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

Most useless but best shotgun ever [img]http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/6/6b/MatrixAutoShotguns-4.jpg/800px-MatrixAutoShotguns-4.jpg[/img] Mouse's shotguns from the matrix. Apparently they inspired the auto shotty from Deus Ex [img]http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110902082405/deusex/en/images/4/47/Assault_Shotgun.jpg[/img]

[t]http://www.angelfire.com/biz4/soundsofstz/Manville27mmTeargasLauncher.jpg[/t] which itself was probably based on this which isn't actually a shotgun at all [editline]17th February 2014[/editline] [t]http://cdn.instructables.com/FL0/GEDO/HDOW6JMM/FL0GEDOHDOW6JMM.MEDIUM.jpg[/t] here's a picture of a replica

[QUOTE=Sableye;43951776][t]http://www.angelfire.com/biz4/soundsofstz/Manville27mmTeargasLauncher.jpg[/t] which itself was probably based on this which isn't actually a shotgun at all [editline]17th February 2014[/editline] [t]http://cdn.instructables.com/FL0/GEDO/HDOW6JMM/FL0GEDOHDOW6JMM.MEDIUM.jpg[/t] here's a picture of a replica[/QUOTE] [img]http://puu.sh/70rp3.jpg[/img] Christopher Walken approves.

All these rotary guns reminded me of something: [img]http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/smg/australia/1287828138.jpg[/img] This, is the Owen machine carbine, as you could probably tell from the fact that it's upside down: it is an Australian made weapon, and was the standard SMG of Australian forces during the second world war, actually one of the better SMGs of the era. What does this have to do with rotary guns? Well, the Owen gun was designed by one man with the somewhat awkward name of Evelyn Owen, and he got into professional gun design after his neighbor one day found this leaning up against mr.Owen's garage: [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/640x430xRELAWM30622.001_2.jpg.pagespeed.ic.-O-31HdbCp.jpg[/img] This was Owen's original design, which he made from spare parts and a .22 rifle, and could best be described as a cross of an open bolt SMG, and a hyper-simplified version of a Striker shotgun, in .22. [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/390x139xRELAWM30622.001-390x139.jpg.pagespeed.ic.olwMeTnCZ-.jpg[/img] You may notice there's no trigger on that pistol grip, that's because the gun has a thumb-trigger on the top of the rifle grip [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/308x390xowenimprovisedsmgtrig-308x390.jpg.pagespeed.ic.wx8MiUEmp5.jpg[/img] Very simple mechanism, if you could even call it that, the trigger catches on the bolt and prevents it from flying forward into the primer until you pull it, pulling it down allows the bolt to spring forward, then the force from the round firing drives the bolt back, and if the trigger is released in time it will catch and hold open. The magazine is made from a harmonic balancer and a coil spring, and like on the Striker is designed to rotate around just enough to line up the next chamber after each shot is fired. Owen actually attempted to submit this design to the Australian army as well, but at the time they had no interest in SMGs. Owen's neighbor was a manager at a manufacturing plant, and after giving this design a looking over he was able to convince the owner of the plant that it had potential, and to let Owen work for them to continue developing weapons. In 1941 his final design (the first one I posted) was tested by the army and found to be superior to both the Thompson and the Sten in terms of reliability, which led to it being adopted.

