consider where the bullet will go after it passes through a target. Any given shooting range will have a backstop, often consisting of a mound of dirt which can stop pretty much anything. This is also one of the few rules that applies to when you're actually using a gun in self-defense. It's good to consider the possibility of your bullet passing through your attacker, through some drywall and into your neighbor before you pull the trigger.
3)Never point a gun at anything you're not willing to destroy.
In other words a reiteration of treating a gun as if it's always loaded. But now you're focusing specifically on where it's aimed. When a newer person gets a hold of a gun they can easily forget this rule and accidentally find themselves doing what is called a "muzzle sweep" where they unwittingly move the barrel past a person or a number of people. This is an unsafe thing to do considering the aforementioned assumption that the gun is loaded. In short, don't point it at people. In fact , since the barrel has to point somewhere point it at the safest place you can think of. Downrange (assuming you're on a firing line and there's nothing between you and downrange) or towards the ground work fine (not your foot).
4)Keep your finger off the trigger until you're ready to fire.
Since you don't need to keep your finger on the trigger while holding a gun it is good practice to keep it outside of the trigger guard. In fact it's good practice to do this even when you are shooting, keep the finger off the trigger while aiming the gun and only slide it inside the trigger guard when you're about to take the shot. This rule can apply in self-defense situations as well. Keeping the finger outside the trigger guard until you make a definite decision to shoot helps keep you from firing a gun as a result of being startled.
So there you have it. The basic rules you must follow when you are holding or using a gun. When you are new to it you will find yourself breaking them occasionally, particularly trigger discipline and muzzle sweep. But so long as you are quick to correct yourself it will come to you in due time and it will swiftly become second nature. Some people pick it up faster than others and if they can't pick it up at all that's what nerf guns are for.
But there are other things you should keep in mind.
-Don't load the gun unless you're planning on shooting it. Having a loaded gun somewhere that's easy to reach in case you need to defend yourself is fine, having a loaded gun sitting around within plain view and easy reach of anyone is a very bad idea. If you're simply storing a gun, store it unloaded.
-While the merits of trigger locks are disputable it is generally a good idea to store your guns in a gun safe or at very least a place where they're hard to get at.
-Wear eye and ear protection when at a gun range or firing a gun. This is because guns are loud, very loud. If yours isn't loud you'll probably find yourself sharing the range with the one guy who's packing a .44 magnum with a 1 inch barrel that you can hear from 5 miles away. It is generally accepted as good practice to not go deaf. This is even more important to consider if you're at an indoor range. Eye protection is there because those very hot shell casings tend to get tossed around a fair bit. Catching one in your eye is somewhat unpleasant.
-If you reload ammunition know what you are doing. Don't just cram the casing with all the gunpowder you can stuff into it. Any given gun is only meant to handle so much pressure. Overloading can put a lot of unnecessary wear on your gun or even cause it to explode in your hands.
-Hold a gun properly. Shooting limpwristed, gangsta style, shouldered improperly or just overall the wrong way can shift the barrel in an unsafe direction. Have a good amount of control over your gun. This is not only safer it significantly helps you shoot accurately. Also, holding a gun that is reasonably powerful the wrong way can cause the recoil to hurt you. Improper shouldering of powerful rifles or shotguns can severely injure one's shoulders. Improperly holding a handgun can cause the slide to bite your wrist, recoil can cause severe injury as well. We're not talking wanker's cramp either.
-If your gun jams, don't be an idiot and look down the barrel. That is something that only happens in cartoons. Misfires can be the result of many things and they do not guarantee that it is safe to ignore all the proper rules of gun handling. Either fix a misfire yourself or have someone who knows what they are doing fix it for you.
-Transport a gun in a gun case or a gun bag. People can be somewhat skiddish around firearms because like the very first rule says, people generally assume that guns are loaded. A locked case can also help keep it from falling into the wrong hands. So in general when transporting a gun, have it inside a case or a box. You don't want to give people heart attacks.
-Don't shoot guns into the air. Bullets fall out of the sky at pretty much the same velocity as when they leave the barrel. They can and on rare occasion have fallen out of the sky and killed people.
-Don't use a gun while drunk or stoned. This is pretty self-explanatory.

This stuff is essentially common sense but you'd be surprised how often even the simple rules are broken.

[b]Special edition 7:[/b]To stop a bullet...
[img]http://www.int-int.biz/acatalog/covert_vest_kevlar.jpg[/img]
It has been a while since I did a special edition but I felt this would be somewhat interesting.
What exactly does it take to stop a speeding bullet?
That question has been asked by thousands of people ever since guns were invented and even before, when arrows and blades were the primary concern. The answer isn't very strait-forward. Simply put, anything can stop a bullet. Even a .50 cal can be stopped by a block of Jell-O if that block is big enough. Obviously wobbly confections aren't the protection of choice on the modern battlefield since just about everything else can accomplish the same task far better. You wouldn't think of dirt or sand as the ideal bullet-stopper but at just about every outdoor range you will ever go to the backstop is just that, a mound of dirt or sand. There is simply enough of it that it can stop just about any caliber that is shot at it.
However this is something video games like to get wrong. In video games you can often duck behind a desk or just simple drywall when in fact neither of those things would offer you much protection at all. They are better than nothing since that way the person shooting at you can't see exactly where you are, but assuming the bullet is going for you and a piece of plywood is the only thing in its way that object simply won't suffice. So while anything can stop or at very least deflect any bullet if it is large enough, most everyday objects won't. In video games anything that simply looks solid (such as a car door) will stop any caliber.
This brings us to another factor. Not all bullets are the same. The most dangerous rounds in this regard are the ones that penetrate well as opposed to slower cartridges that have more punch but less pierce. If you are out in a normal street you could probably find a few things to hide behind if someone whips out a .22 gun or a shotgun (A fire hydrant, a small brick wall, a light post, etc.) but if they whip out a G3 in 7.62 NATO there isn't much for you to hide behind. One recommendation police departments often issue is to hide behind the engine compartment of cars since the solid metal engine block will stop just about anything. But since that doesn't stop some of the heaviest calibers and most other objects that are likely to be in your vicinity are even weaker your only real bet is concealment. To get behind something where they won't be able to see exactly where you are.
Distance is another factor. All bullets lose some of their power gradually as they fly longer distances. They are literally slowed by their resistance against the air. This means that some objects that can't protect you against a certain caliber at close range can do it at greater distances. For instance the PASGT helmets worn by US troops can't withstand a hit from a 7.62x25mm Tokarev handgun round at point blank while they have been able to hold up against the 7.62x39mm rifle round at 300-400 yards on some occasions. A task for which they were simply not designed. At that kind of range however the bullet would have lost enough force to be defeated by the armor, if barely.
So what about armor?
Well you can have armor on a vehicle that will stop almost any rifle round, but there is a trade-off with mobility. Police departments and VIPs often normal road cars that are retrofitted with armor. But as a tradeoff they are much heavier which makes them slower, less fuel-efficient and far more difficult to drive. Even opening or closing the heavy doors can be a challenge.
But what about personal armor, the kind that you wear?
That has been an issue ever since guns were introduced in Europe. At the time guns were introduced there the knights had plate-mail made of iron to defeat swords and bows. But even the most primitive guns could penetrate that armor with ease. There was a brick wall. The only way to toughen the armor was to make it thicker but that just made it too heavy to carry since unlike a car or a tank a human can only carry so much. Even then the less he carries the better he fights. So it is the protection/mobility tradeoff again.
With the introduction of steel the armor-makers were able to stop some of the projectiles fired from unrifled, underpowered handguns of the time that used black powder. They would test or "proof" their armor by shooting the breastplate. These marks identified certain armors as "bulletproofed" which is the origin of that particular word. Eventually with the advent of bigger, more efficient guns and bullets the entire concept of armor seemed totally obsolete. Nothing that you could actually carry on your back could top a bullet so why bother?
For several centuries that was how it went. The gun-makers rendered the armor-makers obsolete. A number of armors existed but they were made of metal, heavy, largely ineffective and highly impractical. Often relegated to sparse use, if any. There were Flak jackets existed in WW1 and during the Vietnam war but they were vests that contained chunks of steel only meant to stop shrapnel. Although in Vietnam they used aluminum instead since the steel jackets were simply too heavy for infantry use. It wasn't until the advent of Kevlar that things changed.
Kevlar is a synthetic fabric that was developed by DuPont in the 1960's and marketed for all sorts of things such as fishing line. It was touted as being much stronger than a strand of steel of the same size which caught the attention of a number of entrepreneurs. NIJ did a study looking into kevlar's potential as body armor if it was woven into multiple layers. this breakthrough essentially caught incoming rounds. They would pierce several layers and so long as the round wasn't too powerful eventually stop. This breakthrough was widely marketed to largely reluctant law enforcement agencies in the 1970's but has been standard issue ever since.
To further suppliment the protection offered by such vests there are pockets that allow the user to install metallic or typically ceramic inserts. We aren't talking ceramics like the kind of stuff you find in your dining room. We're talking trauma plates made of silicon carbide or polyethiline. These plates are almost as hard as diamond, yet still relatively light. I say relatively because they do add quite a bit of heft. Never the less, although they do fracture when hit with high power rifle rounds they can stop them while at the same time the vest remains light enough not to pin the user to the ground.
Kevlar can stop most handgun/shotgun rounds because it catches them like a net, with the inserts which strait try to stop anything that hits them it can stop some rifle calibers as well. It is still not quite perfect. Such vests are often bulky and difficult to conceal, not to mention highly expensive. The ones that are light, mobile, comfortable and concealable offer less protection. That trade-off is still ever-present.
So there you have it. While just about anything can stop any bullet if there is enough of it, very few things can do it efficiently.

[b]Special Edition 8:[/b] The history of rifle grenades.
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/M1_Garand_rifgren-shooting_line.jpg[/img]
While the exact origins of rifle grenades are uncertain the concept has been around about as long as firearms have. By simply having a gun that had a wider bore you could lob bigger projectiles. Sometimes these projectiles would have been early grenades. But these weapons functioned more or less like their more conventional counterparts, only they were heavier and much more dangerous to operate.
It wasn't until about the turn of the century that this ancient concept would have been revised in what became the first modern rifle grenade. It was the brainchild of the Japanese who in 1905 were struggling with the Siege of Port Arthur (nowadays known as Dalian, China). Such portable artillery proved effective however it was found that recoil was too great to fire it from the shoulder so the rifle stock was often rested on the ground. These various experiments inspired the Spanish and later the French who perfected them in WW1.
During that conflict the French had what was called the V-B. It was a cup adapter for their 8mm rifles that fitted on the front of the barrel. You would then insert one of the projectiles (which had a hole in the middle) and fire the thing without using any blank cartridges. The bullet passed through the grenade and the muzzle blast propelled it a maximum of 200 or so yards. Because it didn't require blank cartridges it was a bit faster to use than subsequent designs, but the range was limited and a version modernized for American use was a disaster.
Still, this concept inspired all of the major players of that conflict prompting similar modifications. Often with numerous different projectiles to take advantage of the launchers versatility. Often a timed fragmentation projectile and a HEAT shell that detonated on impact meant for dealing with armored vehicles. Germany made for the K98, Japan continued development on the old concept, resulting in a very modular and universal spigot grenade system. Italy adopted something similar for their Carcano rifles.
America developed a different design in 1941 that used an attachment to 1903 and 1917 rifles known as the "Babbitt" grenade after its creator. This version was basically a snap-on barrel extension. You slid an elongated, rocket-shaped projectile over the end and used blanks to propel it. One was made for the M-1 carbine, but was prone to severe recoil and the M-1 Garand variant had to cut off the gas system. This made the Springfield 1903 and 1917 the preferred weapon in the field for lobbing these grenades.
By the time Vietnam rolled around the concept of the rifle grenade was used by almost every country on earth. But it wasn't perfect. The biggest problem is that when you have the grenade and you are aiming at something you can't use your gun there and then. If an enemy pops out of the bushes you are more or less screwed. It was also a pain in the butt to attach and remove the adapter from the gun. Overall an effective but bulky and time consuming approach that led to the development of the M76 and subsequently under barrel launchers which are also far more accurate. So that means no one uses rifle grenades today, right?
Wrong.
They still have a lot of advantages over the older system. For one thing the newer launchers incorporate the exterior of the barrel and flash suppressor, thus not requiring any adapter (For example the Yugo SKS and FAMAS). Because the adapter (again, assuming there is one) isn't a complete weapon system the whole deal is significantly lighter. It also helps ease some headaches since training grenades can be reused multiple times. They can also fire a wider variety of projectiles, which is why they are still in widespread use today.

[XxKitsunexX]

[QUOTE=ventilated;15803597]I endorse this continuation since that thread was going quite well.

Still waiting for your "(G)narly Non-Lethals" thread (which would include Nerf guns).[/QUOTE]

It was going quite well because everybody was amazed at how much Bean-o was obsessed with guns and doesnt shutup about them lol

[highlight](User was banned for this post ("trolling" - GunFox))[/highlight]

[Furfurag]

You're going to get gold member now

[Missing User]

Point stands even though Ventilated creams his pants for Bean-O (a respected user!! omg!!!). This is a thread that didn't need to exist, Facepunch has enough shitty threads as it is. We don't need Bean-O bumping this thread every few days with a news article containing the word "gun" somewhere. I understand that Ventilated is a thoroughly awful mod and probably was just trying to stick up for his boy, but this is a shit thread by a shit poster - gas gas gas gas gas

[highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Asher Roth." - ventilated))[/highlight]

[Bean-O]

[QUOTE=XxKitsunexX;15803709]It was going quite well because everybody was amazed at how much Bean-o was obsessed with guns and doesnt shutup about them lol[/QUOTE]
If you think my threads suck that isn't my problem. Don't post in them. Simple.
Also ventialted, nonlethal weaponry might be done as a specialized section rather than a new thread. But at this point I'm trying to cover civil war-wild west era.

[highlight]NEWER UPDATE[/highlight]
81)BOYS anti-tank rifle
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/bb/Boys_Mk_I_AT_Rifle.jpg/800px-Boys_Mk_I_AT_Rifle.jpg[/img]
Russia, while the largest user of anti-tank rifles wasn't the only one. Nor were they the first.
Way back in 1937 the British developed a bolt-action .55 caliber rifle that fired from a removable 5-round magazine for that specific purpose. The bullet is fired is called .55 Boys or alternatively 13.9x99mmB. It was developed from the Browning M2's .50 caliber bullet. Because it is smaller than the Russian 14.7mm round which came later it wasn't as effective during WW2.
Indeed, this weapon had many problems, some of them serious.
Initially, the MK1 ammunition could only penetrate about 16mm of armor at 100 yards, good enough against the weak points of many tanks of the time. This weapon and ammunition first saw use during the Winter War when many were used by the Finns against relatively poorly-made Russian tanks. The Finns rather loved them because they did their job, but when they had to be pressed into service in the Second World War against German armor the limitations of the .55 caliber round became apparent. A new bullet of the same dimensions but with a tungsten core was developed, but it only added an extra 5mm to the overall penetration.
Another problem that plagued the BOYS was simply the way it was put together, which was with many screws (you don't want to have to use tools to dismantle ANY firearm) made of very soft metal that were twisted in way too tightly (meaning you could deform them very easily). This was a total nightmare to maintain. A MKII version was made but it mainly addressed problems with the bipod and muzzle brake. The third version was meant for airborne forces and it had a shorter barrel, resulting in not enough muzzle velocity for it to be useful against all but the weakest armor.
But while it had these problems it wasn't useless.
In the Pacific Theater the Commonwealth as well as the US Marines and even the Chinese used them to great effect against very small and thinly armored Japanese tanks. These rifles were nicknamed at least by the Americans as "Elephant Guns" due to the tremendous recoil and "Charlie the Bastard" by the Australian troops for the same reason. The Chinese also rechambered a few to .50BMG and experimented with using them against unarmored targets at incredibly long range, one of the reasons why the Americans tried the same with the PTRD in the Korean War since anti-tank rifle crews occasionally took potshots at unarmored targets during that conflict.
Even during WW2 the BOYS was used for this purpose.
They were used numerous times against aircraft and soft ground targets, sometimes even on vehicle mounts. But just like the PTRD and PTRS it was essentially obsolete by the time the war started. With the only thing these guns were effective against being either softer armor or completely unarmored targets they were replaced with the M2 in many positions which was simply better suited to the task. But during it's successful or arguably not-so-successful career 60,000 BOYS rifles helped beat back the Russians as well as the Japanese, it definitely influenced the creation of the PTRD and PTRS as well as the advent of the big-caliber sniper rifle even if during it's service life it was very rarely used for that purpose.

