Coolest/Ugliest Weapons V5 - Bullpup AKs are the best - General

[QUOTE=Riller;42978557]The AK is only 66 years old, sliightly older than the M16, and there has been no big breaks* in the assault rifle market since then. The 1911 is 102 years old, and pretty much every single feature it has is outdated by today's standards. *The AK's sights are still [I]absolute crap[/I]. The rifle design might only be 65ish years old, but the sight design is 122 years old, lifted straight off the Mosin Nagant. [editline]25th November 2013[/editline] And an [I]actually[/I] classy early MP5. [/QUOTE] Hate on AK sights all you want, i can hit fine with them.

[QUOTE=Jagur;42982863]Hate on AK sights all you want, i can hit fine with them.[/QUOTE] They're fine for a maximum of 300m engagements, but increasing the sight radius and changing the rear sight to an aperture type would benefit the accuracy of the rifle tremendously. The sight radius on an AK is the same as an M4, but the M4 has a rear aperture sight. If I wanted to keep irons only on my AK, I'd probably fit it with a Krebs sight rail, but I think the platform benefits from optics.

[QUOTE=Jagur;42982863]Hate on AK sights all you want, i can hit fine with them.[/QUOTE] that doesn't make them not absolute garbage AK irons are pretty much a grade-A example of objectively bad sights [editline]e[/editline] this coming from someone who prefers the AK platform to ARs, etc

[QUOTE=MAC21500;42982286]Never thought I'd see the day... H&K is going to sell us worthless civillians a greebled-up G36! For $4,000! I kid, I kid, there is no price yet, but if it is anyways similarly priced with other H&K rifles, it will rape your wallet. [url]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...-civilian-g36/[/url] "In Europe the gun will be called the HK243 and in the USA it will be marketed as the HK293. The rifle is made with parts from the G36, but the bolt and the .223-chambered barrel design are unique. The reason for this is that gun companies in Germany cannot sell “weapons of war” to civilians. This gun has been sufficiently changed that it cannot be easily converted to a military-stye fully-automatic G36. The rifle will feature a quad rail and a STANAG magazine well that accepts standard AR-15 magazine. Four different types of stocks will be offered, a short fixed stock, a long fixed stock (hunting/SLR style?) and two types of adjustable stocks. There will be four different model (Compact, Kurtz (Short), Sporter and Long) which vary by barrel length from 8.9″ – 18.8″. It is not clear if H&K actually plan on selling the shorter barrel (SBR) versions in the USA, or if they are just apply for approval in case they ever wish to in the future." [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/HK243-660x247.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/HK293-660x244.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Lemme guess; after the German army said they didn't want the G36 any more because it's too crap, HK needed to unload a bunch of surplus parts, so they slightly changed them to sell them as this turd?

[QUOTE=Riller;42983974]Lemme guess; after the German army said they didn't want the G36 any more because it's too crap, HK needed to unload a bunch of surplus parts, so they slightly changed them to sell them as this turd?[/QUOTE] I doubt they'd go to the trouble of re designing the bolt and chamber to sell "parts kits". That forend rail estate needs to go, I prefer the standard G36 forend with rails on it as pictured in asteroid's post.

[QUOTE=MAC21500;42984091]I doubt they'd go to the trouble of re designing the bolt and chamber to sell "parts kits". That forend rail estate needs to go, I prefer the standard G36 forend with rails on it as pictured in asteroid's post.[/QUOTE] The G36 needs to go, I prefer the standard AR-18.

[QUOTE=Sableye;42982019]huh all last page's talk about sights made me wonder how good this [t]http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRAKC3xbrkRxz0WqpsyKVJotIwoo9VKWoR3pH2_ZcS_BQUos1HzZQ[/t] was at aiming with both a carry handle and a magazine in the way[/QUOTE] yes because gun designers would make their gun impossible to aim because that would make it extra effective, right?

He was simply wondering how effective it was, he didn't need your snark.

[QUOTE=Riller;42984192]The G36 needs to go, I prefer the standard AR-18.[/QUOTE] Pffft... both those guns are old, get with the times and be a non-conformist; buy an XCR.

Something about the Bren A1 makes my panties wet [T]http://www.bvv.cz/public/galleries/16/15578/ceska-zbrojovka-cz_805_bren_a1_3d2.jpg?bf1d2cb30962272c00be3c7301f18ed6[/T] Apart from the stock Filename says it's the A1 but I could've sworn it is the A2 :/

I think it has to do with it looking at first glance to be very geometric and comprized of fairly simple shapes, but on closer inspection it's actually a lot busier and detailed up close.

[QUOTE=Kebab;42991377]Something about the Bren A1 makes my panties wet [T]http://www.bvv.cz/public/galleries/16/15578/ceska-zbrojovka-cz_805_bren_a1_3d2.jpg?bf1d2cb30962272c00be3c7301f18ed6[/T] Apart from the stock Filename says it's the A1 but I could've sworn it is the A2 :/[/QUOTE] Looks like a Czech SCAR/G36 knockoff to me...