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;43955989]All these rotary guns reminded me of something: [img]http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/smg/australia/1287828138.jpg[/img] This, is the Owen machine carbine, as you could probably tell from the fact that it's upside down: it is an Australian made weapon, and was the standard SMG of Australian forces during the second world war, actually one of the better SMGs of the era. What does this have to do with rotary guns? Well, the Owen gun was designed by one man with the somewhat awkward name of Evelyn Owen, and he got into professional gun design after his neighbor one day found this leaning up against mr.Owen's garage: [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/640x430xRELAWM30622.001_2.jpg.pagespeed.ic.-O-31HdbCp.jpg[/img] This was Owen's original design, which he made from spare parts and a .22 rifle, and could best be described as a cross of an open bolt SMG, and a hyper-simplified version of a Striker shotgun, in .22. [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/390x139xRELAWM30622.001-390x139.jpg.pagespeed.ic.olwMeTnCZ-.jpg[/img] You may notice there's no trigger on that pistol grip, that's because the gun has a thumb-trigger on the top of the rifle grip [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/308x390xowenimprovisedsmgtrig-308x390.jpg.pagespeed.ic.wx8MiUEmp5.jpg[/img] Very simple mechanism, if you could even call it that, the trigger catches on the bolt and prevents it from flying forward into the primer until you pull it, pulling it down allows the bolt to spring forward, then the force from the round firing drives the bolt back, and if the trigger is released in time it will catch and hold open. The magazine is made from a harmonic balancer and a coil spring, and like on the Striker is designed to rotate around just enough to line up the next chamber after each shot is fired. Owen actually attempted to submit this design to the Australian army as well, but at the time they had no interest in SMGs. Owen's neighbor was a manager at a manufacturing plant, and after giving this design a looking over he was able to convince the owner of the plant that it had potential, and to let Owen work for them to continue developing weapons. In 1941 his final design (the first one I posted) was tested by the army and found to be superior to both the Thompson and the Sten in terms of reliability, which led to it being adopted.[/QUOTE] for a gun made out of spare parts, that's utterly brilliant! Even for a concept from a big firearms company at the time, it still would have been pretty damn clever.

[QUOTE=Trekintosh;43956143]for a gun made out of spare parts, that's utterly brilliant! Even for a concept from a big firearms company at the time, it still would have been pretty damn clever.[/QUOTE] Less clever, more so-dumb-it-might-just-work.

[video=youtube;JrZHa15OMHk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrZHa15OMHk[/video] I know you guys love Bullpup Conversions

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyvYEv2YcKg[/media]

[QUOTE=Vexua;43956850][video=youtube;JrZHa15OMHk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrZHa15OMHk[/video] I know you guys love Bullpup Conversions[/QUOTE] In all honesty forgotten weapons makes my favorite firearms videos

[QUOTE=M.Ciaster;43953193][img]http://puu.sh/70rp3.jpg[/img] Christopher Walken approves.[/QUOTE] I see your Walken with a gas launcher, and raise you this... [IMG]http://www.imfdb.org/images/a/af/MV3-FRANSPAS-1.jpg[/IMG] Reb Brown with a nickel-plated SPAS-12.

[QUOTE=Sableye;43950728] [t]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Y7kQSOBuEJw/Rub5ybB26bI/AAAAAAAAAG8/kHrzKeV0iPs/s320/AC130TracerPattern.jpg[/t] scary gunships are scary[/QUOTE] I think you mean Spooky. [video=youtube;Cddlo-jzAI4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cddlo-jzAI4[/video]

So, apparently India has a new gun up their sleeves: [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/650x244xxj8g6MQ.jpg.pagespeed.ic.at8ppkfjzq.jpg[/img] The "Multi-Caliber Individual Weapon System" or MCIWS for short. The name comes from the fact that they're intending to manufacture it in 5.56, 7.62x39, and 6.8 SPC, and make it easily convertible between the three. [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/650x301xPVZYwE7.jpg.pagespeed.ic.SiGedHffA0.jpg[/img] The barrel looks to be about the same as on the INSAS, but now the weapon seems to have considerable AR-15 influence replacing most of the AK-like areas [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/650x487xlWfSZGB.jpg.pagespeed.ic.ol0bhf4ndK.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/650x397xjihNk6D.jpg.pagespeed.ic.o0dXLVowkd.jpg[/img] The manufacturing looks a lot less flimsy than on the INSAS, but the design still looks worrisome to me.

It looks really chunky.

Dat trigger discipline.

I feel like when trying to show what a display weapon looks like in ready to fire position at a gun show, it's almost excusable.

looks like a galil and a SG 556 had a baby and that thing popped out

Well that's hideous.

