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

[QUOTE=Sableye;46066129]looks like a modern version of [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b9/WWII_M1_Carbine.jpg[/t] i like it[/QUOTE] Holy fuck, how did I not see that? US Army pls use it.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;46066170]Holy fuck, how did I not see that? US Army pls use it.[/QUOTE] huh? it was the m1 carbine, not to be confused with the m1 gurand, it was issued to non-combat soldiers like radio men and people who needed a gun but didn't necessarily need a big one, my grandfather had one in korea it was basically given to anyone who was an ally, had any special job on the battlefield, or were in places where the big riffles were cumbersom [editline]24th September 2014[/editline] [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/86/81_m-m_Mortar_crew_in_action_at_Camp_Carson%2C_Colorado_-_NARA_-_197171.jpg/800px-81_m-m_Mortar_crew_in_action_at_Camp_Carson%2C_Colorado_-_NARA_-_197171.jpg[/t]

I mean, how didn't I see the M1 Carbine in the ARES SCR. As for the rounds and all that, the SCR can use 6.5mm Grendel which is most likely going to become the new NATO round in the coming years, and overall it just makes sense with current combat applications to begin adopting more semi-auto pattern rifles.

[QUOTE=Timebomb575;46066113]I dont disagree at all and its great when all the targets are in the same 90 degree quadrant in front of you, (which makes it an effective target shooting/3 gun stance) but it suffers in that it requires you to have your body square to the target which can make it harder to use cover effectively [B]it also has the distinct advantage of being TRAVIS HALEY 0P3R8T3R AS FUQ IN THE PRIMARY SLAYING BODIES GOOD TO GO FREEDOM AND EAGLES when compared to other stances, so there's that :v:[/B][/QUOTE] BUST EM

[QUOTE=Riller;46066057]Looks to me like digiflora, in a sunset lighting condition and taken with a mid-range cellphone camera.[/QUOTE] Looks like Spekter-S Autumn tbh, the yellow is too strong to be sunset lighting + camophone

The biggest problem with thumb over bore in combat situations is that you're putting your hand directly over the the gas block which under sustained fire is a good way to make sure your hand will turn into that black carbon residue that's a bitch to clean out of ovens. Additionally most shooting done in combat is going to be supported where TOB isn't even relevant and vertical foregrips are easy enough to come by that you might as well just stick with them. It's nice and all for putting holes in paper, but if you need to be moving around a lot especially in an urban environment, it's just going to get in the way for the most part and you might as well just stick to the classic hold which has been around as long as firearms have..

[t]http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/moonkan/16172126/1094477/1094477_original.jpg[/t] Cameleon .44 magnum

[QUOTE=MegaChalupa;46067419]it's just going to get in the way for the most part and you might as well just stick to the classic hold which has been around as long as firearms have..[/QUOTE] Ah yes, the old "Shaft over shoulder, look the other way and hope it doesn't explode when you light the fuse" never fails.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;46065548]It does, but at least it was made with the intent of trying to reduce the frankengun look. Not to mention I'd imagine that would work as a pretty decent hunting rifle.[/QUOTE] Just be glad it's not like the older Cali/NY legal ARs: [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/frs_15-tfb.jpeg[/img] Also removing the stock pad and changing out the sling and hand guard might help it look better [img]http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/P1060538-900x600.jpg[/img] Personally I always saw it more as a cross of an AR and an auto-shotgun like the Remington 1100.

[QUOTE=Sableye;46066129]looks like a modern version of [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b9/WWII_M1_Carbine.jpg[/t] i like it[/QUOTE] If it had iron sights rather than that dopey scope, then maybe

[QUOTE=Riller;46067629]Ah yes, the old "Shaft over shoulder, look the other way and hope it doesn't explode when you light the fuse" never fails.[/QUOTE] That's what it has been like every time I've fired a hi-point.

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;46067645]Just be glad it's not like the older Cali/NY legal ARs: [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/frs_15-tfb.jpeg[/img] Also removing the stock pad and changing out the sling and hand guard might help it look better [img]http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/P1060538-900x600.jpg[/img] Personally I always saw it more as a cross of an AR and an auto-shotgun like the Remington 1100.[/QUOTE] The top is pretty horrid, but I like the bottom one.

[QUOTE=MegaChalupa;46067814]That's what it has been like every time I've fired a hi-point.[/QUOTE] Many a thing you can say about hi-points being crap, but being prone to exploding is not one of them. Even if one were to explode, you wouldn't notice due to the ridiculous amount of bulk shielding you.

[QUOTE=kaine123;46067602][t]http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/moonkan/16172126/1094477/1094477_original.jpg[/t] Cameleon .44 magnum[/QUOTE] It's pretty and ugly at the same time.

[t]http://www.rockislandauction.com/photos/52/p_standard/FHC2-K-F1-H.jpg[/t] Walther Olympia Model 1926

[QUOTE=Grim2o0o;46063658][vid]http://v.cdn.vine.co/r/videos/BA6F0CA07D1125854958248714240_279b648f892.5.1.5122845857831702913.mp4?versionId=UAietm4gKMtm2AAXzLLOFOPG_Q6azpCM[/vid] Tactical yiff reload. Also, banana mag into a M4 platform rubs me the wrong way.[/QUOTE] Why is there both a rear sight and a reflex sight on the gun?