82)Panzerfaust "Armor Fist" Series
[img]http://www.gd-uk.org/images/research_pages/pznkacker_images/panzerfaust11.jpg[/img]
While only produced from 1943 to 1945 this series of recoilless anti-tank weapons pretty much re-invented the rocket launcher as we know it. The odd part is, the Panzerfaust itself is NOT a rocket launcher.
That's right.
From the very early stages of development to the actual production version it never had a rocket motor. The projectile was simply fired out of the tube. In 1942 German weapon developers got the idea to give some of their soldiers the ability to knock out tanks with a single-shot disposable, recoilless rifle that fired a projectile which actually protruded outside of the weapon, allowing it to carry a large, explosive warhead. On impact this warhead was to detonate, sending a tungsten core through as much as 5 inches of solid steel.
Eventually this idea sprouted into the Panzerfaust 30. Named so because the effective range of the projectile was 30 meters. Essentially a stone's throw. The wooden stabilizers that unfolded mid-flight only helped marginally and the lack of sights didn't help much either. But this weapon put the ability to penetrate the armor of almost any part of almost any armored vehicle into the hands of just about every soldier in the field. This production version could punch through 200mm of armor, almost 8 inches. It was also very light, weighing in at a little over 10 pounds. It was also very easy to use. In all almost 1/2 million were made.
But as you can see by the picture the 30 wasn't the only model. In fact it wasn't the most common either. The extremely limited range made it a very unsafe and dangerous weapon to use. It was swiftly withdrawn from production when these serious problems arose. Thus a 60m version with a bigger warhead, twice the range and the addition of actual sights was produced. This one, introduced in 1944 would see the largest production of the series. Millions upon millions were made.
Some were even shipped to Finland to help them beat back the Red Army in the Continuation War which was as the name implies a continuation of the Winter War. While this launcher wasn't as light it was still quite portable as far as anti-tanks weapons go. It weighed about 13 pounds. At the same time it had twice the range, almost twice the power and cost about the same to make.
The last version introduced en masse was the 100. This time it had a range of 100 yards and could penetrate an extra 20mm of armor. The big innovation was that it could be reloaded up to ten times, beyond that reloading and using it an 11th time is considered unsafe. Only introduced 2 months before the end of WW2 very few of these were made. A 150 version was designed as well, but never produced.
In all as many as 5 million were made in the span of two years, allowing the average German squad to reap havoc on Allied armor and vice-versa allowed allied troops to use captured examples to equal effect against their original users. Russia designated captured Panzerfausts as the RPG-1. The proliferation of this weapon among German ranks meant that Allied armor could not advance without infantry support, especially in urban fighting lest they fall prey to its wrath since almost every other German had one and knew how to use it.
While this is very impressive by any standard, let alone that of a weapon which was only in production for 2-2.5 years, this weapon had a hell of a legacy to leave behind. The reloadability of the Panzerfaust 100 coupled with the configuration of the projectile (where it protrudes in front of the tube) ultimately inspired the PRG-2 which in turn led to the RPG-7. Meanwhile the concept of a disposable, single-shot anti-tank weapon inspired the LAW and many of the other disposables still in use today.

83)Arisaka Series
[img]http://world.guns.ru/rifle/arisaka-38-1.jpg[/img]
Originally designed by Colonel Arisaka Nariakira in 1898 to replace the aging 8mm Murata the Arisaka Type 30 proved the first in a line of relatively decent firearms which is shocking considering all the other lemons that Japan made during that time. It is based off the Mauser's magazine and a bolt which is heavily influenced by the Mannlicher. In a way this would prove to be part of Japan's efforts to catch up with the rest of the world as an industrialized nation.
In truth the Type 30 saw very limited production due to deficiencies seen during the Russo-Japanese War, the Type 38 and 99 are the most common. In the beginning, while the quality was hit-or-miss the 38 was a huge success. It spread throughout neighboring countries such as China, Cambodia and Thailand who often used them to supplement stocks of other rifles, such as China's 8mm Mauser 98s. These weapons would see extensive use before and during WW2. More interestingly the 38 spread around Eastern Europe during the same time. Many were used in the Russian Revolution, most notably by a large Czech regiment. A few other countries such as Britain, Finland, Albania and even the US used them in some limited numbers, often for training since the smaller round had relatively little recoil.
Now the big difference between the 38 and 99 is the caliber. The former fired 6.5x50mm Arisaka which was a notably underpowered round for the time. By contrast the Type 99 fired 7.7x58mm which was also used by many other Japanese designs during WW2. Many 38s were also rechambered to this caliber. During the war it was found that while quality was occasionally shoddy the rifle's action was very strong. The Chinese often rechambered them for 30.06.
Another prominent feature was the bayonet. It was almost more important than the gun it was attached to. This could have been due to occasional ammunition shortages, outdated infantry tactics of the aforementioned quality control problems. In fact towards the end of the war the Arisakas made were called "Desperation Rifles". The quality was so poor that anyone shooting them risked life and limb in the process of doing so. They had a tendency to explode.
After the war Japan's arsenals had to stop all of their operations and dispose of their entire inventory. The soldiers were ordered to file off the Imperial Seal or "mum" in order to prevent anything with that seal being surrendered. Many such rifles had already been captured by GIs and brought back to the states, some of which were modified to fire more common ammunition. This would have been necessary since the production of all 7.7x58mm ammunition stopped abruptly in 1945 with Japan's surrender. Thus every Arisaka in this caliber suddenly became obsolete. Many were simply destroyed.
Today an original Arisaka in an original caliber with the mum still intact is a very rare collector's piece. Many, as mentioned, were rechambered by civilians or occasionally arsenals for more common calibers. While companies like Hornandy still make the obsolete ammunition it is incredibly rare. Firing any Arisaka rifle is considered dangerous because of the risk that you're either handling one of those "last ditch" or the risk that it had been rechambered to a caliber that the scant quality control didn't accommodate for, such as 30.06.
In all, several million were made. While not a truly great design it did prove that if anything, Japan wasn't as far behind in respect to industrialization as many of the other nations believed at the time it to be.

84)Carl Gustav M/45
[img]http://world.guns.ru/smg/kp_m45.jpg[/img]
When you think of the kind of guns used by US special forces and Seals a simplistic open-bolt SMG such as this would be the last thing on your mind. However, unimpressive as it may seem it was in fact once prized by that specific clientele.
Designed in Sweden towards the end of WW2 by (you guessed it) Carl Gustav the M45 represents what you would expect of a WW2 era SMG. It is open-bolt, simplistic, rugged and reliable although not particularly accurate. Indeed it is such a crude weapon that it doesn't even feature a proper safety, not like that actually matters that much in a battlefield. The really neat feature on this design is actually the magazine. It is actually wider at the back than it is in the front, allowing the ammunition to be staggered efficiently enough to hold 36 rounds, 50 rounders exist as well. These magazines are also notable for avoiding the feed problems that plague other designs, even in freezing conditions which is why the Czech model 23 and 25 as well as the French MAS SMGs borrow this trapezoid concept as well. It also greatly influenced the development of the TEC-9 series.
It was adopted by the Swedish army as their standard SMG in 1945 and even though it has fallen out of service since that time a number are still in use. Abroad, it is license-built in Egypt as the Port Said which is in turn sold to a number of countries such as Indonesia. But this isn't what you want to hear. I bet it's killing you, I know that you want to know why the hell "Operators" would ever give this junky-looking late-WW2-era pipe gun any kind of consideration at all?
Well the answer is that it is a prime example of an incredibly simple open-bolt blowback SMG. This means that there are very few components that can get nark'd during use. In fact it is so simple that a Seal could submerge with it and fire it as soon as he raises it out of the water. It really helps quite a bit that at the same time it is very solidly built, the Swedes did not cut corners. During Vietnam both the Seals and the Spec Ops used unmarked Gustavs which they called the "Swedish K". After Sweden stopped making them Smith and Wesson made an unlicensed copy called the M76.
However both the Swedish K and M76 were soon withdrawn from service for one reason or another. Quite a few ended up on the Class 3 civilian market in the US. Because of this they have actually appeared in a couple of movies too such as Dog Day Afternoon, The Getaway, Miami Vice, Starsky and Hutch, the Joker even used one in the Dark Knight and that's just the M76.
It isn't a very well known design but in it's time it was very much an operator's weapon. At the same time it was still simple and cheap enough for numerous third world countries to acquire it. The magazines were especially successful, since they held more ammo and were more reliable than many others of the time, although they just never caught on as much as they should have. In all 300,000 original M45s were made, but copies such as the Port Said and M76 could number over a million combined (we may never know for sure). In all, quite impressive for what many people would quickly pass off as an "obsolete" WW2 era SMG.

85)MP38/MP-40
[img]http://world.guns.ru/smg/mp40-1.jpg[/img]
In the Mid 1930's Germany set upon developing a new, compact SMG for its army in disregard for the conditions of the Treaty of Versailles (not that the League of Nations would ever do anything about it). This weapon, commissioned by the Heereswaffenamt (Army Weapons Office) was to be smaller and handier than the carbine style SMGs that came before it, such as the venerable MP-18.
The results of these trials were a series of less-than-memorable subguns which were for the most part based off the MP-18 one way or another that never entered production in any great numbers. Eventually they settled on the MP-38 which was based off the 36. The MP-38 was a departure in that it had a vertical 32 round magazine and the front coupled with a pistol grip in the back which had a simple (if rickety) folding stock.
This gun had no semi-automatic setting, but rather than being a simple pipe gun it actually featured a weird bolt system that included a recoil buffer. This in turn helped keep the rate of fire to a minimum, allowing a soldier to fire off a single shot with a quick pull of the trigger. At the same time it served to control recoil. Contrary to popular belief you should NEVER fire it holding on to the magazine, instead the foregrip is a plastic panel located between the pistol grip and magazine.
All in all however very few MP-38s were ever made as they featured machined steel throughout and were taken out of production after only two years, replaced with the MP-40. The major difference here is that it was far more simplified, using stamped parts wherever possible. This second-generation SMG had finally come of age as a WW2-era firearm, the critical element being simplified production.
As we all know MP-40s were used extensively by Germans in WW2. In truth however not each German got one. Most still carried K98k's. An MP-40 would frequently be issued to a squad leader. Often they would be issued to a larger group of troops if they were expected to do a lot of urban fighting, but the majority would still be using the K98 since it had far greater range and accuracy. The two weapons worked together in a squad fairly well since the riflemen would take care of any threat at long range while the man with the SMG could provide adequate support at closer ranges.
After the war with millions of these weapons in existence they weren't all destroyed. That wouldn't make much sense. Many countries such as Austria and Norway continued to use them. Because the 9mm ammunition was adopted by NATO it wasn't obsolete, therefore these guns still found use all over Europe and abroad. Many were used by law-enforcement agencies. In one notable incident the fledgling SWAT unit of the LAPD used a few during a shootout with the S.L.A. in 1974.
A number of copies were made over the years, such as the Yugoslavian M56. But this weapon is essentially obsolete. It has been bested by lighter, more effective weapons such as the UZI and MP5. Indeed the overall role of the SMG in warfare had been significantly diminished with the rise of the Assault Rifle which offers a middle ground between it and battle rifles such as the K98.

86)Winchester 1897 Shotgun
[img]http://www.imfdb.org/images/2/21/WinchesterM1897.jpg[/img]
Photo Swagged from IMFDB. This is a "riot" version. The civilian versions had significantly longer barrels.
Contrary to popular belief this isn't the wold's first pump-action although it is the first successful one. The first such weapon would have been the "Spencer Pump Gun" which was made in the 1880's.
Back then the pump-action had yet to prove itself. The way people saw it if your shotgun had one barrel it was a single shot and if it had two it was a double. Pump-actions were untrustworthy and ungentlemanly. Anything new was. Because of this, combined with its own flaws which were numerous, the Spencer was a total failure. Eventually, working from what he saw as a work of genius John Browning used the basic concept of the Spencer to make a pump-action shotgun of his own. Only this time he would do it right.
He failed.
The result was not the Winchester 1897, it was the 1893. This weapon, while a great improvement over the Spencer and essentially a combination of that and Winchester's many lever-actions had a critical safety failure. Coupled with inherently weak construction and poor reliability it was taken out of production in 1897 with an updated version which was ready for the duck hunt. This was the gun that we are more familiar with. Winchester even went so far as to recall and replace all existing 1893s to avoid lawsuits.
Except nobody bought this new improved shotgun.
It too was a marketing disaster. For the same reasons the Spencer failed no one wanted anything to do with such a "complex" device. Mix in the appalling reputation of the 1893 and the Spencer and we have a weapon that is going nowhere fast. This was however, until fate intervened in the form of the first world war.
By the time America entered this conflict, it was known that such a shotgun would be very handy in trench warfare since it could be fired much faster and packed a more fierce punch at that close range, you would have been EXTREMELY lucky to be issued one. Here, on the battlefield this weapon earned its reputation as well as a number of nicknames such as "The Widowmaker", "The Thumb-Breaker" (Due to the cocking piece which protruded backwards when the pump was moved back) and "The old 97". Those that used them, loved them. The Germans however despised them, considering it an ungodly abomination of the battlefield. Any GI captured with it was executed on the spot. After the war Germany petitioned for shotguns to be banned by the Geneva Convention.
Having proved itself an effective weapon many GIs bought them as surplus once the war ended and took them hunting. After the war once the arsenals of surplus were depleted (which took about a week) Winchester was swamped with millions of orders from both law enforcement and civilians. Everyone and their uncle wanted one.
During the 1920s police raids were often spearheaded by an officer with this gun because it was so grizzly and intimidating, particularly the sound of it being pumped. It pioneered the now prolific relationship between a cop and his shotgun, something that up until then was a rarity. After the collapse of the stock market few people could afford so much as a mid-range double-barrel shotgun, but the price of the '97 remained as low as ever, making it a very affordable "people's gun" much like the Mossbergs and Remingtons of today. They were used to put food on many tables, often when there was simply no other way to do so.
But its military service wasn't over by a longshot. Although Winchester created the Model 12 which is an improvement of this design, some old '97s were pressed back into service in WW2 (although not in the European theater, due to the Germans hatred of anyone carrying such a weapon), a number were re-used in Korea and Vietnam although by then the guns in service were very old and dilapidated. Production of the 1897 was halted in the 1950's due to competition from more sophisticated and solid designs such as the 870 and Mossberg.
Today an original Winchester 1897 is worth about 1000$, more if it has seen WW1 and more still if it fought against Japan in WW2. It would be worth more but well over a million were made. 1893s are worth slightly more as well but not by much since they are considered very dangerous to use.
While Winchester doesn't make them anymore a Chinese company makes a reproduction for about 400$, they also make lever-action 1887s. But with much higher-quality American-made shotguns available for less these guns are mainly marketed to people who participate in cowboy-action-shooting (a somewhat new marksmanship sport where the shooters need to use period-accurate firearms).