[QUOTE=MAC21500;42991712]Looks like a Czech SCAR/G36 knockoff to me...[/QUOTE] probably cause it is. Czechs haven't made an original gun since they turned an SKS into an wannabe AKM

[QUOTE=Kebab;42991377]Something about the Bren A1 makes my panties wet [T]http://www.bvv.cz/public/galleries/16/15578/ceska-zbrojovka-cz_805_bren_a1_3d2.jpg?bf1d2cb30962272c00be3c7301f18ed6[/T] Apart from the stock Filename says it's the A1 but I could've sworn it is the A2 :/[/QUOTE] I think it is, according to CZ's website the difference between the two is the A1 has a longer barrel, so that should be the A2.

I dunno why, but i have a soft spot for World War 2 guns being butchered to use 21st century attachments. [img]http://files.gamebanana.com/img/ss/srends/33292.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=flashn00b;42995052]I dunno why, but i have a soft spot for World War 2 guns being butchered to use 21st century attachments. [img]http://files.gamebanana.com/img/ss/srends/33292.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] If they're 3d virtual models, sure. If its the real thing though, fuck thaaaaat

[QUOTE=MAC21500;42991712]Looks like a Czech SCAR/G36 knockoff to me...[/QUOTE] a [i] beautiful [/i] one at that

[QUOTE=Araknid;42996288]If they're 3d virtual models, sure.[/QUOTE] or reproductions

Oh, yeah; here's a nice, old one. [IMG]http://www.littlegun.be/arme%20belge/artisans%20identifies%20a/artisans%20anonymes%20puckle%20gun-03.JPG[/IMG] The puckle gun; one of the, if not [I]the[/I] very first rapid-fire single-barrel guns in the world, predating the Gatling by almost a hundred and fifty years, and capable of firing 11 32mm shots before needing to be reloaded. Meant to be mounted on ships to defend against boarders, but also possible to be used on a tripod like shown. Most interesting (read: hilarious) is this... [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/Puckle_gun_Photo.jpg[/IMG] Notice anything odd? Look at the chambers. They're square. Two versions of this gun was made; one firing round projectiles, to kill Christians; and one firing square projectiles, for use against muslims. This proved... Ineffective. Because you can't rifle a square, so they refused to fly straight. The puckle gun never achieved widespread adoption, but it was nevertheless a very interesting early machine gun.

what's the logic behind round stuff killing Christians and so on

[QUOTE=Joazzz;42999845]what's the logic behind round stuff killing Christians and so on[/QUOTE] Well, a square bullet would, in theory, do much more damage; so it'd show that, if you converted to Christianity, we'd kill you less hard. Problem is, if you stayed a Muslim, the round wouldn't hit in the first place.

Haven't you posted the puckle gun like 50 times?

[QUOTE=Griffster26;42999900]Haven't you posted the puckle gun like 50 times?[/QUOTE] I haven't before, no.

Could have sworn you posted it before.. was about to say you should cut down on the gunpowder huffing. Anyho, came across this and I liked it. [img]http://24.media.tumblr.com/3734aad66ad7a82672bfbb770b8839d6/tumblr_mwwplyHaxB1qmqs6fo1_1280.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Griffster26;42999900]Haven't you posted the puckle gun like 50 times?[/QUOTE] I posted about the puckle gun about a month or 2 ago.

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;43000084]I posted about the puckle gun about a month or 2 ago.[/QUOTE] Might explain it, then. I only came back a couple weeks ago.

I'm extremely sorry that it's a meme but I could not find another picture of it: [img]http://d24w6bsrhbeh9d.cloudfront.net/photo/awrz8xr_700b.jpg[/img] What is this exactly? looks fucking awesome

It was a mockup thing made for the second GI Joe movie.

It's a concept tank from a GI joe movies [t]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-22FxxDXPtCc/UVw_HRSua6I/AAAAAAAAaxY/DSein8ilYKM/s1600/Jerad-S-Marantz-GI-Joe-Retaliation-0003-HT_copy_lighter.jpg[/t] [t]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LG9Gf6TsFpg/UVw_HbKmA6I/AAAAAAAAaxc/q6GcMkEJ5wc/s1600/Jerad-S-Marantz-GI-Joe-Retaliation-0001-HS_tank_2_copy.jpg[/t] [t]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uoIPSkH6Pgs/UVw_HdgLqKI/AAAAAAAAaxg/zh947CcbTAM/s1600/Jerad-S-Marantz-GI-Joe-Retaliation-0002-HS_tank_2_revisions.jpg[/t]

[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;43000451]I'm extremely sorry that it's a meme but I could not find another picture of it: [IMG]http://d24w6bsrhbeh9d.cloudfront.net/photo/awrz8xr_700b.jpg[/IMG] What is this exactly? looks fucking awesome[/QUOTE] It's a mockup. However, it looks a lot like the Mantis modification of the Universal Carrier. [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f6/Universal_Carrier_Praying_Mantis_1_Bovington.jpg/800px-Universal_Carrier_Praying_Mantis_1_Bovington.jpg[/IMG] A vehicle designed in 1943 in preparation for the invasion of France, it was meant to allow the two-man crew to drive up to one of the many Normandic hedgerows, raise the gunner up high, and allow him to fire over it at the Germans with two Bren guns mounted in it. Starting at 0:40, this video shows some of the one-man prototype and later two-man version. [video=youtube;umbpabDnSNE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umbpabDnSNE[/video] It was rejected. Supposedly because, when raised, the poorly armoured underbelly was very exposed. Imagine being the guys inside that cramped, hot tin can, with your entire body-length raised upwards without much cover or protection, facing the enemy. Yeah...