[QUOTE=kaine123;46069922]Why is there both a rear sight and a reflex sight on the gun?[/QUOTE] Back up irons in case the optic is damaged/runs out of power/commits suicide when it realizes who's using it.

Wouldn't the ironsight get in the way of the reflex optic?

[QUOTE=kaine123;46069971]Wouldn't the ironsight get in the way of the reflex optic?[/QUOTE] There is this concept called co-witness you should look into...

[QUOTE=TacticalBacon;46017135]And what is probably the deal-breaker for the UTS-15 for me: It ain't ambidextrous. Because of the side ejection port which is always on the right side, if I tried to use it as a lefty, I'd be getting hot brass right in the mouth.[/QUOTE] Like this? [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/9kTluTI.gif[/IMG]

[t]http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/9237P1010031a.jpg[/t] I really, really want to build an AR-15 with woodstock.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;46072751][t]http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/9237P1010031a.jpg[/t] I really, really want to build an AR-15 with woodstock.[/QUOTE] Absoloutely LOVE the wood on it.

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;46067645]Just be glad it's not like the older Cali/NY legal ARs: [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/frs_15-tfb.jpeg[/img] Also removing the stock pad and changing out the sling and hand guard might help it look better [img]http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/P1060538-900x600.jpg[/img] Personally I always saw it more as a cross of an AR and an auto-shotgun like the Remington 1100.[/QUOTE] reminds me of the pump action .223s we have here [img]http://cdn2.armslist.com/sites/armslist/uploads/posts/2013/01/19/877102_01_remington_7615_640.jpg[/img]

That's what I thought as well, sort of the opposite order of the same idea, the pump .223s are shotguns with AR magwells rammed into their loading gates, and the SCR is an AR-15 with a shotgun stock+trigger group for a lower. Both get you a sort of AR shotgun hybrid, but leaning more towards whichever you started with.

[QUOTE=kaine123;46069971]Wouldn't the ironsight get in the way of the reflex optic?[/QUOTE] my dad actually does this with his rifle, they sell ironsights that can fold down when you're not using them. All you have to to is flick a lever at the base of the sights and they pop back up via springs.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;46072751][t]http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/9237P1010031a.jpg[/t] I really, really want to build an AR-15 with woodstock.[/QUOTE] "Patrolling the Mojave almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter..."

"...engine"

[QUOTE=M.Ciaster;46077544]"...engine"[/QUOTE] Nah, game. Like all Bethesda RPGs, the fallout series is a featureless DPS-race once you get down to fighting, and it has a world that's way too big for it's own good, since it just feels underpopulated. Not as bad as Skyrim, mind you, but still pretty hollow.

[QUOTE=Riller;46079141]Nah, game. Like all Bethesda RPGs, the fallout series is a featureless DPS-race once you get down to fighting, and it has a world that's way too big for it's own good, since it just feels underpopulated. Not as bad as Skyrim, mind you, but still pretty hollow.[/QUOTE] Nah, engine. If you've actually played the Fallout games (3 and NV aren't the only ones in the series), you'd know that they're actually full of lively and unique characters, interesting environments, and good gameplay (albeit the gunplay in 3 and NV attempts to be like an FPS, but is more like Oblivion with guns; ie sluggish, somewhat awkward gunplay except for when your enemies are a good distance from you). The next installment in the Fallout series could be a lot better, so long as Bethesda (Bethsoft only made FO3, Obsidian developed NV) sticks to producing a new engine and funding the game, while Obsidian handles all development of it. When it comes to the game world, what were you expecting? The series takes place in the aftermath of a massive nuclear war that virtually destroyed civilization as we know it. For the most part, every environment in the Fallout series has mostly been scavenged buildings, nuclear blasted landscapes, and lifeless ruins. There are plenty of settlements around, ranging from small villages to decent sized towns, small cities even (The Den, New Reno, Vault City, Rivet City, etc) There are few massive, sprawling settlements anywhere (unless they're a vault city, a slaver compound, a aircraft carrier squat, or even the Vegas strip). The Fallout series has its flaws (lots of flaws, really), but that doesn't make the games outright bad. They're pretty great, really, you just have to look past the bugs, wonky gameplay elements, and some cheesy writing. Isn't the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series pretty similar? And just remember all of the mentions of charm people are quick to mention when talking about those games.

[QUOTE=Riller;46079141] DPS-race once you get down to fighting.[/QUOTE] Sorry to be a shitstain and keep the arguing on but you just described Payday 2 in it's entirely and I see you quite like that game. (I do too though) Anyway, on topic Fallout guns! [t]http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110329163724/fallout/images/2/2c/BigBoomer.png[/t] Colorful ballistic weapons in fallout? [t]http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110207223446/fallout/images/c/ca/FNV_Gobi_Campaign_Scout_Rifle.png[/t] [t]http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110207001631/fallout/images/1/1a/All-American.png[/t] Delicious [t]http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110207052315/fallout/images/7/72/RangerSequoia.png[/t]