87)Chauchat
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/31/MWP_Chauchat.JPG[/img]
I know what you're saying.
"This is the worst weapon of all time, what the HELL is it doing on this list?"
Well it could very well be among the worst guns ever made, but damn if it isn't influential. Also the exact degree to which it sucks has been skewed by a colossal fuck-up, as I shall explain.
As far as turn-of-the-century firearm designs go the Chauchat was actually quite a revolutionary concept. Rather than having another maxim copy that weights over 150 pounds you make lighter magazine-fed automatic guns that can be carried by one guy to support a squad or just be a much more sprightly and maneuverable MG on the battlefield. Working from (IE ripping off) John Browning's patent for a "Long barrel recoil rifle" Rudolf Frommer and Louis Chauchat designed such a weapon in 1907.
Field tests were, at first, promising.
Although the ergonomics were absolutely horrible, requiring a new user to essentially tame the gun it worked decently enough. It was chambered in 8mm Lebel, the standard service caliber of the French. It was select-fire, although the rate of fire was slow at about 240 rounds per minute. This was done to make the distinctive U-shaped 20 round single-stacked magazine last longer. During testing it didn't work flawlessly, but it functioned adequately for the most part. Essentially the French army now had a gun that actually worked quite well on paper.
So what went wrong?
The answer is just about everything. The biggest problem was manufacturing. Although on paper this gun worked well the biggest manufacturer was "Gladiator", a motorcycle company. While they didn't fuck up the barrel, they did screw up everything else. The barrel and recoil system were precision machined from solid blocks of steel, but the receiver and everything else were made out of insidiously cheap and shoddy stamping.
These guns broke constantly.
They were also so incredibly sloppy that aside for the barrel and gas units the parts were often not even interchangeable. Even the magazines from one gun often failed to fit another. When issued strait from the factory they would have to have been disassembled and each of the parts modified to work properly. The worst part is that throughout Chauchat's service life (which ended in 1944) Gladiator made the largest amount of them at just over 225,000.
There was another factory called SIDARME which actually did it right, but in all they only made about 65,000 in all. But even these weapons fell victim to a large variety of genuine design flaws. Of all of these flaws the magazine was a huge weak link. It had holes cut out in it so that the gunner could see how much ammo they have left which let dirt get in. The solution, obviously, is not to fight where it is muddy. What's that? WW1? Trench Warfare? Lots of mud? Well that gunner is SOL now, because not only does that magazine serve as a mud-magnet the workings too are very exposed. Cleaning? Hadn't thought of that.
There were actually a fair number of variants of these guns too, all were made by Gladiator since SIDARME made only the 8mm Lebel versions which were exclusive to French armed forces. During WW1 Romania, Russia, Belgium, Serbia, Greece, Poland and Italy used a couple thousand each, which were given to them by France for helping out. Many were re-chambered for calibers such as 8mm Mauser and 7.62x54mmR but the only country that liked them was Poland which formally adopted it as an LMG.
There were also AEF versions which were re-chambered to 30.06. Of all the variants these were the very worst since they started out as very poorly made 8mm Lebel guns and then very sloppily re-chambered to 30.06. Those that were issued to American troops were inspected and swiftly discarded as useless. Sometimes they didn't even have .30 caliber barrels. Many were unsafe to fire, if you could get them to fire off any shots at all. They were more useful as bludgeons than anything else.
Ok then...
The point is reiterated, what is this weapon doing on the list?
Firstly the 30.06 Chauchats were the worst, but the 8mm Lebel and Mauser versions did function to some degree. They weren't stellar and anyone would rather have a Lewis Gun any day of the week but the French swore by them. It is essentially a "pretty lousy" weapon that many people consider to be the "worst" because of what the Americans said about theirs (in which case they would be right). Secondly these were quite successful, about a thousand or more were used by almost every country that fought the German Empire in WW1. It was the most mass-produced automatic weapon of the war. Indeed they still saw use in WW2 and the Winter War as well. A number were even spotted in Vietnam (since it used to be a French colony).
More importantly this gun is the first somewhat successful LMG. It predated the Lewis, BREN, BAR and DP. In fact it is because of the Chauchats widespread influence (as well as its failings) in WW1 that these weapons came into being. It ushered in the concept of having a lighter automatic weapon for squad support which lead to the LMGs of WW2 and by proxy the invention of the Assault Rifle.

89)Lewis Gun
[img]http://world.guns.ru/machine/lewis-2.jpg[/img]
Although this gun is more famous for its service in the hands of British and Commonwealth troops it is actually an American design.
It was invented around the turn of the century by Colonel Isaac Newton Lewis of the US Army.
This weapon features a pan magazine which holds either 47 or 97 rounds which is respectable by any standard. It is removable so reloading is quick and easy (bulkiness of said pans notwithstanding). This concept would later influence the Russian DP. It was also a much lighter gun than the various Maxims used at the time, weighing in at around 30 pounds loaded. This isn't a light weapon, but it is much lighter than a freaking Maxim gun.
The innards consisted of a gas system that cycled a fully-automatic-only open-bolt action. The big distinctive feature is a weird return spring system in a hump in front of the pistol grip which functioned somewhat like a wind-up watch, only much faster. There is also a distinctive metal shroud around the barrel which funneled air into the back and out the front when the weapon was being fired, rather efficiently in fact. But it was bulky and often discarded to save weight.
Ironically while of American origin the American armed forces didn't want anything to do with it.
Lewis spent many years fighting with the head of the US Army Board of Ordnance who he had gotten into a political tiff with. Eventually Lewis gave up and set up shop in Belgium to market his gun in Europe. His company was called Armes Automatique Lewis. Pretty soon he found that unlike in the US his gun was actually quite appreciated. The biggest competitor was the Chauchat, but it way flimsier, less reliable and held less bullets even if it was cheaper and lighter. Soon Britain was license building this gun at the BSA (Birmingham Small Arms) factory.
They weren't alone. Savage had started making licensed copies back in the US for Air Force, Marine and Navy contracts. Russia ordered 10,000 from Britain. Belgium bought up a bunch for their army too. As did all the Commonwealth nations such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc. Other nations such as Italy and even France bought several. Eventually Japan would make their own version as well.
Of course the big proving ground for this new technology would be WW1. Here it was found that the Lewis had everything. Well ok, it wasn't exactly sprightly. But it worked great, it had a good magazine capacity and it didn't overheat too much. Many were used on vehicle or aircraft mounts, even then often without the jacket to save weight. The AEF soldiers who carried Chauchats regretted the Board of Ordnance's decision to not buy this design and the few US soldiers who managed to get their hands on 30.06 Lewis guns prized them.
It remained in service into WW2 as well. The Commonwealth forces mostly relegated it to vehicle mounts due to the lighter BREN but it still did its job. Many American Lewis guns ended up in Britain being used as AA guns. Interestingly, they were still chambered in 30.06 and those versions had red bands around the jacket to indicate the fact that they used non-standard ammunition. Original .303 versions still saw much use on the front lines.
By that time however the age of these weapons was beginning to show. Many of the countries that used them adopted lighter guns in new NATO-pattern ammunition after the war ended so the Lewis guns became obsolete. They still saw use in brush wars for many years but with lighter, more effective guns available that use more common ammunition they only make sparse appearances on today's battlefields.
But the Lewis did it's job and it did it admirably. It had the magazine capacity to lay down the law and the reliability to chew through that huge pan. In all, more than a million were made and while they don't see as much use as they used to they still pop up here and there to this day.

90)Colt 1905/1908 Hammerless.
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Colt_Model_1908_Pocket_Hamerless_AdamsGuns_1783.jpg[/img]
This gun was designed by John Browning as a development of his concept for a semi-automatic pistol with a slide, this time the license to build it went to Colt rather than FN which mass-produced the first such gun in 1900.
Contrary to this weapons title it isn't actually hammerless. The hammer is internal in order to avoid snagging when the weapon is drawn which is an ideal trait for such a compact weapon since its small size makes it a decent concealable firearm. Overall the entire concept has been refined and simplified. The 1903 and 1908 more closely resemble more modern handguns such as the model 1911 which, indeed, is a further development of this very design.
You may be wondering what the difference is between the two. Originally the 1903 was chambered in the same .32 ACP bullet as the FN M1900 which predated it, but 5 years later Colt introduced the .380 ACP bullet which is still relatively popular today. The 1903 was updated and rechambered to this caliber, resulting in the model 1908 although there are .380 ACP 1903s. All of these handguns were collectively marketed as the "Colt Pocket Hammerless".
Well ok, now we have a handgun that closer to what we are familiar with today? Why is it so special?
To answer this question, you need only look at the kind of characters who used them. It was released just in time for the roaring twenties where it proved itself to be an ideal weapon in the hands of various gangsters. Al Capone never went anywhere without one tucked in his jacket. Bonnie used one to bust Clyde out of jail. That and millions of other crooks used them for various nefarious deeds. Just as impressively it was issued to officers for a few years before and even after the 1911 was adopted. General Patton had one with three and later four starts set in the grips although he never used it much. Future president Ike Eisenhower was issued one as well. Bradley and Marshall each carried one too.
But this is only part of the picture. The lionshare of sales supplied various civilians who just wanted a small, simple and not too expensive gun with which to protect themselves. During its production life from 1903 to 1945 over half a million were sold. The purpose they served varied, but the gun proved itself to be a reliable forerunner to what would become arguably the greatest handgun ever made.

91)AR-18
[img]http://world.guns.ru/assault/ar18.jpg[/img]
There has been an awful lot of fanfare regarding various new "Piston" AR-15s which are made by just about every firearm company in the US market that makes AR-15s. The idea is that a piston system is more effective than direct impingement since it doesn't channel residue from the gunpowder into the workings. What I don't get is how this all makes the gun cost an extra 100-1,000$. But before all this fanfare there was essentially the first true piston AR and it was a real Armalite.
Not to mention technically a commercial failure.
It all started after ArmaLite sold their rights for the AR15 (AKA M16) to Colt. They then wanted to make a new gun to blow their previous invention out of the water. The idea was to take the AR-15 and improve on its flaws by giving it a piston so that it doesn't need to be cleaned as often and worked more reliably while at the same time making the gun cost far less to produce so that third world counties could afford it.
Indeed, this rifle met all of said expectations. The receiver was made out of stamped steel, rather than precision machined aircraft-grade aluminum. This solution saved both money and weight. Since there was a piston, maintainable was less of a chore. It could also take the same aluminum STANAG magazines the AR-15 used because there was no need to change what worked. Aesthetically it has a cruder and more simplistic appearance with a distinctive diagonal line running from the base of the stock to the end of the magazine well. To some it looks a bit better, in a crude sort of way.
But not that looks matter.
As usual Armalite lacked the necessary facilities to mass-produce such a weapon, so they tried to license it abroad. While some attempts were made to sell it to the US government it soon became clear that Colt ran the show and there was no way in hell they were going to accept a contract for a gun that costs LESS to make, even if it is more reliable. Abroad they found that the AR-15 had a better grip on the higher-priced rifle market while the AK-47 dominated the low end of that spectrum. At the time the AR-18 was too expensive for the poor and too cheap for the rich so it found very few takers.
This isn't to say it didn't find any.
Sterling in England as well as Howa in Japan took up the offer. While neither could convince their country to adopt it they still made about 20,000 guns which found use in specialized roles. Particularly in England. The light weight made the AR-18 excellent for patrols in Northern Ireland where captured examples of said rifle earned infamy in the hands of the IRA which dubbed it "The Widowmaker". A civilian version known as the AR-180 was made as well and proved to be very competitive in civilian markets around the world which is in part due to the lower cost and in part due to its ability to take STANAG magazines (although a few variants used their own proprietary mags). Meanwhile in Japan Howa built them for a couple years before the government forbid them from manufacturing military firearms. While production in Japan halted immediately when the government requested a new 5.56 assault rifle Howa made the Type 89 which is an AR-18 with a few tweaks and updates.
Cases like the Type 89 proved to be the AR-18's legacy as they were by no means uncommon. Sterling's relative success in making said rifle in England partially resulted in the L85 series which is little more than a bullpup AR-18. Although for some weird reason it costs a lot more and works a lot worse. In spite of its price tag the G-36 series too is based directly off the AR-18. The same is true of the Singaporean SR-88 and SAR-80, the Australian M-17s (although that was a flop) and a handful of other designs.
In 2001 the new "Armalite" reintroduced the AR-180 as the AR-180B with the main difference being a polymer receiver to further save weight. I guess that means it has come full-circle. First there was the AR-15, the AR-18 added a piston which created a number of assault rifles that competed against the 15 resulting in all the various AR-15 clones with pistons and now the original AR-18 is back in production to compete with all of those because it costs half as much. Too bad the 180B is no longer in production.