The optic kind of looks like a poorly faxed MARS sight too.

It looks much larger than it should be

[t]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/650x487xlWfSZGB.jpg.pagespeed.ic.ol0bhf4ndK.jpg[/t] Bullet view port just cause.

[QUOTE=Binladen34;43974569][t]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/650x487xlWfSZGB.jpg.pagespeed.ic.ol0bhf4ndK.jpg[/t] Bullet view port just cause.[/QUOTE] Just cause a third of the magazine is obscured by the magwell, and knowing if you got 10 or 2 rounds is kind of important, yeah.

[QUOTE=Riller;43974871]Just cause a third of the magazine is obscured by the magwell, and knowing if you got 10 or 2 rounds is kind of important, yeah.[/QUOTE] Agreed, although the rest of the gun looks pretty naff, this does seem like a genuinely good idea. The difference between 10 rounds and 1 could save some lives.

Personally I think they'd be better off going with a lower-profile magazine well like their old AK and FAL rifles rather than take what looks like an AR type magwell and cut a big hole in it. Unless this thing is intended for STANAG mags, in which case I'd ask just how much more it would cost to have a transparent plastic cover over that hole. Also, while we're talking about the holes they cut into this thing, did anyone notice the one in the gas system? [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/650x292xindia-MCIWS.jpg.pagespeed.ic.pZERIlgtOT.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;43975234]Personally I think they'd be better off going with a lower-profile magazine well like their old AK and FAL rifles rather than take what looks like an AR type magwell and cut a big hole in it. Unless this thing is intended for STANAG mags, in which case I'd ask just how much more it would cost to have a transparent plastic cover over that hole. Also, while we're talking about the holes they cut into this thing, did anyone notice the one in the gas system? [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/650x292xindia-MCIWS.jpg.pagespeed.ic.pZERIlgtOT.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Prolly taken out to disable the gun while still being able to show off all it's functions at the show, just to be on the safe side. The magazine looks super-cheap, though. Like, transparent plastic is already shoddy compared to real plastic, and that doesn't look very thick or sturdy.

[QUOTE=Riller;43975375]Prolly taken out to disable the gun while still being able to show off all it's functions at the show, just to be on the safe side. The magazine looks super-cheap, though. Like, transparent plastic is already shoddy compared to real plastic, and that doesn't look very thick or sturdy.[/QUOTE] Yeah, that was a big problem on the INSAS as well, if these mags are anything like those they're gonna be complete crap.

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;43975407]Yeah,that was a big problem on the INSAS as well, if these mags are anything like those they're gonna be complete crap.[/QUOTE] Clear transparent plastic is pretty shit, no exceptions. It's why Euroguns with transparent mags like the G36 (grr), P90 or SIG 550 series all have that dark, smoky brown tint to them. When you add shit to your mix to make the plastic stronger, you lose transparency. Either go with a small window of shitty plastic like window-peemags, or with a darker, stronger body like glorious Eurogun masterrace.

[QUOTE=Riller;43975461]Clear transparent plastic is pretty shit, no exceptions. It's why Euroguns with transparent mags like the G36 (grr), P90 or SIG 550 series all have that dark, smoky brown tint to them. When you add shit to your mix to make the plastic stronger, you lose transparency. Either go with a small window of shitty plastic like window-peemags, or with a darker, stronger body like glorious Eurogun masterrace.[/QUOTE] Don't forget Steyr AUG mags.

[QUOTE=MAC21500;43975799]Don't forget Steyr AUG mags.[/QUOTE] Those too, sure. And MP5/10 mags. And a lot of other shit. G36 and SIG were just first on my mind because of their silly connecty studs.

steyr aug mags aren't made of transparent plastic [editline]19th February 2014[/editline] thankfully

[QUOTE=Taggart;43975857]steyr aug mags aren't made of transparent plastic [editline]19th February 2014[/editline] thankfully[/QUOTE] Some are, some aren't. [IMG]http://www.remtek.com/arms/steyr/aug/specs/magazine/mags.gif[/IMG]