92)M60
[img]http://world.guns.ru/machine/m60_01.jpg[/img]
After WW2 just about every country was studying the various small arms developed and used against them by Germany. America was no exception. The result was an experiment by the Saginaw Steering Gear division of GM to convert the MG-42 to 30.06 although that turned into a trainwreck when they discovered that the American bullet is 6mm longer than 8mm Mauser meaning that just about every component had to be re-designed to do this.
So that project was a failure. But not quite. When the US army was asking around for a newer, lighter GPMG this idea was resurrected. This time, however it used the FG-42 as the base and essentially slapped an MG-42 belt feed system on the left side, feeding from the bottom to the top. It was called the T-44 prototype and looks something like this.
[img]http://world.guns.ru/machine/m60_t44.jpg[/img]
This didn't quite resemble the gun we ultimately ended up with, because the development of this project was halted abruptly when the US army adopted the lighter 7.62x51mm NATO bullet. Working from the T44 they ended up with a T-52, then a T-161 and eventually the T-161E3 which was adopted in 1957 as the M60. By that time due to extensive tweaks, renovations and re-designs it had little in common with the humble T-44.
Ultimately the Us army ended up with a gun that worked, for the most part. It was much lighter than machine guns such as the Browning 1917 at about 20 pounds. It was made out of cheap and light stamped steel components wherever possible. Many of the grip and stock components were made out of composites. The receiver and feed system worked flawlessly during testing but the constant foible was the barrel and gas cylinder assembly.
Feeling the need to redesign the wheel GM's designers gave it a gas piston with a cup at the front end. However, this could be installed backwards by accident, turning the machine gun into a 20-pound belt-fed bolt-action rifle. It could also shake itself loose during prolonged firing and many US troops reinforced the exterior of the gas piston assembly with "safety wiring" to prevent the piston from flying out.
It didn't help too much that the barrel, gas piston and bipod were one piece and any machine gun crew needs at least one spare barrel in case the other overheats. Hauling around spare M60 barrels meant hauling the gas system (often with improvised retrofits which added weight) as well as the bipod which wasn't that light either.
Other than the gas piston that wanted to be a bullet and the needless heft of the barrel assembly (at least when you need spares) this gun was ready for one of America's bloodiest and most famous conflicts. Vietnam. There, it became an iconic symbol of American efforts to support the fight against communism. The troops that carried them were not happy.
On top of the gas and barrel assembly foibles it was found that the gun needed constant care and maintainance in jungle conditions. Otherwise it jammed constantly. Many parts such as the feed tray were too cheaply made and broke during operation, rendering the weapon useless. The Marines who especially hated the M60 kept using Browning BARs instead, they even kept using them unofficially years after they were supposed to trade them in for M60s.
It was time for an update.
The result, while it never entered mass production was the M60E1. It had better parts that didn't break, the gas system was partially fixed and the bipod was moved to the receiver so it wouldn't add weight to the barrel assembly. In the 1970s the Saco division of Maremont Corp developed the M60 "Lightweight". This gun worked from the M60E1s improvements but now the gas system was separate from the barrel, it was also improved so now it didn't need any safety wiring at all. It also kept the E1's bipod which was attached to the receiver. Other improvements such as a forward pistol grip, improved sights and better internals followed resulting in a significantly more effective gun.
By that time the war was essentially over and due to the many foibles and flaws encountered with the M60 platform the US army adopted the M-240 (AKA FN MAG) to replace it. However it wasn't done yet. The Lightweight ultimately spawned its own variants, known as the M60E3 and E4. They are mostly used for special forces operations, rather than being a frontline weapon. This is on top of the various M60s left in service here and there.
But America wasn't the only user.
Largely due to American influence other nations such as South Korea, the UK, Mexico, Taiwan, Australia, Israel and Colombia use them as well. Granted some nations received a limited number and never did much with them, preferring designs with a more solid reputation. Leftover M60s from the Vietnam war are still used by a number of countries in Asia including Vietnam itself. There aren't too many license-built copes but the ones made by Saco and US Ordinance number in around a million with more still in production today. It is little surprise that they still pop up in use by various nations, show up in small conflicts and even see use in the hands of the occasional terrorist group.

93)PPS-43
[img]http://world.guns.ru/smg/pps-43-1.jpg[/img]
While the PPSh-41 had many advantages over many SMGs of its time and indeed remains a very unique weapon today it was not totally perfect for the role of the SMG. While it had a colossal rate of fire and the magazine capacity to feed that thirst it was also very bulky. That rate of fire, while grizzly and intimidating had its disadvantages too. Ultimately the red army wised up and saw the need for a lighter, simpler, cheaper subgun with a lower rate of fire that they could give to their tank crews which at the time only carried Tokarevs since the PPSh is simply too bulky to be useful in such tight quarters.
The result of this request was the PPS-42 designed by Sudaev.
It incorporated simpler metal stamping than the PPSh-41, meaning it was simpler to make. At the same time it was designed to use 35 round curved box magazines similar to those used by the PPSh although they are actually not interchangeable. The PPS-43 has no drum magazines available since it simply doesn't need them. It was designed to be used as a lighter alternative. The fact that it has a folding stock and a pistol grip rather than the PPSh-41's carbine-type wooden stock really helped. In spite of being simpler to mass-produce it also featured a chrome-lined barrel designed to withstand as many as 20,000 rounds which is an awesome feat considering that the ammunition in service was highly corrosive in nature. The rate of fire is also reduced to a more manageable 600 rpm so the 35 isn't dumped in a quick tap of the trigger.
Some would say that this is a modernization, an improvement over the PPSh. An evolution into a more modern and conservative submachinegun. Others say it sacrificed the very things that made the PPSh so great. It was designed just in time to see fighting in the Seige of Leningrad although only 50,000 or so were made before 1943 when it was modernized and tweaked resulting in the PPS-43. This weapon served alongside the PPSh-41 through the end of the war with production eventually halting in 1946. By that time 2 million were made.
These subguns ended up being largely replaced with the AK-47 much the same way that the PPSh was. Some were tossed into arsenals, relegated to police service and others were handed out to Russia's allies. There were many variants as well. China made a copy called the Type 54, Poland started making their own in 1958. Finland made a 9x19mm copy called the M44 which used Karl Gustav mags and Suomi M/31 drums. This gun was licensed in Spain and these Spanish copies of a Finnish copy of a Russian gun ended up of all places in the hands of West German border patrol units.
While many people claim that it was the best submachine gun of WW2 there is still some debate. It isn't as well made as the Thompson and not as devastating as the PPSh but considering how simple it is to produce it is an example of a gun that is made cheaply but its performance on the battlefield does not reflect its otherwise humble nature. It is in the end a highly effective weapon. Although it's heyday was somewhat brief.
After WW2 the role of subguns in warfare largely diminished to that of a rear-echelon weapon, something that while more suited than its predecessor the PPS-43 isn't perfect for. Given this role it isn't as good as more modern designs such as the UZI or MP5 series but what is surprising is that it can hold its own. This is one reason why although it isn't in very vast production nowadays it does pop up here and there.

94)G-43
[img]http://world.guns.ru/rifle/kar43.jpg[/img]
While the Americans are the most well-known for carrying semi-automatic battle rifles into WW2 they were not alone. While Russian troops are known for using the SVT-40 it turns out that the Germans, too had an interest in the virtues of the autoloader. Granted they were quite apathetic about it.
The high command was really not all that interested in semi-automatics since the primary firepower of any given squad came from the MG team. What the other squad members carried was a secondary concern and truth be told the Mauser 98 was an excellent weapon. Nevertheless the advantages of a semi-automatic were obvious and some resources were invested in the development of such a weapon. It was supposed to be a semi-automatic rifle that fired 8mm Mauser from a removable magazine but it was also to incorporate no moving parts on the exterior, the barrel couldn't be tapped to vent gas backwards and it had to function as a bolt-action in case of an emergency.
The result was the G41.
It used what is called the "bang" system that has a cone on the muzzle of the gun which catches the gas thus pulling a thin rod which works the action. That was done because the barrel couldn't be tapped to vent gas backwards like a normal piston. This solution, while it helped accuracy somewhat was an example of complete buffoonery. But Mauser and Walther couldn't change the requirements they were presented and this highly expensive, complex and needlessly fragile design was mass-produced for about a year. Walther's variant was significantly better but it was still a trainwreck of a weapon.
Then Operation Barbarossa came, Invading German forces were surprised to find the SVT-40 was in widespread use by Russian forces to compliment their bolt-action Nagant rifles. It was only when compared to this rather decent firearm when the German forces realized how much the G-41 sucked. The answer to these woes came from Walther which took the G-41, gave it the SVT's gas system and called it the G-43.
In all this gun represented a vast improvement over the 41 because it actually worked. Although it was introduced late in the war and was never meant to completely replace the Kar 98k due to a somewhat higher production cost (granted it was leagues cheaper than the 41) a substantial amount of these rifles were made. In fact almost half a million were manufactured and used by war's end. Some were even sniper variants, meant to be used at closer ranges than the Mauser 98 sniper variants. In fact almost ideal for city fighting. But this is something that movies and games like to get wrong. While quite a few were issued with scopes that only represents about 50,000 guns out of 400,000+. Contrary to popular belief not ALL G-43s were used by snipers. In fact they were more popular with regular infantrymen.
Another cause for confusion is that in 1944 the G-43 was redesignated as the K-43 or "carbine". The K-43 has no visual or mechanical difference from the G. It is just in the stamping. The G and K are the exact same weapon.
After the war G and K-43 rifles ended up largely in Soviet and East German armories collecting dust. Many were destroyed since they no longer served a purpose and the ammunition they fired was now essentially obsolete. A handful did make it to civilian markets and largely remain legal to own around the world due to their less-than intimidating appearance. However they remain largely collector's items, often being auctioned for thousands of dollars.

95)Beretta M12
[img]http://world.guns.ru/smg/beretta_pm12s-1.jpg[/img]
While Beretta is more famous for their handguns and in some circles their shotguns as well the oldest gun company on earth has in fact made a surprising variety of different firearms. Among them some SMGs, most notably the Model 12.
Designed in the 1950's when Beretta realized that the role of the SMG in modern warfare had changed it borrowed much from the UZI which was in development at the same time. Specifically the telescoping bolt which allowed the gun to maintain a short profile without sacrificing barrel length. This system functioned much like the UZI only it retained a more conventional layout. All variants also have a grip safety. The M12 had another feature in common with the UZI, the ease of manufacture. Many parts were simple stamped steel. Yet, in spite of the surprisingly simplistic and rudimentary nature this gun has character. It appears highly sophisticated, it is very beautiful. Everything from the folding stock to the grip and magazine well assembly appears highly elegant at a glance.
However it had some flaws.
The spartan construction methods resulted in a sloppy trigger group which was prone to firing 2-4 shot bursts when set to semi-automatic and the safety features could occasionally fail. All 3 of them. Regardless of this recurring problem it entered production in 1959. The Italian armed forces and police adopted it soon after.
Eventually seeking a solution to the safety problems Beretta updated it in 1978 as the Beretta M12s. Later, working from a license-built variant made by MAS for the French Gendarmerie Nationale Beretta further refined the M12, resulting in the PM12-S2 which is the only version they make today.
But that's not all.
By then partially due to this weapon's sexy appearance, effectiveness and ease of manufacture it had been licensed by Taurus in Brazil as the MT-12, PT Trinidad in Indonesia as the PM-1 and even manufactured by Defence Industries Corporation in Nigeria as the NS-1. Oh yeah, and don't forget the French MAS which I already mentioned. All of these countries and many more used the M12 for a while in varying numbers. Brazil even made some slightly improved variants that were for a time the primary service SMG in their armed forces and police.
Across the Adriatic Sea from Italy, Croatia also made a copy, although it was somewhat heavily modified. This gun, the Agram 2000 fought in the various scuffles between the Baltic states in the aftermath of the breakup of Yugoslavia before ultimately becoming a prime choice for criminals due to it's compact nature. Of course the M12 found a similar calling for the same reason. It too was found to be an excellent weapon for the criminal underworld. However on the other side of the coin it also found a calling as a VIP protection weapon.
Today the M12 and all of it's cousins pop up here and there. It isn't as popular as the UZI or the MP5 but it is still used by Italy where it is still made by Beretta and there are plenty of other customers as well. From the crime-fighter to the criminal in the street, in fact it isn't unheard of that a couple turn up in the hands of Insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.

96)Ruger Standard Series
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/Ruger_mkiii_bull.jpg/800px-Ruger_mkiii_bull.jpg[/img]
(Pictured is a MK III variant with a bull barrel.)
The origins of this gun coupled with the many uses that were found for it and ultimately the stunning amount of success it brought to its creator make for a rather interesting story.
It all started in 1949.
Back then Bill Ruger, a tinkerer and self-taught engineer was considering making a new handgun. One day he received a baby Nambu pistol as a gift brought back by a GI having returned from Japan. At first he successfully made two duplicates of this pistol which inspired him to make another, more original design that used the same bolt system. This gun also had the profile of a Luger and the familiar grip angle of a 1911.
It was chambered in .22LR.
Realizing that he had a gun he could sell due to the appeal of the Luger's looks, the 1911's feel and the inexpensive, easy-to-use .22 ammunition Bill went to an investor named Alex Strum seeking an investment with which to jump-start his own little company. Impressed with the inexpensive nature and overall sellability of the prototype Alex invested 50,000$ effectively founding Strum Ruger and Co.
Although it appears very solid and indeed it is very well made one of the major innovations in the Standard's construction was simply how inexpensive it was to make. Bill implemented concepts such as two stamped sheetmetal halves welded together to make the receiver and piano-wire springs, these various shortcuts in the production stage were possible and indeed adequate because of the underpowered nature of the .22LR cartridge the Standard fired. Ruger realized that he simply didn't need to utilize the expensive and sturdy construction that other .22LR handgun manufacturers used at the time. The result is that when the first 100 models were released, they were sold for 32$ each.
That is dirt cheap even in 1940's money.
Because of the weapons naturally appealing nature, the bargain-basement price and surprising quality they sold fast. Thanks to well-executed marketing with articles and advertisements in various magazines the Ruger Standard became an American institution overnight. Ruger however insisted that they remain very responsible with their spending. One distinctive trait was that the company didn't cash checks they received from people ordering their guns until the gun was shipped. This kind of responsible approach would become a signature trait for the company for decades to come and in large part contributed in keeping their firearms from being targets of firearm legislation. It also earned them a reputation for good customer service that further bolstered their sales, a good reputation that the company still holds today.
By the next year the company had earned enough money to introduce a target variant with a longer heavier barrel, an improved trigger and adjustable sights. Both stayed in production until 1981 when a refinement of this concept came in the form of the MK II. This variant came in a number of barrel lengths and included a slide stop. The MK II had its own target variant as well.
Eventually in 2004 Ruger updated their handgun again with the introduction of the MK III, it features improved safety features such as a loaded chamber indicator and an internal safety lock which is set with a key. There are other improvements such as the magazine release which had been moved from the heel to the back of the trigger guard and weaver sight mounts for all pistols shipped with adjustable sights including the Target model. There is also a variant called the 22/45 which more closely mimics the feel of the highly popular Colt 1911.
Due to this weapons successful and therefore wildly prolific nature there is a truly vast aftermarket for parts and upgrades. Much like the 10/22 it is possible to have a Ruger Standard, MK II or MK III with very few Ruger parts. You can get everything from precision-made barrels to triggers, to sights and everything in between. One popular modification is to take advantage of such a small caliber by silencing the gun. The US Navy SEALs, Mossad and many a pest control officer utilize silenced variants which although severely underpowered are much quieter than other suppressed handguns.
It is all a shame however, since the investor that made it all possible never lived to see it all become such a great success. Alex Strum died of Hepatitis in 1951, just before the company really took off. Bill too, died a legend of the firearm world in 2002 which was just before the current production MK III series was introduced. While this little pistol faced much competition and many claim (quite possibly rightly so) that it is inferior to other designs such as the Browning Buck Mark it remains the single most successful .22LR handgun ever made.

97)Winchester Model 12
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/32/Trench_Shotgun_win12_800.jpg[/img]
When it finally found the acceptance it deserved Winchester's Browning-designed 1897 shotgun proved to be a revolution in the industry. Seeking to capitalize on this success Winchester had its design staff, led by Thomas Crosley Johnson modernize it in 1912.
The biggest improvement over the old '97 was the hammer, or lack thereof. Granted there is still a hammer it is internal and therefore much less likely to snag or jam. The practice of doing this soon became an industry standard with guns such as the Winchester 1300, Mossberg 500 and Remington 870. Initially it was only offered in 20 gauge but in part due to its success after being released in 1912, 12 and 16 gauge variants were offered in 1914. Pretty soon the 12 gauge version became the most popular. Law enforcement agencies were quick to embrace it for the same reason they valued the 1897.
The US military was very quick to snatch them up as well. Model 12s fought alongside their more aged brethren (the '97s) in WW1 and WW2. Soon enough they almost completely eclipsed the inventories of its predecessor. It is also among the very few guns used by all branches. The Air Force used them to keep saboteurs off their bases, the Navy used them to keep guard over their ships when docked, the Marines used shotguns to great effect in the Pacific Theater of WW2 and the Army naturally used them on the front lines, even if they did so in limited numbers. This gun remained in service long after WW2. All branches, seeing no reason to replace it, continued to use Model 12s throughout the Korean and Vietnam wars.
But while the Model 12 was doing well abroad it was the competition at home that ultimately sealed its fate. Because it used high-quality construction with many carefuly machined parts it was expensive to produce. By the 1960's other companies such as Remington and Mossberg introduced pump guns that were just as effective but they utilized cheaper construction and therefore cost less. Sales eventually dwindled and Winchester halted mass production in 1963.
But that wasn't the end.
You could actually custom order one up until 2006 when the factory was finally closed down which means that this shotgun had an impressive production run of 90+ years. In all that time more than two million served civilian customers, the police who protected them and the soldiers that protected the entire country.

98)Colt model 635
[img]http://world.guns.ru/smg/COLT635.JPG[/img]
In the 1980's the German MP5 series was sweeping the world of SMGs. Having realized that the new role of an SMG is either that of a lightweight personal defense weapon or alternatively a highly accurate and sophisticated closed-bolt gun for special applications where accuracy mattered but so did collateral damage H&K made a gun accomplished both quite effectively since it was lighter and more accurate than many of its WW2 era predecessors such as the MP-40.
Feeling the need to compete with this new German import Colt decided to develop a closed-bolt SMG of their own. Ironically they did so much the same way their competition did. The Germans took the G3 battle rifle and scaled it down to 9x19mm. Colt took their M16a2 and scaled that down to 9mm as well. However unlike the MP5 the Colt 635 doesn't retain the gas system. Instead it uses a simple blowback upper receiver. The lower receiver (I think) is interchangeable with the M16 series although I am not sure. Unlike the M16a2 the 635 has a fully-automatic setting rather than a 3-round burst although a 3 round burst version does exist as we shall see.
Compared to H&K's MP5 series the colt is a bit simpler since it doesn't have a roller lock system. This helps keep the cost low although that goes out the window when you factor in all the license built copies of the MP5. It still helps keep it light although in the end it weighs about the same as many other MP5 variants. The real advantage is the layout. It has all the same controls as the M16/AR-15 series. Everything is in the exact same place. That means if you have been trained with an M16 you can very quickly and easily familiarize yourself with the 635. That saves a lot of headaches and spending for the various agencies that use it, assuming they use the M16 series in tandem.
It is for that reason why (at least within the US) law enforcement sales have been very good. It has won out in many contracts over its German nemesis. Agencies such as the US Marshalls and DEA are known for carrying them in large numbers. In fact the DEA carry their own variant which has a shorter barrel known as the 633. A 3 round burst variant known as the 639. A civilian semi-automatic-only version exists as well. A company called La France makes a .45 ACP version that takes Thompson magazines. Other than the Marshalls and the DEA the US Marines have been known to carry a couple. The US Department of Energy uses them to guard nuclear power plants from possible terrorist threats. This is on top of numerous SWAT and counter-terrorist teams across the country and some abroad as well.
I think this is perhaps an iffy addition to the list. While it was widely successful within the states as a Law Enforcement weapon the purposes it serves are still somewhat specialized and while it has seen substantial sales outside of the US it is still not as successful nor as prolific as other submachine guns. But it was designed to fill a purpose, to give the MP5 a run for its money and at least within the US it has done just that rather well.

99)HK33
[img]http://world.guns.ru/assault/HK33.JPG[/img]
The origins of the HK33 are the same as the origins of the MP5. In the 1960s H&K took their G3 and experimented with cambering it in various calibers. They made one in 7.62x39mm, one in 9x19mm and one in 5.56mm which is the subject of this article.
The result was a highly accurate if somewhat expensive 5.56 assault rifle. It is much lighter than the G3 series and was marketed as an alternative to other 5.56mm assault rifles such as the M16 series in tandem with a carbine variant known as the HK53. Both were offered with either solid or retractable stocks. A marksman variant called the HK33SG/1 was also offered, as was the HK13 which was an LMG variant that could take a 100 round drum. The rest of the HK33 variants took either 25, 30 or 40 round proprietary magazines. A civilian version was also made, it was marketed in the states as the HK93 alongside the civilian G3 known as the HK91.
As was standard fare at the time, H&K allowed clients to license-build them around the world. In the US H&R made a copy called the T223 which was used by US Navy SEALs in small numbers towards the end of the Vietnam war. A civilian HK33 was also made in the states by Vecto

[MarkG06]

[QUOTE=XxKitsunexX;15803709]It was going quite well because everybody was amazed at how much Bean-o was obsessed with guns and doesnt shutup about them lol[/QUOTE]

Don't like it don't post in it then silly.

[Bean-O]

You see, it makes no sense to go to a thread about video games and start shitposting with bullshit like "Hurr you're really obsessed with video games, hurr." or "this thread sucks because I don't like video games". So don't do the same here. Don't give a damn about the subject? Don't read it. There are plenty of threads on general discussion for you to post in. It's not like my thread dominates the front page and forces you to scroll through it every time you want to see every other thread.
If you don't like it, ignore it. That's just common sense.
And I'm ranting about this because I have been having this problem with the old thread. Most of the people posting there were discussing the subject at hand and being constructive but every page or so someone would charge in with "this thread sucks, get out, guns suck, trying too hard" etc.

[highlight]More updates[/highlight]
101)AR-7
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/27/AR7rifle.jpg/800px-AR7rifle.jpg[/img]
Of the many firearms designed by ArmaLite it may come as a surprise that some weren't exactly built for conventional purposes. One of which, and it has become a success in its own right is the AR-7.
Designed in 1958 by Eugene Stoner it is a bare-bones closed-bolt semi-automatic .22LR rifle that fires from a removable 8 round magazine. The guns action is very simple, the sights are very primitive and the gun itself very light. But it is indeed a military weapon. But how so? How could anyone in the armed forces have any kind use for a stupidly simple blowback .22LR gun?
It is built as a survival rifle for air crews who can occasionally end up getting stranded somewhere and need a lightweight low-caliber rifle in order to help them forage for survival by shooting small animals (birds, rabbits, etc.). The guns features reflect this purpose too. Since it is so simple there is very little that can go wrong. This is important since you can't exactly mail-order spare parts when you don't even know what part of the rain forest you are lost in.
A more interesting feature is the stock. You can actually remove the action from the stock, remove the magazine, detach the barrel and stow everything in a hollowed out space in the stock. Thus a full-size rifle is collapsed down to a small, watertight, 3 pound stock. The best part is that since it is so lightweight and watertight the gun actually floats. Little can be said about the accuracy however and the magazines can be prone to misfeeds if they get damaged.
Over the years many were offered to an used as survival rifles by a few armed forces. Israel is the most famous because they modded theirs with a pistol grip stock and improved sights. The big success however was the AR-7's success in the civilian market. It is highly popular with pilots, off-road enthusiasts, boaters and just about anyone else who runs the risk of being stranded out in the middle of nowhere.
As far as production goes Armalite did make a few but as they did with just about all of their designs they gave the contract to someone else. Namely Charter Arms who are known as a bargain-basement manufacturer. The quality control was so bad that people reported the barrels warping. Eventually Henry got the rights to make them and the AR-7's reputation for reliability improved virtually overnight. Henry still makes them today with an option for a white or a black finish.
Another footnote is that because the barrel and stock could be removed there were numerous aftermarket parts, most of them pretty useless. They included dress-up kits to make the AR-7 resemble guns such as the Thompson or M1 carbine. Charter Arms also made a pistol variant built to emulate the Broomhandle Mauser. AR-7s also made a couple appearances in James Bond films as assassination weapons since they could be disassembled easily. However I doubt any secret agent would have used such a weapon for anything other than its intended purpose which is simply wilderness survival. Nothing more, nothing less.

102)Type 85 SMG
[img]http://world.guns.ru/smg/type85smg1.jpg[/img]
China has actually had a surprisingly short history of developing its own SMGs rather than making licensed copies. One of their first was the Type 64, a simple open-bolt blowback 7.62x25mm gun with an integral silencer and a control scheme mimicking that of the AK-47 meant for clandestine operations. This gun was issued in tandem with a specialized, subsonic 7.62x25mm round although it is capable of firing normal Tokarev bullets as well.
In 1979, working from this surprisingly effective design China made the Type 79 which while it isn't silenced does have another unique feature. It had a gas system. In fact it is essentially an AK-47 in 7.62 Tokarev. While highly effective and quite accurate it was simply too expensive to continue making. With only about 300,000 ever made it would soon be replaced by the subject of this article.
Wishing to further standardize their arsenal China wanted an SMG similar to the Type 64 and 79. They liked the idea of a simple subgun in their specialized subsonic 7.62x25mm round. But the 79 was too complex and had no part commonality with the 64. The solution was to start over by making another highly simple 7.62x25mm SMG. The Type 85, as it would later be called is really just an open-bolt pipe gun. Reminiscent of the subguns used in WW2 only significantly lighter, to better suit its role as a rear-echelon weapon. It is still optimized for the subsonic 7.62 bullet, although like the 64 it can use standard Tokarev rounds as well. In fact it even uses the same magazines as the Type 64. But rather than simply replacing the Type 79 it was designed and produced in tandem with an integrally silenced variant in order to replace the Type 64 as well.
Enough of a headfuck yet? Starting to see why I have trouble sorting out firearms with Chinese/Japanese designations?
Let me simplify things a bit.
First they made a silenced subgun in a special low-velocity 7.62 Toke round for clandestine troops, then an unsilenced subgun using the same bullet but it was essentially a downsized AK-47, then they replaced that with a much simpler blowback gun and a silenced variant of the new gun to replace the original in the same swoop. That new gun is the Type 85.
In practice this idea seems to have worked out rather conveniently.
Now the armourers have less of a headache to deal with since both the general-issue SMG and the special forces version have a good deal of part commonality and use the same magazines. The guns themselves are also quite good. Since they are so simple there is little that can go wrong. They also feature a decent rate of fire, at 700-800 RPM. It is also a very light gun, the standard version weighs about 4 pounds although this is a double-edged sword because given the high rate of fire they might be a bit tough to control.
Another advantage is the ammunition. Both it and the silenced version (since it has a pointed tip) have far excellent penetration although at the expense of stopping power. Guns in 7.62x25mm have been known to pierce light kevlar, something that more conventional handgun calibers such as 9x19mm or .45 ACP simply aren't capable of.
Still, little is known about just how effective the 85 has proven itself to be. But since it is one of the standard service SMGs of the Chinese armed forces there is no doubt that by now at least several hundreds of thousands have been manufactured. Even if it is to be replaced you can bet your ass they will hand them down to training units and various Chinese law enforcement agencies which will use them for decades to come.

103)Trapdoor Springfield
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Springfield_M1873_%22Trapdoor%22.jpg/800px-Springfield_M1873_%22Trapdoor%22.jpg[/img]
After the Civil War the US army came to the realization that although it had fought against itself and won, the situation in its arsenals was a complete mess. The most common weapon in service was a .58 caliber muzzle-loading Springfield rifled musket. While powerful it lacked range and was a huge pain in the ass to reload. They also had a dizzying array of various rifles, some of them repeaters that implemented self-contained cartridges and proved themselves to be far superior in just about every way to the muzzle-loaders of the time.
While designs such as the Spencer or Henry were clearly the best thing available at the time you have to remember that this is before the government spent recklessly. They had a budget and standardizing the arsenals by equipping everyone with the best of the best simply cost too much. It certainly couldn't be justified now that the war was over. In fact the only excuse they had to change anything was that the war had clearly shown that the musket was obsolete. They did want self-contained cartridges, but they didn't know how to keep it financially viable.
In 1865 the answer came from their current manufacturer, Springfield. A brainchild of Erskine S. Allin rather than completely replacing the millions of .58 caliber guns available, why not retrofit them? Rather than spending 20$ on new rifles it cost only 5$ to machine open the breech and install a flap that hinged on the top of the barrel. This flap contained a firing pin which was set at a weird angle to use the existing hammer.
Since you could reload faster you could achieve double the rate of fire of the musket it replaced.
To reload you first cock the hammer to the first of two settings (which let you open the flap and served as a safety when reloading). When you flipped the flap or "trapdoor" open an extractor caught the rim of the casing, yanking it out if there was one in there. You then inserted another round, closed the flap and cocked the hammer all the way back. A self-contained cartridge was made for this modification called the .58-500-60 (meaning .58 caliber, bullet weighs 500 grains AKA an elephant gun and those 500 grains of fuck-you-up are propelled by 60 grains of black powder).
While the idea was good and it was a cheap way of doing things they quickly realized that all the retrofit parts would wear out too fast and after only making a couple they pawned them off to civilians. In 1866 they made another attempt. This time the barrels were re-rifled to .50 caliber and the mechanisms that were added in the retrofit were significantly toughened up resulting in a far more reliable weapon that worked essentially the same way as the 1865 but with a longer service life and a more efficient .50-70 (70 grains of black powder that shoved a 450 grain .50 caliber bullet down the barrel, still an elephant gun) cartridge. Unlike the 1865 a reasonably large amount of these conversions were made, roughly 50,000+. They were not adopted by the army but they were used in various scuffles such as the Bozeman Trail clashes.
In 1868 that was modernized again. This time it featured an entirely new barrel for every rifle. This made modification significantly more expensive but it worked far better. This too was not formally adopted although as many as another 50,000+ such conversions were made.
By 1873 all these years of making relatively experimental conversions of muzzle-loaders resulted in a more or less finalized design. Now it used an even smaller, although still Goliath-sized .45-70 cartridge. The extractor problems were almost completely sorted out. The barrels were all new to better suit the cartridge, much like the 1868. Unlike all of its predecessors, the 1873 was finally adopted by the army and eventually 700,000 guns were modified to fill this contract. It was reliable in operation and as few as 5 soldiers could produce a volley of nearly continuous fire. An individual soldier could crank off about 20 rounds a minute which was like Rambo back in the day although nothing compared to the Winchester '73 which as its name implies was released the same year.
That was essentially the Achilles heel.
Because of the various repeaters gaining popularity at the time the 1873 Trapdoor Springfield was obsolete by the time it was adopted in spite of its relative ease of use and impressive power. It simply couldn't out-shoot a repeater such as the Winchester which it occasionally faced when it was put against Renegades, Bandits and Indians in the various battles the US army dragged these guns into.
The most notable failure was the cartridge which was originally made of copper. Since that metal expands when it gets hot sometimes the casing essentially welded itself in the breach, rendering the gun useless. After the famous Battle of Little Big Horn it was found that this type of jam was a major contributing factor in that defeat, as a result the US army and just about everyone else has used brass-cased ammunition ever since.
In spite of these glaring problems and its overall obsolescence this rifle remained in service almost until the turn of the century, seeing use in conflicts such as the Spanish-American War. Some were still in storage as late as WW1. But with the adoption of the bolt-action Krag and later Springfield 03 the Trapdoor was finally phased out and almost all such guns were pawned off to the public.
By that time the .45-70 government cartridge had already become very popular with civilians as a hunting and defensive caliber. It and other massive calibers like it were used to decimate herds of buffalo, nearly bringing the species to extinction. This cartridge became so popular that even today manufacturers make guns in this caliber and the ammunition, while not as cheap as it once was, is still in production. Today an original trapdoor can run anywhere from 300-3000$ so they remain somewhat popular with nostalgic shooters and collectors.
So yeah, it and all the various experimental production runs that came before it were essentially an exercise in futility from the first concepts to the moment it was replaced but it ultimately helped the US army tame the west and beyond.

104)Martini-Henry
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e4/Martini-Henry_1867.jpg/800px-Martini-Henry_1867.jpg[/img]
Seeking to steal the contract for the standard service rifle of the US army from Springfield a New England man named Henry Peabody devised a rifle very similar in operation to the Sharps in the 1860s.
To open the action you had to move an extension of the trigger forward. This dropped a falling block allowing one to insert a cartridge. Then a hammer had to be cocked before the gun could be fired. While not a bad design it was turned down for the significantly cheaper trapdoor conversions. compared to the Sharps which it at very least imitated one can't say that Peabody did a bad job. In fact it worked just as well if not better.
Having failed to secure the US contract Peabody went abroad. Numerous countries tested his design before it caught the eye of Frederich von Martini (not to be confused with the popular alcoholic beverage by the same name) during Swiss army testing. He owned a company that made lace. But being a handyman he saw a flaw in Peabody's design Martini replaced the exposed hammer with an internal striker that cocked itself during operation, thus somewhat improving the rate of fire.
Martini sent this gun to the Brits for testing in 1867 where it was well received. The officers tasked with selecting a new rifle for military service were impressed with the action but less than enthusiastic with the rifling. They turned to Benjamin Henry, maker of the Henry rifle to do the rifling. During testing they found that the gun was quite reliable enough and could achieve roughly 20 rounds per minute. Having determined that this gun could do what they wanted it to do the British began issuing them in 1871.
Those guns were issued in a caliber called .577/450 which referred to the straight-necked .577 cartridge used in a previous single-shot Snider-Enfield which was necked down to .45 in the cartridge used by the Martini-Henry.
This weapons effectiveness in the field turned out to be iffy. The conflict for which it is best known would be the first Zulu war, specifically the Battle of Rourke's Drift where 150 men used them to beat back seemingly endless hordes of Zulu warriors. More impressively some were armed with Martini-Henry rifles that, less impressively, were captures as the result of a staggering loss at Isandlwana just prior. In that battle it was found that the rolled brass-foil cartridges made to cut costs fouled up the action, making the process of working the gun needlessly difficult or sometimes rendering it useless altogether. That was quite an embarrassment.
This problem would be rectified by the time the second Zulu war came around due to properly made drawn brass cartridges. But by then the Martini-Henry had a bigger flaw. Overall obsolescence. One of the major combatants was a group of wily Dutch settlers armed with bolt-action Mauser rifles. Since they could achieve much greater rates of fire they decimated British troops prompting a call for the British to adopt a bolt-action rifle of their own in 1888 called the Lee-Metford. This gun would later evolve into the SMLE.
But the Martini-Henry had left its mark. As the standard service weapon of the British armed forces and their colonies over a million were made and used in colonial scuffles the world over. In fact it wasn't until the early 1900's that they were completely phased out of service. By that time not only did various civilian variants sprout up (including shotguns and various .22 rifles, such guns were made well into the 1960's) but so did copies. The most prolific being Khyber Pass rip-offs which were of poor quality but were detailed down to the stampings and markings. Their origin is largely tied to British influence in the region but interestingly some were fielded by Afghan tribesmen against the Soviet invasion in the 1980's.

105)Smith and Wesson #3
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/S%26W_New_Nodel_3_Frontier_1791.jpg/800px-S%26W_New_Nodel_3_Frontier_1791.jpg[/img]
Designed in 1870 this revolver predated the famous Colt Single Action Army (AKA Peacemaker) which would go on to eclipse it in both military service and civilian sales, but never the less the #3 proved to be a very popular design earning both fame and infamy for its service in the hands of larger-than-life characters such as Billy the Kid, Jesse James, John Wesley Hardin, Virgil Earp and Theodore Roosevelt.
The gun itself is a single action revolver (cock, shoot, cock) that unlike most other such revolvers at the time fired a self-contained cartridge which meant it could be reloaded much faster. Another key feature is the top-break action. The barrel and cylinder assembly are on a hinge. When the top is opened this assembly hinges open and at the same time extracts all the cartridges. This process meant the #3 could be reloaded much faster than its nemesis, the gate-loaded Colt. But on the other hand unless you fired off all 6 shots before reloading you would be dropping precious ammo on the ground.
On top of the civilian market there were two major customers.
The most famous is known as the "Russian Model". In fact there are three different Russian models. All were made to fill a contract with Imperial Russia. Originally the #3 was made in .44 S&W American. But the export versions were made in .44 Russian which is slightly larger. Indeed it is the precursor to the .44 Special which fathered the .44 Magnum later on. But that is another story. Originally the caliber was the only major difference, but after the initial batch arrived the Russian ordinance inspectors requested a few minor alterations.
The 2nd version would later become known as the Old Model Russian (whereas the first is the Old, Old Model Russian). By contrast the New Model Russian became the version Russia finally adopted before blatantly ripping S&W off. By this point it differed from the very first #3 in not only the caliber but also a distinctive "hook" near the rear of the trigger guard.
After roughly 100,000+ such guns were delivered Imperial Russia reverse-engineered the design and built some locally and licensing production in other European nations. They refused to accept further shipments, temporarily flooding the US market with numerous unsold Russian Models and in doing so (alongside other black powder .44 caliber handgun cartridges) helped create a niche in the American firearm market that ultimately created the .44 Special. The worst part of this betrayal was that the Czarist government refused payment for the guns that were delivered which severely hurt S&W and would have killed it outright if it wasn't for a bigger, more lucrative contract.
Before the Czar ever garnered any interest in issuing such weapons to his troops the US army wanted them. In fact they adopted the #3 in the original .44 S&W American the year it was released, making it the first sidearm adopted by the US army that used a self-containing cartridge. When they later adopted the .45 Colt they wanted a new version that chambered the same round. But rather than using the .45 Long Colt, S&W made their own slightly shorter .45 Schofield (AKA .45 S&W). It was quickly found that the smaller round wasn't interchangeable with the .45LC. The Colt revolvers could actually fire both, so the US army adopted the ammunition while the troops in the field preferred to carry the Colt which could fire it as well as the entire inventory of leftover .45LC ammo.
This went on until the 1880's when production finally stopped. The Army continued to use #3s all the way up until the Spanish American War. After that was over the Army sold their inventory to the civilian market. By that time almost a million were manufactured for both the military contracts as well as civilian versions in the original .44 S&W American, .44-40, the .41 Henry Rifle round, .32-44, .38-44 and numerous others.
While it didn't leave the legacy that its nemesis, the Colt SAA, did the #3 and all of its variants did leave their mark. For a time they not only gave Colt a run for their money but they were in fact on top. The hinge system was later copied by designs such as the Webley. But the interesting part is that production had resumed anew. Numerous manufacturers such as Uberti have started making period-accurate replicas and in 2000 S&W made a replica version of their own. I'm not sure if they currently manufacture it.

106)Sterling/Patchett SMG
[img]http://world.guns.ru/smg/sterling02.jpg[/img]
During WW2 Britain had the STEN with which they weren't particularly happy. Seeking a replacement they put out a contract to do just that. The specifications were that it had to be very accurate, as in all 5 rounds out of a 5 round burst hitting a man-sized target at 100 yards accurate. A tough feat for wartime open-bolt subguns. It could also weigh no more than 6 pounds and the rate of fire had to be around 500 RPM. In fact they wanted the fully-automatic setting to be more of an afterthought. Even the troops that were issued STEN guns were trained to shoot it in semi-automatic unless there was an emergency.
A man named George Patchett designed just such a weapon for the Sterling Arms Company. Upon submitting his designs the British Army requested 120 for trials. It could take strait STEN magazines as well as its own curved 34 rounders. The gun itself while it clearly showed influence from its predecessor with the side-fed magazine was actually a great departure from the Spartan STEN gun.
By contrast Patchett designed his submachine gun to be made almost entirely out of carefuly machined parts utilizing sturdy and effective building techniques. It cost more to make, but it showed. When they were issued to British troops near the end of the war Patchett SMGs quickly earned a reputation for reliability. As far as open-bolt SMGs go the new design was also very accurate and controllable. It wasn't too heavy either.
After the war the Brits had a huge stockpile of STENs that were left over. Since they greatly outnumbered the few Patchetts in service (which were only issued for testing purposes) the decision was made to delay adoption. In fact the British didn't adopt it until 1951. They also adopted a silenced variant to replace the silenced STENs already in service. Like many other British firearms both spread throughout UK's sphere of influence. Canada manufactured a slightly improved variant called the C1. India made a copy as well, in fact they still make them today. New Zealand adopted them too. Other countries such as Cyprus, Chile, Malasia, Jamaica, Lestoho and the Phillippines used it for a time. Sri Lanka adopted the variant built in India.
These guns remained in service for quite a while too. It wasn't until Britain adopted the L85 that it was replaced along with the L1A1. New Zealand replaced it with the Steyr AUG in a similar fasion. Malasia replaced it with the MP5 since it was a more sophisticated design. But by the time all of that happened almost half a million had been made. They saw service in the Suez Crisis, the Falkland War, various problems in Northern Ireland and even the Gulf War. It had even starred in a Hollywood blockbuster directed by Spielberg. Know the blasters carried by the Storm Troopers in Star Wars? They are all Sterlings dressed up as blasters.
While not as prolific or sophisticated as some of the more modern designs it has aged very well. This is why it is still in production and service with a handful of countries. Even the nations that stopped using them handed them down to various law enforcement agencies.

107)Ithaca 37
[img]http://world.guns.ru/shotgun/ithaca37hs.jpg[/img]
For starters it is worth noting that Ithaca didn't invent the 37. It was actually originally the Remington 17, which served as the fore-runner to the 870. That gun was designed by Browning and John Pedersen.
Rather than buying any kind of license to blatantly rip Remington off Ithaca simply waited for the patent to expire and began planning to call their gun the Model 33 until they realized the Pedersen still held some patents on the design that wouldn't expire until 4 years later. Thus the weapon was put in production after an added 4 year delay. That is also why it is called the 37. Remington didn't care that much because at that point they were already manufacturing more advanced designs. Not like they had any legal recourse anyway since the patents were indeed expired.
As for the gun itself the design is naturally a very sound one, being that it is of Browning's and Pedersen's origin. One neat feature is that not only is it loaded from the bottom, it ejects the casings out the bottom too. This has given it a great advantage over other pump-actions over the years since that makes it much easier to use if you are left-handed. It is also a notably lightweight weapon, weighing in at around 6 pounds unloaded. This does however carry the disadvantage of slightly harsher recoil.
On top of the legal blunder they encountered earlier where they ended up having to delay production for 4 years the timing of this weapons release into the gun market could hardly be worse. It was the freaking great depression. The simple fact that Ithaca didn't go under is a miracle in and of itself since the '37, in spite of its low cost at the time, struggled to compete with used Winchester 1897s. During WW2 Ithaca stayed alive making 1911 copies and M3 Grease Guns for government contracts.
After the war ended the '37 saw some sales with various law enforcement agencies, particularly within the corrections system. The largest user was the LAPD which still has a few in stock although they are replacing it with the Benelli M4. One version offered was the "stakeout" which has a pistol grip and a shorter barrel, meant for undercover work although it is still somewhat bulky as far as concealable weapons go. Not to mention difficult to use.
Over the years Ithaca has struggled to stay in business. The company has changed hands numerous times. But the model 37 has never the less stayed in production. Its reputation for its smooth, ambidextrous action and excellent reliability have made it a gun that can just about sell itself. Today it is offered in home defense and hunting configurations.
Since it was introduced in 1937 and is still being made today it has seen the longest continuous production life of any pump-action shotgun. The future however is uncertain since the current versions retail at a higher price than the more popular designs such as the Remington 870 or Mossberg 500.

108)MAS 49
[img]http://world.guns.ru/rifle/mas49-56.jpg[/img]
Although the design of the MAS-49 differs greatly from the FN-49 they are both semi-automatic battle rifles with a surprising number of coincidences in their history of service.
Seeking an improvement over the MAS-36 and other bolt-action guns used by France at the time they decided to come up with a semi-automatic in the same 7.5x54mm caliber. The development started in the late 1930's and a few prototypes were issued to the troops by 1940. But in the same way that fate intervened in Belgium, a swift takeover and prolonged occupation by German forces meant the end of this rifles development. At least for a time.
Much like the FN-49 the development of the MAS rifle resumed after the war ended and like the names imply they were both finalized and released in the same year, although the MAS was adopted in 1951.
Like I said however, although it may greatly resemble the FN in looks, name and possibly even operation which causes great confusion between the two the workings are a bit different. The most notable difference is that the MAS doesn't have a gas piston. It is a direct impingement gun. Rather than having a gas-actuated rod run all the way back into the workings the gas is directed against the bolt carrier itself.
But unlike the AR-15 series which are more famous for having this feature the bolt carrier looks somewhat like that of an SKS rifle. It is highly exposed as to better accommodate stripper clip feeding. Because the bolt carrier and the surface upon which the gas pushes are so exposed they are very easy to clean and it takes a long time for residue to build up there before that could cause any malfunctions. Because the way the direct impingement system was so well thought out on this rifle it quickly earned a good reputation for reliability which it maintained throughout its career. Indeed it worked so well that the Swedish copied the system used by the MAS-40 protoypes to make the AG-42.
Other than the fact that a few prototypes served in WW2 the story of the MAS differs from the FN in that rather than serving as a forerunner to a better design the MAS went on to become a success in its own right and remained in service well into the 1970's. It saw use in Indochina, Algeria, the Suez Crisis and Vietnam not to mention other colonial scuffles that the French were involved in over the years. It has also been proliferated throughout Frances various spheres of influence and remains prized for its reliability, accuracy and overall well thought-out design.
The placement of all the components, the workings and even the accessory kit that was issued to all French troops in tandem with the MAS rifles indicates that this gun was designed from lessons learned in the trenches of WW1. Even by modern standards it could very well hold its own against more well-known battle rifles such as the FAL and M14. For one thing unlike many semi-automatics of its time the magazines were the primary method of reloading, with stripper clips being more of an afterthought rather than the other way around. Some were even issued with 18-round magazines although those can be a bit rare.
Towards the end of its service for France itself it was among a hodgepodge of various rifles that served as a holdover for the FAMAS which replaced all of them in 1979. After that some were converted to 7.62x51mm NATO and used as sniper rifles while most were imported to the states. Because the French ammunition was scarce there Century Arms rechambered several to 7.62x51mm NATO. However most of these American conversions were poorly done and are to be avoided, especially now that a number of commercial manufacturers make 7.5x54mm and besides which there is always the possibility of reloading your own ammunition.
Ultimately while the French aren't known for making too many good firearms credit must be given where it is due, the MAS-49 is by any standard a wonderful design.

109)STG-44
[img]http://world.guns.ru/assault/mp44-2.jpg[/img]
While this wasn't a very good design and it wasn't as widely used as people tend to think there is little denying that it was revolutionary. Much like the French Chauchat (although nowhere near as bad) I would say that while this design had flaws, some of them serious, the concept behind it went on to be highly influential for future designs.
Way back in 1942 the German command put out a contract for the various firearm designers to make something between a submachine gun and a battle rifle so that they could replace the two with one design. Back in the 1930's they began experimenting with intermediate cartridges and they came up with the 7.92x33mm (AKA 8mm Kurz) bullet. The gun that was to fire this bullet was supposed to be accurate out to about 600 yards. German designer Hugo Schmeisser (who had worked on previous SMG designs) made a design for this contract while working for C. G. Haenel Waffen und Fahrradfabrik in 1942.
In 1943 various modifications of this weapon were made. For one thing it was changed to a closed bolt, rather than open in order to help with the accuracy which as it turned out was nowhere near good enough for shooting at 600 yards. The ammunition simply wasn't capable of having that kind of reach. Still, this gun was put in production that year as the MP-43. By 1944 about 10,000 were made and they were all renamed to MP-44 for some complicated bureaucratic reason (there is no real difference between the MP-43 and 44).
The entire idea was to take a rifle and cross it with a submachine gun. It was to fire a much smaller rifle bullet that was far more controllable in fully-automatic fire than, say, 8mm Mauser. The diameter of the round was kept the same for the same reason the soviets made all of their calibers identical. They didn't want to spend the extra money on getting new equipment to machine barrels of a different diameter, not when the same diameter worked fine. In the field, while not as accurate or powerful as a Mauser 98 it had significantly a greater rate of fire which helped a lot since most firefights happened within 300 yards anyway. But since the MP-40 is only good out to about 100 yards, even though the MP-44 wasn't as controllable or light it was still better since it had more range. It could outperform a battle rifle at close range and a subgun at long range.
Upon hearing this, Hitler himself requested that production of this gun cease immediately. He had carried the Mauser 98 into WW1 and he didn't want anything replacing it. Because this approach better suited the squad tactics used by the German army at the time, this gun was found to be highly effective in the field. After glowing reports of this weapons effectiveness reached Berlin from the front lines Hitler reportedly changed his mind and allowed the production and implementation of this design to resume. He even reportedly came up with a new name, the "Sturmgewehr" or "storm rifle". While it isn't likely that this name was really Hitler's brainchild it stuck, eventually becoming the name of a whole new class of small arms, the "Assault Rifle".
While the idea behind the Stg 44 made it very useful and effective in the field. The design was actually quite bad. In typical German fashion the workings were needlessly overcomplicated and prone to failure. This gun worked wonders when it was actually shooting. One major problem was that it was highly fragile. If dropped the complex feed system could break, rendering the gun useless.
Because it was introduced so late in the war the factories that built them had to cut corners which didn't help at all. This doesn't even mention that the gun was still very heavy and difficult to control. Ultimately by war's end less than 1/2 million were made. Not a small number but given the size of this conflict it was too little, too late.
After the war ended many ended up falling in Russian hands. It is widely believed that the design was directly copied, creating the AK-47. But that is not true. Only the basic idea behind it along with some of the components were used. In fact the 7.62x39mm round is little more than the 8mmK bullet narrowed down for .30 caliber because the Soviets still wanted the bore diameter of all their guns to be the same. The Spanish CETME which is the forerunner to the G3 series is also a distant derivative of the Stg. On top of that surplus Sturmgewehrs ended up popping up in war zones here and there. Some were even recovered from various terrorist organizations in Afghanistan.
The true legacy of this design is by no means in its copies. It is in the idea behind it that made it so effective in spite of its flaws. The idea of select-fire rifles in an intermediate rifle bullet as the standard issue arm of all troops has since then become the small arms doctrine used by just about every country on earth since it works so much better for the more mobile, up-close and personal battles fought throughout the latter half of the 20th century and most likely for the rest of the 21st as well.

110)Winchester 1895.
[img]http://world.guns.ru/rifle/win95-1.jpg[/img]
When I covered the Winchester rifle series I simply didn't have space to mention this gun. In part the fact that it has its own article may be considered even more fitting because it embodies another total overhaul by Browning.
This time he took the Winchester action and made it stronger still, allowing it to chamber military cartridges such as 7.62x54mmR and .303 British. More importantly (and this is what sets it apart from other lever-action rifles) it has a magazine rather than a tube. This means that it can chamber spitzer-shaped bullets whereas with most lever-actions you need flat-nose or rounded-nose cartridges unless you want the tip of one puncturing the primer of the one in front of it, thus blowing the tube off.
Soon after its introduction various civilian sales were complimented with military contracts. The lever-action allowed this gun to be fired much faster than any bolt-action. The most prolific of these guns would have been the Russian version. Imperial Russia ordered 300,000 such rifles in 7.62x54mmR. In addition these guns were retrofitted to take stripper clips and mount a bayonet. About 250,000+ such rifles were delivered before the order was cut short by the client nation erupting in a civil war.
During the revolution it was found that while a faster gun to shoot and an accurate one at that the Winchester wasn't that much better than the native Nagant design. For one thing it wasn't as crude and therefore a bit difficult to build. It was also a pain in the butt to cycle the action while laying prone. Also, while durable, the action itself wasn't as soldier-proof as the armorers had hoped. Certainly not as simplistic as the competing Nagant design.
The British and American armies both adopted a handful of these rifles in .303 and 30-40 Krag respectively. While the soldiers in the field were happy with them neither nation had any real interest in making it a standard service rifle. A .30-06 version was made, but primarily for civilian sales.
While a 300,000+ contract is by no means a "failure" the major legacy would be the '95s relative success in the world of hunting. As well as the aforementioned military calibers (including quite a few surplus Russian 95s, some of which were never shipped overseas) the civilian variants became popular with hunters. Winchester even made their own calibers for it, .35 and .405 Winchester. One famous user, Theordore Roosevelt had a rifle in the latter caliber which he used to off lions.
Sadly it never caught on as widely as Winchester had hoped and production ceased in the 1930's with the onset of the Great Depression which instantly crippled the only market that this gun catered to. But in that relatively short production life quite a few were made (although exact figures tend to differ). Today they are not incredibly rare, but highly prized by collectors and shooters alike and demand a hefty price.

111)Vz. 58
[img]http://world.guns.ru/assault/vz58v.jpg[/img]
Often mistaken for the AK-47 and its variants the Samopal Vz. 58 is actually an excellent and reasonably successful design in its own right.
It dates back to the 1950s. Czechoslovakia was part of the communist block but they had always vied to be just a little bit more independent from mother Russia than many of its socialist neighbors. One way they expressed this resentment was with their firearm designs, namely the fact that while they were still chambered in Warsaw-pact calibers the designs were all different. In the 1950's it came time to get an assault rifle, which would replace the Vz. 28 SMG and Vz. 52 rifle much like how other nations replaced their mixed arsenals of rifles and subguns with firearms like the AK-47 and M-16.
Rather than adopting the AK-47 like every other communist country they designed their own gun. Staring in 1956, spearheaded by Jiří Čermák Samopal began working on what would later become the VZ. 58. Although the profile of this gun greatly resembles the AK series the workings are significantly different. Some have stated that it resembles the workings of a P-38 mixed with a Bren. It uses a somewhat unconventional short stroke piston that has its own return spring and operates independently of the bolt.
This bolt looks like something off an SKS where the carrier is highly exposed, with a handle on the right. It locks back after the last round is fired and even has stripper clip guides at the top of the bolt face for SKS clips. While it can take those the Czechoslovakians wanted to distance themselves from the Russians even further and thus they felt the need to make it take its own magazines which function fine but are not interchangeable with the AK-47 series.
Either way, it actually works quite well, perhaps even better than the Kalashnikov family. While it fires the same cartridge all of the components are machined, rather than stamped and the overall build quality is significantly less sloppy. This allows it to be somewhat more accurate than the AK-47. In spite of being built to much tighter tolerances this gun is still highly reliable, capable of firing thousands of rounds without too much cleaning.
With the design completed in 1958 the army began testing them and adopted this design in 1959. It has been in service with Czechoslovakia ever since. It is still in use with the Czech Republic and Slovak Republic. There are three major versions. The Vz. 58"P" is the standard wood-stocked variant, the "Pi" is the same thing only with a mounting bracket on the left side of the receiver for a night vision scope and the "V" which has a distinctive side-folding stock which reportedly works much better than the AKS/AKMS under-folder.
Of course this design had been adopted by other countries as well. It is popular in African/South American/Middle Eastern and a few Asian countries such as Sudan, Guinea, Ethipoia, Cuba and Indonesia as an improved albeit slightly more expensive alternative to the AK-47 family.
It is also popular with civilians. In Canada there are laws forbidding the ownership of any firearm that uses the AK action (including the Saiga) because it was arbitrarily determined that no civilian could have any legitimate use for such a weapon. Semi-automatic Vz. 58 variants are popular there because they have no commonality with the AK series and are therefore legal.
The same semi-automatic variants have been offered in the US as well. Both the Canadian and US Vz. 58s are very high-quality rifles that are offered at competitive prices although they hadn't been around long enough to earn much of a name for themselves and are still often mistaken for AK variants.
Never the less, in spite of their relative obscurity and the fact that this design has spent its ever-continuing service life in the shadows of the AK family, roughly one million of these guns were made making this design at very least a modest success.

112)Savage 99
[img]http://www.terosdesign.us/cook/gun_images/Savage-99-full-2.jpg[/img]
Near the turn of the century Arthur Savage, who had up until that point made his living doing everything from running Australia's largest cattle ranch to building race cars (he even invented the radial tire) decided to venture into the world of firearms.
His design used a lever action which was prized by hunters and sportsmen for its speed over bolt guns but he wanted to manufacture it in spitzer-cartridges such as the .303 British. Unlike Winchester he opted for a rotary magazine to contain the bullets. An even greater innovation was the hammer. Or lack thereof. This gun is often credited as very first mass-produced firearm to use a spring-activated firing pin rather than a hammer.
An earlier version competed against the Krag for US army trials and lost out, but the true legacy would be on the civilian market. Its great reliability, reasonable price and ability to fire more effective spitzer cartridges made it wildly popular with hunters and recreational shooters. Granted its success in Europe wasn't so great since the European hunters often consider any lever-action gun "vulgar". Even then the rotary magazine makes the model 99 somewhat acceptable in those circles.
So successful was this design that it stayed in production for more than 100 years, although it has recently ceased production. The company that created it, Savage Arms, is definitely still in business and used model 99s are still abundant. After all, more than a million were made.

113)MK 19
[img]http://world.guns.ru/grenade/mk19mod3-1.jpg[/img]
We all know about the various grenade launchers that exist, but what about automatic launchers? From belt feeds? Yep, that's what the MK 19 is all about.
Back in the 1960s the US army used various hand-cranked launchers that fired 40x46mm shells, not unlike those used by M79 launchers. But the range and rate of fire of these weapons was highly limited. Thus, learning from this, the US Navy developed the MK 19 which uses a longer 40x53mm shell that has more range.
The weapon system itself is an open-bolt recoil-operated belt-fed machine gun (essentially) that fires the big shells that aren't compatible with M203 launchers that I mentioned earlier. This weapon alone weighs almost 80 pounds plus a heavy tripod and even heftier ammunition that comes in links of 32 and 48 rounds. The rate of fire is slow to prevent cook-offs and a crew can sustain roughly 40 rounds being fired a minute, 60 is they work real fast. The gun itself can fire 300 rpm, but at that rate you would be wasting ammo.
That may not seem like a lot but remember we are talking grenades here. And these ones can reach over a mile. This kind of range, coupled with the lack of any significant muzzle flash made countering such a weapon a daunting task by any means. The heavy weight is offset by the fact that it is mostly used mounted on vehicles. It proved itself to be a reliable and deadly crew-served weapon in Vietnam and beyond. In fact it is still in service with all branches of the US armed forces today.
It is also highly popular with other countries. Mexico uses them to fight the drug cartels, the UK, Colombia, Argentina, Chile, Australia, Israel, Pakistan and numerous other nations use them as well. In all roughly 30,000 exist, making it the most prolific weapon of its kind. Certainly you wouldn't expect a million of these things to exist, especially considering the 13,000$ price tag.

114)HK21/HK11
[img]http://world.guns.ru/machine/hk21e_01.jpg[/img]
A derivative of the G3 series the origin of this weapon can be summed up rather simply. With the success of the G3 rifle H&K decided to make a machine gun that had as much part commonality with the G3 as possible. Four such weapons were designed in the early 1960's.
The HK21 itself is, like I mentioned little more than a G3 with a built-in belt feed system. Unusual for a GPMG it also has a closed bolt although the rate of fire is still a substantial 800 RPM. Among the relatively few changes is a heavy quick-change barrel. Since the belt feed system is mounted under the receiver reloading is a pain, but the advantage is that system can be swapped for a magazine well which can take standard G3 magazines. You could also swap the barrel, feed system and a couple other components resulting in the same gun chambered in 5.56mm or even 7.62x39mm. The HK 11 is just an HK 21 set up to fire from magazines, rather than a belt feed.
Interestingly the 5.56 configuration was originally marketed as an HK21, although later it would be marketed as a different weapon system, the HK 13 (mag fed) and HK 23 (belt fed). The 7.62x39mm version remained as an afterthought and I don't know if it is even being made anymore. Later on in the 1980s the entire series of machine guns was updated to use the new safe/single/burst/auto trigger group rather than the older SEF group that all the other older G3s and derivatives shared. All of these guns can be distinguished from the originals because they all have an "E" at the end (which stands for "export").
Why were they designated as export weapons?
Because the German army never adopted the HK machine gun series. A number of the HK 11Es are used by specialized forces as the G8 but the MG3 beat H&K to the punch and the Bundeswehr had no reason to replace such a dated, yet effective and intimidating weapon.
Naturally that isn't to say no one uses the HK21/11/13/23. It was widely exported since it was marketed in tandem with the ever-successful G3 series. In fact Mexico, Portugal and Greece made licensed copies. Several countries such as Niger, Malaysia and Bangladesh use both the 21 and 11. The 5.56 variant never saw much success. Still, Bolivia, Colombia, El Salvador, Sweden and numerous other countries use them today.
Sometimes in somewhat specialized roles. For instance NASA uses a couple to patrol the Kennedy Space Center and BOPE (the world's deadliest special forces agency) uses them in Brazil for counter-terrorist and counter-narcotic operations.

115)M3 "Grease Gun"
[img]http://world.guns.ru/smg/m3_gg1.jpg[/img]
Before the US entered WW2 the US Ordinance Corps were investigating the effectiveness of various submachine guns being used. They found that while significantly cheaper than the highly expensive Thompson design, these guns were only marginally less effective. Even the STEN. They then set a requirement for a new subgun that could be converted from .45 ACP to 9mm in the field, that was just as cheap as the STEN design and preferably perform a lot better.
Two designers named George Hyde and Frederick Sampson who worked for Inland (a division of GM that at would also manufacture M1 carbines later in the war) cobbled up just such a design relatively quickly. It would later become known as the M3.
This weapon was a simple open-bolt gun that featured very simplistic production throughout. Everything that could be made of stamped steel was made of stamped steel. The only things that weren't were the barrel, bolt and firing mechanism. At one point there was a safety, but it was nixed during development. Instead there is a little sear in the dust cover that blocks the bolt from moving when the cover is closed. The cocking handle was a weird crank in front of the trigger assembly you had to pull back. Another distinctive feature was a very heavy bolt which gave the gun a distinctively slow rate of fire, roughly 300-400 RPM, allowing it to be quite controllable. The stock was a simple wire and the sights were non-adjustable, fixed to 100 yards.
But the really nice feature was an extra barrel, bolt and magazine well adapter for 9x19mm that took STEN and MP-40 magazines allowing this gun to be converted from .45 to 9mm in the field. All this cost the US government 20$ per gun which is a bargain considering that the two most expensive components (the bolt and barrel) had to be built twice with each gun.
Overall this gun was designed to be disposable. Should any parts wear out and stop working, chuck it and get another. This approach was scrapped early on due to an overall shortage of subguns available. The soldiers in the field dubbed it the "grease Gun" due to its resemblance to a tool used by mechanics to oil vehicles and other heavy machinery. The design itself (predictably) had a number of flaws. The biggest of which was safety, with the gun cocked and locked with the latch closed, if you dropped it the latch could pop open and the gun could discharge. Accidental discharge was a problem that plagued the M3 throughout its service. In addition the .45 magazines were a pain to load and the cocking handle sucked.
The latter problem would be addressed in 1944 with an update to the M3a1. This gun had total part commonality with its predecessor except for the bolt, dust cover and receiver. The bolt had a simpler built-in cocking handle. Another change was the dust cover which had to be elongated to accommodate the new cocking handle the receiver had to be altered to accommodate the larger dust cover. Overall the new gun was cheaper and a bit more reliable. When many M3s were modified into M3a1s the crank system was simply chucked and shipped back to the US as scrap metal.
As well as the new M3a1 variant, the OSS asked and received 1,000 M3s that were internally silenced although these guns are very rare today as only a thousand were made, compared to 600,000 normal M3s. Even more M3a1s would be manufactured during the Korean War. The best part is this: Guess when the US army stopped using them.
I'll give you some time.
Odds are you are probably wrong since you would have figured that like all other WW2 era designs it was obsolete by the time WW2 ended and was dropped shortly after the Korean War. You would be partially wrong. The US army stopped using them in large numbers after Korea, but they remained in service with tank crews up until the 1990s. It wasn't until the .45 ACP cartridge was forced out of service by NATO that they began seeking a replacement. When large quantities were retired circa the 1980's many were sold on the US class 3 weapons market, where they still circulate today at inflated prices.
In fact the last reported sighting of these guns in US hands would have been truck drivers hauling them around during the Gulf War. This is on top of various agencies such as the CIA that used leftover M3A1s during the 1970's and 1980's.
By that point the US wasn't the only country that had manufactured them. China made a copy called the Type 36 which in an ironic twist was used against the Americans in Korea. Argentina also made 9x19mm copies for a time. On top of all that numerous other nations such as South Korea, South Vietnam, Cambodia, the Philippines and Japan's JSDF received surplus M3A1s after they were withdrawn from service. Granted, nobody uses them today.

116)Astra 400
[img]http://world.guns.ru/handguns/astra400.jpg[/img]
This one dates back a while. Back in the early 1920s Spain was seeking a replacement for this really awkward-looking Campo-Giro pistol. A contract was put out for a weapon of the same 9x23mm (AKA 9mm Largo) caliber, but of a simpler design.
Numerous handguns were submitted. What was ultimately approved for service was a simple blowback design. The idea is the same as the Campo-Giro, but greatly influenced by the FN1903 and 1910 hence an internal hammer system. Often considered too weak and therefore unsuitable for a full-power handgun round, blowback-operated handguns do not have a locked breech. The only thing holding the round in the chamber is the recoil spring and the mass of the slide. This unconventional approach gave the Model 400 (sometimes nicknamed the "Pipewrench" due to its strait grip and long barrel) a number of unique properties.
For one thing, while it fired 9x23mm Largo, the same gun could actually chamber 9x23mm Steyr, 9x20mm Browning long and 9x19mm. But only in emergencies. The inconsistent dimensions and different loading of these calibers make shooting them out of a model 400 dangerous. After the Spanish Army adopted the 400, Nazi Germany placed an order and quickly found that this difference in chamber dimensions caused severe problems with the gun when loaded with 9x19mm. Namely headspacing issued which caused the guns to explode after firing a substantial amount of rounds. Thus a version was later made which was optimized for that caliber.
Overall the design is decent. There is an internal hammer which reduces the things the gun can snag on when it is drawn. The slide is a bit tough to pull back and the ergonomics are iffy, but it did its job as well as any other automatic pistol of the time. Its ability to chamber other 9mm calibers was found to be risky, but useful. Ironically the first widespread use of this gun was against itself during the Spanish Civil War. During that conflict two additional factories were made to fill the demand. It also saw service in the Rif War, a little known colonial conflict involving Spain and France vs. the Republic of the Rif which as a result became what is known as Morocco today. Besides that and the few used by Germany during WW2 (remember, Spain was allied with Germany, but neutral in the fighting) Chile used them for a while.
In the postwar era surplus Astra pistols were sold in Europe and the US. This is on top of civilian sales which had existed throughout the 400's existence. The variants chambered in lighter calibers such as .380ACP and .32ACP were marketed as the Astra 300, but were otherwise for the most part the same. Around the 1950s the 400 and 300 were put out of production because newer and better designs were being made. In all 100,000+ were made by Astra, as well as numerous licensed and unlicensed copies. The 9x19mm version was known as the Astra 600. Only about 10,000 were delivered to Germany before and during WW2 where they earned a reputation as a solid, if awkward design. Another 50,000 were made and many were sold to East Germany after the war ended. In all roughly 60,000 such pistols were made.
Today they are largely collector's pieces since 9mm Largo is a bit hard to come by in the states. However, due to the crude nature of the weapon itself the asking price for one is seldom as expensive as that of other handguns of its time.

117)Carl Gustav recoilless rifle.
[img]http://world.guns.ru/grenade/cg_m3-1.jpg[/img]
During WW2 Sweden toyed with the idea of recoilless rifles meant to deal with light armor. In 1942 they adopted a shoulder-fired rifle that fired a 20mm projectile. This proved insufficient for anti-tank warfare and by war's end it became clear that a new weapon was needed.
Utilizing the same concept, the Carl Gustav was born. It wasn't invented by Carl Gustav, that is simply the name of the company manufactures it. This weapon was actually designed by Hugo Abramson and Harald Jentzen who worked for the Royal Swedish Arms Administration in 1946. The original design was designated as the M1, with subsequent updates being called the M2 and M3.
Originally the Carl Gustav was an anti-tank weapon. Its projectile is an 84mm HEAT (High Explosive Anti Tank) round that uses a shaped explosive which detonates on impact. Unlike other launchers there is no stabilizing fin. Rather the rifled barrel of the launcher itself provides the stability. This approach also allows the weapon to have a greater muzzle velocity and range. A moving target can be hit at roughly 400 yards.
But it gets better. After adoption the Carl Gustav began seeing use in other purposes. Often it is used to destroy stationary targets such as fortified structures. For that purpose it is effective out to roughly 700 yards. When fired, the propellant gasses are sent out of the venturi tube in the back which cancels the recoil. With some more modern rounds thy have secondary rocket motors that increase the range further still whereas conventional 84mm shells are simply shot out.
To reload, the venturi tube is hinged open and a fresh round is inserted. The firing mechanism is a conventional pistol grip with a second one to improve aim. There are simple iron sights, but the preferred method is a 3x optic with an optional night vision insert. All in all the only drawback of this design is weight as it is significantly heavier than its soviet counterpart, the RPG-7.
As far as variants go the prototype is the M1 which never saw much production 9if any), the M2 was the first widespread production version and the M3 is a significantly lightened and modernized variant of the M2 which weighs 14 kilos while the newer version weighs roughly 10.
From its adoption this weapon became an instant success. Numerous other nations swiftly adopted it and it became among the most common if not the most common squad-level anti-tank weapon on earth. It is used by its native Sweden as well as numerous other NATO members such as the UK, Austria, Denmark, Germany, Norway, Poland and the US to name a few. Numerous other nations such as Japan, Australia, Brazil, Egypt, Greece, India, Indonesia, Pakistan and Venezuela use it too.
In truth, while widespread the extent of its use varies. For instance the US only issues them to specialized forces such as USSOCOM.Some of the other nations that use it only do so in relatively limited numbers although a substantial amount of them have it as a standard-issue weapon. It remains devastating against 1960s-1970s era tanks, but is often defeated by more modern armor.
Thankfully it has found a variety of roles other than tank-busting. For this purpose there is a very wide array of 84mm shells. Everything from HEAT to anti-air to incendiary, illuminating, anti-personnel and High Explosive (HE) rounds exist, often with a number of variants. I would imagine with so many capabilities, creative soldiers will find numerous uses in the field for this weapon for decades to come.

118)M95 Steyr Mannlicher
[img]http://world.guns.ru/rifle/steyr_m95_r_f.jpg[/img]
We are all familiar with the Mauser 98 and its sphere of influence circa the turn of the century. But there was another design, the Steyr Mannlicher, which was of Austro-Hungarian origin.
It is the brainchild of Ferdinand Ritter von Mannlicher who experimented with various early semi-automatic rifles in the late 1880's to the turn of the century. His designs would inspire the M-1 Garand and M-1 Carbine but it is his invention of the en-bloc clip that so greatly contributed to the M95 Steyr Mannlicher. In this design you have 5 rounds held together with one clip which you insert into the gun. When the last round is chambered the clip falls out of a slot in the bottom of the gun which is much faster than the more conventional stripper clip and internal magazine systems in use at the time.
He patented this clip system in 1885 and created his first strait-pull rifle a year earlier than that. With a strait-pull the entire act of pulling a bolt up, back, forward and down was replaced with a faster system where you simply pulled back and forth. Other designs such as the K31 and Ross would later utilize the same concept. Early combinations of these two concepts were ill-fated due to a weak wedge-locking system. It wasn't until the 1890s that he implemented more conventional dual locking lugs which essentially turned into the M95 Steyr Mannlicher.
This design was originally adopted in 8x50mmR, a caliber dating back to black powder days. These rifles were used by Austria-Hungary during WW1, rather than the more famous Mauser. After the war ended booth Austria and Hungary continued to use them, although during the inter-war years many were converted to a newer and more powerful 8x56mmR round which was introduced by a machine gun. By that time more than 3 million were made. This doesn't count rifles such as the Italian Mannlicher-Carcano which borrowed concepts (in that case the en-bloc clips).
Captured Steyr Mannlicher rifles were used extensively by Romania in WW2. Other countries (including Germany) used them as well, sometimes rechambered for the more common 8mm Mauser although that conversion often involved the en-bloc clip system being replaced by a more conventional internal magazine.
The weapon itself in notably fast to fire, although the severe recoil of the large bullet makes a very high rate of fire a daunting task for most. As well as standard infantry versions, carbine, cavalry and sniper variants were issued.
It wasn't a perfect rifle however. There is severe bullet drop, requiring the gun to be aimed up quite a bit if the target is beyond 300 or so meters. Recoil is fierce, especially with carbine and Cavalry variants. Also the slot at the bottom of the gun for the en-bloc clips to drop out is a magnet for dirt, especially when the weapon is fired from a prone position. Another problem plagued the much sought-aft

[Campin Carl]

[QUOTE=Furfurag;15803753]You're going to get gold member now[/QUOTE]

Respected User is worth more than Gold

[Missing User]

Point stands even though Ventilated creams his pants for Bean-O (a respected user!! omg!!!). This is a thread that didn't need to exist, Facepunch has enough shitty threads as it is. We don't need Bean-O bumping this thread every few days with a news article containing the word "gun" somewhere. I understand that Ventilated is a thoroughly awful mod and probably was just trying to stick up for his boy, but this is a shit thread by a shit poster - gas gas gas gas gas

[highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Asher Roth." - ventilated))[/highlight]

[Manic matt]

[media]http://www.defenselink.mil/dodcmsshare/newsphoto/2000-09/000905-M-0000R-002.jpg[/media]

Do you know anything about the mark 19's history?
Or is this thread dedicated to weapons that shoot bullets?

[Mezmer]

Holy shit 60 articles already. I have read every one but never looked at numbers

[Missing User]

Point stands even though Ventilated creams his pants for Bean-O (a respected user!! omg!!!). This is a thread that didn't need to exist, Facepunch has enough shitty threads as it is. We don't need Bean-O bumping this thread every few days with a news article containing the word "gun" somewhere. I understand that Ventilated is a thoroughly awful mod and probably was just trying to stick up for his boy, but this is a shit thread by a shit poster - gas gas gas gas gas

[highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Asher Roth." - ventilated))[/highlight]

[Bean-O]

[QUOTE=ShyFX;15803997]Point stands even though Ventilated creams his pants for Bean-O (a respected user!! omg!!!). This is a thread that didn't need to exist, Facepunch has enough shitty threads as it is. We don't need Bean-O bumping this thread every few days with a news article containing the word "gun" somewhere. I understand that Ventilated is a thoroughly awful mod and probably was just trying to stick up for his boy, but this is a shit thread by a shit poster - gas gas gas gas gas[/QUOTE]

Wow, you were permabanned, made a new account and immediately copied and reposted the exact same thing you said earlier that fast? Now who is trying too hard?
Now we have spammers. Great, just what I need.
[QUOTE=Manic matt;15804028][media]http://www.defenselink.mil/dodcmsshare/newsphoto/2000-09/000905-M-0000R-002.jpg[/media]

Do you know anything about the mark 19's history?
Or is this thread dedicated to weapons that shoot bullets?[/QUOTE]
No, grenade launchers are fine. I'll look into it after dealing with the spammers and finishing off wild west week.

[Missing User]

Point stands even though Ventilated creams his pants for Bean-O (a respected user!! omg!!!). This is a thread that didn't need to exist, Facepunch has enough shitty threads as it is. We don't need Bean-O bumping this thread every few days with a news article containing the word "gun" somewhere. I understand that Ventilated is a thoroughly awful mod and probably was just trying to stick up for his boy, but this is a shit thread by a shit poster - gas gas gas gas gas

[highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Asher Roth." - ventilated))[/highlight]

[XxKitsunexX]

[QUOTE=Campin Carl;15803996]Respected User is worth more than Gold[/QUOTE]

no

[Missing User]

Point stands even though Ventilated creams his pants for Bean-O (a respected user!! omg!!!). This is a thread that didn't need to exist, Facepunch has enough shitty threads as it is. We don't need Bean-O bumping this thread every few days with a news article containing the word "gun" somewhere. I understand that Ventilated is a thoroughly awful mod and probably was just trying to stick up for his boy, but this is a shit thread by a shit poster - gas gas gas gas gas

[highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Asher Roth." - ventilated))[/highlight]

[lintz]

[QUOTE=Manic matt;15804028][media]http://www.defenselink.mil/dodcmsshare/newsphoto/2000-09/000905-M-0000R-002.jpg[/media]

Do you know anything about the mark 19's history?
Or is this thread dedicated to weapons that shoot bullets?[/QUOTE]

Technically, firearms encompass grenade launchers.

[Missing User]

Point stands even though Ventilated creams his pants for Bean-O (a respected user!! omg!!!). This is a thread that didn't need to exist, Facepunch has enough shitty threads as it is. We don't need Bean-O bumping this thread every few days with a news article containing the word "gun" somewhere. I understand that Ventilated is a thoroughly awful mod and probably was just trying to stick up for his boy, but this is a shit thread by a shit poster - gas gas gas gas gas

[highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Asher Roth." - ventilated))[/highlight]